Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
This topic is about
Shadows on the Sun
Questions (not edit requests)
>
Wrong ISBN
date
newest »
newest »
Never delete anything with a "valid" ISBN - by valid I mean not necessarily that the ISBN matches the book, but that the ISBN by itself is a valid ISBN. You wouldn't be able to in this case anyway, since you aren't a super librarian. Nor would you be able to merge since it has too many ratings.Since Cait is the source of some of the data on that edition, maybe she has special insight. Certainly Worldcat thinks it is an edition of Shakespeare, as you said. The source of the ISBN is Barnes and Noble and there haven't been any librarian edits to the ISBN.
If some of those people were shelving by ISBN, did they think they were shelving Star Trek, or Shakespeare?
Lobstergirl wrote: "Since Cait is the source of some of the data on that edition, maybe she has special insight."Alas, nope! I think I was just going through and fixing authors and truncated book titles at the time, not specifically looking at this edition. As far as I can tell from Google, B&N had the ISBN13 listed as this book's hardcover 1997 edition (see Google results) in the ~2010 timeframe when we were importing B&N data, but it looks like they've since retracted that assertion. The Shakespeare collection definitely has a much stronger claim on the ISBN.
I have a paperback copy of the Star Trek book with that ISBN. WorldCat also agrees that it is the correct ISBN for the Star Trek book, dating back to 1993.I know that WorldCat supports more than one book per ISBN, unlike us.
I was under the impression, that it was first in best dressed for ISBNs?
Mod
In this case, it clearly was reused, so the one that had it first here, keeps it. Looks like that's Shadows on the Sun.
Being a new librarian, I have not been able to find the proper resolution to this. Do I delete the edition? Or combine it with another? Both of these solutions seem not quite correct.