Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Book & Author Page Issues
>
How do we get rid of a poor entry in favor of a good one?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
JSWolf
(new)
Mar 08, 2010 12:15PM
When an entry is made for a book and it's poorly made, how do we remove it in favor of a properly made entry? The ISBN numbers are really the issue as the poor entry has then stolen when it's really meant for the good entry.
reply
|
flag
Can you link to an example? Usually we just update the existing entry with the good information -- you can post a request with the details in this group -- but if there's conflicting information an alternate edition is sometimes needed.
The book in question is Star trek: Inception.The entry that was already there is incomplete and has errors. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/75...
The one I put in is http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/78...
The original listing is missing the format which if they use the ISBN numbers used is ePub. It's missing the description and the link to the eBook. It's got page numbers listed which an eBook really doesn't have. Plus, no cover.
I would have been fine with cleaning up the original listing, but the system won't allow me to since I'm not the originator or a librarian. I do eventually plan to try to become a librarian once I hit 50 books in my listing.
I've updated the ebook listing with the additional information and merged your edition into it. Is this correct now?http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/75...
Almost correct.Under format I put eBook and under edition, I put the format of the eBook which in this case is ePub. Also, 320 is the number of paperback pages, not ePub pages. ePub is the only eBook format to have page numbers and unless you have the ePub, you won't know so it's best to keep page numbers out of eBook listings. But if you really want to put in a proper page number, then it's 171 pages.
Thanks, JSWolf! Without page numbers, the status updates don't work, so until we get a way to put in percentages for ebooks they're still important.
JSWolf wrote: "Almost correct.Under format I put eBook and under edition, I put the format of the eBook which in this case is ePub. Also, 320 is the number of paperback pages, not ePub pages. ePub is the only e..."
That ISBN is used for multiple formats of the ebook, not just ePub. Is there any reason to have multiple editions for different formats of an ebook?
Is that ebook available in any other format? The publisher's website only listed ePub, but if that ISBN is used for other ebook formats, then the edition should cover them all instead of being just for the ePub, yes.
Fictionwise has it available in 3 formats, all using the same ISBN. I've removed the ePub from the edition field.
Format of ebook (except for Kindle, only because it has an ASIN), should not be differentiated on GoodReads, since there are many different formats and they often use the same ISBN, as noted above. Also, I know a lot of people use the page numbers (including myself) so we can update our status on books. Ebooks will have different page counts (unless it's epub), but I don't think that really matters. I add page numbers to the ebook, just using the page count from the paper version. I'll take my page numbers from the ebook, divide to get a percentage, and apply that to the page number on goodreads.
And finally, we shouldn't be linking to a place to buy the ebook in the URL field. Those should be for pages from the author, etc.
Cait wrote: "Thanks, Dori!"No problem :)
Jessica wrote: "And finally, we shouldn't be linking to a place to buy the ebook in the URL field. Those should be for pages from the author, etc."
??? Did we do that and I missed it?
As quoted to me by Rivka, the All Knowing One, some months ago - PDF format for ebooks does have a valid page count. I only buy PDF ebooks, therefore all ebooks I own or come across have the supposed correct page count.
Mod
Not everyone considers PDF to actually be a (valid) ebook format, but that's a whole other can of worms. Certainly PDFs have a definite and distinct page count.
Dori wrote: "Cait wrote: "Thanks, Dori!"No problem :)
Jessica wrote: "And finally, we shouldn't be linking to a place to buy the ebook in the URL field. Those should be for pages from the author, etc."
??? D..."
Nope, just pointing it out. The OP didn't make it clear if that's what he what he wanted linked, and I put that in there, just in case that's what he was talking about. Sorry for the confusion!
