Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

166 views
One suggestion

Comments Showing 1-25 of 25 (25 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments Like so many of you, I am working on cleaning things up a bit (ie combining editions and translated versions) and I have an idea:

-When someone adds a book and that book is a collection of plays, stories fairy tales FROM THE SAME AUTHOR, could there not be a "word of advice" box that suggested writing the names of the plays/ fairy tales in the "about the book"-field?
I am really beginning to hate the "Five Major Plays", "Seven Favorite Fairy Tales" etc titles :-)


message 2: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
The problem is that the vast majority of books have been automatically added by Amazon and its subsidiaries. I doubt they would comply. ;)


message 3: by Lisa (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2400 comments Anna & Rivka, and All,

Although, if while Goodreads librarians are cleaning up book data, and we get to these types of books, I do think it would be polite and helpful if, at the beginning of the book description box, we added which plays, etc. are contained in the volume(s), if that information isn't already given.


message 4: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments Rivka - ah. I guessed it was something like that as ther are so many out-of-print books with no reviews or shelf-holds. No point in cursing, then. :)

Speaking of which, has there been any discussion on deleting some of those ? Eg HC/ Hans Christian Andersen has a seemingly endless number of "Favorite/ Five major/ Four Favorite.. Fairytales that are out of print, lack cover and any information as to contents, has no reviews or any shelf-holds and were added like three years ago. I don't dare combine those as there's no info on them and quite frankly, they're just annoying. Is it OK to delete some of them, after CAREFUL checking - of course!

Lisa - I so agree and I've been trying to but many of these books lack info even on the Amazon homepage


message 5: by Lisa (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2400 comments Anna, Don't delete them. For one thing, users might have those editions and might eventually rate/review them. But, more importantly, Otis says any books, etc. on this site that are deleted will just appear again anyway, and then without any edtiing/descriptions any of us have added.


message 6: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments Thank you Lisa - good to know. It's seriously frustrating to find 20 out of print "Favorite Fairy Tales" that nobody has "claimed" and that you have no idea if you can combine or not as there is no info anywhere as to the contents.
(My idea was that it'd be better if adding books was an active choice, ie that whoever had an out-of-print Puffin edition of FFT from 1958 could add that book.) But good to know - I'll puy my organizing urge away for a while. :-)


message 7: by Lisa (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2400 comments Anna,

Well, we can also manually add books. I've manually added many books.

But unfortunately, that does not help at all with the problem you're describing.

There's still plenty of organizing we can do; we just need to try to ignore the books we cannot "fix."


message 8: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
My tendency is to clump those long-out-of-print and without-any-reviews collections as a single edition. It makes the search results much cleaner, which I feel outweighs any issues of them not really being a single edition.


message 9: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
I wasn't clear. I don't mean all such collections; just the ones that are indistinguishable.

So Five Plays published in 1915 and the same title (by the same author) in 1937 might be five different plays. But if neither has a cover (or only one does), how would one distinguish them? And for some authors, there are dozens of volumes with almost identical titles -- and no way to tell them apart, except by ISBN. And sometimes not even by that.

Anyone can put up reviews for more than one edition, in any case.

In my opinion, my suggestion does help the general user -- at least, more than leaving all 20+ of the similarly titled as separate search results. Having more data about the individual volumes would be nice, but isn't always practical.


message 10: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
I'm guessing that even when you've been here a while, you still won't be able to read my mind. ;) Sorry about being unclear.


message 11: by Matt (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Matt Mazenauer (provlear) | 11 comments Oh no, Rivka don't worry. We've all got you and Otis's minds down pat. You don't even have to make posts anymore.


message 12: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
O_O

>_>
<_<


message 13: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments Thank you Rivka :) - that was my exact question. (I ofcourse try to look for the contents elsewhere too, but a lot of them go waaaaaay back. With popular authors such as HC Andersen new collections of fairy tales are constantly printed!
It seems a lot of those books stem from Amazon's sale of used books?

Also - should someone suddenly get hold of and wish to shelf and review that collection from 1905, it is just a matter of separating it from the rest of the editions (or ask us librarians to do so).


message 14: by Debbie (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Debbie Moorhouse I try to add that information where it's available (and when I have the time/strength), but often it isn't. Sometimes I find myself peering at book covers trying to make out the small print!


message 15: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments I know - I do too. :-) But the editions that Rivka and I are having such qualms about even lack a front cover!


message 16: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
Exactly. And often the only information that Google can find is that there are two copies in existence, and they run $30-50 apiece. ;)


message 17: by Debbie (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Debbie Moorhouse I've seen much more ludicrous prices than that. I have at least one book that I've seen listed in the $100s of dollars. I didn't pay anything like that for it!


message 18: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
Oh, so have I. (It's amazing how the price drops if/when it's reprinted.) But the lower range is more common -- and still ridiculous for most of them.


message 19: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
That's a good question.

Maybe Otis could weigh in on this, but it seems to me that sort of info should be included in the description. Which certainly doesn't preclude anyone from putting such things in their reviews.


message 20: by Debbie (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:19PM) (new)

Debbie Moorhouse I've been putting information like that in the description. Leaves you more space to write your review ;).


message 21: by Anna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:19PM) (new)

Anna | 22 comments My 2 öre on this is to put it in the description too, for all the reasons mentioned above. :)


message 22: by Alex (new)

Alex (little_alex) | 9 comments Abigail wrote: "Different illustrators are also very important when it comes to children's titles."

Sorry, is there a consensus on this yet?

(Asking because the two different editions of Richard Bach's There's No Such Place as Far Away have two different illustrators, and I don't know if they should be separated)...


message 23: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 36324 comments Mod
They should not be separated. As mentioned above, one can review each one individually, even if they remained combined (as they should be).


message 24: by Aerin (new)

Aerin (aerinrose) | 1 comments I think this would be a place to clarify:

There's a huge grouping for "Snow White" picture books. Different authors, different illustrators (different ISBNs)...not just all Grimm, variety of editions. If I were the illustrators, I'd be peeved to have them all grouped.

Sure, we can review them all separately, but when I 'search' one by its ISBN, I get a whole bunch of very (very) different works.

Help?


message 25: by Mahyar (new)

Mahyar Mohammadi | 16 comments There would also B another problem: some would have read a version that have had only specific stories, and they only want to add the stories they've read in their own books.


back to top