Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Book & Author Page Issues
>
What do these Librarian Notes mean?
date
newest »
newest »
maybe you should try to contact the librarian who made the notes.but where did you get the reference of 80% difference to not be combined?
if it really is that high, lots of separated edition should be combined, even book 1 of 2 should be combined with the original works (50% difference only).
It was mentioned on another thread. I will see if I can find it.Edit: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...
And I trust Paula's word. I believe at some point rivka said it too on another threads. Basically it is to make sure the editions stay combined with unabridged, annotated, etc.
The reason books 1 of 2 stays separated is because it is a split volume, even if the difference may only be 50%. In other words, it has a numbering difference.
These books are still 1 is 1 and 2 is 2, so the only difference is the "updates".
Mod
Well, 80% is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule, but I suspect they should be combined, despite the Notes. I agree with Nenangs that contacting the librarian who left them is a good place to start, though.
Will do. Thanks guys. I will contact them and direct them here for reference and then find out what the difference is and how far these updates go.
I agree about the "updates" being combined, only when the updates did not constitutes major changes (such as change of endings, change of major plot, change of main characters, etc.).I will ask about the 80% difference in the linked thread you've given.
Well rivka already clarified it really and she is an employee... so her word is kind of final.I never use it as a hard line, but I agree that small changes, even adding a chapter or two, is not enough to NOT combine the editions.
Hi, Krystal:I am the one who asked that everyone not combine her older series of books with the newer revised ones. The reason is the content. Ms. Hatcher "redeemed" (her word), updated, or changed the content of the older series to aim them at the Christian market. I have no problem with that but when I read some of her older books I loved them for their entirety. I am guessing that she changed them to take out the sexual situations and add some Christian content. Again, no problem BUT if you mix up the older books with the newer ones with the Christian theme it will make you wonder what is going on.
Here is an old editorial on the author and changes. Http://www.likesbooks.com/editorial.htm. I confess that I did not read this before I made the changes yesterday. I simply did this because I have read several of the older books and saw that the newer ones weren't quite the same.
I hope I did this properly. Let me know if I should have handled it some other way.
Linda
Should they be left separated still?
Mod
I would say they should be. Editing out a few scenes to lend it more toward Christian audiences doesn't seem like enough to keep them separate.I'll work on this now.
Krystal109 wrote: "I would say they should be. Editing out a few scenes to lend it more toward Christian audiences doesn't seem like enough to keep them separate.I'll work on this now."
I agree, but if these are now being marketed as "clean" or "Christian" someone is gonna be in for a shock if they accidentally get the old version instead of the new. :D
How about combining them AND having a line in bold at the top of the description which points out that this is NOT the Christian version or some such thing. It does seem reasonable to me that an author who now considers herself to be "Christian" might be a little cautious about her older, earthier, works.
Banjomike wrote: "How about combining them AND having a line in bold at the top of the description which points out that this is NOT the Christian version or some such thing. It does seem reasonable to me that an..."
Agreed...and this would be more reliable distinction for members, than the librarian note.
You could also add "Updated Version" and "Original Verrsion" to the edition field. Though I would say definitely put it in the description. The edition field information is easy to miss IMO.
Bleh.... I don't even know which editions they were now. I will ask the original librarian to do this.
+1 for banjomike & vicky_girl suggetions.and LOL for jennifer's comment. :D
edited (again) for banjomike's name.
Nenangs wrote: "+1 for banjominke:D"banjoMINKE
Hm, "Minke" =lesser rorqual, is a name given to two species of marine mammal belonging to a clade within the suborder of baleen whales.
That is almost certainly an insult in some ancient language but I will ignore it.
I thought that abridged editions were NOT to be combined with original editions - have I got that wrong?
Banjomike wrote: "Nenangs wrote: "+1 for banjominke:D"banjoMINKE
Hm, "Minke" =lesser rorqual, is a name given to two species of marine mammal belonging to a clade within the suborder of baleen whales.
That is almost certainly an insult in some ancient language but I will ignore it."
oops, sorry for the typo. corrected right away.
never meant to insult you.
and as a diver, i love all sea creatures indiscriminately. :)
Michael wrote: "I thought that abridged editions were NOT to be combined with original editions - have I got that wrong?"Abridged editions are combined unless they are so different that they are considered adaptations.
Cait wrote: "Michael wrote: "I thought that abridged editions were NOT to be combined with original editions - have I got that wrong?"Abridged editions are combined unless they are so different that they are considered adaptations"
I tend to write "abridged" or some such in the edition field.
Let me know what I should do. I can add 'original edition' under EDITION and DESCRIPTION. My personal experience having read some but not all, of the two series that I had separated, are the newer books are adaptions. Some of the content was revised or modified and the author even went as far as to change the title from Kiss Me, Katie to Catching Katie....which started this whole thing. I was trying to update the series information for readers and couldn't find the title because they were combined.
Let me know what you want me to do.
Linda
Linda wrote: "the author even went as far as to change the title from Kiss Me, Katie to Catching Katie"So 'Catching Katie' is more Christian than 'Kiss Me, Katie'?
Given that the author is seemingly unhappy with her older works perhaps we should add a much more descriptive banner to those editions. Something along the lines of "Not revised for Christian readers". Only a suggestion.
"So 'Catching Katie' is more Christian than 'Kiss Me, Katie'?"Honestly, I don't know why she changed that title and not the others when she revised the series unless it was to remove the words KISS ME from the title.
Banjomike wrote: "Given that the author is seemingly unhappy with her older works perhaps we should add a much more descriptive banner to those editions. Something along the lines of "Not revised for Christian readers". Only a suggestion. "Rather than adding a note to earlier editions, wouldn't it be more logical to add a note to the later edition? Something like "revised edition."
Banjomike wrote: "Cait wrote: "Michael wrote: "I thought that abridged editions were NOT to be combined with original editions - have I got that wrong?"Abridged editions are combined unless they are so different t..."
Righto, Cait - I will bear that in mind for the future.
Banjomike - I also use the edition field to note an abridgement, so if any books I've worked on get re-combined it will be clear that they're not the original text.
Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Rather than adding a note to earlier editions, wouldn't it be more logical to add a note to the later edition? Something like "revised edition." "If we do that then we would have to add the same notation to all FUTURE editions as well. Mark the old ones and then we can leave it.
Banjomike wrote: "Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Rather than adding a note to earlier editions, wouldn't it be more logical to add a note to the later edition? Something like "revised edition." "If we do that then we ..."
Are all future editions revised? Do we know that for certain? I thought we probably only knew about editions that are coming out now. Are they just less sexy? In any case, marking them as "Christian" might not be accurate, but I haven't read them.
Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Are all future editions revised? Do we know that for certain? I thought we probably only knew about editions that are coming out now. Are they just less sexy? In any case, marking them as "Christian" might not be accurate, but I haven't read them."The current editions seem to be what the author wants so presumably new editions of those titles will be based on them. New titles would be anybodies guess though she does seem to be consistent in her Christian message.
These pages are the nearest I've found to an explanation in the authors own words and it ties in with the message from Linda that Krystal109 posted above.
This is the older pre-redeemed stuff
http://www.robinleehatcher.com/genera...
and this is the new stuff and the redeemed versions of the old stuff. I think.
http://www.robinleehatcher.com/books....
Christian is definitely the target audience of the revised books.
This author has a lot of librarian notes saying not to combine because it isn't "updated" like the others.
What does this mean? Are these "updates" enough to make the 80% needed difference to not be combined?