Big news! LibraryThing is now free to all! Read the blog post and discuss the change on Talk.
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
  • LibraryThing
  • Book discussions
  • Your LibraryThing
  • Join to start using.

See and sort your catalog by average ratings

New features

Join LibraryThing to post.

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:11pm Top

By popular request ( http://www.librarything.com/topic/109934#4045317 ), especially from Goodreads people missing a feature they have, I've added a column in "Your books" for a work's average rating. You can see it and sort by it.

The column is called "Work: Rating." Add it to your Your books here: http://www.librarything.com/editprofile/styles . The column also shows the numerical rating, to show more precision.

It looks like:

As usual, you can sort by the column by clicking on the column head.

Thanks to TenaciousDK and others for putting this before me again.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:13pm Top


Apr 16, 2013, 12:17pm Top

I'm open to suggestions for other work-level data in the catalog.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:19pm Top

Okay, secondary reaction: Cool, thanks! But would it be possible to show the number of ratings in there somehow? Or maybe that would have to be an additional field, I suppose...

Apr 16, 2013, 12:20pm Top

Meh. Seems fiddly to me. It could be there, but…

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:24pm Top

I only thought of it when I noticed that one of my ratings matched the average rating perfectly...only to realize that I was the only one who'd rated that book! :)

Also, this is curious: Ice Forged shows (3.53) on the work page, but (3.5) on my catalog page.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:24pm Top

Oh, I thought the work page had one decimal point of precision. It must have two. Will look at how it's doing it and fix.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:28pm Top

With column space at a premium, I'd prefer a data only option, if possible with the number of ratings added: 3.44 (236). Or if this is too complicated, rating is bold if there are more than 100 ratings.

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:31pm Top

My concern is the graphics. Looking around, I saw a number of books that showed an X.5 rating, but had the X+1 (or, more rarely, X-1) graphic. Unless that's somehow tied to the rounding?

Apr 16, 2013, 12:30pm Top

@8: I agree about the horizontal real estate, but it's the header "Work: Avg. Rating" that makes the column take up as much space as it does.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:31pm Top

Unless that's somehow tied to the rounding?

It rounds to the closest star.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:34pm Top

I do see some half-star graphics, though; but is that only because the avg rating is exactly X.5?

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:34pm Top


#11 by timspalding> It rounds to the closest star.

On the work page, it rounds to the nearest HALF star:

Apr 16, 2013, 12:36pm Top

I mean half-star. It isn't doing that?

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:45pm Top

I also like how the rating shows on the top of the workpage (the Avg. Rating cell) a bit better. It's slightly smaller and fits more with the normal text size. Here's the work page Avg. Rating vs what we have now in the catalog:


Apr 16, 2013, 12:42pm Top

#1 by timspalding> "Goodreads people missing a feature they have" is starting to prove the largest blessing to LT I've seen in several years... Thank you, Amazon!

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 12:45pm Top

#14 by timspalding> I mean half-star. It isn't doing that?

Not on mine. Here's my rating vs work rating for Flashforward:

Both should "round" to 3 1/2 stars.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:43pm Top

With column space at a premium, I'd prefer a data only option, if possible with the number of ratings added: 3.44 (236). Or if this is too complicated, rating is bold if there are more than 100 ratings.

I'd also really like one of these options.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:44pm Top

Just to be clear, in my msg 15 above I'm asking if Tim could change both the rating and work rating column to use the smaller stars that fit more with the normal text height in our catalog.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:44pm Top

14> I mean half-star. It isn't doing that?

Look at msg#6 a little closer. In addition to the difference in decimal places the two examples show a different number of stars.

Apr 16, 2013, 12:45pm Top

And I'd like a more condensed column name, just "avg. rating".

Apr 16, 2013, 12:46pm Top

#21 by _Zoe_> Right now condensing the column name wouldn't really do much because of the giant stars. But yeah, I agree that that's a better name and with smaller stars would save some space.

Apr 16, 2013, 1:04pm Top

Remember to add "Work: Rating" to the menus in the sort button (up|down arrows). While you are at it you might also add the physical description fields there as well.

Apr 16, 2013, 1:08pm Top

Oh, it's not there.

Okay, a bunch of changes. I can't do them now, but I'll do them soon.

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 1:10pm Top

(nm, didn't notice the "s" on the end of "physical description fields")

Apr 16, 2013, 1:45pm Top

This is really great. Thanks again.

