Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Policies & Practices
>
Combining abridged versions with original - Please don't!
date
newest »
newest »
Adaptations are not supposed to be combined with the orginal. You are correct there. However, "abridgements" can be combined. Abridgments would include abridged versions of audio books, condensed versions, etc. that contain the original texts, with some deletions to shorten the total length.This information has been added to the rules for combining on the combine page (where anyone combining should be able to see it), but not the librarians manual. I typed up an update but it hasn't been added yet (see it here). I think we should probably bumped it up in priority.
In any case librarians should not be ignoring notes from other librarians. For myself, I would post in the group and put something up for discussion before ignoring a note.
There is a possibility that the combine is an unintended mistake. Auto-combine can combine items with the same title. I always make sure that adaptations do not have the original author listed first. This has improved things for me quite a bit.
ETA: If someone is blantantly ignoring notes from other librarians, and is not available for a message, I would report them to the Goodreads staff using the contact link. (Or possibly send a message to Rivka, who is esentially our head librarian).
Speaking of librarian notes being ignored, I'm wondering if we could enhance their impact a bit. Currently, if you try to combine more than two works (or two works with more than two editions each) it goes to a page asking "are you sure you mean to do this?" or something.I'd like to see an additional page, which says "Before doing this, did you read the librarian notes?" with the notes highlighted front and center. At that point, if they proceed incorrectly, the person is deliberately ignoring them, as opposed to not just paying attention.
Sorry, just thought of one more thing...Are you using the librarian comments (at the bottom of the edit page) or librarian notes (top of the page)?
The comments cannot be seen on the combine page, and if the title is the same, the combine could have been an honest mistake. If it was a librarian note, it would have been seen on the combine page, and my previous post on reporting them to GR would then apply.
I agree, Not the Michael. I have definitely seen notes ignored. Just last night I noticed someone combined a multi-part Korean edition of The Host by Stephanie Meyer with the main listing despite notes to the contrary.I haven't had the stomach to go through fixing it yet.
vicki_girl wrote: "I agree, Not the Michael. I have definitely seen notes ignored. Just last night I noticed someone combined a multi-part Korean edition of The Host by Stephanie Meyer with the main listing despite..."I also agree. I noticed the same problem with the Harry Potter books. I've separated the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire editions out, but I'm waiting to see who combines them again before separating all the wrong editions out of each book. It seems they have a combine/separate tug-of-war going, but I can't tell exactly who combined the wrong editions.
Angela wrote: "...And on that note, the people who combined them are conveniently unavailable to be messaged. It would be cool to have a librarian flagging system (where we can leave comments on what the librarian did wrong) and therefore a staff member could contact them if they're continuously doing something silly..."An interesting complaint, Angela. When trying to message you, I get "Sorry, this person isn't accepting messages."
??????
vicki_girl wrote: "Sorry, just thought of one more thing...Are you using the librarian comments (at the bottom of the edit page) or librarian notes (top of the page)?
The comments cannot be seen on the combine..."
I only just saw this response thanks to the new notifications. Yes, I was talking about Librarian Notes, not comments. :)
James wrote: "An interesting complaint, Angela. When trying to message you, I get "Sorry, this person isn't accepting messages."Really? Whoops. Some setting must be misplaced.. Sorry!
Angela wrote: "Really? Whoops. Some setting must be misplaced.. Sorry!"Ah, yes.... Isn't technology just wonderful?
re msg 2 - I don't see instructions about abridgements and adaptations on the combine page yet. And I'm glad. I don't understand the the reasoning that it's ok to combine abridgements with the original edition, and I'm pretty sure I disagree. I tried to find discussion here in the librarians group but couldn't - could someone please explain?
I know this thread is old (I was looking to see if another issue was addressed yet) but in an attempt to answer Cheryl's question from my point of view:An abridgment is essentially an "abridged edition" of a given work, just as "2nd Expanded Edition" is in the other direction. Whereas an adaptation is a different work "based on" the original. I generally try to keep the original author as a secondary on adaptations, and (depending on what other libraries do) list the adapter as the primary. In the case of an abridgment, the fact that it's shorter should be sufficiently notable from the reduced page count, plus "(Abridged)" in the title and/or "Abridged Edition" in the Edition field, but IMHO it is fundamentally the "same" book in terms of combination here.
FTR, I have no official standing here in terms of policy making; I'm just a Super, and defer to the Librarian Manual and the PTB, including actual paid GR employees in case of disputes.
Keith wrote: "I know this thread is old (I was looking to see if another issue was addressed yet) but in an attempt to answer Cheryl's question from my point of view:An abridgment is essentially an "abridged e..."
The issue was already addressed in this thread: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/4...
From the "Library Manual Additions" folder: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/group_...
In case anyone here missed it. =)
"the fact that it's shorter should be sufficiently notable from the reduced page count, plus "(Abridged)" in the title and/or "Abridged Edition" in the Edition field"Well, maybe, if those fields and notes were consistently accurate and filled in. Thanks for your input!
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Well, maybe, if those fields and notes were consistently accurate and filled in."Aye, there's the rub! A Librarian's work is never done.
The sad thing is that this has happened despite me leaving librarian comments several months ago about it being an abridged kids version and NOT TO COMBINE it with the original.
Can people please read the librarian notes before they combine?
And on that note, the people who combined them are conveniently unavailable to be messaged. It would be cool to have a librarian flagging system (where we can leave comments on what the librarian did wrong) and therefore a staff member could contact them if they're continuously doing something silly.
Ange.