Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

410 views

Comments Showing 1-50 of 101 (101 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 3

message 1: by jenjn79 (last edited Apr 30, 2009 05:33PM) (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Here is the very rough draft of "how to edit a book" which has information on what each section of the book edit page is to be used for. It's just a first draft - spelling and grammar mistakes and all - for discussion on anything that needs to be added, changed, reworded, etc. It's kinda lengthy since I tried to include a lot things that are necessary for librarians to know. And there are some sections with (((text))) where I make a note of something I need to look into for clarification.

So if you have thoughts on adjustments, leave a comment.

...okay, so the draft was too long to post so I uploaded it to my webspace. You can view it here

****

EDIT: of course, a lot of this might be repetitive now that there are changes upcoming to the edit pages. Oh well.


message 2: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Thanks Isis! This should definitely be in the librarians manual. I'm sure it will fit there.


message 3: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 593 comments Great job.

The only thing I've done differently is the series information. I thought the instruction from GR was to leave the formatting alone if it was consistent among that series, even if it didn't fit the exact pattern (Series Name, #_). In other words, hold off for GR to finish making the series info change.

I've got some books without the comma and "#", an even more brief format.
Ex: (Meredith Gentry 3)

I've got other books with colons and the "book" keyword. (The colon was used instead of a comma because there was a comma in the series name.)
Ex: (Anita Blake, Vampire Hunter: Book 17)

And thanks for the info about sort by titles. I never could decide how to handle moving an article to the end of the title when you had series information attached. In other words, does the "the" go after the title or after the parenthetical series info.


JG (Introverted Reader) | 480 comments Thanks for taking the time to do this, Isis. You obviously put a lot of thought into it. My suggestions (some of these are very small, but I do tend to get lost in details sometimes):

Author names: Could you specify that they should be entered first last?

"Author" roles: Would it be a good idea to say "Do NOT include cover artists" or any other roles we've decided not to include? (Did we decide to leave out cover artists?) This is small and might not be worth the effort, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

The instructions for adding an edition with alternate cover art are pretty complex. Could you link to an example?

Publisher: I'm not clear on imprint vs publisher. You don't mention it, but I know someone was making a big deal about it a few months ago. Does it matter? If so, could you explain the difference?

You mention Worldcat somewhere. Could you turn that into a link, please?

Description: Could you say that if we're cutting and pasting from Wikipedia, we need to be very careful about spoilers?

Upload photo: Would it be a good idea to say NOT to use the art used for the cover? It should only be used as it is on the cover, most often with the title and author included.

Hopefully all that makes sense. You did a great job spelling everything out.


message 5: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Thanks, Lisa, mlady_rebecca and JG!

******

mlady_rebecca: the series one is tricky because I don't think we ever settled on one format other than to say that it wasn't necessary to use the words "series" and "book" and to go with the simpler form of "series name _".

I usually leave existing info alone except if it is the long-hand version...seeing a series labeled "The In Death Series, Book 17" drives me nuts and looks cluttered. So I tend to clean up entries like that.

But I can add other accepted examples.

re: the issue of leaving series formatting alone if it is correct...I was going to add that, but considering I've been guilty of going around reformatting series labels to the short version, I wasn't sure if I should.

**********

JG: author names - I'll definitely get the first/last thing added. That's been a definite issue with manually added editions.

author roles - I forget the consensus on that one. But if we did decide they shouldn't be included, I'll add it as well.

alt. cover editions - I will pop in a link...I've added a bunch myself so I'll use one of those.

publisher - I remember the discussion, but I think it was mostly one person wanting more fields. Or maybe it was to list both? Or was it to put the imprint in the title? Anyone remember?

Worldcat - will add a link to that

Description - I will make note about spoilers. I think I'll also say that if a description is copied from elsewhere, credit should be given to the source.

Cover art - will edit that also to say to only upload the actual cover image.


This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For | 949 comments I think the general conclusion on series was the best approach was to use "Series Name, #_" BUT that it wasn't worth librarians getting worked up about going out of their way to change everything if they didn't want to because there will hopefully be a better solution in the future.

I've been gradually changing series to match this form, but only if I'm working on an author or set of books for another reason.


message 7: by jenjn79 (last edited Apr 30, 2009 08:08PM) (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Okay, the page was edited to include several of the points JG brought up - do those changes cover the issues you brought up, JG?

