Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Questions (not edit requests)
>
Bots creating duplicates?
date
newest »
newest »
Tami wrote: "If they are not duplicates I suppose I should leave them be but if they are duplicates how to deal with them?"Weep, for the bots have overrun us.
Tami wrote: "I keep encountering these records created by the bots that have a librarian note that says "The ISBN XXXXXXXXXXXXX for this book was also used by another book" but it's only the isbn10 copied into ..."These are not duplicates! The latest "gimmick" of our oh-so-great bot is that it always tries to add the ISBNs of the print versions to the Kindle editions (which it does diligently). If the print ISBN is already correctly assigned to the print book, the bot creates this note.
There was this problem before around the turn of the year, then it was apparently solved for a short time, but now the bot is happily mixing up the ISBNs again and creating meaningless notes.
Miss Pageturner wrote: "Tami wrote: "I keep encountering these records created by the bots that have a librarian note that says "The ISBN XXXXXXXXXXXXX for this book was also used by another book" but it's only the isbn10..."so what should we do with all these kindle editions that now have additional ISBNs since we can't delete ISBNs anymore as librarians? almost all the new added editions (at least the german translations) have this issue. there are way to many to report every one of them. and it makes it so hard to identify which edition is the the kindle edition and which not, since all of them have ISBNs now.
the database is a mess right now.
paperlove wrote: "Miss Pageturner wrote: "Tami wrote: "I keep encountering these records created by the bots that have a librarian note that says "The ISBN XXXXXXXXXXXXX for this book was also used by another book" ..."At the moment I send daily mails to the support with the links to about 20 books that are affected by this, with the request to remove the ISBNs or move them to the print editions. Sometimes I write several a day. Support reacts very quickly, usually a " batch " of links is dealt with within 2-3 hours. So far I have only received very nice replies with thanks, so it seems to be ok.
However, I also asked whether they might not want to think about at least deleting the Superlibrarians ISBNs, then everything wouldn't have to end up with the support.
Otherwise, we can only hope that the problembot will be fixed and we Librarians should always make sure to ALWAYS fill in both ISBNs, i.e. 10 and 13, as well as the ASIN, if possible. If the respective numbers are already assigned, the bot cannot enter anything twice.
Miss Pageturner wrote: "These are not duplicates!"I was almost sure they were. Thanks.
If it is the ISBN in the ASIN field they usually are duplicates in the records I have seen so far.
Lieke wrote: "If it is the ISBN in the ASIN field they usually are duplicates in the records I have seen so far."Do you have a Link to an example? I have seen many such cases, but not duplicates. They are the Kindle version with the ISBN of the print book if this has not yet been created, or often with the ISBN of the epub e-book. Sometimes you have several Kindles, but that's because Amazon sometimes gives different ASINs for the same book in different regions. For example, at Amazon,com USA a Kindle has one ASIN and at Amazon,de in Germany or Amazon,fr in France the same Kindle has different ASINs. The bots then import them all as individual entries. According to the current guidelines, these are not duplicates, but independent versions.
I know, I don't have examples at the moment but a lot of the ones I saw where two records one with the ISBN in the ISBN field and one with the ISBN in the ASIN field.
I've seen duplicates and also the mixed isbns.I've also sent many reports to support, and they've been fixed very quickly with a thank you.
It is indeed a mess.
Lieke wrote: "I know, I don't have examples at the moment but a lot of the ones I saw where two records one with the ISBN in the ISBN field and one with the ISBN in the ASIN field."ak ok, yes I saw that too, mostly if an entry made by someone hasn't filled in everything and the bot took what wasn't filled in.
Let's hope they will fix this ISBN mess soon. Until then all we Librarians can too is to be aware to fill always ISBNs and ASIN while making new entrys and collect the cases of mixed entry to report them to the support.
I'm confused. Some people say they are duplicates and others say they aren't. I was almost positive this one was a duplicate https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... because it's the same isbn as the other record, the bot just created a new record and copied that into the asin field. Same edition type, same everything else. It doesn't make sense to me this isn't a. An isbn number isn't an asin.
Tami wrote: "I'm confused. Some people say they are duplicates and others say they aren't. I was almost positive this one was a duplicate https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... because it's th..."That is what I have been seeing. The bot is unnecessarily moving one of the IDs to a new record. Personally I have just been ignoring it as there are too many to report, and I figure as long as readers can find an edition with their ISBN or ASIN it's "fine."
Tami wrote: "I'm confused. Some people say they are duplicates and others say they aren't. I was almost positive this one was a duplicate https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... because it's th..."You can't give a general answer. Some the bot create with this Librarian note are duplicates, some not.
Your example is a duplicate. I haven't seen this so often, but I also work mainly on German books, where the bot currently adds almost only kindles with print ISBNs, but does not create any print entries.
And the ISBN 10 is also the ASIN for most books. So from the bot's point of view, it has entered the correct ASIN, which has not yet been assigned. The problem arises when not all fields were originally filled in by the users, because the new bots currently work in such a way that it simply creates a new entry for all ASINs that are not yet assigned in our database and that correspond to the criterion "book". A simultaneous check of the ISBN field as a prerequisite for a new entry is missing.
Scott wrote: "That is what I have been seeing. The bot is unnecessarily moving one of the IDs to a new record. Personally I have just been ignoring it as there are too many to report, and I figure as long as readers can ..."Thank you Scott!
I do leave them alone also.Tried at first to get some of them merged by support (and the "ASIN" added to the original record but they did either not understand what I wanted or did not think it was needed and most of the time told me "the asin is on amazon - valid record" so I'm not wasting my time with that anymore.
☕ Lachgas ♿ wrote: "I do leave them alone also.Tried at first to get some of them merged by support (and the "ASIN" added to the original record but they did either not understand what I wanted or did not think it wa..."
Thank you Lachgas. I agree, best to leave them alone. I try to report some stuff also but they don't understand. I'll just leave it be xP
Corinne wrote: "I've had success with staff doing everyone I send. I don't send a ton but I do send some.I usually send them a link to the editions screen when there isn't a lot of editions. because i think the ..."
I did exactly that. The staff person didn't understand the instructions. Said it was done when he had done nothing. That took a couple of exchanges and 4 days. By that time another helpful librarian had recombined the separated editions. Reporting this stuff is a waste of time.
I believe these are duplicates but I might be wrong. If they are not duplicates I suppose I should leave them be but if they are duplicates how to deal with them?