Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

Book Issues > Question re publishers vs imprint

Comments (showing 1-4 of 4) (4 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 32149 comments Mod
We prefer imprint over the more general publisher, when it is known. However, I suggest not making correcting these a major project, as it could take a really long time. The various sources of our book data are certainly inconsistent in this regard.

message 2: by lethe (new)

lethe | 10169 comments This issue recently came up in this topic:

Goodreads has the annoying habit of calling publishers' series imprints. Imprints and publishers' series are two different things, see my comment #9 in said topic.

Penguin Classics is the publisher's series (which may be added in the edition field), and Penguin the publisher that belongs in the publisher field.

message 3: by lethe (new)

lethe | 10169 comments Tim wrote: "I just went back to see if I could still edit the 3 or 4 Penguin Classics but my editing ability on those ACEs I entered has ended. "

I found them and changed them back :)

message 4: by lethe (new)

lethe | 10169 comments Tim wrote: "publisher New American Library which, back in the day, published Signet, Mentor, Classic, Plume, Meridian & NAL books"

I don't know about Classic, but I would say Signet, Mentor, Plume and Meridian are definitely imprints, so should be in the publisher field.

There is no hard and fast rule, but publishers' series names are often in plural: (Modern) Classics, World Classics, Series, etc. In other languages they are often called collections.

back to top