Jessica wrote: "Nope, just pointing it out. The OP didn't make it clear if that's what he what he wanted linked, and I put that in there, just in case that's what he was talking about. Sorry for the confusion!"Ok, I was think I had totally missed something. Thanks for clarifying :)
The entry says "official URL". So I put in the official URL which is to the book's listing at the publisher's website. Yes you can buy it from there. But it is what the field asks for.And yes, we do need to have the specific eBook format listed as not every eBook comes in every format. I don't think this comes in MS Reader, PDF (not an eBook format), IMP, LRX/LRF, FB and others. It does come in ePub, eReader, Mobipocket, AZW. So unless we list the eBook format, we are telling people it comes in every format out there. Why bother to list hardcover or paperback if we aren't going to care about the format?
So to fix up this listing so it is correct, it needs the eBook format and the link to the publisher's website which is the "Official URL".
Mod
I don't agree. We list "ebook" as the format, which is comparable to "hardcover" or "paperback".
It's the edition field that should have ePub there. Then the listing will show eBook, ePub (or something similar). Different format eBooks are different editions.
Mod
It's just not necessary to distinguish the format. And hardly feasible. If a user wants to distinguish the formats, they can use the shelves. I read several formats myself and just an ebook listing is enough. It might please a handful of users, but in reality it would be difficult to execute, create way too many virtually identical listings with no isbn, and confuse the heck out of a ton of people. The only reason kindle editions are separated now is because they have a unique asin.
Some eBooks do have different ISBN numbers. So how do you differentiate those? Plus, the listing is still missing the "Official URL". Do I have to recreate the entry or is this going to be fixed?Microsoft Reader
Street Date: Friday, September 22, 2000
ISBN: 9780743420013
Total Filesize: 0.3 Mb
No extra information available.
eReader
Street Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2002
SKU: 5551227278
ISBN: 9785551227274
Total Filesize: 0.3 Mb
Same eBook, different ISBN. So how would you handle that? Easy. By putting in the eBook format like the listing I'm trying to get fixed should have. Besides, why cannot Goodreads fix the software to allow the same ISBN when clearly differing editions do have the same ISBN number sometimes.
There are some publishers (well, perhaps one) which release ebooks in different formats with different ISBNs, but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. For that specific publisher (can't recall who it is...Random House maybe?) it makes sense to be more specific, but generally there is little to be gained by specifying all of the formats an ebook may or may not come in (particularly since this may change through time).Many publishers don't even use unique ISBN's for the ebooks but just copy that from the printed book (whether hardcover or paperback) which was used to create the ebook in the first place.
On an unrelated note, I'm not sure I agree that the ePub format formally has page numbers. As with the other formats specifically designed for reading (e.g., mobi) as opposed to those designed for printing (e.g., pdf), one of the big draws is the ability to change text size on the fly, meaning the number of pages is fluid. This is as true for epub as many other similar formats and therefore there is no true "page numbering".
Mod
I do not see where in this thread you have provided the URL in question. I cannot make any determination about whether to include it until you do. Or would you rather continue to make empty threats?
JSWolf wrote: "Besides, why cannot Goodreads fix the software to allow the same ISBN when clearly differing editions do have the same ISBN number sometimes."
Because of how the database handles books. This is extremely unlikely to change anytime soon, but feel free to bring it up in the Feedback Group.
I provided the URL in question in the original book listing. It was removed because someone said (incorrectly) that it was a link to buy the book when in fact, it was a link to the listing on the publisher's website.Also, unless the URL and the eBook format are put back, I'm going to have to recreate the listing as it's not what I had and what's proper. I tried to help get a poor listing sorted out and I end up with one that I have to argue about to get it made right when it was right in the first place.
The URL is http://books.simonandschuster.com/Sta... and the edition is ePub. So please fix this as what's there now it wrong and will be wrong until these two things are PUT BACK.
This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For wrote: "There are some publishers (well, perhaps one) which release ebooks in different formats with different ISBNs, but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. For that specific publisher (c..."This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For wrote: "There are some publishers (well, perhaps one) which release ebooks in different formats with different ISBNs, but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. For that specific publisher (c..."
