Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Questions (not edit requests)
>
Is It Possible to Remove Books from a Listopia List
How does this look? I set out rules. Made them word specific. Totally understood where you were coming from! I Took out any 'simple' as i see that problem & laid at where one can determine. I added 3. The description, genres, & reviews... I almost added Lists. But I was worried Top fun list written any way would run into the 'simple' problem lol... and be too vague. Cant control other lists and could make matters worse. I was Curious your opinion on that? Hopefully i did the right changes. If not... easy enough.to change it again. How hard is it to become a librarian? I've always been curious about becoming onehttps://www.goodreads.com/list/show/2...
Jay (FanBoyBooks) wrote: "How does this look? I set out rules. Made them word specific. Totally understood where you were coming from! I Took out any 'simple' as i see that problem & laid at where one can determine. I added..."That's better! :) The note about you having ultimate say about what's on the list isn't in alignment with the purpose of Goodreads lists -- they are intended to be built by the community, not the sole property of a single person. I'd advise that you remove that portion, but I think your other requirements are clear and will hopefully reduce the number of books added in error, and save your sanity in the long run!
Let me know when you've finalized the description, and then include a fresh list of books to be removed at this time. Hopefully you can move forward with a clean slate! :)
Mod
This is important to keep in mind. Listopias are public, not personal. For personal lists, please create a custom bookshelf.
Also, major changes to the requirements for a list years after it was added and after many other users have added books are a problem. I have reverted those changes.
rivka wrote: "Martine wrote: "The note about you having ultimate say about what's on the list isn't in alignment with the purpose of Goodreads lists -- they are intended to be built by the community, not the sol..."But they weren't major requirements yet right? Me and and Martinie were going back forth on the description... Me taking every advice. Back and forth. These werent requirements yet because #1 still finalizing them #2 I can't decide requirements. Librarians do. Interpretations and such from librarians are basically the requirements. Because i can put the rule there, but doesnt mean a book would be removed because of it. Because like pointed out... I can't.
And I'm curious.... Please take no offense ... this discussion has been going over several days. What's more a major change a work in progress 'draft' 'requirements' that I'm doing in response to Martini's input that such words as simple were too vague and too make the description 'more specific' which I did. But we still were working on it.... VS you coming in just now just deleting it outright with very vague explanation, no specifics why just overall vague, no how to move forward. Im not trying to troll or anything. Just curious which you feel is more a major change? My changes did nothing but change description.... Yours just undid everything we were working towards to eventually having solid specific rules which was posted days ago and you never had a problem with.
It's all cool with what hairnet just what make it clear.... I wasnt the one making major changes. i didn't. And I never acted like Oh I disagree? No changes! And revert everything back. Buuut maybe rivika I should listen to you. Along with my first question, How would I go about having you guys delete my List? If the new rules are any changes to few years old list can't happen, even though I didn't simply make the major change.... I can't here to work with you guys to make it right. So if you thought too drastic you would simply give suggestion (as Martinie did with being too vague). So if we are making major changes, let's be cool about it, and just delete it. Because if as you see through the posts I was working with guys with changes and still was... Let's work together this one time. You want this major change. I as originally posted didn't want to remove every book I disagreed with.. I thought #1 had no place but #2 did. As Martinie mentioned with what you reverted back to... Recommended me to be more specific. You didn't ask for less specifics but reverted back which as you would know kept original problem. I think because you stop the work in progress after good bit of work, best solution is delete it please?
..... EDIT..... Take back the remove the List / delete if its okay. I think its best to find middle ground as I have been trying from start. Lets take the rules now in place and i'll provide the books that do not fit it and exactly why they do not. I've gone over it. I wont change years of rules.... Ill maintain it for for you rivika. ill go every book and make sure they meet these rules: "Simple the Great Science Fiction & Fantasy books that are very Fun and/or Funny." So ill look for evidence for each book (i voted for or not) if they are 'Simple the Great Science Fiction & Fantasy' if they meet one of those & evidence of ' that are very Fun and/or Funny.' ill look for very Fun and/or Funny. I know vague but something we tried to change and you felt the vague rules should be in place. But of course just my proposal. And ill provide my further proposal of books that dont those
#311-312 Jay, I think what rivka meant is that the list has been in existence since 2012 and that clarifying/adding specific criteria 4 years after the fact and removing titles retroactively is not fair to the people who have contributed to the list in good faith, never knowing that those titles weren't according to your ideas of what the list should look like.In your place, I'd leave this list be and start a new list with the exact criteria you formulated earlier this week. There are many Listopias with overlapping themes, so I don't think that would be a problem.
