Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

64 views
Book Issues > Please delete these "future" releases of Saga

Comments Showing 1-5 of 5 (5 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Bert (new)

Bert (bjmdotbooks) | 14 comments For some reason someone has created entries for future volumes of Saga, a comic book series. Considering that Volume 6 has only just appeared and that there are no set plans for the run of this series, I don't see the point for these to exist:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...

Can someone please delete these? (Also, why can't I do this? I don't think they've got more than one or two "reviews".)


message 2: by Krazykiwi (last edited Jul 20, 2016 04:26AM) (new)

Krazykiwi | 1767 comments There's no reason to delete these, and they would only get added back. In any case "I don't like them existing" is never a good enough reason to delete things.

Publishers (and readers, as in this case) routinely add publications well ahead of publication date. They often start out with very little information, and more is added as it's known. It allows readers to shelve them, and then get notification when they are actually released, for instance.

ETA: They may not have any reviews or ratings (which is logical, they aren't out yet, but do be aware GR TOS allows people to rate things for any reason they feel like, including how much they're looking forward to something being released) but some have been shelved by a dozen or more people already - only superlibrarians can can remove database entries with more than 5 shelvings. The error message does say reviews, but it includes any shelving in the count.


message 3: by Bert (new)

Bert (bjmdotbooks) | 14 comments These weren't added by the publisher.

Moreover, considering Saga publishes about 1 TPB per year, that would mean the final one on this list won't be an actual book until 2024, perhaps a bit earlier.

But most importantly: there is at this time ZERO knowledge of this series even getting 14 volumes.

Adding a future release that will probably happen: sure. Adding a book that isn't going to be released for at least half a decade, if it's ever going to be released at all: what's the point?

This list is mostly wishful thinking, and I cannot imagine any reason for these entries to exist.


message 4: by Krazykiwi (new)

Krazykiwi | 1767 comments I am quite aware these were not added by the publisher, I was just pointing out it is in fact standard industry practice. Yes, even books 4-5 years out from publication that haven't even begun to be written yet, based on nothing more than a contract having been signed and an ISBN reserved can get them into the onix feeds, if the author and/or relevant series is popular enough. So having users preempt that by doing it themselves is not inherently bad.

The reason for it to exist is people want to shelve it already. Does there need to be another reason?

I agree adding them so far ahead is likely wishful thinking, but they do no harm. More to the point they make the people who want to shelve them happy, particularly the next 2 or 3, which is about as far as I'd have added them if it was me.

But your first post didn't say "There's no information available, and the series might not run that long." It just said you didn't like them and therefore they should be deleted.


message 5: by Bert (new)

Bert (bjmdotbooks) | 14 comments In my first post I said "there are no set plans for the run of this series" which is just about the same as "There's no information available, and the series might not run that long."

> It just said you didn't like them

Nope, it doesn't say that anywhere.


back to top