Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

I am copying a post of mine from the feedback group because it is past beginning to be a question of librarian policy. Below is my latest comment from this thread where I have linked to one of my posts upthread.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...


Krazykiwi wrote: "If you're seeing editors on novels, they should be removed, per policy (or ask in the librarians group)."

I think this is not straight-forward. If we're talking about contemporary novels, or at least novels where the author is still living and/or is not in the public domain, that makes sense. But novels that *are* in the public domain may have editors with more than employee status. I suspect this discussion should be taking place in the librarian's group.

ETA: Here is but one example of where an editor exists, and where it seems reasonable that it should. Sister Carrie I did not do the add/edit on this edition, but I see this type of example regularly. If this is against policy, I need to know.

In the Sister Carrie book, the "editor" is not actually an editor, but rather wrote the additional notes and introduction.

In my opinion, Lee Clark Mitchell should not have a role as "editor", but either contributor or introduction/notes.

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/277068164

WorldCat uses "edited with an introduction and notes by Lee Clark Mitchell." This edition was imported from onix ingram and gets the editor role. Are you saying you think all of these should be investigated and changed?

Amanda wrote: "wrote the additional notes and introduction."

This is extremely common in cases of a modern edition of an older work, usually by a deceased author. And would be a case where the editor would be ok to add -- based on the additional content.

rivka wrote: " And would be a case where the editor would be ok to add -- based on the additional content.
"

Yippee! Whew, that's a relief. Thanks for the quick response.