I don't know how much a non-librarian Listopia creator can see/edit, but if you'd like us to copy the new description you added here so you can use it for a new list, please ask.
lethe wrote: "#311-312 Jay, I think what rivka meant is that the list has been in existence since 2012 and that clarifying/adding specific criteria 4 years after the fact and removing titles retroactively is not..."I really wish I could take your advice. Ditch this list & create a new one. But it's not just about the new description/ draft requirements. it's Rivka seeing me coming here to avoid exactly what Rivka did... Just making a major change and being done with it.... By me working with you guys back and forth on rules. Taking every bit of advice. I was told to be more specific, that's what I did. Saying... I was listening. Then Rivka jumps right in giving very little example and saying too specific too late.... Going back to old way. I'm trying sooo hard to work with everything. Rivka does the extreme move. So Rivka is forcing the original rules. Im not going to ditch the list when original rules aren't being followed.
I agree... With the time length... and are there are rules put in place to dictate this stuff?... Im just upcurious what rules determine from after certain amount of time you can't make changes to description. Not being jerk or anything..... I don't really know of there which is why I am asking.
Remember I hadn't made any new rules. New rules weren't in place, they were still working out back and forth, no book was removed.
But like I said I'll work with the major change Rivka made... Using the original rules. So I'm going through every book... Every description, many pages of reviews (using add-ons to auto load pages & collapsing reviews to see all). To make sure Original Rules are followed... My fault I wasnt bringing the books not meeting original rules (the one rivka restored) to attention of the people who's job it is to make sure these books are properly on the list. So basically I'm doing the hard work I should have done... Looking for mentions in top reviews for: gotta have Simple (lack of word simple & also mentions complex come to play), Science Fiction & Fantasy..... And gotta either have very Fun or Funny.
Those are simply the rules. You can interpret them any which way... But as intended and as written they say one thing. I came here to work on rules back and forth.... No major changes happened. Because it was very clear from the start this was working towards final goal. Rivka claimed I made a major change but made the major change but reverting everything back to original. But even though Rivka seems opposed to actual discussion and back forth work to correct rules. I'm willing to work with Rivka, Martini, anyone with original rules. Because can't change rules after certain date it seems & seeing flaws in original rules Martini wisely said hey why not be more specific?
Big Reason I actually don't like original rules:: Far too many books would be taken out if taken at face value. Even if you don't include 'simple' rule (sadly that rule is in place... Can change it... But thats changing a years old rule and undoes what Rivka did... Rivka said it was wrong so can't make an exception).... But if we hypothetically ignore Simple is in the rules... The rest description rightly takes out #1 But takes out #2. Haven't read #2 but it seem fun.... But try finding descibing the book very Fun or Funny. Really try. I can't. I don't think the book should be removed. Rules can't change, & not fair to change rules to make exception for one.. it's about sticking with years old rules without change right?) So the book would have to go. It's not about my feelings or anyone's...it's about the original rules. There here to stay.
Ill be making my list to suggest to be removed tomorrow. Lol just remember how much reading this must take.
Back sorry had a personal issue and wasn't able to do any work. So far I've gone through the first 25... I've gonne through Goodreads description, Goodreads Top Shelves on Books page, Goodreads Top Reviews from top 5 pages. Looking very if the book is described as 'very Fun' or 'Funny' (upper or lower case)... And not being too specific and ignoring the originial rule of being 'Simple'. Seeing as no ones since I proposed doing this seems to have a problem with it, ill propose using this.Please remember Im just proposing this... This isn't a 'Major change' but what im proposing. If you guys dont like handling original rules... I 100% understand and we can redo this with using inserting 'Simple'. I just thought that was bit extreme.
Here is what I found should be removed based on above:
But if it isn't deleted... Then we must follow what you reverted back to right? Even I dont think what you went back to, I created, was worded right. But if the list stays and we must follow the rules. Description you kept... "Simple the Great Science Fiction & Fantasy books that are very Fun and/or Funny." So lets take that apart... So I would argue 'Simple the Great Science Fiction & Fantasy books' means it has to fit in one of those genres. And 'that are very Fun and/or Funny.' So evidence must for each book to support they are 'very Fun' and/or 'Funny'. Bit extreme, and very vague and but thats what you think the rules should be. This list can have every book if it includes one person who thinks the book is very Fun and/or Funny. I tried my best to not to go overboard taking away or keeping books.