Some feedback:
- For me the stars are not really necessary, i'm ok with just the rating as a number, possibly rounded to 2 decimal places instead of 1.
- I agree with #4 and #18 that an indication of the number of ratings (in the same column or another one) could even improve this feature.

Apr 16, 2013, 2:18pm Top

Yep, it's good stuff, but the number of ratings would make it even better.

Edited: Apr 16, 2013, 2:37pm Top

Well, since rating finally actually does something now, I might be convinced to return to rating things.

Apr 16, 2013, 3:26pm Top

Can the numerical value (and total number of ratings) be put on a new line from the stars? That would make the column thinner.

Apr 16, 2013, 3:32pm Top


Seriously. Maybe I should create a new account as a "GR Refugee" to lobby for some of the stuff I've been wanting for years.

Apr 16, 2013, 3:33pm Top

We need number of ratings somewhere.
4 stars with 200 ratings and 4 stars with 1 are very different things.
Even if it is not sortable based on the number, it should be visible...

Apr 16, 2013, 3:34pm Top

>30 lorax:
I was about to say that everyone that have a long-standing request should find a GR person and ask them to lobby for it ;)

Seriously though - the changes are nice but I hope that someone will decide to get some of the older outstanding stuff done (can we please have Canonical names of authors different on different language sites?) :)

Apr 16, 2013, 3:46pm Top

1> Thank you!

Add me to the list of folks who'd like to see the number of user ratings that created the rating number.

Apr 16, 2013, 3:52pm Top


Any chance to add it into the sorting popup (I don't see it as an option there)?

Apr 16, 2013, 3:54pm Top

Yeah. Sorry. Will.

Apr 16, 2013, 4:41pm Top

>32 AnnieMod:/34, I'm sure you could find a willing volunteer or two
Just as long as us recent immigrants can understand the question. we no speaky LT. >;-)

Apr 16, 2013, 4:44pm Top

Oh, this is a nice surprise. When I'm wading through my unwieldy TBR collection this will come in quite handy. Thanks!

Apr 16, 2013, 8:24pm Top

I want to see and sort by author's date of death.
I want to see and sort by Important Events, Places.
I want to sort by every column we have and every column we ever hope to have.
I want to see and sort by disambiguation notices on authors and on works.

There isn't anything I don't want to see and sort by.

And, after this is implemented in my catalog, I want a page that has all this info for all of an author's works; as if I had all of their books cataloged and could see all the data.

Nice pony. Pretty pony.

Apr 16, 2013, 9:02pm Top

Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you!

Apr 16, 2013, 9:17pm Top

Another vote for number of ratings being averaged to be displayed.

Apr 16, 2013, 10:22pm Top

And another for decimal point form rating plus number of ratings.

Apr 16, 2013, 11:56pm Top

Another vote for number of ratings being averaged to be displayed.

How about if it's on mouse-over—i.e., 43 ratings?

Apr 17, 2013, 12:01am Top

Take that, tablet users!

Apr 17, 2013, 12:03am Top

Seriously, though, what did you think about my smaller stars request in #15, Tim? I'd like that plus the # of ratings. I can do without the decimal rating because at some point it's just too much.

Edited: Apr 17, 2013, 7:28am Top

Well, how small are you going to make the header?

I'd really like an option to display this column without the graphics, since they don't provide enough information to be worth the space.

And once you get rid of them, there will be plenty of room to show the number of ratings in parentheses, unless you're going to shrink the header considerably so that the column can be really narrow.

Even with a really narrow column, the number could go on a second row.

So I have nothing really against mouseover, but it seems messier and less convenient than the other options.

Apr 17, 2013, 7:30am Top

Proposed format:

3.89 (124)

Vote: I like this

Current tally: Yes 49, No 11, Undecided 5

Apr 17, 2013, 7:31am Top

I'd also be happy having multiple formats for this column. Let us choose between "Work: average rating (graphic)" and "Work: average rating (text only)".

Apr 17, 2013, 4:24pm Top

A mouseover works for me, but I'd be just as happy with text on the line below the stars image.

I'm not sure I'd be as happy with no image. I enjoy having a little bit of color here and there. :)

Apr 17, 2013, 8:33pm Top

Fun! I'll be playing with this for a while, I think. :)

Apr 20, 2013, 5:36am Top

Sorting bug reported here. New column reverses sort order when another column is sorted on.

Apr 21, 2013, 8:51pm Top

An unexpected amusement is comparing my ratings to the collective! I'm especially looking forward to prioritizing my burgeoning to be read pile.
Thanks for making this happen.

