Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

This topic is about
Mouse and Dragon
Page Numbering Requests
>
Mouse and Dragon
date
newest »


It's a pretty constant irritation...but it keeps us occupied and off the streets. :) The info comes from Barnes & Noble, and Amazon...both of which are notorious (Amazon, seemingly more so) for incorrect page numbers, sometimes missing or incomplete authors.

Keeps us in a job (too bad its unpaid). LOL"
Yeah, but it's great for the OCD in all of us.


So it's not that it's incorrect, just that it's a pretty useless stat for readers to track their reading progress. ;)
Actually, there are some "standard" sizes, and publishers often distribute those numbers early on. Amazon rarely bothers to update them.
That's why you'll see lots of books with somewhere between 350 and 450 pages marked as 400, etc.
That's why you'll see lots of books with somewhere between 350 and 450 pages marked as 400, etc.

Doc
Doc wrote: "It may be that the page counts ARE right, but for a different edition."
That is actually less common, as most sites (including GR, Amazon, and all publishers that I can think of) code these things by ISBN, not title.
That is actually less common, as most sites (including GR, Amazon, and all publishers that I can think of) code these things by ISBN, not title.
I've noticed that a number of books that I've read lately have inaccurate page numbers on GoodReads. Is this a big issue? Are the publishers pushing out bad data, or is it coming from somewhere else?