But I'm holding off on the series issue mlady_rebecca brought up, and 2 of JG points (the cover artist role issue, and the publisher vs imprint issue).

There's a change log at the bottom of the page noting changes.


message 8: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
First of all, brava!!! That's great, Isis. Shows a lot of work and careful thought.
Star 2Star 2Star 2

Cheerleaders 2


A few suggestions:

* Sometimes with series you included a comma and sometimes you did not. If that's deliberate, then it needs to be clearer why; if it's not, consistency might be better.

* IMO, this ISBN converter is considerably better than the other.

* ISBNs first started being used in 1966 and were not internationally accepted until about 1970 (1974 in the UK).

* I would specify that ASIN/LCCN never be placed in the ISBN field.

* I recommend providing the link to Google Books (http://books.google.com/), not straight Google. And for the LoC search (http://catalog.loc.gov/), not the main page.

* Page numbers: include appendices, glossaries, and author's notes if they are normal numbered pages (not if they have ii, etc.) Do not include ads or previews for other books.

* Maybe an example of what should and should not be used as URLs -- a yes and a no for the same book. (OSC's Ender's Game, perhaps.)

* Its, not it's associated editions. (Sorry, pet peeve.)



message 9: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 593 comments I'm good with changing series, if we've reached a consensus. I mainly like to see internal consistency within a given series.


message 10: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Thanks, Rivka. I'll work on those changes tonight and I'll post when the new ideas (and any others) get added.


message 11: by Random (last edited May 01, 2009 07:37AM) (new)

Random (rand0m1s) | 56 comments I don't know if this will be relevant.

When adding a new book, if you leave the sort field blank the system will auto fill.

When it does so, it handles leading articles in the title as

title name [series #:], the
instead of
title name, the [series #:]

I was wondering the other day about imprint/publisher but hadn't gotten around to seeing if there were any topics on the subject. I think it would be handy to see detailed in the doc.


I like the document. It contains a lot of info that isn't in the manual and is difficult to find elsewhere. :)



message 12: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Random wrote: "It contains a lot of info that isn't in the manual and is difficult to find elsewhere. "

Indeed. Three cheers for Isis!

Cheerleader 2Cheerleader 2Cheerleader 2


message 13: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments LOL...cool cheerleaders, Rivka.

And thanks, everyone! I'm glad the page seems like it will be a helpful tool.

I'm not sure if Goodreads will officially host the page or not, but I have no problem leaving it on my webspace for people to view if that's the easiest solution.

Random wrote: "I don't know if this will be relevant.

When adding a new book, if you leave the sort field blank the system will auto fill.

When it does so, it handles leading articles in the title as

title nam..."


True, that is what the system does (re: article after series)...which I've always thought was odd, but it's probably the easiest way to work it. If I manually do the sort by title on a book with a series, I tend to put it before the series part.

But when I do edits tonight, I will add information about that, along with some of the other changes suggested.


message 14: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Isis FG wrote: "I'm not sure if Goodreads will officially host the page or not"

I think the answer to that may be yes, but at minimum I can edit each of the sections into the Manual.


message 15: by Otis, Chief Architect (new)

Otis Chandler | 315 comments Mod
Awesome - thanks so much Isis! Rivka can you add that to the librarian manual? Either as one entry or broken up - whatever you think looks better.


message 16: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
I think broken up, probably. But I may also enter it as one "new librarians" article, if the duplication is ok. And I'll wait until the editing is done.


message 17: by jenjn79 (last edited May 01, 2009 04:28PM) (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Otis wrote: "Awesome - thanks so much Isis!"

Thanks, Otis! I'm happy to help out where I can.

*********

Version 1.2 with various edits (noted in the change log) has been posted.

Still needing clarification on:
--whether cover artists should or should not be listed in the author fields
--the issue of publisher versus imprint


message 18: by Otis, Chief Architect (new)

Otis Chandler | 315 comments Mod
Our release is out - let me know what you think of the new edit book page?


message 19: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
VERY cool. I especially enjoyed "This information will eventually be used for a higher purpose." :D


message 20: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
And the undo function is so very nice. *gleeful*


message 21: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Oh, I like very much what I see. I don't see the two things Rivka just mentioned. Perhaps I have to be actually editing a book? Anyway, Thank you very much. Vast improvement. Now, as long as librarians read those instructions... ;-)


message 22: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
The undo is on the log pages.


message 23: by Lisa (last edited May 01, 2009 04:55PM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Thank you Rivka! I'll definitely check that out!