Apr 22, 2013, 4:54pm Top

>51 readaholic12:

I'm especially looking forward to prioritizing my burgeoning to be read pile.

Yeah, that's mostly what I'm going to use it for as well. :)

Apr 25, 2013, 1:40am Top

I've added half-stars.

The number of ratings is now available when you mouse-over the rating.

I'm afraid I don't believe that most user would prefer to remove the stars entirely and replace them with "number (number)." I think you'd have to follow the debate rather closely to see that's what Zoe was in fact proposing.

Apr 25, 2013, 5:31am Top

Argh. Would it kill you to have two options, at least? I like the column, but catalogue space is too precious to waste with redundant, imprecise data.

Apr 25, 2013, 5:31am Top

Vote: I voted in #46 without actually understanding what it meant

Current tally: Yes 0, No 29

Apr 25, 2013, 5:32am Top

Vote: I thought the proposed format in #46 included graphic stars

Current tally: Yes 0, No 29

Apr 25, 2013, 8:32am Top

The column would have a heading saying "Avg. Rating", right? And you'd have to specifically choose that type of column on the edit catalogue styles page, right?

In which case, I don't see where any confusion comes into play.

Apr 25, 2013, 9:03am Top

55, 56>

Vote: It annoys me when Tim makes pronouncements that boil down to "I think most people reading this thread have very poor reading comprehension

Current tally: Yes 11, No 12, Undecided 7

Apr 25, 2013, 7:43pm Top

Hmm, interesting comments. I don't care. I also don't care what the 'average rating' is. I do want to remember how I rated it

Apr 26, 2013, 2:32pm Top

There is a translation issue: "1 rating", "2 ratings", "3 ratings" etc. all have to be translated individually right now, these are thousands of entries. Could it be fixed that this has only to be translated two times (singular and plural)?

Apr 26, 2013, 2:52pm Top

Oh good. I just voted on whether I annoy myself. It's now tied. I can live with that! :)

Apr 26, 2013, 2:54pm Top

#61 by timspalding> Yes, but how can we be sure you actually understood what you were voting on?

Apr 26, 2013, 2:57pm Top

I just vote no on everything. I don't like change.

Apr 26, 2013, 3:58pm Top

Vote: Do you hate change?

Current tally: Yes 11, No 15, Undecided 14

Apr 26, 2013, 4:13pm Top

Quarters are cool, but I can take or leave pennies...

Apr 26, 2013, 6:37pm Top

'"Goodreads people missing a feature they have" is starting to prove the largest blessing to LT I've seen in several years'

This is one of the things on GoodReads I hate and I'm really disappointed it's here now.

Apr 26, 2013, 7:23pm Top

#66 by the_red_shoes> That makes entirely NO sense to me, given that you are in 100% full and total control of what fields you see in the catalog.

Apr 26, 2013, 8:22pm Top

>66 the_red_shoes:

The existence of the feature?

Apr 27, 2013, 5:53am Top

>66 the_red_shoes: If you don't want it, then don't put it in your catalog. Your attitude is completely ridiculous. Don't like it? Don't use it!

Apr 27, 2013, 12:28pm Top

Well, let's not beat a dead horse. Anyway, I've said we may want to include it in the defaults in the future. When we've changed the defaults it's generally been for NEW users, so it wouldn't matter to anyone currently on the site, but still…

Apr 29, 2013, 5:22am Top

Now that we have sorting by ratings in our ctalogues if we want it...

Where I would really like to see sorting by ratings is in the reviews. If someone has both reviewed and rated a book it would be lovely to be able to quickly find the reviews of those who either loved or hated the book.

Apr 29, 2013, 8:13am Top

>71 MarthaJeanne:

That would be very useful on books with a lot of reviews.

Apr 29, 2013, 12:09pm Top

That would be useful.

Edited: Apr 29, 2013, 12:35pm Top

Apr 29, 2013, 1:10pm Top

RSI is basically for members to talk among ourselves and figure out the best form of features that we can then recommend to Tim whenever he happens to start a vaguely-related thread that he's actually likely to read.

Apr 29, 2013, 5:56pm Top


No, I'm aware of it. I think it would be useful. It doesn't mean that it's going to be my next project.

Apr 29, 2013, 6:25pm Top

Dammit, move downwind, Zoe! You're spooking him!

(That's it, Tim, just a little closer.)

May 3, 2013, 10:18pm Top

Excellent addition, thanks.

Group: New features

45,361 messages

This group does not accept members.


This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 146,529,883 books! | Top bar: Always visible