What constitutes a series?

[Halvor (Raknes)]

I've had several run-ins with (and without) Rivka over the creation of series for non-fiction books.

The latest spat ended in me becoming a bit uncivil, but the issue remains unresolved and in a completely unsatisfactory state in my opinion.

When Goodreads insists that a 2-part anthology of bed-time stories (365 as the title suggests, divided across the two volumes, which are aptly, numbered '1' and '2') doesn't constitute a series and that these two books shouldn't be hooked together (oh, yes, I can create a Listopia list…), then I wonder what's happened to common sense!?

I have repeatedly asked for GR's definition of a series. The best I have been given is the following:

"-It should apply to all editions of a work.
-It should have characters and/or universes in common."

That's it! Still, even with that I cannot see how the one request to which I have linked to above doesn't fulfill the definition.

Can someon please direct me towards a sensible discussion about series definition?

[Philip]

2 things
1) Nobody is going to go against the ruling of staff/GR Employee
2) Just because there are multiple volumes does not mean something is a series. For example a large chunk of the Delphi Classic books would be in series, since they are considered volumes, but they have nothing to do with each other, they are just collections of works. What you are stating above would be the same thing. It is just collections of stories that do not have anything in common, so they are not a series.

[lethe]

The continuous page numbering suggests to me that this is one work split up in two parts. I would have expected the ISBN being the same for both parts though.

[Philip]

lethe wrote: "The continuous page numbering suggests to me that this is one work split up in two parts. I would have expected the ISBN being the same for both parts though."

Yeah that is weird. Missed the continuous page number thing.

[Hugo]

Halvor.

The most basic definition of a Series, according to Goodreads policy, is of a continuing narrative featuring the same characters, and/or set in the same universe.

From the Librarian Manual:

Imprints and other unrelated collections of works (usually by multiple authors) are not series. They can be grouped with a Listopia list, or the collection/imprint information can be listed in the edition field, but they should not be grouped into a series, or listed on a book's title line.

As a general rule, a book is only part of a series if that designation would apply to all editions of a work. To be a series, books should have characters and/or universes in common. In the case of imprints and other non-series collections, it is common for some of these books to be published under numerous other imprints as well.

For example, SF Masterworks would not be a series, and neither would Harlequin Blaze.

Anthologies of short stories are not a Goodreads series, even if there is a series of them.

[[deleted user]]

I feel like there are examples all over GRs where the books like the OP points out are turned into a series, even though they don't follow the series rule.

{deleted example}

Its a great way to clearly organize edition information and is in use all over the site. If that series gets deleted it will IMO become unclear as to what the difference is between those books. This "series" makes it perfectly obvious. (librarian notes aren't seen by the average user and descriptions get over-written all the time)

{deleted example}

[Hugo]

Corinne wrote: "I feel like there are examples all over GRs where the books like the OP points out are turned into a series, even though they don't follow the series rule."

As a fan of horror stories myself, I see this instance a lot of the time; and whether or not I agree that it makes such a series easy to see and navigate, it is at the moment against GR policy to create a Series for anthologies of unconnected stories.

As for non-fiction and books split into parts, I steer well clear... ;o)

[[deleted user]]

Hugo wrote: "...it is at the moment against GR policy to create a Series for anthologies of unconnected stories. ..."

I realize that. I was attempting to add to the discussion. I can understand the OP's confusion/frustration when these "series" are all over the site.

{deleted examples}

Maybe we should have a narc thread. joking.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Corinne wrote: "I feel like there are examples all over GRs where the books like the OP points out are turned into a series, even though they don't follow the series rule."

Just because there are series created which do not conform to policy, doesn't mean we should therefore create a series which does not comply with policy. One of the things librarians do is to fix things, and that includes fixing errors made by other librarians.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Further, if you see items, including series, that do not comply, please report them so they can be fixed. You could even start a Looking for a Project thread. Many of these could be turned into a Listopia before deleting the series.

[rivka, Former Moderator]

Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Just because there are series created which do not conform to policy, doesn't mean we should therefore create a series which does not comply with policy. One of the things librarians do is to fix things, and that includes fixing errors made by other librarians."

Well said.

[[deleted user]]

Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Just because there are ..."

agreed. well said.

[Emy]

Here's a Project page which is for any Series that need altering to Listopias. Feel free to add any you find to it :)

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[Halvor (Raknes)]

Let me just direct the focus back to the two books that are the focus of the (now closed) thread in message #1.

q1: So it doesn't matter that the title says "365 bedtime stories" and that the only way you can get to that figure is by adding the stories in both volumes?

q2: And now that we have also established that the page numbering is continous from volume 1 to volume 2, i.e. the first page in volume 2 is 401, does that still not matter?

By the way, the code linking to that other discussion was broken, I have now fixed it, but just in case, here it is: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Halvor wrote: "Let me just direct the focus back to the two books that are the focus of the (now closed) thread in message #1.

q1: So it doesn't matter that the title says "365 bedtime stories" and that the only..."

No, it is not a series, it is a 2-volume work. There are many multi-volume works where the volumes have been published separately and with different ISBNs. That doesn't make them a series.

[Halvor (Raknes)]

Your answer begs this question, Elizabeth:

Is it fine then that multi-volume works should remain not linked? Such as a twenty-volume encyclopedia where each volume has it's own ISBN (and there may or may not be an additional ISBN for the complete set)? (And please nobody mention Listopia or I'll laugh myself into a hernia­­.)

Because in my view, not problematizing this and simply, in the worst of bureaucratic fashion merely consulting the rules and concluding that (apparently) such works do not fulfill the definition for a series, makes a mockery out of GR users and their needs and expectations.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Halvor wrote: "Because in my view, not problematizing this and simply, in the worst of bureaucratic fashion merely consulting the rules and concluding that (apparently) such works do not fulfill the definition for a series, makes a mockery out of GR users and their needs and expectations. "

You are welcome to have contrary opinions, which doesn't change the policy.