Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

100 views
Book Cover Help > Replace cover: Moby Dick

Comments Showing 1-24 of 24 (24 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments Re: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11...

The current cover is for a different edition (by a different publisher). Cf. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23...

The Kindle cover for the Public Domain Book is this >> http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I...

The title used for this edition is >> Moby Dick: or, the White Whale


message 2: by Empress (new)

Empress (the_empress) The alternate cover editions is already on GR here: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16...


message 3: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments It is very unlikely that a public domain book digitized by Amazon http://amzn.com/B004TRXX7C used a cover from a paperback published by Barnes and Noble.


message 4: by Helmut (new)

Helmut (schlimmerdurst) | 43 comments A lot of these Kindle PD books have a wrong cover. I see the need for alternate cover editions, but what if a cover is simply wrong, as in this case? As Eric, I'm also pretty sure the mentioned edition has never been published with the currently displayed cover.

Shouldn't the cover be replaced, and then the edition be merged with the ACE?


message 5: by Helmut (new)

Helmut (schlimmerdurst) | 43 comments Helmut wrote: "A lot of these Kindle PD books have a wrong cover. I see the need for alternate cover editions, but what if a cover is simply wrong, as in this case? As Eric, I'm also pretty sure the mentioned edi..."

As I'm having a closer look at these cover issues, I see that for these editions the image uploader almost always was a user called "goodreads 1", and by the sheer mass of editions that got assigned images by that user, I assume it is some automated batch job, that assigned dummy default images to all Kindle editions without covers around Feb 2012. Could that have something to do with the Amazon clash?

I would really like to hear your opinions on this, as there are literally hundreds of editions of at least many dozens of books that are handled that way.


message 6: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments Wasn't that the time that all data from Amazon was purged from Goodreads?


message 7: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Jun 12, 2013 06:40AM) (new)

rivka | 41073 comments Mod
Yes, and Kindle editions of certain types were provided to us as an import feed.


message 8: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments So what will be the action for this record? Will the incorrect cover still stay?


message 9: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 41073 comments Mod
I am not convinced this Kindle edition did not have that cover at some point.


message 10: by Helmut (new)

Helmut (schlimmerdurst) | 43 comments rivka wrote: "I am not convinced this Kindle edition did not have that cover at some point."

The Kindle edition that you can download at Amazon under the ASIN B004TRXX7C does not have an introduction or notes by Carl F. Hoyde, and it was certainly not published by Barnes & Nobles in their "Classics" imprint as the cover would suggest. The B004TRXX7C book is a public domain Kindle version that Amazon published during their collaboration with Project Gutenberg alongside many other PD classics, easily recognizable by their distinctive cover design.


message 11: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments There are four other Kindle editions of this work available on the US Amazon Kindle store:

http://amzn.com/B00AWJMTRQ
published by Start Publishing LLC; Pap/Dsk (February 8, 2013)
No record on Gooodreads

http://amzn.com/B006LMPHOU
published by Wordsworth Editions (October 1, 2011)
Goodreads http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13... displays cover by Barnes and Noble Classics

http://amzn.com/B000QCS8VA
published by Bantam Classics (November 4, 2003)
Goodreads http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/76... displays the correct cover

http://amzn.com/B000FC1D6I
published by Digireads.com (March 30, 2004)
Goodreads http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/66... displays cover by Barnes and Noble Classics

rivka wrote: "I am not convinced this Kindle edition did not have that cover at some point."

Why would the Kindle PD book and 2 other publishers re-use the cover from another publisher?


message 12: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments Any concrete action for this case?


message 13: by Michelle (new)

Michelle E. Carey | 6 comments I am hopping in this conversation a bit late, but it brings up something I have been wondering about. When I do update a cover- so far, only my books only - I use the cover that is physically in my hands for physical books. However, for Kindle books I purchase, I used the cover that I receive through my Amazon purchases. I also verify the asin number and add if it is different and the different cover. I have been specific to use the picture that states it is the Kindle edition.

Am I doing this correctly? I haven't graduated to the point of doing any other changes that are not my own - which means I am only adding if I don't see the edition already listed.

I want to make sure I am doing my own correctly since I am new. Then I can have confidence that if I notice any changes that can be made to others - I want to make sure I only make correct changes.

If I mess upy own - I can always delete. But I don't want to do anything incorrect to affect all goodread users.

Thanks!

Also, it is my understanding after reading the rules, that if there is any question about a book cover ever being used- we should leave the original cover. And then add a different edition.

If I have any of this wrong, please let me know. Thank you for any help and I will follow this post to learn the final outcome of the book being discussed!!


message 14: by Michelle (new)

Michelle E. Carey | 6 comments Let me quickly add that I go to my Kindle purchase history and use the cover page from mylinked purchase. And just make sure or matches the cover on my kindle.


message 15: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments I am reviving this thread branching from message #5:

Helmut wrote: "As I'm having a closer look at these cover issues, I see that for these editions the image uploader almost always was a user called "goodreads 1", and by the sheer mass of editions that got assigned images by that user, I assume it is some automated batch job, that assigned dummy default images to all Kindle editions without covers around Feb 2012. Could that have something to do with the Amazon clash?"

Could this automated batch job be the source of all Kindle editions with "disputable" covers? Are all the actions of this job reliable.

If the librarians don't want to replace the cover of Kindle editions disputed by other people, I have a compromise: user uploaded covers should take precedence over automated uploaded. Meaning, an alternate cover edition can be created but the user created record should be the main record and will carry the ISBN/ASIN, and the record with the disputed cover will become the alternate cover edition instead.

How does that sound?


message 16: by Helmut (new)

Helmut (schlimmerdurst) | 43 comments Sounds great for me, Eric. Good to see that you're persistent in this topic.


message 17: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 41073 comments Mod
Eric wrote: "Meaning, an alternate cover edition can be created but the user created record should be the main record and will carry the ISBN/ASIN, and the record with the disputed cover will become the alternate cover edition instead."

Adding an alternate cover edition is fine. Moving the ISBN/ASIN is contrary to established policy.


message 18: by Helmut (new)

Helmut (schlimmerdurst) | 43 comments But in such an obvious case of error? Should we really perpetuate the error just because it is established policy?

I hope I don't sound arrogant, but this is a wee bit frustrating...


message 19: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments rivka wrote: "Adding an alternate cover edition is fine. Moving the ISBN/ASIN is contrary to established policy. "

Is the automated batch upload of covers within policy?


message 20: by Eric (last edited Jul 29, 2013 04:25PM) (new)

Eric | 247 comments Helmut wrote: "But in such an obvious case of error? Should we really perpetuate the error just because it is established policy?

I hope I don't sound arrogant, but this is a wee bit frustrating..."


One such error was found in The Mysterious Island (discussed here).

The edition is English (and Public Domain) but the cover is French (by some other publisher). It was replaced.

Is that against policy too?


message 21: by Lobstergirl (new)

Lobstergirl Eric wrote: "user uploaded covers should take precedence over automated uploaded"

This is already the case.


message 22: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments Lobstergirl wrote: "Eric wrote: "user uploaded covers should take precedence over automated uploaded"

This is already the case."


Not according to rivka . Message #17.


message 23: by Lobstergirl (new)

Lobstergirl I'm not seeing how #17 contradicts what I posted.


message 24: by Eric (new)

Eric | 247 comments If the user created record takes precedence over the automated record, why can't the ISBN/ASIN be moved to the user verified record?


back to top