Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Questions (not edit requests)
>
Siren-Bookstrand content tags, where should they go?
date
newest »
newest »
According to the GR Librarian manual the description field is for the following:The description field is for entering a summary of the work. The best description to enter is one found on the back cover or on the dust jacket of the book. If the book does not have a summary listed anywhere on the cover or pages, you can copy a description from a different edition or you can write your own. The description can be a couple of sentences or a couple of paragraphs describing the content of the book. It should be a generic summary and should NOT include reviews or personal feelings (i.e. "This is a book about sisters. It was good. You should read it"). The summary should also NOT contain any important spoilers such as mentions of characters deaths, how the book ends, major twists or other information that would spoil the story for those who have not read it.
Descriptions copied from an outside source, such as Wikipedia, should contain a short citation stating where the summary originated from.
There is no mention of content warnings required for inclusion. Clearly content is included though.
I actual very strongly prefer to have content warnings at the bottom - not the top. If you care about content then you should read the description - but when putting the content warnings first it eclipses the summary description - particularly if you put it in bold. The one you referenced above reads as much as a "promo" in a way as it does content tags - and if everyone followed a content tag at the top sometimes we would run out of room for the description. Your example includes the publisher and line the book is in. That isn't a summary either really...so where do you draw the line?
As far as I know there isn't really a standard publisher model that everyone follows - but I might be wrong. Since none of this content remotely scares me off - I find it irritating that I have to brush past it to see what the story is about. YMMV. I definitely do agree though that content warnings can be very helpful - and needed to help alert readers to what's inside.
How the publisher does it - well everyone does it differently. I've seen descriptions where it indicates "A bargain value at $2.99" before the description but I wouldn't put that in the description box. So probably there is editing on the librarian part here.
I am one of the librarians who will edit to move this content summary to the bottom because I feel it doesn't belong at the top. It just so happens this publisher puts it there. There is another very popular erotic publisher that puts content warnings at the bottom (Samhain Publishing) so if there is to be a standard set clearly it should be the same for all.
It's a good question - hopefully someone in the know can answer and perhaps even clarify because this is absolutely not consistent.
The description is a free form text field. Other publishers and imprints include those content tags in different format, at the end, in the middle, or not at all. Why does there even need to be any kind of specific format or consistency? If it was important, it'd have a field, and a policy.
:-) I'm specifically asking about Siren-Bookstrand, not other publishers. If other publishers put it at the end, then that's how they do it. I wouldn't expect them to be added to the beginning, if the official publisher didn't do it that way (like Samhain Pub as Jo mentioned).
Siren-Bookstrand puts it at the beginning and because I've noticed summaries from S-B published books being edited many times because it's at the top, then someone changes it to the bottom, then someone fixes it, then it's changed, etc. It'd be nice to know, for this publisher, now things should be handled. It'd stop unnecessary editing, is all. Or else, when people see it at the bottom, they'll change it to the top as that's how it is on the official site and it'll just keep going on and on...unless someone gives up or forgets about it. I've seen one book changed back and forth about 5 times, so...yeah...this does happen.
Here's some S-B books that have it at the top as copied from the official site:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
Here's two that was put at the beginning, but edited to the end:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
Most S-B erotica books, though have it at the top.
(Also, I've never seen the in bold in the book summary. I only made it bold in my post here, to highlight what I was talking about with "content tags" ;-) )
Anyway, thanks for weighing in, those that posted.
since I recently asked asterope this question I would also really like to know the answer because my take is that how it is listed on the publisher's website is how it should be listed on goodReads. Raiders of these books are aware of where the normal warnings are if I'm reading a siren book I expected to be at the top and if I'm reading a damn shame book I expected to be at the bottom and in my own personal library that's how I enter information for that book.bottom line for P is that I thought the manuel said listed as it is on the publisher site which is why I always put it out on the top for the siren books and that will be how I continue to list up until told otherwise
The publisher's description or summary is often edited for Goodreads. Why? Because sometimes it contains inappropriate information: big spoilers, blatant marketing, blurbs - these are not supposed to be part of the description on Goodreads. On publishers' websites, it's a different matter - they are free to put whatever they want on their websites, but this material is often altered for GR.So it doesn't really matter how Siren-Bookstrand does it, since Goodreads is not beholden to Siren-Bookstrand.
I agree with Jo - content warnings should be at the end of the description, and they should not be bolded - because they are not the primary purpose of a description. As Jo said, if people are concerned about a book's content then they should read the entire description and not stop after the first two sentences.
Lots of content warnings actually sound like promotional material to me.
