Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

43 views
Questions (not edit requests) > Combining books that are split into two volumes in translation

Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Derek (last edited Jan 06, 2012 01:20PM) (new)

Derek (derek_broughton) | 29 comments Sorry if this has been asked, but "Search is not available..."

What is the policy on combining books that are published as multiple volumes in translation? Earlier this week, I discovered that all of Michael Connelly's Japanese translations had been filed under a Japanese transliteration of his name, so I combined them back under Connelly, but most of them are published as two volumes, so I left those separate. Today I was looking at Terry Goodkind and see that almost all of the German and French versions that have been published in two halves have been combined into the original work.

Which is correct? If we don't have a problem with combining half-a-book with a full-book, I certainly don't :-)


message 2: by rivka, Former Moderator (new)

rivka | 45177 comments Mod
If a book has been published in multiple parts, those parts should not be combined with the complete book, just as we would not combine an omnibus with the books it comprises.


Also, when a translation is listed under their name in another language, we generally move that to the secondary author spot and the English name to first author. It makes it easier for users searching under either name to find it.


message 3: by Derek (new)

Derek (derek_broughton) | 29 comments rivka wrote: "If a book has been published in multiple parts, those parts should not be combined with the complete book, just as we would not combine an omnibus with the books it comprises."

OK, that's what I thought, and what I did.

"Also, when a translation is listed under their name in another language, we generally move that to the secondary author spot and the English name to first author. It makes it easier for users searching under either name to find it."

That seemed logical, and while other guidelines correctly say the first-named author on the cover should be the first-named on GR, since this was not two different authors, it seemed only right to make sure they all ended up associated with the same person.

Thanks for confirming that I'm getting it right :-)


back to top