Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

64 views
Policies & Practices > Nobel Prize for Literature

Comments Showing 1-11 of 11 (11 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For | 949 comments Someone has yet again recreated the "Nobel Prize for Literature" under the awards section and populated it with 176 books. Unfortunately, the Nobel Prize for Literature is not given to specific books. It is a lifetime achievement award given to writers for their complete body of work. References to specific books in the award are meant as exemplars of excellence and not that the prize was given to those specific books.

I'm sort of tired of deleting this over and over again, particularly since it is clear someone else is just going to recreate it. Am I missing something vis-a-vis the meaning of this award?


message 2: by Laura (new)

Laura | 10 comments Not missing anything. But the definitions, updating process, and governance of the awards section remain in their infancy. The general population of goodreads is not in agreement on the definition of 'award', 'nominee', 'nomination', 'honoree', 'list', 'recognition', 'submission'.

And with the current structure, pretty much anyone can create any award, with any definition, on any book. Ex:search the term 'nominated'. I'm saying anyone, because anyone can request librarian status and from what I've observed in the awards section, I'm guessing that most goodreads authors have librarian status.

As much as I enjoy dabbling with upkeep in the awards section, I've concluded that a clean list is improbable with the current governance structure.

My suggestions if we want a clean list:
1) we need to request an alteration to the process of updating awards.
2) write the missing section of the librarians manual.
3)provide authors a short definition on what does and does not qualify as an award
4) provide a 'recognition' feature for everything else - lists, nominations, author recognitions, etc.

Until that happens attempts to keep the awards section clean tend to be valiant but ineffectual. The first two pages of awards are fairly clean. The remainder tends to be a highly variable population.


message 3: by Laura (last edited Feb 24, 2011 07:29PM) (new)

Laura | 10 comments Laura wrote: My suggestions if we want a clean list:
1) we need to request an alteration to the process of updating awards."


To expand on my first suggestion above, here are a few ideas:

A. Establish an 'Adopt-an-Award' program similar to the 'Adopt-a-Highway' program made popular in the US. Allow specific librarians to adopt particular award listings and agree to their maintenance.

B. Require awards to be established before they can be linked to a specific work. Eliminating the practice of allowing free form text on an 'edit book' page to create an award listing. Instead require users on the 'edit book' page to select a pre-established award listing.

C. When establishing awards require the inclusion of a valid web address of the 'official' prize listing that confirms winners, nominees, honor books,etc.

D. Consider segmenting the awards section into tiers: global / international awards of renown, national / regional awards, highly-intriguing & unique sub-categories. (which can be much more interesting...ex: E.B. White Read-a-Loud).

E. Create a 'Listed Book' feature which allows authors to free form enter the various lists to which they've been selected. (Ex: recommended reading lists, best book lists, best seller lists)

I'm pretty convinced that ideas A,B,C have merit. Not completely sold on ideas D & E. If ideas A&B,C gained traction - you could have two tiers of awards 'validated' and 'not yet validated'.


message 4: by Cait (new)

Cait (tigercait) | 5005 comments Laura wrote: "B. Require awards to be established before they can be linked to a specific work. Eliminating the practice of allowing free form text on an 'edit book' page to create an award listing. Instead require users on the 'edit book' page to select a pre-established award listing."

This is how the series work now, and while this approach does have some problems (duplication of series being the biggest one) I think it probably works better than the freeform creation, it has the big benefit of making it easier to add books to an existing award and the side benefit of making the awards and the series features work in similar ways so that it's easier to learn them both.


message 5: by Laura (last edited Feb 24, 2011 08:09PM) (new)

Laura | 10 comments For those who want to get a flavor of the entropy under discussion, here are some fun Award search terms:
'nominated', 'list', 'man', 'best', 'select', 'top', 'pick'


message 6: by Laura (new)

Laura | 10 comments Sorry, Michael - I figured out my reply fits better in the Goodreads Feedback group. http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/5...

No suggestions for you on Nobel prize. My opinion: If you delete it...it will endlessly reappear until some sort of features update is released.


message 7: by Riikka (new)

Riikka (rakuna) | 61 comments I think one very nice solution for the Nobel prize problem would be if there was a possibility to add awards to the authors, not to the books. I think it's valuable data, that really can't be used right now. I actually suggested it at the feedback group a little while back.

Also I agree that the librarians manual should be updated on this subject.


message 8: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 42443 comments Mod
Riikka wrote: "I think one very nice solution for the Nobel prize problem would be if there was a possibility to add awards to the authors, not to the books."

It's a to-do item.


message 9: by Riikka (new)

Riikka (rakuna) | 61 comments rivka wrote: "Riikka wrote: "I think one very nice solution for the Nobel prize problem would be if there was a possibility to add awards to the authors, not to the books."

It's a to-do item."


Ah, good to know. I knew it was considered but didn't know it had made the to-do list. :)


message 10: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 42443 comments Mod
Pretty sure there's an open ticket. Probably not terribly high priority.


message 11: by Brian (new)

Brian (bper) | 64 comments Laura wrote: "B. Require awards to be established before they can be linked to a specific work. Eliminating the practice of allowing free form text on an 'edit book' page to create an award listing. Instead require users on the 'edit book' page to select a pre-established award listing."

I agree with Cait agreeing with Laura on this one. Though would you suggest still allowing librarians to create awards out of thin air, and then go ahead and edit the book? I guess adding one step to the process might cut down on the problem, but wouldn't really eliminate it. I'm guessing there probably aren't many new awards popping up each year, so once we had a good baseline, I would expect (hope?) that updating the list of awards wouldn't happen too often.

rivka, cool, good to know that there's at least a good solution to the Noble-specific problem!


back to top