Series Type

[• Tom •]

This is a thread that was started in a different group, but evolved to the point that it was suggested to be put into this group. Here's a link to the old thread (starting at post 31) http://goo.gl/kfH2Z , but I will re-post what I said here, and hopefully some of the replies will also get moved over.
________________________________________________

OK, I became a librarian (because I wanted more series metadata), and have edit the series descriptions (of those I have read) with brief notes on how the series is organized. I basically used 1 of 3 texts:

1. Each book in the series is a whole story with a beginning and an ending, however the plot of each book relies heavily on the prior books in the series.

2. The whole series is comprised of one epic story.

3. Each book in the series is a whole story with a beginning and an ending, however there may be minor references to prior stories in the series.

Tweaking the text as required.

I have only done this on series that I have read. I may do so to a couple of series that I have not read yet, but know (based on research in the past) how the series is organized.

I saw another post from a couple of years ago that another librarian would also add this info. Hopefully more people get inspired to do so.
______________________________________

Vicky posted a very nice break-down of my texts above, but I'll let her re-post it here.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Thanks, Tom. I think adding this information in the Series description - when possible/known - will be very helpful to members.

[• Tom •]

I think so too.

I wish there was a different field for series type, instead of having to put it in the description, but I guess there needs to be enough interest first, before GR will do that.

[Monique]

• Tom • wrote: "I think so too.

I wish there was a different field for series type, instead of having to put it in the description, but I guess there needs to be enough interest first, before GR will do that."

Tom, I am not sure that you could or should really have something like a drop down field for series type. Take Terry Brooks' books, for instance. Some of his trilogies fit under #2, but others are more #1. When leaving a note in the chron or pub series for those, a drop down box wouldn't work.

But, overall, I really like what you have done and have started to add that kind of information to series I know.

[• Tom •]

Monique, you're right in that a drop down list wouldn't work. It would have to free text because there's too many variations.

Besides Terry Brooks, another example would be Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. Books 1 & 2 would fall under category 2, but the rest of the series would fall under #1. So I deviate from my list as needed, and only use it as a guideline.

But when I said a different field, I meant a free text one, and not a drop down list. Just separate from the description. Not critical, but maybe it's just a little bit of the OCD in me.

Thanks. I'm glad I got you interested.

[Vicky]

Here's what I posted before, edited a smidgen for better clarification/OCD.

• Tom • wrote: "1. Each book in the series is a whole story with a beginning and an ending, however the plot of each book relies heavily on the prior books in the series."

1. This would be a series where you probably wouldn't want to read the books out of order. The Southern Vampire Mysteries is a good example of this - each book has it's own mystery to solve and has it's own beginning and ending, but there are character personalities and relationships that build over the course of the series. You could pick up the 4th book and enjoy it, but you might be missing important things that happened in earlier books, not get the full story or otherwise not enjoy it as much as you would had you read the entire series. Even


• Tom • wrote: "2. The whole series is comprised of one epic story."

2. This would be a series that is clearly one entire story split up into multiple books. Lord of the Rings stands out as a good example of this. This series would probably have cliffhangers and major unresolved plot threads in each book.


• Tom • wrote: "3. Each book in the series is a whole story with a beginning and an ending, however there may be minor references to prior stories in the series.
"

3. This would be a series where it probably doesn't matter what order you read them in. Eloisa James writes the Fairy Tale series where each book is based on a different Fairy Tale. These books aren't interrelated at all. There are also some romance series where each book is based on a different couple. You may see old couples pop in now and then, but you wouldn't necessarily have to read every book (there are just as many romance series that I would put under #1 though).



It's also worth noting that not all series are going to fit into one of these categories. It depends a lot on how the reader wants to read. Personally, I'm pretty OCD about reading series in order regardless of how little the stories build on each other. I also know plenty of people who don't really care.

As an example, I think Harry Potter stradles 1 and 2. In a sense it is one epic story, but it's also told episodically and each book has a beginning, an end and is wrapped up pretty neatly at the end.

