Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

Vicky wrote: "For people concerned for or willing to help with international books, I found this list of National Libraries. It has about 50 different libraries listed, so it should be a good resource! :)


riv..."

Thanks for compiling this, Vicky. Unfortunately, several of these sources are not valid. Library Thing cannot be used for data, for one thing. I will see about getting an official list posted in Rivka's thread ASAP.

Otis wrote: "Sarah wrote: "I have a couple of questions, to confirm a few things that have come up.
1) People asked if Google Books is okay as a source, and it seems to be thought that it is, but Google Books n..." We don't have an explicit license with Google, so legally any books rescued from them would be at risk down the road. However, if the choice is not finding another source or using Google (Worldcat, publisher, etc come up empty), then it's possible we can negotiate a license down the road.

Otis - thanks very much for your explanation about Google Books. I have noticed that Google Books uses Goodreads reviews in its book listings, including with books that it sells. As far as I know, this is done without our explicit permission as reviewers (unless by signing up with Goodreads we have agreed to this in some way. But of course other booksellers such as Amazon don't automatically import Goodreads reviews in their listings). It certainly seems that if Goodreads is giving our reviews to Google Books, which helps them sell books, Google might consider giving something in return.

uhoh i used Google Books as a source for some books (it was the only source i could find) and now i am worried about them. is it ok to leave them as is?

Lisa wrote: "I'm finding books, such as http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/45... , that seem to have no source other than commercial. And somehow the cover image for this one is alread..."

I found this in my university library and they had a ink to WorldCat

http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=no%3...

BUT -- how do you deal with rescuing a book, like this, that doesn't have an ISBN number on WorldCat (the ISBN is from the amazon source, I'm assuming).

That's interesting: I just imported books from a .csv list and then checked my to rescue list which was still the same. Next, I checked a few of my newly imported books and tadaaa, they need rescuing.
So why don't they just appear on my to rescue shelve? Is something wrong or does the script need more time to sort it out?

Thanks, Jeannette. I don't know.

And I have so many books with no independent source, and I'm the only member who has it shelved, or one of a very few members who have it shelved.

Nothing at Library of Congress, WorldCat, etc. etc. And some with no ISBNs as the books are too old.

I really am stymied. And part of it is I don't have time to work on this. I've done several of my own books and several others I've happened to come across, but I don't have time to do the hundreds of mine, especially when I can't find independent sources for most of them, and assume they'll not be among the imported books Goodreads plans to do.

I think I might have just done one incorrectly given what Patrick just said. The ONLY source for the book is Amazon so I used the web site owned by the writer of the book/her daughter. Wonder if that one will survive.

Books with no ISBN should not be at risk, because they should not have come from Amazon. Almost always, they have been entered manually.

Lisa wrote: "I used the web site owned by the writer of the book/her daughter."

Author websites are great sources.

I cross-posted Vicky's post to the FAQ thread, with a few edits:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/7...

rivka wrote: "Lisa wrote: "I used the web site owned by the writer of the book/her daughter."

Author websites are great sources."

Okay. Good to know. Thanks, Rivka.

rivka wrote: "Books with no ISBN should not be at risk, because they should not have come from Amazon. Almost always, they have been entered manually."

Well, many of mine are listed as at risk to be deleted.

I mean it the other way around. Lisa's book has an ISBN currently on GR

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/45...

But, the independent source I found for it does not list an ISBN. What's the procedure here; fix the existing GR record or make a new one without an ISBN?

Lisa wrote: "Well, many of mine are listed as at risk to be deleted."

How peculiar. Can you link a couple examples?

Jeannette wrote: "What's the procedure here; fix the existing GR record or make a new one without an ISBN?"

I don't think you can use a record from WorldCat with no ISBN to rescue a book with one. But certainly you can add a new edition manually with the WorldCat info.

Lisa wrote: "rivka wrote: "Books with no ISBN should not be at risk, because they should not have come from Amazon. Almost always, they have been entered manually."

