Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

Jillian wrote: "Just from a monetary position the change makes no sense. With amazon owning both audible and goodreads it is in their interest to increase sales. I know audible promotes the Great Course, they are even a featured list. Goodreads is one way to advertise. When I add, read, or review a Great Course book it is free advertisement for everyone I am friends with. Now, I can no share those BOOKS with other goodread members. "

Perhaps bring it to Audible's attention? I'm not an Audible customer, so I doubt they'd listen to me.

AlegnaB † wrote: "The other DVD set I have includes a "Lecture Transcript and Course Guidebook."..."

AlegnaB †, may I ask you to write this to GoodRead support and ask them why specified courses with guidebooks are NABbed? I'm just not sure we'll get any answer from GoodReads team in this thread. Thanks in advance.

Aleksey wrote: "AlegnaB †, may I ask you to write this to GoodRead support and ask them why specified courses w..."

I'm fairly sure it's at least partly because GR employees didn't realize that many of the sets have guidebooks that are not solely transcripts. And as I was combining the various formats for particular courses, I noticed that very few of the coursebooks are on GR. Most courses were added as DVD, CD, or audiobook, probably with no information about a coursebook in the description (I didn't pay attention to that). If coursebooks/transcript books were deleted or converted to NOT A BOOK, it was probably because the GR employees thought they were solely transcripts [rivka wrote: "Course books would stay, even if they include other material. Editions that have solely recorded lectures (or transcripts of same) would not."]

rivka has been responding here, so I'll give her time to respond again.

AlegnaB †, so seems like we CANNOT add courses, but we CAN add course books, so titles should be like "XXXXX: The Great Courses Guide Book" or "XXXXX: Guide Book" instead of just "XXXXX" -- of course for courses that have guide book.

According to their site, Course Guidebook details are:
296-page printed course guidebook
Chronologies
Wordscore guides
Glossary

So, they ARE BOOKS.

I completely agree with others that this is the wrong decision. Nowhere in Goodreads' policies does it state that audiobooks are only audiobooks if there are recorded in a recording booth, but not audiobooks if they are recorded in a lecture hall.

If there's been a policy change, then the documentation should be updated, and (out of courtesy) GR staff should explain the reasons for that change.

I appreciate you have to draw the line somewhere, but as it stands, it seems like it's been drawn completely arbitrarily, and there's no-one I can see who's actually familiar with these courses that believes it's been drawn in the right place.

Ok... I've just corrected a "NOT A BOOK" title before realizing this thread. This is a very wrong decision, Crystal is right on point and I don't see her questions being answered other than "our policy, sorry". If this is what librarian is all about I just don't want to be part of it

Aleksey wrote: "AlegnaB †, so seems like we CANNOT add courses, but we CAN add course books"

Only if they are published separately, which does not often appear to be the case. If they are supplemental items included with the DVD/CD/ etc., they still would not be considered books on Goodreads.

I don't want to be librarian anymore and I can't see option to sign out.

What is coming next? Comic BOOKs?

Any Goodreads Librarian wishing to relinquish that status should use the Contact Us link on the Help page to make that request.

I don't agree with the policy that these audiobooks aren't books but accept that staff has ruled it that way. However, I would like to see the section in the manual that supports this as I can't find anything that would. If it's not there, the manual should be updated to include these items as not books as people will continue to re-add them or move them out of NAB if they don't frequent this group and see this topic.

Already looking into an alternative to catalog my readings. Holy crap, what a f.... let down.

Well, at least the Great Courses will be in good company with ISBN-coded classics such as
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

Would you please clarify, does the policy update suggest that NOBs with ISBNs, such as the Great Courses, will be deleted en masse and no longer be accepted as new additions?
Are the reviews written for them still accessible and could be copied elsewhere?

The notabooks do not get completely deleted, but remain in place so that the original information is not imported again. So no reviews are deleted.

Man is an aural creature. The stories passed from our ancestors through story telling enlightened our species. Recording these stories in any written format is an outgrowth of this heritage. Recording stories and teachings in an aural format represents a step closer to the original.

