Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

78 views
Policies & Practices > Ambiguous rule in the manual.

Comments Showing 1-8 of 8 (8 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Empress (last edited Apr 08, 2014 06:21AM) (new)

Empress (the_empress)
Author roles should always be added using the "add role" feature next to the author name, and not by adding it in ( ) following the author name.

For audiobooks or translated editions, this field should list the author of the original work.




So we should put translator as first name and original author in author role or the other way around. I am genuinely confused by this rule.


message 2: by Monique (new)

Monique (kadiya) | 1097 comments Original author in first slot, translator in second spot followed by translator in role.

Like in this example:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...


message 3: by Empress (last edited Apr 08, 2014 06:21AM) (new)

Empress (the_empress) Monique wrote: "Original author in first slot, translator in second spot followed by translator in role.

Like in this example:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1..."


That is what I have always done, that is why I posted this.

Maybe my English is insufficient to understand the rule from the manual, because to me it says something completely different.

If names are not to be added in the role field I suggest rephrasing the rule to avoid confusion amongst non-native English speaking librarians.


message 4: by Monique (new)

Monique (kadiya) | 1097 comments I see what you mean. That sentence really is ambiguous given the paragraph above it. Yes, I agree that line could be better written.


message 5: by Emy (new)

Emy (emypt) | 5037 comments I think it's because English can be rather ambiguous in defining which word the "this" is referring to. The problem is that the whole section is referring to "this field", i.e. the Author area of the form. Would it be clearer if somehow the bits about Translators, Narrators etc. was separated out so that "this field" therefore only referred to "who to enter names in the author box(es)", and the Role bit was dealt with separately?


message 6: by Empress (new)

Empress (the_empress) I think it will be helpful to do that separation, as we often read only the section we are most interested in and my search for translator give only 2 results, this part of the manual and the part for sacred texts.


message 7: by Emy (new)

Emy (emypt) | 5037 comments I'll have a think on it and then we can see if we can come up with something clearer to suggest to TPB :)


message 8: by Empress (last edited Apr 08, 2014 10:57AM) (new)

Empress (the_empress) Emy wrote: "I'll have a think on it and then we can see if we can come up with something clearer to suggest to TPB :)"


I think even moving the sentence about the author roles would make it clearer.

I see that author role is after explaining about adding editor. I think those should be kept together.

Isn't it simple if "that field" is changed to "author field". Though repetitive this is a manual not a creative writing, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Sorry to be pain in the bum but, if I am a new librarian that part manual that will really confuse me. And I have occasionally seen librarians adding names in the role fields.

TPB? Trade Paper Back? The Parent Body?


back to top