Well, many of mine are listed as at risk to be deleted."

I think what has happened here is the physical book does not have the ISBN printed on it, so it is impossible to verify. I would create a new entry without an ISBN in this case. Extra editions can always be merged later.

Jeannette wrote: "...the independent source I found for it do not list an ISBN. What's the procedure here; fix the existing GR record or make a new one without an ISBN?"

Making a new one without the ISBN seems like the best solution for now. Extra editions can be merged later if needed.

Okay, I can do that. Thanks!

Mayanka wrote: "#2) No, you must obtain the cover from elsewhere, please. It should come from any trustworthy site that is not a bookseller; the publisher or author's website is best.
" fanfiction.co.uk is OK?

rivka wrote: "Lisa wrote: "Well, many of mine are listed as at risk to be deleted."

How peculiar. Can you link a couple examples?"

Yes, When I find them again. I think what has happened is that my books don't have an ISBN but later on one was added (from later editions???) and those must be Amazon sourced???

I wonder if some well-meaning librarian incorrectly merged them into editions with ISBNs. >_<

Amazon shows an ISBN, but the library doesn't. Makes sense that someone just took the info off of amazon when it was allowed.

Just one more comment about Ingram. They are the largest US book wholesaler. Ingram Content Group (formerly Ingram Book Group) sold off Ingram Entertainment in the early 1990s/late 19980s so they have been separate for nearly 30 years. As they are focused on selling new books to new bookstores (not used), their data on OP books is admittedly skimpy, but they should have that data going back to when their database began, which is probably the early 1980s. They are entirely US based so they will have scant UK info. The biggest UK wholesaler is Gardners. Gardners is partly owned by Baker & Taylor, the second largest book wholesaler and Ingram's biggest competitor so I'm not sure how keen they would be to work with Goodreads if Ingram is our biggest source now, but they would be the best single source for in-print UK books. I think Ingram is a great solution for the current crisis Amazon most certainly caused with their bullying tactics.

A question: can I use Baker & Taylor as a source for info? (I am a former employee of both wholesalers.) I know not everyone can access the B&T database but many booksellers and public librarians can.

rivka wrote: "I wonder if some well-meaning librarian incorrectly merged them into editions with ISBNs. >_<"

In some cases, I'm afraid so. I know my original edition of A Wrinkle in Time from 1962 is gone, and just the 1964 one remains. Maybe it's still there but I can't find it.

Carin wrote: "A question: can I use Baker & Taylor as a source for info?"

They are a bookseller, so I'm pretty sure the answer to that one is no.

Carin wrote: "A question: can I use Baker & Taylor as a source for info? (I am a former employee of both wholesalers.) I know not everyone can access the B&T database but many booksellers and public librarians can. "

Unfortunately, you cannot use Baker & Taylor data, either. Likewise any sites that are getting their data from B&T.

rivka wrote: "Carin wrote: "A question: can I use Baker & Taylor as a source for info?"

They are a bookseller, so I'm pretty sure the answer to that one is no."

They only sell to bookstores and libraries, just like Ingram, not to the general public at all, which is why I was asking.

Carin, I'm guessing that GR is able to use Ingram because they have come to a licensing agreement with Ingram. They would have to do a similar thing with B&T for using their data to be permissible.

Are we allowed to use Wikipedia... because to be perfectly honest, I've found the info there on book series to be the most helpful.

My problem is that I have a decent amount of books in the German language that I have never gotten around to checking on GR. I am going to try to organise my German language bookshelves and check/rescue/add those books which require it, but I honestly do not know wether I will have enough time to do this by the 30th; we have other things to do as well, sigh.

I'm sorry, but I really want to bump this question for the devs again:

Question about "may be merged" editions: if these editions are merged, will this be like the existing merge that librarians do on duplicate editions, where the original is completely deleted, there's no record of its unique values, and people's reviews are permanently shifted onto the kept edition? Or will this be some sort of conditional merge where if data is imported later for the merged edition it will be restored on people's shelves the way the "may be deleted" editions could be?

