Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Page Numbering Requests
>
What to count in the page number
date
newest »
newest »
From the Librarian Manual:The number of pages in a book is meant to include all content except for advertisements and preview chapters for other books. Included end material may include acknowledgments, afterwords, appendices, glossaries, indexes, notes, and suggested discussion questions.
Introductory material paged using roman numerals is not included in the total page count.
So you would not include the additional excerpt, but would include any additional material relevant to that story.
To be consistent we have to go with the manual, but I gotta say it's rather funky. I mean, often the roman numeraled material at the front is *very* relevant - however, who actually reads the index?What I'll try to do when it's a glaring thing, like a huge index and/or un-annotated bibliography, is note that in the description. Something like "Included are 144 pages of notes, a 77 page index and 29 pages of citations."
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "I mean, often the roman numeraled material at the front is *very* relevant - however, who actually reads the index?"
But if we added in the count for roman-numerated pages, you'd have to do arithmetic every time you updated what page you were on.
But if we added in the count for roman-numerated pages, you'd have to do arithmetic every time you updated what page you were on.
Sure. I don't think any system would be perfect. I do admit though that I almost never use 'currently-reading' so your objection would never have occurred to me. I'm sorry if I sounded like I was complaining.
Yeah, I haven't been including excerpts, because I felt it was not relevant to the book/story. I hadn't been too sure about the rest of it though, so I had never changed those page numbers. Good to know, thanks!
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "I'm sorry if I sounded like I was complaining."
Not at all. I agree that it's inconsistent, but it's with malice aforethought! ;)
Not at all. I agree that it's inconsistent, but it's with malice aforethought! ;)



This question has been bothering me for a while, now.