#1 Galatic Energies
#2 The Secret of Excalibur (Excalibur Saga #1)
#6 Glacial Eyes (Salt Lake After Dark, #1)
#11 Old Bony Blue Eyes (Clockpunk Wizard, #3)
#12 Ready Player One [[a favoriteof mine but... No Shelves with Funny or very Fun, going through top pages of reviews: finding no mention of very fun and only one mention of funny. ]]
#19 Monster Hunter International (Monster Hunter International, #1) [[another favoite but.... One mention of Funny in reviews I could find in the top pages and it was a 1 star review where they were saying basically how it wasn't funny.]]
#24 L'Ultimo Eroe (Storie di Okkervill, #1)
#24 Greegs & Ladders [[two Funny Mentions: Zichao Deng say: "I could also do without the politics. I think I'm probably in a minority here, since a lot of people seem to have found the political bits clever and funny." So while saying Funny, Person saying they didn't find it funny.
Philip Says: "Yes it has a tongue firmly in its cheek and clearly takes inspiration from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy; however I did not find it as funny." I don't want to assume anything. The person says "not find it as funny", and Doesnt say its funny.]]
... So I included ones where it had many reviews but in the top 5 pages of reviews.. finding say Ready Player One... only 1 person calls it funny. But remember Im just proposing these to be removed. The rules do state That are very Fun and/or Funny. Im not sure in the top reviews / top 5 pages... only 1 mention its funny = Concluding it fits that it is.. It fits one persons view on it in a group of many reviews (unlike some where they only have 1-2 pages of reviews).
But hey I included them because I strongly think just doing drastic changes without discussion isnt right. I believe I including stuff that appear to suggest they should stay. Because I did do the research. But im simply proposing it to you guys! and hope we can continue doing this for the rest of the list! Oh yeah for all the [[ ]] examples... if you need quotes for each one, just let me know ill post em.
could you remove akira books 1-6 from this list? it was requested that there be no graphic novels/manga.https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
flum wrote: "could you remove akira books 1-6 from this list? it was requested that there be no graphic novels/manga.https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1..."
All set :)
Hey I was curious the status of the 8 books I proposed to be removed on Aug 12, 2016 02:58PM is still under consideration? Just hadn't gotten any response so wasn't sure. I've been working good bit on the next set of books and taking my time... I didn't want to slam you guys with huge mounts of books and trying to propose them in chunks. Just curious of the status? I totally would understand if you guys are too busy and don't want to go through all this. I seriously don't want to waste your guys time at all (100% serious). I know from my side going through reviews, comments, descriptions here can be time consuming. I'd be on board on just having the List deleted. Would really be best solution... without making sure the rules apply & not changing rules.Because I don't want to put you guys through too much work... and just want the best outcome. So really leave it up to you guys. Im good either way... going through each book or just deleting it.
this looks like a personal list: the title is "Paper books to read", only 1 voterhttps://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
These ones it's unclear what they are about
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/8...
Hello, I'm hoping a moderator/librarian can help me out. I created listopias for the Millions' Most-Anticipated Second-Half 2016 Fiction and Non-Fiction lists. And, of course, despite specifically asking that no one add titles to these lists since they are entirely based on lists from the Millions website (just, Listopia'd to make it easy for GR users), people have added additional titles to both >:( (Sorry, it makes me a tad grumpy that I need to come and ask someone to edit the list for me.)From https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1..., could a librarian remove:
My Grandmother Asked Me to Tell You She's Sorry (currently #40)
Miss Jane (currently #71)
This Must Be the Place
Small Great Things
The Trouble With Goats and Sheep (all three at #44)
A Gentleman in Moscow (currently #19)
From https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1..., could a librarian please remove:
Blood at the Root (currently #10)
Island Passages (currently #11)
Historic Rural Churches of Georgia (currently #13)
Thanks so very much. :) Melissa
I was hoping my List, Great Fun Science Fiction & Fantasy, will get deleted / I'm requesting it to be deletedhttps://www.goodreads.com/list/show/2...