Edit: I'd been there but missed it. Now I see it. AND I'm very excited.


message 24: by jenjn79 (last edited May 01, 2009 05:46PM) (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments I have to admit that though in essence I like the idea of having to enter a reason for the change, I can also imagine it becoming very tedious for those of us who do a lot of edits.

I'm kinda torn on the idea. I like it, but then I think how there are times when I go through and add series info to all editions of a book...I just copy and paste title to make it simple. So thinking about how now every time I'll have to add a reason for making the change makes me cringe a little...especially some of those books with like 20+ editions.


message 25: by Otis, Chief Architect (new)

Otis Chandler | 315 comments Mod
The reason isn't required. Though it says it is :)


message 26: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Reason for change is optional. Reason to become a librarian is now required.


message 27: by jenjn79 (last edited May 01, 2009 05:53PM) (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Otis wrote: "The reason isn't required. Though it says it is :)"

Ah, that works. All's well then ;)

I like the other changes. Makes the edit page much more informative.

The only thing I'd change would be the example under title:
For example: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Book 1)

People see that "Book" word label and they think it has to be used for every series label. I'd use a more typical title/series example. Most series aren't labeled like the HP books.


message 28: by Otis, Chief Architect (new)

Otis Chandler | 315 comments Mod
Can you suggest one?


message 29: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments The one I used on the "how to use the book edit page" was:

The Unsung Hero (Troubleshooters, #1)

but if you wanted to go with something more viral mainstream:

Breaking Dawn (Twilight, #4)
[Twilight (Twilight, #1) might be a little confusing:]


JG (Introverted Reader) | 480 comments Looks like you addressed my main concerns, Isis. Thanks again for doing this.

Thanks to you too, Otis. The edit page makes a lot more sense now.


message 31: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Otis, I saw that you changed the series example on the Edit page. Thanks for doing that! I think it may help a lot in getting people to use the same format for series labels.


message 32: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments Does anyone have any more suggested changes for the how to edit a book page?

I've added all changes suggested already except for these two:
--whether cover artists should or should not be listed in the author fields
--the issue of publisher versus imprint

since I don't know how to answer those issues.

I will probably add a section for the new field about entering the reason for a change. And I may add a section about when manually adding a new edition is appropriate.


message 33: by Lisa (last edited May 03, 2009 08:42AM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Isis,

I'm still reading through your how to edit a book instructions. It looks great.

So far all I'd change is the google link. I'd make it to google books, not google. Sorry, I do not know how to format this correctly, but I know that you do:

http://books.google.com/

Edit: Actually, I much prefer google books advanced!!!:

http://books.google.com/advanced_book...


Edit:

This is optional and "unrelated text" you'd think would cover it, but I'd add "or preview text of other books" or something like it to the page number instructions. Isis, your instructions are perfectly clear to me, but I think preview chapters/text to future/other books might confuse some librarians not aware they shouldn't be included.

Everything else looks terrific to me.


message 34: by Cait (new)

Cait (tigercait) | 5005 comments This is fantastic! :)

I do have a few suggestions:

When numbering books in a series, be sure to number them in the correct, accepted order. The best place to find the correct order is often on the author's official website.

Actually, I'd say that the best place to find the order is on the cover of the book, if you have it available. Sometimes books are reissued in different orders -- Narnia is the most famous example of this, but I see it with translated books often, if one of the earlier books was published split or omnibused and that throws off the numbering on the rest of the series in that translation.

When initially manually adding a new edition to Goodreads, the system will automatically create the sort by title.

You might want to mention that the system sort-by won't handle articles other than "a", "an", or "the", so if a title begins with punctuation (such as quote marks) or a non-English article (such as La) the sort-by should be manually set.

Also, author names should be entered first name last name so they will link to the appropriate author profile on Goodreads.

Should middle names and initials be mentioned here, so people don't think that they should be left out?

When doing this, enter the exact ISBN into the appropriate 10 or 13 digit field on the book edit page.