This is a high-handed and ridiculous decision. I listen to Great Courses lectures just like audiobooks, and count them toward my challenge. As Bill said, this makes Goodreads less useful. And reviews of the courses posted to Facebook look incredibly stupid and uninformative.

Scott wrote: "The notabooks do not get completely deleted, but remain in place so that the original information is not imported again. So no reviews are deleted."

Most of the courses are being converted to NOT A BOOK so that they remain in the system and on bookshelves, but at least one course was deleted from the system. It’s a course that I own and have been working through with my family (Decoding the Secrets of Egyptian Hieroglyphs). I had it on at least one shelf with a start date, and it has disappeared. I’m fairly sure that a few others have also disappeared since I created a great-courses shelf and added a bunch of courses that I found at my public library’s online catalog and RBdigital site. I think the total on that shelf was more than 90, but now it’s 86.

Only courses without an isbn/asin would be deleted, otherwise the system would just reimport them.

Sandra wrote: "Only courses without an isbn/asin would be deleted, otherwise the system would just reimport them."

Well, I guess not everyone who can use a delete button knows that, because my hieroglyphs course has an ISBN. 🤔 I think the GR page for the hieroglyphs course had an ISBN, but I’m not completely sure. I usually search for an item by ISBN when I have the item. If the course didn’t have it here, I may not have added it.

Great Courses: How to Listen to and Understand Great Music, 3rd Edition was deleted too ( ISBN-13: 9781598032697 ; ISBN-10: 1598032690 ). I tried manually adding it anew, but apparently, there's an item with the ISBN-13 number already in the database, even if couldn't find it through the search bar. Perhaps reimporting takes time.

Volo wrote: "...I tried manually adding it anew, but apparently, there's an item with the ISBN-13 number already in the database, even if couldn't find it through the search bar..."

This is exactly the point of NABing a record (and not deleting it completely from the database), so it wouldn't be added again if it was already marked as Not A Book.

Olivia wrote (79): "This is exactly the point of NABing a record (and not deleting it completely from the database), so it wouldn't be added again if it was already marked as Not A Book. "

Olivia, thank you for clarifying. It makes sense to keep a record of ISBNs referring to NABs.
However, I encountered a case in which a ISBN appears to be recorded in the GR database, but can't be accessed via search or found on user shelves. I'm wondering what explains this - to me - anomaly.

Based on what Scott wrote (72): "The notabooks do not get completely deleted, but remain in place so that the original information is not imported again. So no reviews are deleted. ", and prior comments, NAB information should remain accessible. I was curious whether this was indeed the case, given a NAB with an ISBN that can't be accessed, or whether the case is unconnected to the NABing.

Wow. As an avid Great Courses listener, I'm really disappointed by your decision to list these as "Not a Book." I have at least two of these that I purchased (in a book store, mind you) that came with beautiful books as an accompaniment. That is, the lectures were written out as a book you can read vs. listen to, if you should so choose, complete with beautiful artwork and photographs. Most of these lectures are carefully written out prior to recording, and are more thorough and comprehensive than many "official" books I've read on the same topics. To me, the professors should absolutely be listed as the author, as they clearly spent as much time planing and writing out their lectures as any author has on a textbook or other "official" book. I've been a goodreads member almost since its inception over 10 years ago. I have an entire bookshelf for these lectures/audiobooks, with over 50 Great Courses listed. Honestly, this makes me want to leave Goodreads entirely. There's something just not right about it at all. Audiobooks are still books. They still have authors. And those authors need to be credited and acknowledged, with their work not dismissed disrespectfully as "not a book."

I should add that many of these professors also have other books and textbooks they have written. And now, when you're looking at their author page to see all their work listed, the Great Courses are no longer included. This is not right. I've also seen some of the courses/audiobooks deleted entirely from your website. All the reviews are lost. I don't understand this decision. It doesn't make any sense. It lacks an understanding of what the Great Courses are and is disrespectful to the professors who wrote them.

This seems like a grey area/semantic issue and clearly isn't popular, so can you please reverse this. If its a system issue, fix it.

