Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

I would like to question the sense of the NAB policy. I'm all for using it to segregate things that actually aren't a book - multi packs and the like but Goodreads is a book catalogue. The rejection of the following is absurd;

***A short story or short stories only published in an anthology or magazine
***Deleted scenes
***Extras only published at the back of a specific book edition
***Stories only available via subscription to a newsletter, or via a website that requires registration
***Individual works that are only available for purchase as bundled with another, primary work

For starters all of the above contain actual words. If we're including colouring books, sheet music and calendars then we absolutely should be including an author's work. Cataloguing extras for series allows a reader to discover and locate things they would otherwise miss without following every social media account and newsletter. Particularly when we're discussing sites that require free registration like ProlificWorks. I'm pedantic - I like to know I've read, can track and review all parts of a series an author has written. I like being able to find them and see what other people have thought. I surely can't be the only one who feels like this?

Please respond if you agree and maybe the policy can be changed.

Thanks,

Mella

Calendars are not considered books, and sheet music only if it is bound in book form.

None of those seem like books to me. Short stories published in a magazine and not on their own cannot possibly be considered a book. Extras not published separately cannot possibly be considered a book.

Items not available to the general public are not books. I don't see anything wrong with the policy.

I think the problem here is this part:

***Short stories only available via subscription to a newsletter, or via a website that requires registration

And the language used below:

Shorts are retained in some cases. Shorts that belong are those that are:

Published separately

Published online as a specified short story (i.e. not a "bonus")

Complete flash fiction

So, here is my question. If a book is a specified short story (not a bonus) and currently only available via a free site that requires a login, is that book then allowed to remain on the site? The way it comes across to me is, yes, that story should remain due to it being a specified non-bonus short. But the language/format in the manual is a bit confusing.

Also, I have seen books be NAB'ed that are NOT short stories but are novellas and novels. For which this (***Short stories only available via subscription to a newsletter, or via a website that requires registration) rule doesn't apply.

In regards to some of these sites (ie Bookfunnel, Prolific Works, Story Origin, etc.), they are oftentimes used by self-published and indie authors as a means to send out ARCs. And since ARCs are allowed to be listed, how are we as librarians supposed to why the book is on the site? Indie and self-pub books on Amazon are often day and date releases without a preorder. Unless we talk to the author directly, we have no way of knowing when or if the book will be released via other outlets.

I'd like to note that I agree that extras, outtakes, and bonus material, as well as short stories sent in the body of an email newsletter and not otherwise available, should not be considered a book.

If it requires registration then it is not considered valid for inclusion here. The first rule overrides the other one.

Also, some magazines have a digital edition. I can see why stories so included would appear to be Published online as a specified short story , when in reality they are still part of the magazine.

Readers who read such stories are welcome to shelve the magazine and then state in their review that they read only one story. Members can also include such information in their private notes.

ARC editions need to be marked as ARC editions (in the edition field). Also, most ARC readers should have at least an approximate release date for the books (even if they aren't available for pre-order), especially for the self-published authors.

For the other Newsletter subscription downloads, Goodreads policy is they get NAB'd if they have reviews. Even if the book will be released, it does not make that edition valid (we would just merge into the valid edition once available).
*I do think the "short story" portion of the policy needs to be removed since it's not accurate.

The ways publishing works have changed, so it is not strange to ask if policies should be looked at.
What I have heard about some platforms, how big is the difference with for example needing an Amazon account to buy a work that is exclusively on Kindle? (I don't know enough to give that answer.)

Scott wrote: "Calendars are not considered books, and sheet music only if it is bound in book form."

Calendars are considered if they have extra content. Sheet music in a bound book is still hardly something you would sit and read. Lots of people copy parts out for their students.


Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote:
None of those seem like books to me. Short stories published in a magazine and not on their own cannot possibly be considered a book. Extras not published separately cannot possibly be considered a book.

Items not available to the general public are not books. I don't see anything wrong with the policy.

Extras are often published via newsletters or prolific works which brings me back to my first problem. As far as not available to general public - all those items are. I'm going to guess you're not an ebook reader. I had this issue when I first started reading ebooks as deciding what was a book. But I've decided to embrace it. I don't agree with sheet music or extra content calendars or that - but I'm happy for other people to have them uploaded so they can record them. All I'm asking for is that we allow the people that want to record those items to be allowed to under the author's profile and under the series page. One of the novellas that brought this issue to my attention is a 115 page novella I downloaded in epub format. At the moment the author is classed as NAB. It seems unfair that it can't even be listed under the author's name. It's not like we can't change the media type to something else.


Dana aka ♥Belladonna♥ wrote:

I'd like to note that I agree that extras, outtakes, and bonus material, as well as short stories sent in the body of an email newsletter and not otherwise available, should not be considered a book.

I'm happy for the format or media type to be listed as any of those things - my main argument is I don't think the author should be considered NAB. The author still wrote it.

Renske wrote: What I have heard about some platforms, how big is the difference with for example needing an Amazon account to buy a work that is exclusively on Kindle? (I don't know enough to give that answer.)

Fair point. Maybe we can consider changing the edition field or the format instead so that it can all be recorded under the actual author.

Renske wrote: "What I have heard about some platforms, how big is the difference with for example needing an Amazon account to buy a work that is exclusively on Kindle? "

I need an Amazon account to buy paperbacks from them, so it isn't just Kindles. Most companies (not just Amazon) require you to have an account, although I'm aware some allow you to check out as guest.

Together with the social aspect of challenges and reviews, Goodreads is (also) a cataloguing site for published works: individual short stories published in magazines or in anthologies do not "exist" as separated publications. So it's just incorrect to add them. I like that this site maintains also a scope of rigorous catalogue.

Moloch wrote: "Together with the social aspect of challenges and reviews, Goodreads is (also) a cataloguing site for published works: individual short stories published in magazines or in anthologies do not "exis..."

Okay, but we are also talking about stories/novellas that are published individually - on Prolific Works or via an author's newsletter, for example. There is no sensible reason to NAB them. Those stories exist in the world, on the internet and on people's e-readers - just not on Goodreads. And if they were available (for free) on Amazon they wouldn't get NAB'ed - this also leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

I don't know; I think there needs to be some criteria where to draw the line, otherwise every written text gets added to Goodreads and someday someone will want to add their own emails because they are "on the Internet". I don't read these kind of novellas, extra scenes etc. so I don't want to give an opinion on that. But I think some criteria (that not everyone will agree upon) is needed.

Moloch wrote: "I like that this site maintains also a scope of rigorous catalogue.
"

As do I.

This policy existed before Goodreads was purchased by Amazon. It isn't a policy that Amazon decided to minimize the book buying competition. This is a book site. There is nothing that says members are not allowed to track short stories published in magazines or novellas published behind some newsletter wall. It just isn't done at Goodreads.

Prolific Works still requires you to have a login for the website (at least last time I checked), so email still needed for download.

Bookfunnel does not require any sort of email entry for some books (those can be entered on GR as books). The ones that require you to sign-up are not valid.

Yes, there are a handful on Bookfunnel that do not require any signup or email at all, and those are valid to be on Goodreads.

While this group is the place to ask for clarification regarding existing policies, it is not the place for debates. And certainly not for attacking other users.

We have noted the various opinions expressed here, and will take them under consideration the next time we review these policies. You are welcome to send in any additional thoughts via our Contact Us page. Closing thread.