"enter the exact ISBN without dashes", I'd suggest.

published - month - day

I'd suggest mentioning that month and day are optional but year is STRONGLY encouraged.


message 35: by jenjn79 (new)

jenjn79 | 565 comments re: Lisa's suggestions -

There is a link to Google Books in one of the other sections. I included Google since I used it often to look up information. And generally I've not found Google Books to be any more helpful than other sites. But I can add another link to it.

I will also update the page number section with your suggestion.

*****

re: Cait's post

series number - I've not actually come across many books that have a number on the front. Most of the series I read just say what series it is. But I can add a note to that section to say if the cover has a series number on it, to use that.

sort by title - I'll adjust that section.

author name - I will rework that a little to mention middle initial. And I think I'll also add a part about author's whose first names are initials (i.e. how that should be formatted).

ISBN - I don't think it matters if the dashes are entered. I've done it both ways an not had any problems. Has anyone had or heard of issues with this?

published-month-day - Good suggestion. I will add that as well.


message 36: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Thanks Isis. Thank you so much for all this work - It's going to immensely improve things here.


message 37: by Kathrynn (new)

Kathrynn | 189 comments Fantastic, Isis!


A. Could you emphasize (underline or bold) this:

"When a book has multiple authors they should be listed according to the order they show on the cover, if possible."

It's so important to list authors in the same order and using how the book indicates is the best tool. I know we had a discussion(s) on this in the group.

B. I was thinking about book titles in other languages. Noticed several formats and wonder if we should include a consensus.

1. Translated Title / English Title (Series, #1)

or

2. Translated Title (Series, #1) (English Title)

or

3. Translated Title (Series, #1)

C. I've seen people putting the publisher's info in ALL CAPS...perhaps a note about that.

D. May need to remove "Amazon" from the sample of official URL. Because the edit screen states about not using this for book sellers.

I'm still scratching my head about not including fiction db in the URL when I use that as a source for award data. They have excellent book data (minus page numbers).
Also, putting that link (exactly to the book) shows the award data, synopsis, etc.

Awhile back we could include multiple URLs separated by semi-colon, but that doesn't appear to work anymore.

E. For character names: Could we include an example of what NOT to do like: Bob and James (Grr, I see this all the time).

F. When a book comes out in large print, I've been putting that information in the publishing area.

For example: Wheeler (Large Print)

I think it clutters up the title--especially if there is series info--to include the type of print there.

What do others think? And can we include the consensus where that should go?

I used to put the words "(Large Print)" in the format area, but now that that is a drop down it doesn't seem right to edit.

Thoughts?

Great work!


message 38: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Translated Title (Series, #1) (English Title)

That would be my vote. But I agree that consensus is more important.


I'm still scratching my head about not including fiction db in the URL when I use that as a source for award data.

In cases where there is no more official link, I tend to agree. (Maybe Otis will clarify.)


Personally, I think Large Print still belongs in the format area. Editing it in is fine.


message 39: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Isis FG wrote: "--whether cover artists should or should not be listed in the author fields"

Otis said no.



Isis FG wrote: "--whether cover artists should or should not be listed in the author fields
--the issue of publisher versus imprint"


Personally, I'd leave that one be. Not only is not always clear even if you are actually holding the book in your hands, it certainly is not when looking books up various places online.


message 40: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 593 comments For the translated books that are part of a series, wouldn't it be useful to also have the series name in both English and the translated language?

So more like:

Translated Title (Series, #1) / English Title (Series, #1)


message 41: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Rebecca, I like your idea.


message 42: by Kathrynn (new)

Kathrynn | 189 comments mlady_rebecca wrote: "For the translated books that are part of a series, wouldn't it be useful to also have the series name in both English and the translated language?

So more like:

Translated Title (Series, #1) / E..."


I like that too, but can't always translate the series info...




message 43: by Kathrynn (new)

Kathrynn | 189 comments rivka wrote: "Isis FG wrote: "--whether cover artists should or should not be listed in the author fields"

Otis said no.


Good to know. I've been seeing more and more of the cover artist added as author AND the system or a person creates author data, but it's a cover artist. I'll start removing that when I see it.

Been seeing "Reader" in lieu of "Narrator" and been changing that when I see it.




This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For | 949 comments The problem with putting both the translated and English titles in the title field (beyond clutter) is that there is not always a one to one correspondence, say when a single volume in English is broken into two volumes in German. I always try to describe this situation in the description and in librarian notes, but from a title standpoint it could become very awkward.