If you're insistent on this classification I suggest a better way of categorising entries that doesn't include NOT A BOOK in the title or the author... which is incredibly ANNOYING!

Laurel wrote: "I should add that many of these professors also have other books and textbooks they have written. And now, when you're looking at their author page to see all their work listed, the Great Courses a..."

Totally agree. The audio recordings are done in a studio from documents written by the lecturer. Just like any other audio book. An incorrect decision, badly implemented.

Mark wrote: "I completely agree with others that this is the wrong decision. Nowhere in Goodreads' policies does it state that audiobooks are only audiobooks if there are recorded in a recording booth, but not ..."


And even if it did the policies would be wrong. :0)

Outdoors wrote: If you're insistent on this classification I suggest a better way of categorising entries that doesn't include NOT A BOOK in the title or the author... which is incredibly ANNOYING! ..."

Agreed. Even if, for whatever bizarre and petty reason, you want to add "not a book" somewhere in the information, why does it have to be in the author section?? It feels like a disrespectful dig to the authors of these very comprehensive works, who no doubt spent countless hours laboring over writing the lectures (which really are just like chapters). Why not have it in the "Format" section, if you are so insistent on this ? I find it incredibly disrespectful to the authors.

I know that some of the Great Courses are, in fact, DVDs/streaming videos. But, for the most part, these are NOT the courses people are reviewing on Goodreads. They are reviewing the audioBOOKS they got from their library, a bookstore or Audible. AudioBOOKS, by the way, that your own parent company (Amazon) lists as books. That is, Amazon considers Great Courses audiobooks as BOOKS, and categorizes them as such.

Honestly, when I first saw "NOT A BOOK" in the author sections, I thought some immature, ill-informed volunteer had made the changes. The fact that it is written in ALL CAPS makes it seem all the more juvenile. I was shocked to see this was a decision made by Goodreads. It seems so petty and completely uninformed.

I used to use Goodreads in large part to search for reviews for the Great Courses to help me decide which to download from my library next. Now that the authors are removed from the information, and some of the books have been completely deleted, this makes Goodreads so much less useful to me.

Again, I've been on Goodreads for over a decade. I've raved about this site to all my friends, and gotten many to join. This is the first time I've complained about any issue. If this policy sticks, I will no longer be recommending this site to friends, and unless this decision is changed, I likely will have little use for Goodreads anymore.

I'm curious, would you say The Last Lecture by Randy Pausch is not a book? It's a lecture, and is available in audio format, just like the Great Courses. What about Lectures on Literature by Vladimir Nabokov? Those are a collection of his lectures given at Wellesley and Cornell. There's also Essays and Lectures by Ralph Waldo Emerson, or Lectures on Psychoanalysis by Sigmund Freud. I could go on and on. Yet, credit is given to these authors for their work. Why are you not also giving credit to Great Courses professors for the same thing? There's nothing in your policies that I could see that specifically states lectures are not books (if there is, please direct me to it?). Again, what is the difference here? You've really made a poor and unfortunate decision, and I think your members deserve a better answer. Thank you.

Laurel wrote: "I'm curious, would you say The Last Lecture by Randy Pausch is not a book? It's a lecture, and is available in audio format, just like the Great Courses. What about Lectures on Literature by Vladim..."

I completely agree.

Laurel wrote: "I'm curious, would you say The Last Lecture by Randy Pausch is not a book?"

The book by that title has very different content than the recorded lecture. It is absolutely not a transcript of the lecture, but additional/supplemental material. The late Dr. Pausch was well aware of the difference between the two media.

What about Lectures on Literature by Vladamir Nabokov? Again, those are a collection of his lectures given at Wellesley and Cornell. How is that different? Also, there's the fact that your policy does not say, at any point that I could find, that lectures are not books.

Laurel wrote: "the fact that you put NOT A BOOK (in all caps) in the author section"

This is how Goodreads handles items which are deemed not to meet our criteria for inclusion as books. See https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

I am not familiar with the Nabokov works. It is possible they do not meet our criteria either.

Wow, if we start removing Nabokov and Freud and Emerson and Noam Chompsky from the author section, simply because they are lectures, then this is getting more and more ridiculous.