An eBook in ePub is not the same as an eBook in eReader. Just as a book in hardcover is not the same as a book in trade paperback and not the same as a book in mass market paperback. So why treat an eBook like there's only one edition when there is not? All eBook formats are different just like all different bindings of a paper book are different. Sure, sometimes the publishers reuse ISBN numbers. But they do that for paper books too sometimes.
ePub does have page numbers. The page numbers is based on a 1024 character count or when a new flow is started. ePub is the only reflowable format that has page numbers that work no matter the screen or text size.
When the publisher treats each format as a separate edition with separate ISBNs, GR also created separate editions. When the publisher lumps them all together under one ISBN, though, GR also follows in this unless the cover art differs. We rely on ISBNs to keep editions sorted out, and while there are always going to be exceptions to that rule, it's still our current rule. Cover art gets an exception because enough readers are attached to their particular cover art that it's worth the trouble of an exception; thus far, very few people have spoken up as particularly attached to their ebook format. If that's changing, we can re-examine the rule...?Publisher's webpages for books are usually so ephemeral that they aren't worth linking to, has been my impression. Is there an official stance on this? Usually we're looking for authors' webpages in that field.
JSWolf wrote: "I'm going to have to recreate the listing as it's not what I had and what's proper."
And the next librarian to come along is going to see that these are duplicate editions and merge them. It does no good to create extra editions if there's no policy change; what you need to do is make a case for changing the rules here.
Mod
1) It is indeed a listing to buy the book. Whether it is also something else does not change that fact.
2) Once the duplicate listing was deleted, there is no way for me or any other librarian to see any of its contents.
Cait wrote: "Publisher's webpages for books are usually so ephemeral that they aren't worth linking to, has been my impression. Is there an official stance on this? Usually we're looking for authors' webpages in that field."
When no authors' webpage exists, we sometimes link to the publisher's page. But only when there is some reason to do so -- a book preview, etc. That does not seem to be the case this time, so I see no reason to add that URL and several not to.
There is no author website. I did have a look. So in this case, the only official URL is the one to the publisher's website. That makes it fit the field. having the ability to buy the book from the publisher's website should be irrelevant. The fact is, it is the official URL. And if you are looking for an author's website in that field, then change the field. But until then it's labeled "Official URL" and the URL I gave is the official URL for the book.So when is this listing going to be fixed so we can put this behind us?
Mod
The guidelines are wrong. Plain and simple.There is a field for edition and that's left blank when ePub is the edition and there is a field for Official URl and we have such. So no, it's not fixed.
Mod
I'm going by what the name of the fields are. Can you say that using the field names that I am incorrect?
Mod
I don't see any yellow pop-up boxes. I use Firefox and have it set to block pop-ups. I've just added Goodreads to the exception list. So I'll see what I get.As for eBooks, I did just read this...
Most e-book formats do not have a fixed number of pages since the pagination adjusts for screen size. For PDF specific editions, or any other fixed page e-books, the normal paging rules may be used.
The way it's written makes it sound like PDF is the only electronic format that has specific page number due to fixed pages. It should be changed to say that ePub while reflowable does have specific page numbers. The paging for ePub is not based on screen size or font but by data size. So it doesn't matter the screen or the font.
And established practices seem to be wrong in this case. So if I have an eBook where every version has a different ISBN, then they all just show as eBook and not the format? That's wrong and I want my listing to show that it's the ePub edition which it is. The link to the official URL in this case is to the publisher's website. And why does it matter that you can buy it from there? A lot of author's link to some site to buy their books. So if that's the case, just get rid of the field since you don't seem to know how to use it properly. Might as well get rid of the edition field since that's the same problem too.
official URL This field is for entering a URL officially associated with that book, such as a page on an author's site for the book. It may also be an author or publisher's website for the book, if it contains additional information or resources. Fan sites, reviews, book sellers, Wiki pages or other such pages should NOT be listed
The above is from the librarian manual. It does state that the official URL can be from the publisher's website.
Mod