Some other information which is still missing from the document (these can be reworded to better match the document):

* Names, titles, etc., should all be entered with proper capitalization. Do not use all caps or all lowercase, unless this is the proper form for the specific name or title in question.

* Subtitles should generally be included, separated from the main title by a colon and a single space, e.g., (find an example)

* Author initials should be followed by a period, e.g., "Philip K. Dick" and not "Philip K Dick"

* Author names with consecutive initials should have no space between the initials, but should still have the period after each initial, e.g., "J.R.R. Tolkien" and not "JRR Tolkien" or "J. R. R. Tolkien"

* Author names should not include titles or degrees (e.g., Dr., Professor, Sir, Captain, Reverend, PhD, CPA, etc.), thus "Arthur Conan Doyle" and not "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" (Certain exceptions are allowable, for example, Dr. Seuss)

* Author names can include relational suffixes, such as Jr. or III. They should occur at the end of the name, separated by a space without a comma. For example, "L.E. Modesitt Jr." not "L.E. Modesitt, Jr."

* It's already implied, but emphasize that an author's role should be included using the role function and not as part of the author's name

* In the end of the ISBN section, where there is a discussion of when ISBN was implemented and pre-ISBN books, you might add a note to the effect of "It is possible for pre-ISBN books to be associated with an ISBN if the ISBN was added to a printing of the same edition which occurred after the adoption of ISBN". I can provide an example, if useful.

----

Also, a couple of questions which I've been pondering lately and I don't know if they've been discussed:

* Publishers: What form makes the most sense or is correct? Should it be "Ace" or "Ace Books"? Should one include suffixes such as "Inc." or "Assoc."? Should it be "DelRey" or "Ballantine" or "DelRey/Ballantine" (I guess this is where the imprint issue comes into play)

* Where should edition specific information go? For example, there's a debate about whether Large Print should be indicated in the title, publisher, or binding. What about things like "10th anniversary edition" or "special deluxe edition"? Usually these are found in parentheses in the title, but is there a more appropriate location? Should there be an additional (optional) field for this sort of info which is neither title, subtitle, series, binding, or publisher? If so, it would be a good place to put Large Print as well.


message 45: by Kathrynn (last edited May 03, 2009 05:38PM) (new)

Kathrynn | 189 comments * Where should edition specific information go? For example, there's a debate about whether Large Print should be indicated in the title, publisher, or binding. What about things like "10th anniversary edition" or "special deluxe edition"? Usually these are found in parentheses in the title, but is there a more appropriate location? Should there be an additional (optional) field for this sort of info which is neither title, subtitle, series, binding, or publisher? If so, it would be a good place to put Large Print as well.

Good idea. I see "Boxed Set" or "Collector's Edition" often. Having a separate space for that and "Large Print" would be great.



message 46: by Kathrynn (new)

Kathrynn | 189 comments Those were excellent points, Michael.


message 47: by Lisa (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2413 comments Yes, I agree with Kathrynn. They certainly were excellent points Michael. You found a lot more to include.


message 48: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 593 comments I just thought

Translated Title (Series, #1) / English Title (Series, #1)

might be better than

Translated Title (English series name, #1)

which is what I've been seeing in some of the authors I maintain.

Personally, I've been largely leaving the foreign language titles alone, and have been working to keep the English editions in sync.

But I think all the books for a given author would be kept in better condition if the individual titles were translated. Maybe there needs to be a new field. Guess this goes back to that whole "original title" idea that was bounced around a few weeks back.

Aldawen wrote: "Or would you like to have your English books cluttered up with additional title and series info in German, French, Spanish, etc.? ;)"

I know you meant that as a joke, but I'll answer seriously. Given that this is a US based site which conducts it's business (groups, FAQs, announcements, menuing,...) solely in English, I would expect to see foreign titles translated into English for the benefit of the GR staff and the Librarians from English speaking countries. And, no, I would not expect (or appreciate) seeing the opposite. If this was a German site, I'd expect to see the German language favored.


message 49: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 45058 comments Mod
Well said.


message 50: by mlady_rebecca (new)

mlady_rebecca | 593 comments Thanks, Rivka.


« previous 1 3
back to top