Also, again, if Goodreads insists on this despite the complaints of its members, can you at least please put it in a more appropriate location, like format, and give credit to the authors as one should? I would like to be able to go to an author's page and find out that they have a course on Great Courses. Now I can't. If you do this for all lectures, including Nabokov, Freud, Emerson -- it will make it impossible for Goodreads members to find them, or if they do, to know who the author is.

Indeed, why not simply add a format for lectures? That is, make a lecture option, just like there's a hardcover or audio option. Why make such a fuss over whether a pre-written audio lecture is an "official" book or not? Just create it as a category for it, if you feel there has to be a distinction.

rivka wrote: "Editions that have solely recorded lectures (or transcripts of same) would not. "

For the purposes of this discussion, then, lectures and speeches reprinted would not be books? I see many such in my wanderings through public domain authors, and would request NAB status if they should be such. (Am thinking presidential inauguration or state of the union addresses, for example, but also speeches by other politicians, sermons by clergymen, etc.)

rivka wrote: "Laurel wrote: "I'm curious, would you say The Last Lecture by Randy Pausch is not a book?"

The book by that title has very different content than the recorded lecture. It is absolutely not a trans..."
So you are implying that the media makes a book?
As an audiophile, I take great offense to that.
I think anyone disqualifying audiobooks is ill suited to be a moderator on GoodREADs.

Jonathan wrote: "I have been using GoodReads to track my book and audiobook consumption, and lectures from Great Courses and Modern Scholar represent a reasonable number of them. To have them no longer count as boo..."

I use Library thing for my "master" catalogue after having problems with GR several years ago on similar lines. They are not arbitrary and are happy to have people use the site in whatever manner is useful to them. I recommend them. Never have I encountered a situation where an item I entered into my personal list has disappeared because someone, volunteer or paid employee, decided one day that it didn't suite their personal interpretation of what is appropriate to appear in my personal list. Can't say the same for GR which is why I stopped participating actively several yrs ago.

Mario wrote: "Already looking into an alternative to catalog my readings. Holy crap, what a f.... let down."

Try Library thing. Excellent and not arbitrary.

The question I get out of this interesting discussion is what it costs GR to leave the lectures in? Computer space would seem to be very small and the ability to P/O users is very large. It's difficult to see what GR gains from this. Without users, GR will evaporate. Not likely in this situation I grant you but still, it would pay to remember why GR is popular and who makes all the ad rates and income possible.

Wow, why so pedantic Goodreads?

I have to wonder what Jeff Bezos will think of the ban on The Great Courses. Since Goodreads is part of the Amazon empire and their philosophy is to "Obsess over the customer". The customer seems to want the Great Courses included in OUR databases. Take a vote. If we don't like it, we can opt out of the Goodreads website. Mr. Bezos will lose the data he would have gotten from the absentee (former) users. The folks who wish to ban the Great Courses will get to make Goodreads their little club.

rivka wrote: "The Great Courses are lectures. Goodreads does not consider them books."

They are. As others have pointed out, they come with ISBNs, notes in the form of an ebook, & are distributed as books by libraries & book sellers.

Many of us have spent a long time adding reviews from them & reading other books by the authors, sometimes a book that covers some of the same subject. How does this minor format change make any difference? Listing the author as a narrator is fine, but replacing that field by "not a book" is stupid. Is GR going to start listing plays as "not a book" too?

What about the 2017 on Goodreads & all its predecessors? Why are they books? I like them & jumped on the chance to use them, but they should be listed as "not a book", shouldn't they?

We should start listing all audio books as having a page per minute, too. This old school idea of listing it by the number of CDs was stupid when it started & it's gotten more ridiculous as that format has died off.

Laurel wrote: "...I used to use Goodreads in large part to search for reviews for the Great Courses to help me decide which to download from my library next. Now that the authors are removed from the information, and some of the books have been completely deleted, this makes Goodreads so much less useful to me...."

Agreed, especially deleting the author name entirely. Listing them as narrator would be OK if I can search for them, I guess.