I'm not saying anything about being beholden to Siren.. I also don't feel like their content warnings (specifically) have any spoilers attached OR marketing, blurbs, ANY of that.. simply genre type info like its mm, mfm ect. and that the story contains vampires, werewolves, historical, bdsm etc.Me personally I'm not a fan of historical at all even if I read mm. So I would most likely skip that particular book.. or if I didn't like mmf but liked mfm then I'd be warned and skip it.. Not ALL blurbs are clear enough by reading them to know to expect these particular things.
Even Amazon and Barnes and Noble list Siren's content at the beginning of blurb as well. They also list samhain at the bottom exactly like the publisher website.
The point of this is for someone to either make a decision or just bounce around how I feel vs. how you feel and everyone continue to update books how they feel is the correct way without having a definitive answer causing several unnecessary edits.
So who's in charge of editing or making librarian rules or should this be something to 'sit down' and come to a decision on?
Hc wrote: "I'm not saying anything about being beholden to Siren.. "No, I was responding to Asterope's statement which was, "I'm specifically asking about Siren-Bookstrand, not other publishers."
My point being that we don't have different guidelines or rules according to who the publisher is. The description guidelines are the same for everyone, every book.
Even Amazon and Barnes and Noble list Siren's content at the beginning of blurb as well. They also list samhain at the bottom exactly like the publisher website.Those sites don't have an army of volunteer librarians editing descriptions.
Hc wrote: "So who's in charge of editing or making librarian rules or should this be something to 'sit down' and come to a decision on? "Generally a consensus is attempted. As far as I'm aware, everything in the librarian manual was the result of discussion, sometimes dispute resolution, and a general consensus.
I just want to say, yet again that I was never talking about putting them in bold. I've never seen them in bold. Ever. I did it in my OP to highlight what I was referring to, so those that aren't aware can easily see it. That is all. I don't know why people keep bringing up the "and they should not be bolded" thing. They're not. Never were. Won't be. In the GR's summaries, they are normal font, always have been. Please stop mentioning the bold thing, it's not what this is about. If they were in bold, no matter where they are, I could see that as an issue as it's very distracting. I am not advocating that at all. ;-)I just wanted to make sure that was clarified and my stance was made clear about that.
also again my intake flash perspective is however if it's listed on the publishers website is how the librarian should be listing it in good grief that was my question this way we can avoid the numerous edit from top to bottom to top to bottoMand as far as who makes the rules that was kind of the point of this to start a discussion to see the best way to handle them and I am sorry if anyone is taking that the wrong way I do not mean to sound argumentative I am looking for clarification because to me the blurb should be exactly like the publisher's website
honestly now I'm beginning to wonder how many people p for these little warnings at the top verse is at the bottom...again I prefer to go with how the publisher puts there about since I know where to expect to find these things
I disagree with the blurb being the same as the publisher/ author website, which is often full of reviews / praise which is not the same as the description of the book. GR does not need to do as the publisher does, as LG states we would then have different rules go reach.My preference is for content to be at the end of description but would rather it was not there full stop.
I always skip reviews attached and such.. if there are any
You should remove them. Unlike the content tags, which it doesn't seem many people actually care about, that is in the librarian manual.
My view is firstly, that the blurb that a publisher writes can only be a guideline for us on Goodreads. Spoilers and such stuff are part of the blurb-writers manual. We don't want that. The manual says "The best description to enter is one found on the back cover or on the dust jacket of the book" but I've lost count of the number of times that blurb has either spoiled a book for me or else apparently been written by someone who has no idea of the contents of the book. As I said, a guideline.Secondly, blurbs do not need tags or warnings which include "Siren Ménage Everlasting" or "Samhain" any other publisher or imprint, they are advertising and have their own fields. Content warnings possibly could be at the start of the description but why bother?
The edit wars that move the tags from start to end should be flagged to support whenever they are seen because they are stupid and we do not need stupid librarians.
Editing to add, because I said it once an it seems to be missed. No one is talking about putting the content tags in bold. I've never seen them in bold. I merely made it bold to highlight what I was talking about for those who didn't know.
All of them follow this pattern, so when people copy and add the sumamry to GR's they're copied as is...but it seems that some Librarians are sometimes changing it, making it so the content tags are at the end of the summary, not the beginning. Which leads to other Librarians re-editing, etc.
I am asking where they should be placed -- in the beginning, where the publisher has them or at the end?
My view is they should be at the beginning as they often warn for content some may or may not want to read. It lets people know very quickly what is within the book. If they're at the end, they're hidden by the "...more" thing and, while yes, everyone should read things fully, it makes it very easy for things to be missed.
Can someone clarify this issue?
ETA: Also, do authors on GB's have a choice how their blurb is inputted or should it too follow the standard/publisher model? Or can they change things and say, add the content tags in the bottom?
Thanks!