Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Policies & Practices
>
Combining editions (two part audio-book editions)
date
newest »


If there are other editions of part 1 then combine all those together
look at Leo Tolstoy as an example
It also says:
don't combine:This is similar.
* 2-in-1 books or boxed sets that include the given book.

But can someone please explain the logic behind this rule? In my mind, this does seem different from the rule about not combining 2-in-1 books.
Actually a rule that said never combine audio-books with print books would make sense to me as the reviews often contain remarks about the quality of the abridgment and the performance of the reader.
However, a rule that we not combine parts one and two of an audio book when the author issued a single book and the parts have most likely been introduced to the audio version simply as a matter of packaging, seems somewhat arbitrary to me. I'm NOT advocating any position per se, just asking for someone to supply the reasoning behind the rules.
Thanks in advance.


Yes.
Stephen wrote: "In my mind, this does seem different from the rule about not combining 2-in-1 books."
How so? We don't combine A or B with A&B together, whether something was originally published as A and B separately or A&B together.
How so? We don't combine A or B with A&B together, whether something was originally published as A and B separately or A&B together.

It just seems to me that the "atomic" or natural unit of measure when working with books is the book as published by the author. I realize that many many books were originally released as serials so the "do not combine parts 1 and 2" rule has some logical justification.
And certainly, any book club selection that includes four books in one should NOT be justification for combining these four books on this site. However, Audio-books, tend to be dictated by how much material fits conveniently on the medium.
I guess what I'm trying to understand is, Is there any additional utility derived from NOT combining parts 1 and 2 of an audio book? There is the downside of not seeing any reviews of one when viewing the details of the other. I'm just trying to discover the upside. And any rationale/reason for the rule.
The rationale is: The parts do not equal the whole.
And I disagree entirely with you on the "natural unit" of a book.
And I disagree entirely with you on the "natural unit" of a book.

However, I think the bottom line is whether it is one book that is only sold as one book, but in two (or more) volumes, or whether the two parts are sold separately.
What I have learned is that in some cases audiobook publishers do in fact sell the parts separately, so it's completely possible for, say, a library to just buy one part of the book -- and then for the reader to only read that part. Thus, I would agree that this "half book" is actually a different book than the whole book, rather than a different edition of the whole book.
I think the publisher's decision in selling the parts separately which in no way reflects how it was intended to be published is another issue, but once it's done, Goodreads can't fix it.
This all holds true whether it's audio or printed books.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13...
Should this book/cd combination be combined with the book? I've left it separate but am uncertain.
But should we combine parts one and two of audio-books with the when the audio-book has been split into two parts? I've seen this a number of times and have always just left them uncombined because I was uncertain.
I did combine the audio-book editions of Son of the Morning Star parts 1 and 2 with the novel as this did seem the thing to do.