We've been discussing both the lectures & books of some authors in "The Evolution of Science Fiction" & I often refer to & copy points from my reviews of lectures on points also discussed in other 'books'. Ditto with the "Science & Inquiry" group.

I think they're using all caps so they can do a search & destroy on the lectures. I certainly hope not. I've been on GR over a decade & haven't liked a lot of the changes, but I don't think I can put up with deleting my books & reviews, though.

I've exported my books & like GR far better than LibraryThing, but this might push me over there. I bought a lifetime subscription way back when, but rarely use that service. I'm not sure how they handle lectures, but I've got far too much time wrapped up in my reviews & notes to lose them.

Jim wrote: "This old school idea of listing it by the number of CDs was stupid when it started & it's gotten more ridiculous as that format has died off."

That may have been policy before, but nowadays audiobooks are (should be) listed by the number of hours rounded up, not by the number of CDS. See the Librarian Manual.

lethe wrote: "That may have been policy before, but nowadays audiobooks are (should be) listed by the number of hours rounded up, not by the number of CDS. See the Librarian Manual."

Just as ridiculous. Is a play 100 pages in ebook or paper format, but only a few pages when read? Is it not a book when performed by a cast rather than read by a single person? Silly.

MissJessie wrote: "Try Library thing. Excellent and not arbitrary."

Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll try using that for keeping track of The Great Courses and perhaps other things, too.

I, too, wonder what possible benefit Goodreads thought this would serve. It serves absolutely no one, and only makes things harder on its users. There's utterly no point and no benefit to anyone in doing this. And yet, I feel like we are just talking to ourselves here, as Goodreads doesn't seem to care what its members think, want or prefer, nor are they listening to the reasoning we are giving as to why these are indeed books, or why the authors at least deserve credit for their work.

It's sad to me, as I've been on GR for over a decade, and it used to be such a wonderful site.

I have to wonder if the person(s) who made this call ever actually read/listened to any of the Great Courses. If they had, and understood what they entail, it just seems like this decision never would have been made. Again, some of these courses come with books filled with artwork and photographs and print material. Further, they are written and recorded just like all other audiobooks are. They are not theatrical performances in any form whatsoever. And they are not merely transcripts, either.

If you mark Great Courses as NOT A BOOK, you then have to mark all other lectures, including those by Nabokov, Freud, Emerson, and many others. Some lectures, like the Feynman lectures, are now considered classics. Surely you don't want to label them as NAB? Where would it end?

I made the switch to LibraryThing yesterday as a result of this, and exported all 1300 of my GR books. Only thing is, now I have over 50 books LibraryThing doesn't recognize because the author, thanks to goodreads, is marked as NOT A BOOK. So silly. I now have to go search out all these books on LibraryThing and add them in one by one. But, I'm grateful that LT, just like every other book website (except GR), recognizes Great Courses as books.

Laurel wrote: "I, too, wonder what possible benefit Goodreads thought this would serve. It serves absolutely no one, and only makes things harder on its users. There's utterly no point and no benefit to anyone in..."

Agreed.

I exported my books & found most of the authors using an old export to fix the author names. I haven't read as many lectures as you, but I only had to google a few to manually put the authors back in to the .csv file. That can then be touched up for import into LibraryThing.

Can someone point to the actual text in the official guidelines that is being used to justify NABing the Great Courses?

The official guidelines that I am aware of are here:
https://www.goodreads.com/help/show/1...

Those guidelines are not 100% clear but seem to indicate that many, but not all, of the Great Courses would be considered books for several reasons:

Books includes: " audio productions, not recordings of theatrical productions (the format should be "audiobook") "

This is open to interpretation, but also seems to include recorded lectures (even if they didn't have an accompanying book.)

"Note that any of these items packaged with a book count as a book, if the specific book edition with which they are packaged is not otherwise sold separately. "

This applies to many of the Great Courses. They are often "packaged with a book" that does not have a separate ISBN but which contains much more than just transcripts of the lectures.

If you have made an official change in policy, please update the guidelines and librarian manual *before* implementing that policy.

The silence from the "officials" at GR is quite deafening.

I agree. I really hope someone soon responds to your excellent points, Ed.