In particular, I'm worried about two cases: one, where I've uploaded a unique cover to an otherwise Amazon-sourced edition, and two, where there's an at-risk edition in one language but the most popular edition is in a different language. Scanned covers and language data are what I really don't want to lose.

This does NOT make me happy. I have over 2400 reviews posted and have always made a point of finding the proper edition. Often, the books are UK releases, purchased prior to the UK edition being released.

What about Audible, an Amazon company, downloads. Especially Audible originals?

It's very disappointing to hear goodreads is partnering with a data source so heavily US focused, since most of my books are UK editions.

Debra wrote: "What about Audible, an Amazon company, downloads. Especially Audible originals?"

I asked this question earlier - apparently Audible audio books were never automatically imported, so member would have entered them manually, making them safe. As long as you own an Audible Audio, you can enter in the information for it manually (assuming no one else has already done so for that book) and it's fine. You just can't access the *information* about the book from Audible/Amazon.

Cait wrote: "Question about "may be merged" editions: if these editions are merged, will this be like the existing merge that librarians do on duplicate editions, where the original is completely deleted, there's no record of its unique values, and people's reviews are permanently shifted onto the kept edition? Or will this be some sort of conditional merge where if data is imported later for the merged edition it will be restored on people's shelves the way the "may be deleted" editions could be?"

We are hoping to restore all editions and lose no data here. For editions we can't find alternate source for by the deadline, we will do the former and merge them with the best edition, but keep in the background that it was originally for another edition and hope to restore it later.

LJ wrote: "This does NOT make me happy. I have over 2400 reviews posted and have always made a point of finding the proper edition. Often, the books are UK releases, purchased prior to the UK edition being ..."

I know it's frustrating, but please hold your unhappiness until after get through this. We are really striving to not lose any data!

Thank you, Petra. There must be a caching issue because it's still showing as needing to be rescued.

Otis, I have quite a few books where there is only 1 edition and I'm not finding any external sources and I doubt Goodreads will either. In some cases I'm the only member who has the book shelved or there are fewer than 5 members who do.

Should I/can I manually add those books? I'll wait until Goodreads does its save.

I have quite a few old, pre-ISBN books.

When will that be?

Before the 30th?

Thanks.

Lisa wrote: "Thank you, Petra. There must be a caching issue because it's still showing as needing to be rescued.

Otis, I have quite a few books where there is only 1 edition and I'm not finding any external s..."

Lisa, I am tripping over books all over the place, sigh. I guess I really should be happy this is getting me to organise my bookshelves, but I don't like the limited time frame as well (I don't type very fast and make lots of mistakes).

I would also like to know exactly when all of the data imports etc. will be done.

Lisa, do you own copies of these books? If not, how would you add them manually?

Abigail wrote: "I have a question regarding the fake ISBNs that amazon made up, for pre-ISBN books. I have created alternate editions, for each of these, and switched my reviews, but they are still showing up on my list. Would it make sense, since I have created alternate listings, and combined them, for a super-librarian to delete the amazon listing? If so, where should I post the links to the editions I think should be deleted?"

I am curious about this myself. Should we merge the listing if it has an invalid ISBN (assuming there is a duplicate)?

Sarah wrote: "Otis - thanks very much for your explanation about Google Books. I have noticed that Google Books uses Goodreads reviews in its book listings, including with books that it sells. As far as I know, this is done without our explicit permission as reviewers (unless by signing up with Goodreads we have agreed to this in some way. But of course other booksellers such as Amazon don't automatically import Goodreads reviews in their listings). It certainly seems that if Goodreads is giving our reviews to Google Books, which helps them sell books, Google might consider giving something in return."

WorldCat has GR reviews on it, too! Hmmm...