Reasons (if needed):. I came here to discuss removing books from said list. A good back and forth discussion began about altering rules to be more specific to fit the purpose of the list. Books that aren't considered very fun and/or Funny Or specific to having either words mentioned (according to GR reviews, shelves, description, and such). Simply AKA being general and looking at the books to see if evidence they are funny Or seeing if they have words very Fun or Funny. Giving books chance being just one. So either being vague in search or specific, top ranked books just don't fit as I shown. But wisely, Martine suggested making the rules more specific. Went back and forth on ideas. No books were removed & nothing was finalized. Brainstorming. Then all of a sudden Rivka jumps in, says the edit to description (which had been changing throughout the brainstorming), was to much a major change (Nothing was near final and no books removed, so no Real Change) & because rules been around for long time.... Rivka makes the major change to the description draft of rules we were working on by Reverting back to original rules. And bam leaves conversation. Hey person has all the right, but Rivka made the major change and put it on me, I didn't. I admitted my mistake above. Not stepping in and overseeing if books met the rules at all and proposed rules change earlier. That was on me.
I may see things differently, but I wouldn't want to see lists ruined by having....: say for example... Martine's (Martine who has done a great job helping) lists such as Best Books of 2008 or any of the other years.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/4...
Best Books of 2008
The best books first published during 2008.
Now using the standards set, Martine, "Since simple/great/fun/funny are very subjective, my personal assessment is that the books don't warrant deletion.". Same standard could ruin many lists. Imagine Best of 2008 being filled with the top ranked books in list having only one star / one & half star. Martine has done a great job helping! But 'Best' is subjective, and some of my best books have gotten 1 star on Goodreads, but I don't believe they have a place on a 'Best of' list. Are 1 star books allowed on the list? I'm asking to better understand the process. I'm not sure why you Martine after doing so much help & still active on Goodreads jumped ship on helping good while ago or why Rivka stopped either.
Since July 24, no one has responded back to a comment of mine on the thread & while others continue to recieve help. I understand people might want to ignore / hoping I'll go. But being as long as it has and no one seems to care about it, let's delete it.
Best solution is just to delete said list and this will all be over. Just to clarify I asked for its deletion on August 12.
I hope the best to everyone involved & thank you for the support.
I bowed out of the discussion when Rivka, a more experienced librarian, indicated that my solutions weren't in alignment with the goodreads listopia policy. Sorry! I don't want to lose my hard-earned librarian status.
And I had already given my advice, which is start a new list with the clearer criteria and leave the old list be.ETA Just in case it gets overlooked, request #321 still needs to be done.
I updated the description and curious what people think? It's a bit long lol and if it's too much 100% open to suggestions to fix it. I went back and read Rivka's comment how the rules were too specific and reverted back to original rules. I should built upon that and seen how I could fix the rules with what was stated. I kept the idea of Simple & Of Funny and laid out rules. Instead of making it specific about what must be mentioned... The words said, I turned it into about what people are saying more vaguely (taking the Simple), and creating rules around them. I noticed after I wrote the new description people have commented here, I want to beable to fully respond & such later today when I have time. LoL if I read then now I'll probably want to write more, but I need to get work done. So I'll read them & respond later tonight. And wanted to post about new description to see how it is received (I love getting corrective critism). Hopefully I did the new description well enough. However I'm always open to changing it as much as possible. Oh yeah inspiration for some of the wording came from:https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
I liked the use of Please & Please No lol
Please can someone check #320? I would like a second opinion before possibly deleting the lists
Hello again,In the interim, my application for GR librarian was approved so I took care of my own deletion request (#321) this evening. I read through all the instructions so I think it all worked right and I didn't accidentally delete the wrong books. So *waves* nice to join you all. I promise to use my powers only for good :) Melissa
Moloch wrote: "Please can someone check #320? I would like a second opinion before possibly deleting the lists"Can I delete the lists in post 320?
[Edited out the names to comply with the Moderator]HELP!! The "Best Science Fiction" list is being heavily spammed by sockpuppets. This is my favorite list, I've been focusing on it for three years tying to complete the Top 100.
There are five books in particular which, many believe, are being spammed by the own author. The most recent one, [*****], jumped from #300 to #82 within 48 hours.
Here are the 5 books which clearly are being sockpuppeted/spammed.
82:[*****] (1,289 total rating)
92: [*****] (1,256 total rating)
94: [*****] (1,139 total rating)
125: [*****] (159 total rating)
126: [*****] (48 total rating)
What can I do? Is there a way to report the sockpuppet accounts? Is there a way for a Librarian to remove the books themselves from the list due to obvious spamming?
Thank you for your time.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Mod
Librarians can only remove books from lists where they do not meet the list's description. That does not appear to be the case here.
