Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
45 views
Policies & Practices > Date of original publication

Comments Showing 1-12 of 12 (12 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments In the case of anthologies (of one or various authors), what should be considered as the original date of publication : the date of the first publication of the anthology or the date of the oldest text in the anthology ? Thanks for the recommandation.


message 2: by lethe (new)

lethe | 13669 comments It should be the date of the *newest* text in the anthology.

If previously unpublished contributions are included, it should be the date of the first publication of the anthology.


message 3: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments OK. Thanks.


message 4: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments In this case, I think you may delete this crazy folder :
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...

and just transfer the ISBN on this one, with date of publication 2005 :
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...


message 5: by lethe (last edited Sep 21, 2019 10:10AM) (new)

lethe | 13669 comments André wrote: "In this case, I think you may delete this crazy folder :
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...

and just transfer the ISBN on this..."


The changelog shows that Worldcat created this entry in 2008, and later deleted 'tome 2' from the title and added publication date 20002005, so why it shows as 65535 is a mystery to me.

Looking at the entry in Worldcat, it is clear that it was meant to be 2000-2005, since it describes two volumes: https://www.worldcat.org/title/romanc...

Since the ISBNs belong to tome 2 (tome 1 has different ISBNs and was published 5 years earlier), I will merge the edition.

Please, in future do not add a duplicate edition, but ask here in the Librarians Group to have the existing edition corrected. Adding a duplicate creates a lot of extra work.

ETA: Merged.


message 6: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments lethe wrote: "André wrote: "In this case, I think you may delete this crazy folder :
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...

and just transfer th..."


I know that I should have not created duplicates but I was so unhappy with all those approximative folders... and doubtful that any librarian would ever take care of all my corrections !

As for "Les romanciers libertins", you could create a serie but not merge volume 1 and volume 2. In reality there are three ISBN numbers :
- Volume I (published in 2000) : 9782070113293
- Volume II (published in 2005) : 2070115704
- Coffret Volume I et II (published in 2005) : 2070118401

See the publisher website : http://www.gallimard.fr/searchinterne...

For Gallimard books, the website of the publisher is the most reliable source. Highly professional !


message 7: by Emily (last edited Sep 21, 2019 10:14AM) (new)

Emily | 13197 comments André wrote: "I know that I should have not created duplicates"...

Then don't. We have asked in multiple threads now not to do this.

"and doubtful that any librarian would ever take care of all my corrections !"

If you ask in the correct way, and reply to your own post if it has been more than a day or two, then your edits will probably be completed.

If you create more work then people probably won't respond, as they will move on to other projects.


message 8: by lethe (new)

lethe | 13669 comments It is better not to use the Policies & Practices folder for edit requests.

You could add volume 1 and the set yourself, if they are not in the database yet.

I am not sure if we create series for anthologies in multiple volumes. I know we don't for collected works of an author.

Regarding your original question: what should be the original publication date for this anthology? I have set it at 2005 for now.


message 9: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments Emily wrote: "André wrote: "I know that I should have not created duplicates"...

Then don't. We have asked in multiple threads now not to do this.

"and doubtful that any librarian would ever take care of all ..."


I know, I know... But, in some cases, describing the corrections to be done is almost more time consuming that reading the book...

I am sorry, I do not understand your "reply to your own post if it has been more than a day or two".


message 10: by lethe (new)

lethe | 13669 comments André wrote: "I am sorry, I do not understand your "reply to your own post if it has been more than a day or two". "

If you have started a thread and not received a reply within two days, you can "bump" the thread (i.e. move the thread to the top of the list) by replying to it.

That way, there is less chance of the thread being overlooked.


message 11: by André (new)

André (alfarrabiste) | 1333 comments lethe wrote: "André wrote: "I am sorry, I do not understand your "reply to your own post if it has been more than a day or two". "

If you have started a thread and not received a reply within two days, you can ..."


Thanks for the tip !


message 12: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 42044 comments Mod
Since the initial question regarding policy has been answered, closing thread.

For requests to edit specific books, threads in the Book Issue folder would be appropriate.


back to top
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.