[Cheryl]

I don't generally read series, but my husband does and is a GR librarian, so we'll try to improve the series descriptions that we know about in this way.

Do you prefer us to use your exact wording? ... I'd feel more comfortable just typing a sentence that describes how I understand the interconnectedness of the series rather than coming back here and picking 1,2, or 3 every time. But if we want consistency, and if those 3 options cover all possibilities, I'm game to comply....

[Vicky]

Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Do you prefer us to use your exact wording? ... I'd feel more comfortable just typing a sentence that describes how I understand the interconnectedness of the series rather than coming back here and picking 1,2, or 3 every time. But if we want consistency, and if those 3 options cover all possibilities, I'm game to comply...."

I think a reader's description of interconnectedness would be more valuable than a blanket statement, especially because not all books are going to fit snugly into one category.

[• Tom •]

I agree with Vicky. Those categories are just guidelines I set up, but I edit my description as needed for each series. The goal here is so the reader is informed about the interconnectedness of the series so they can make an intelligent decision.

I think you'll find that half of the series types I have added, are at least a little bit edited from the three I posted.

Thanks

[Empress]

I have a question. Some books have hundreds of editions, but if we set one description as default, am I correct to suggest this will override the description for the foreign editions as well, thus not a good idea?

[Dee]

the series description encompasses all books that are linked to the series, not individual books in the series- like this http://www.goodreads.com/series/41029...

[Empress]

Dee wrote: "the series description encompasses all books that are linked to the series, not individual books in the series- like this http://www.goodreads.com/series/41029..."

Duhh! I'm so stupid! Thanks, I think you just save me a lot of work!!!

[mlady_rebecca]

This is a great idea. I'm a big series reader and I'll be happy to add the information to the series I'm familiar with. I've done a half a dozen already, most of which are type 1.

I've also mentioned the predicted last book for a few of the series where that information is known. (For example, Kim Harrison has said there are 1-2 more books in her "The Hollows" series.) Or I have labeled the series open ended, where applicable.

[• Tom •]

This is cool. I'm glad so many others have an interest in this as well.

[Julia]

If a non-librarian has this sort of information about a series, should it be posted in this thread? Or should I set up a new one with requests to add?

[• Tom •]

I think the best place to put this is another thread called Series Creation http://goo.gl/XSz7I . They also do series edits there as well.

And we can keep this thread as a discussion on the use of series type.

I'm a new librarian though, and those with more experience may have a different opinion.

Thanks for willing to share though.

[Cheryl]

Ok, I've finally done my first one. I put a tweaked version of #3 in the *description* field of Savvy (Scumble). But there's also a note field. Please remind me, what's that *note* field intended for? Is it visible to non-librarians?

[• Tom •]

The note field is only visible to librarians. I had to correct a few of mine after realizing this. :-)

[Vicky]

@Julia I would probably start a new thread for specific series requests.

Re: Notes
Notes are only seen by librarians, I often use them to store links to series references outside of Goodreads so librarians coming in later will have the information. It's especially useful for foreign language translations that have split up the original books.

[Cheryl]

Thanks! Off I go to add descriptions to a few more!

[Empress]

Bump.

[• Tom •]

Thanks for keeping this alive Ellie. I continue to edit series descriptions as I come across them.

Unfortunately, I haven't yet come across any such descriptions in books I'm thinking about reading. So not many librarians are entering series info, even on new books. I wish GR would have a separate field that would remind them to enter the info, but my understanding is that GR does very little work on the site. Maybe even more so that it's now owned by Amazon.

[• Tom •]

Ellie, I think you replied to the wrong thread. :-)

[Empress]

• Tom • wrote: "Ellie, I think you replied to the wrong thread. :-)"

I did! I was wondering where my comments went! I'm so tired I can't handle working with a couple of tabs right now. I even quoted you and replied on the other topic! Deleted