For concerns about possible list voting which violates Goodreads terms, please flag the list or use the Contact Us link on the Help page.
Allegations about specific users are not permitted in this group. Please edit your post to remove specific books/authors, or I will be forced to remove the entire post.
[Thanks!]
Hi,I'm the creator of the 2016 National Book Awards Longlist list and, despite my instructions not to, someone has added two titles to the list that are not on the longlist. I was hoping someone could remove Veritas The Pharmacological Endgame and Big, Fat American Lion Book: An Active Guide for How to Live a Better Life Being Fat.
Thanks!
Elizabeth wrote: "Hi,I'm the creator of the 2016 National Book Awards Longlist list and, despite my instructions not to, someone has added two titles to the list that are not on the longlist. I was hoping someone ..."
I have deleted those 2 books
Hi,I'm the creator of this list, which is for adult and new adult authors who have their first book coming out in 2017.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Someone added FISH OUT OF WATER by Laura Silverman. The author is delightful, and I can't wait to read her book, but it's Young Adult. Can someone please remove it?
Hi! I'm the creator of the list #DiverseDetectives and wondered if someone would remove books from the list that do not fit under the title and description at all. These books simply have white straight international detectives, no matter where they travel to in the story:A Very Private Enterprise (English)
All 3 Arkady Renko books (Russian)
Timaeus the Tracker (Rome)
Intrusion (US Am)
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Thank you!
Hi,Can you please remove book # 156 from this list (https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/7...), Valiant, as it is not Yaoi/BL at all, nor is it manga/manwha or graphic novel.
Thanks!
I created a list-Alien Planets https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/4... and there's a series of books that I'd like to remove from there. The message about removal has me nervous though and I'd like a second opinion. Species Intervention seems very clearly to me to be set on earth. Could someone second that for me?
Julia wrote: "Hi,Can you please remove book # 156 from this list (https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/7...), Valiant, as it is not Yaoi/BL at all,..."
I agree that this book is incompatible with the genre of the list. I have removed it for you.
Shanna_redwind wrote: "I created a list-Alien Planets https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/4... and there's a series of books that I'd like to remove from there. The message about removal has me nervous tho..."Your request seems really straight-forward to me, and the books you mentioned are incompatible with the list's description. I have removed the erroneous titles for you.
I made a mistake. This title is GIRL OUT OF WATER. Sorry. I'd still like it removed, if possible.Thanks!
Laura wrote: "Hi,
I'm the creator of this list, which is for adult and new adult authors who have their first book coming out in 2017.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Someone added FISH ..."
Can a librarian please removeBeautiful Creatures (Caster Chronicles, #1)
from
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
I'm the list creator, but I can't remove the spammed books.
Thank you.
T
Laura wrote: "Hi,I'm the creator of this list, which is for adult and new adult authors who have their first book coming out in 2017.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Someone added FISH ..."
I have removed the miscategorized book.
Thomas wrote: "Can a librarian please removeBeautiful Creatures (Caster Chronicles, #1)
from
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
I'm the list creator, but I can't remove the ..."
When requesting that a book be removed from a list, please include (in your request) specifically what about the book does not align with the list's description. This ensures that we librarians need only verify the information provided, rather than reading through the full list description and full details of each book, trying to guess what was wrong with each book. Thanks! :)
For this list (Best Historical Romances Where the Quiet/Unusual Girl Gets the Guy), I'm wondering if the following books should be removed?https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/6...
#10 - Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte
#31 - Persuasion by Jane Austen
#61 - Mansfield Park by Jane Austen
#103 - The Tenant of Wildfell Hall by Anne Bronte
#123 - Wives and Daughters by Elizabeth Gaskell
#130 - Villette by Charlotte Bronte
#134 - The Professor by Charlotte Bronte
#147 - Bleak House by Charles Dickens
#148 - Hard Times by Charles Dickens
All of these are classics and none of them are historical romances in the vein the list was created for (people may think they're historical romances simply because they were written in the 1800's or so, but they were contemporaries at that time- at least I think they all were).
Can someone please remove these?
Anyone want to remove the ones listed in 343?
