Keith’s
Comments
(group member since Sep 19, 2008)
Keith’s
comments
from the Goodreads Librarians Group group.
Showing 261-280 of 377
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...and
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
into
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
Either someone beat me to it, or there's some confusion: they look combined to me.
done
done
I believe this is the full name used on bookcovers:http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
for this GRA who uses a shorter version as her profile:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
Or else someone is confused (and that might be me). If those are the same, I'm surprised she didn't just adopt the pre-existing long-form profile, but... -shrug-
Tags added for #472
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...into
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
ETA:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
into
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
Got 704.
Banjomike wrote: "#692 693I've corrected the text. The quote is only loosely based on Corinthians. Adding a footnote to say that a quote is a vague paraphrase of a phrase that already exists in umpteen different ..."
Since that chapter is popular and widely variant, I have created a tag for it, and tagged what quotes I could readily identify (moving a few from bogus authors to the correct Bible editions in the process, though there's one outstanding nakedly attributed to Anonymous).
Banjomike wrote: "On a not-exactly-unrelated note, I've reattributed this one from Marilyn Monroe:http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/97752 "
FWIW, since so much of the task of librarians in the quotes database is correcting misattributions, I've gotten in the habit of adding tags to such quotes to (hopefully) ease the process of future research. E.g., I tagged the above as "misattributed to marilyn monroe" so that, when it inevitably reappears under her name, any librarian will be more readily able to see where the merge should go. It also lets readers/fans know about the issue. There is also a "widely misattributed" tag for those words that get put in every mouth but the one from which they issued, and just plain "misattributed" for when we know who didn't say it, but not who really did.
Of course, that presumes that anyone trusts my attributions. Or that any Librarian other than myself even cares.
I just logged this bug in the Feedback group regarding the author merge tool. It looks like, at least in some cases, the merge tool merges the authors, but then deletes the merge-from author from the book records.Keep an eye out for that, and be prepared to do a bit of editing by hand until that gets fixed (if it's widespread).
Banjomike wrote: "She closed her blog."So, her blog is dead, and she never wrote any books, and there are already 276,032 copies of her lengthy, marginally-verifiable quote elsewhere on the interwebz. Does it really need to be on Goodreads?
If it were up to me, I'd delete not only the quote, but the whole 'author' profile, and I'd rather not take such drastic action (even if Super permissions allow for it) unilaterally without some consensus behind it. I may be arrogant and elitist, but I'm not crazy. ;-)
IMHO, our quote database should rest on the core of the purpose of the site: published sources that are or were in print, verified against the printed form. If it ain't published, it ain't for us: viz 'NOT A BOOK'. But mine may not be the universal view, and I have no idea what Otis thinks of the matter.
MissJessie wrote: "Maybe since you have pointed this out, more people who had not thought of doing this, due perhaps to lack of time or inclination, will begin doing so."That would be awesome. :) It would even be good if fewer new Librarians "helped" by merging the author record with diacritics into the one without, though that does seem to be less common lately.
Beth wrote: "And, as rivka pointed out, sometimes it's an issue with imports. If I'm not familiar with the author, and the import is wrong, chances are not good that I'm going to catch it."
Yeah, the imports probably will always be problematic (which is why I had previously thought it would be better to use their orthography, until I was roundly corrected). We just need to be careful, if we're going to merge them, to do so into the one that is most correct/inline with policy. I've been trying to stay in the habit of either doing the research, or leaving it alone, when I'm not sure what something obviously wrong should be. And if it's really wrong and I'm really clueless (or out of time), I bring it here to you helpful lot. :)
But even without diacritic issues, we will probably always have Twain and Samuel Clemens waiting to be merged into Mark Twain. 'Tis the nature of the beast, and the reason why Sisyphus is our patron deity. -shrug-
MissJessie wrote: "There's just no way to do it easily."Copy and paste is generally pretty easy, and as more of the Internet gets used to Unicode, finding the name with the proper orthography is usually a simple matter of 15 seconds on Google. (For whatever reason, copy/paste from Worldcat is far less reliable than from elsewhere.)
Heck, I manage to do this with languages that use whole different character sets, such as དབུ་ཅན་ (which is to say, Tibetan uchen) never mind European diacritics for which direct keyboard entry is possible, if not obvious. (E.g., for é hold the Alt-key down while typing 130 on the numeric keypad; I do that one enough to have it memorized.)
At the risk of seeming a jerk, I would go so far as to suggest that any Librarian who has neither the time nor the inclination to deal with orthography correctly should stay away from editing any material that requires non-ASCII characters, requesting assistance as needed like we do with "foreign" (to the Librarian in question) languages. As was convincingly pointed out to me in an earlier thread, there are good reasons why proper orthography is necessary.
I, for one, get really tired of forever changing author names back to what someone helpfully fixed by making it wrong. At least Gabriel Garcí a Márquez hasn't moved recently; it took a Librarian Note from rivka to finally nail Chögyam Trungpa in one place.
[end rant][#include std.apology]
This one seems to need higher privileges than Super to fix.Per this writeup by The Ralph Waldo Emerson Society, this quote about success with 13K+ likes, was actually written by Bessie Anderson Stanley and published near an essay by Emerson (hence perhaps the popular misattribution) in Heart Throbs Volume 2 , edited by Joe Mitchell Chapple.
A librarian prior to me attempted to apply the update without the source being properly entered in the system. I have updated the source records, but still cannot change the attribution on the quote. I did, at least, manage to combine the ten or so existing variants, though they will surely reappear.
