Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Policies & Practices
>
One librarian keeps removing a series.
date
newest »
newest »
If the stories aren't related to one another, it's not a series.It is against policy to call out specific users' edits. Please remove the link to the edit log.
Scott wrote: "If the stories aren't related to one another, it's not a series.It is against policy to call out specific users' edits. Please remove the link to the edit log."
Apologies, I read the policy as don't link directly to the specific user or their edit log. I assumed the book edit log would be acceptable.
Scott wrote: "If the stories aren't related to one another, it's not a series."Also, it is a series. It is sold as a series, marketed as a series, and published as a series. It is an anthology series. It is not up to a random individual to decide that it isn't a series just because they don't want to acknowledge it as a series.
Alysha DeShaé wrote: "Also, it is a series. It is sold as a series, marketed as a series, and published as a series."None of this means anything here.
It is not up to a random individual to decide that it isn't a series just because they don't want to acknowledge it as a series.
No, but it is up to Goodreads to determine what they want to acknowledge as a series on its site. You're a librarian; familiarise yourself with the manual.
Alysha DeShaé wrote: "Also, it is a series. It is sold as a series, marketed as a series, and published as a series. It is an anthology series. It is not up to a random individual to decide that it isn't a series just because they don't want to acknowledge it as a series.."None of these means that it is a series on Goodreads. This particular one comes up often. For example, the Villains books are a series (shared characters) but the Twisted Tales are not (on Goodreads). It is a series on other sites, but for Goodreads, they have to exist in the same world or share characters.
Scott wrote: "You're a librarian; familiarise yourself with the manual."I have. Nowhere does it acknowledge anthology series, as best I can tell. It is not a "non-series collection" nor is it simply an imprint. It is an anthology series.
Stories in an anthology or volumes in a set must also meet the general series qualifications.
I thought this thread might be helpful. It has input from the former moderator, who was an early adaptor of Goodreads & a long time member of staff.https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
You can use the Listopia to track the "series."
Readers of this thread might want to comment in this Policy & Procedures thread.https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
For those books where a series has been removed, should that series information also be removed from the title?
Yes. It can be added to the edition field.
Emily wrote: "Yes. It can be added to the edition field."It can, but unfortunately the edition field is not visible on the book page anymore, so the information will stay hidden.
lethe wrote: "Emily wrote: "Yes. It can be added to the edition field."It can, but unfortunately the edition field is not visible on the book page anymore, so the information will stay hidden."
You're right. That's very unfortunate.
The edition information *does* appear on the Other Editions page. I can see adding the "Harlequin #4378" type, but not these non-series. I can't seem to explain why I think the two are different situations, but maybe someone else can explain why they are the same. I'm willing to be convinced.
I think I can explain why we should not be putting this type of series information in the edition field. The edition field is for edition-specific information, like Illustrated or Large Print and, yes, Harlequin #4378. The edition field should not be populated with information that pertains to all editions of a book. That information goes in the description field.
But doesn't the Harlequin notation often apply across editions as well?
Miriam wrote: "But doesn't the Harlequin notation often apply across editions as well?"I could be wrong , but I think an author could change publishers, and in that case it would not. For these cases, like in the one at the top of this thread, any time the title is published, it would still be part of the series intended by the author(s).
If the author moved the book to a new series (in the case of Harlequin type books) it wouldn't, but I feel like that is more exception than common.Same can happen with any other book as well. Not all of these "series" are author designations, some are publisher "series" or multi author collections. Those may or may not have later editions published as part of the designation.
I don't necessarily object to using the description field, but I'm just not seeing a big difference between the Harlequin designation and other "series" that are not GR series (regardless of publisher or author designation)
Msg 16: CorrectMsg 17: Not necessarily.
Msg 18: Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "Miriam wrote: "But doesn't the Harlequin notation often apply across editions as well?"
I could be wrong , but I think an author could change publishers, and in that case it would not..."
Correct.
Msg 19: Miriam wrote: "I don't necessarily object to using the description field, but I'm just not seeing a big difference between the Harlequin designation and other "series" that are not GR series (regardless of publisher or author designation)"
It's a policy/procedure/decision made by Goodreads staff about the Harlequin editions. When I found out that was the reason, I stopped thinking about it. Mysterious are the ways ... and I have other windmills that need my attention. 😉
If it is published as a series it is incorrect for Goodreads not to list it as a series.
PaulGamerBoy360(Brigham) wrote: "If it is published as a series it is incorrect for Goodreads not to list it as a series."Take it up with staff.
https://www.goodreads.com/about/conta...
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
One specific librarian keeps deleting a series whenever it is added. Specifically, the Twisted Tales series. Here's one of the books in the series; it's frustrating both as a reader and a librarian. As a reader currently making my way through this series, I depend on the series information being correct so that I can read them in order. As a librarian, I don't want to keep having to redo work that has been done by myself and others because one librarian has some strange vendetta against it being listed properly as a series.
This is an anthology series and, as such, should be listed as a series, but this one librarian will not leave it alone. (You can view the series in a variety of places, including amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B082MDG348 )
Can anything be done to prevent this librarian from wrecking the series information every time it is reconstructed?
Edit: Removed the link directly to the book edit log and posted a link to the book itself.