Melanie wrote: "Anyone want to remove the ones listed in 343?"I can do it this evening! I wasn't 100% sure about removing them, since I wasn't sure about the formal definition of "historical romance." I felt like someone looking for a romance in a historical setting might enjoy P&P, so maybe they should stay on the list? Open to discussion. :)
Martine wrote: "I wasn't 100% sure about removing them, since I wasn't sure about the formal definition of "historical romance.""The broad definition is where the plot takes place in the past. But with historical fiction, I believe it's that the plot has to take place in the past from the time the story was written. A generally accepted practice is at least 25 years in the past from the time the story was written. So f.e. I think writing about 1818 in 1820 doesn't make the book historical fiction now as the book was contemporary at the time it was written.
I think another general way of classifying it is a story written in the present about the past. So writing a book in 1820 about 1750 would be considered historical fiction as it was written about a period in time prior to when it was written.
Although some people consider anything written that long ago to be historical fiction, so if it's too borderline as to whether they should be included, it's fine to leave them. I just didn't think they were historical romances like all the other books on the list were.
Melanie wrote: "Martine wrote: "I wasn't 100% sure about removing them, since I wasn't sure about the formal definition of "historical romance.""The broad definition is where the plot takes place in the past. Bu..."
I'm comfortable with this explanation and will remove the referenced books for you. :) I appreciate the in-depth explanation...be prepared to explain it again or copy-paste the explanation in the future, as there are a lot of librarians, and we are under strict orders not to delete titles from lists willy-nilly, so we're always going to be cautious!) :)
Martine wrote: "I'm comfortable with this explanation and will remove the referenced books for you. :) I appreciate the in-depth explanation...be prepared to explain it again or copy-paste the explanation in the future, as there are a lot of librarians, and we are under strict orders not to delete titles from lists willy-nilly, so we're always going to be cautious!) :) "Thanks! And if I run into a similar issue again, I'll try to remember to put a full explanation in my post requesting the deletions.
could you remove "baccano!, vol. 1: the rolling bootlegs" and "the isolator, vol. 1" from this list? it was requested that there be no graphic novels/manga.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
I'm a creator of a Space Race List:https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
And the problem is people added books to it that had nothing to do with the list quote:
"Books about the space race, Apollo, Shuttle, etc. Both fiction and non-fiction allowed. Fictional must have a strong connection to the space race, whether from a fictional Apollo 18/19/20 mission, or humanity returning to the moon with a new moon program. "
By this tradition, something like 2001 and it's sequel 2010 fit in, but the later sequels like 2063 or 3001 don't.
But....people add stuff like
In Death Ground (Starfire, #3)
by David Weber
Which is FAR FAR future.
How do I eradicate this silliness from my own list?
#351: Removed 3001, the Honorverse books, some Lois McMaster Bujold (from the Vorkosigian saga) and some Steven Brust (not even space related other than tangentially). If you post a list of specific titles (and ideally, what page of the list they're on) a librarian can remove them, assuming they actually are contravening the list description. (For instance, I didn't find 2063 yet)
On the Best American (US) Short Stories list (https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/7...), you will find as book # 43, a compilation of short stories, A Rose for Emily and Other Stories.This page is meant for single stories only.
Thanks for removing this book.
Thanks for removing that book. Here's another one - https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/7...
#18 - The Light in the Piazza by Elizabeth Spencer is an 110 page book not a short story.
Thanks for your help.
To me 110 pages is a short story. It's certainly not novel length.It isn't specified on the List description exactly what is the criteria used for a short story. So I'm not inclined to remove it. Others may have a differing opinion.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Goodreads Librarians Group
Books mentioned in this topic
Occupy (other topics)Sacred Sex (other topics)
A Life That Matters: The Legacy of Terri Schiavo -- A Lesson for Us All (other topics)
The Gospel & Abortion (other topics)
The Delusion: We All Have Our Demons (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Shannon Freeman (other topics)D.B. Tarpley (other topics)
FanBoyBooks -- only librarians can remove books from a list, and we are under strict orders not to delete books unless they are totally miscategorized. Your list description says "Simple the Great Science Fiction & Fantasy books that are very Fun and/or Funny," and the two books in question do fit the genre (Sci Fi, Fantasy). Since simple/great/fun/funny are very subjective, my personal assessment is that the books don't warrant deletion.
I manage a few lists and understand how frustrating it is to see people add books that you feel are contrary to your vision for the list. My advice is to make the list description more specific so (a) others know not to add certain books to the list and (b) librarians can determine whether a book should be removed.
For a good example, here's a list that I maintain -- https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/4... The clear description has helped ensure the integrity of the list, and has helped others contribute in a meaningful way. :)