Linda wrote: "Then I doubt I will be using Goodreads anymore as an author with many books at Amazon. or as a reader. It's too bad you've made that choice."

Linda, none of the books you've written are in danger of being removed.

rivka wrote: "Lisa, do you own copies of these books? If not, how would you add them manually?"

I own several, yes.

Lisa, if you have the book in front of you, that's BETTER than an alternate online source (for rescuing books).

are the following acceptable URL?



Internet Archive

Open Library

Createspace

rivka wrote: "I wonder if some well-meaning librarian incorrectly merged them into editions with ISBNs. >_<"

Lisa wrote: "In some cases, I'm afraid so. I know my original edition of A Wrinkle in Time from 1962 is gone, and just the 1964 one remains. Maybe it's still there but I can't find it."

Probably time that an option was added to allow a user to lock the ISBN cell (in an empty state if a book edition has no ISBN), requiring conscious intent to change it. There are SO many older books in goodreads that should not have ISBNs - unless I was uploading an edition myself, I usually wouldn't bother the ISBN field, figuring that the same garbage data would eventually be imported into the ISBN field or recreated as a new and separate edition by some brainless, automated routine (maybe that wouldn't happen, but I really have little confidence in any database that has input from so many varied sources and no means of locking data from further modification).

I imagine that the books on my shelves tagged for being merged if not rescued will likely suffer some similar, unpleasant fate as your Wrinkle in Time, Lisa.

So my rescue page now has something slightly odd on it. A number of books have white backgrounds and the words "rescued. thank you!" next to them. This is great, but I didn't rescue any of these books. These books are on my shelf and I have rescued others (which aren't listed as rescued) so I'm not quite sure what to make of this indicator other than to assume it's some sort of error in an update to the release system.

A second issue is I have four books in danger of deletion in which my review was on a random print copy, but what I actually read was an ebook from Feedbooks. Since I couldn't directly rescue the print copy, I created a new edition for the Feedbook version, combined it with the current edition(s), and swapped my review. These four books are still listed in danger of deletion (not merging). Should we just assume the caching of the status is confused by the combination or is there an actual danger that the entire set might be deleted, even though one is completely manually entered from a non-Amazon source?

This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For wrote: "So my rescue page now has something slightly odd on it. A number of books have white backgrounds and the words "rescued. thank you!" next to them. This is great, but I didn't rescue any of these bo..."

can you provide a link to the edition that you created? that one for sure shouldn't be marked as at risk for deletion, but it looks like you may have uncovered a bug...if someone creates a NEW edition and combines with a work that's at risk for deletion, we may not update the status correctly....

This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For wrote: "So my rescue page now has something slightly odd on it. A number of books have white backgrounds and the words "rescued. thank you!" next to them. This is great, but I didn't rescue any of these bo..."

That means someone else had the same edition and that they rescued it already!

This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For wrote: "So my rescue page now has something slightly odd on it. A number of books have white backgrounds and the words "rescued. thank you!" next to them. This is great, but I didn't rescue any of these bo..."

Michael, I apologize if there are some discrepancies. The most accurate way to tell if the entire work is at risk is to go to the editions page for the work and see if all of the editions are at risk. The "may be deleted" status on your at risk books list may be out of date (we're looking into that issue).

Susie wrote: "That means someone else had the same edition and that they rescued it already!"

But shouldn't it just go away? I've had one like that on mine that has displayed with this message since the very first day this all started. I've had hundreds of other ones slowly disappear from my list, presumably because someone else saved it. But only one is sticking around with a "rescued, thank you!" note.

Brooke wrote: "Susie wrote: "That means someone else had the same edition and that they rescued it already!"

But shouldn't it just go away? I've had one like that on mine that has displayed with this message sin..."

In most cases it will go away immediately but I think if there has been some combining of editions or similar it might stick around. It will get cleaned out eventually, so I wouldn't worry about those.