How do I combine these books? The Painted Man was published in the UK last fall, and will be released in the US this spring as The Warded Man. This wouldn't be a problem if everyone on LT that owns "Painted" wouldn't have listed the author as Peter Brett instead of the proper Peter V. Brett. And I don't dare combine Peter Brett with Peter V. Brett, because Peter no-V is apparently a completely different author. Help?

Message edited by its author, Jan 9, 2009, 10:48pm.

I've managed to get most of them together (under The Warded Man). There is still one stubborn copy of The Painted Man under Peter Brett. Perhaps someone will better combining skills than mine will able to combine it.

Could someone please post a Disambiguation notice for this book. I would do it myself, but I can't edit CK from this PC.

stray copy combined, disambig notice added

Disambiguation notice posted. I didn't see that stray copy you were talking about, so it may be that someone came along to grab it before I looked.

(aha! I should've known you'd be lurking in the combining fields, Portia!)

Message edited by its author, Jan 9, 2009, 11:44pm.

Danke, all!

So how does CK get handled in this instance? What's the canonical name for this work? Is it "Painted" because that was how it was first published? Or "Warded" because that's how it was most recently published?

#5

I take the coward's way out on this type of book and leave canonical title blank, in which case the majority will rule.

>5

In cases like this (were there are various legitimate titles) - I don't enter a canonical name unless the "elected" name is nonsensical. LT will (usually) pick the name as it is most commonly entered.

Message edited by its author, Jan 10, 2009, 12:09pm.

You could also enter the Canonical Title as "The Painted Man (UK) / The Warded Man (US)" or since painted was first "The Painted Man (US: The Warded Man)"

but putting the info in the disambiguation notice is fine... you might also want to put it in the disambiguation notice for the author, too.

As Tim has directed that the Canonical name for Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone is Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone, as published in the US, I don't see any support for including both titles in the canonical name field.

When I have a book that has been republished under a different title, I include the alternate title in the title for MY copy. I consider it information that another user might want/need. I do not have a problem with a book in my library/catalog having two titles.

I would probably list HP as Harry Potter & the Sorcerer's Stone (Philosopher's Stone - UK)

I think it would be useful to display disambiguation notices such as this one on the main work page as well as the edition page.

>12
kathrynnd - I agree - thus the disambiguation notice that I posted on the work in the OP.

My usual format:

"Variant Titles: The Painted Man (UK) = The Warded Man (US)."

>10
I appreciate it when people do that (so thank you) and try to do it myself (especially if that info is on the cover of my book i.e. Original Title: Some Other Name).

Message edited by its author, Jan 10, 2009, 11:42pm.

> 8: Though I see your point I don't think that's wise, since canonical titles also seem to influence touchstones.

I always add the original title as canonical in situations like this - if it was first published in US then the US, first in the UK then UK. I add the different title in the Disambiguation Notice. I have this OCD issue with it, so sue me! I can't stand the thought of the US titles floating to the top of work titles that were originally published in England under a different title and I work on the basis that there's an equally anally retentive section of US users that feel the same about works published over the pond (It's '... the Philosopher's Stone' and 'Northern Lights' ... no poxy 'sorcerer' and 'compass'). Same goes for spelling of titles - if it was originally published in UK, UK-English, if in the US, US-English. Seriously never going to stop doing it that way either, so y'all can hang, draw and quarter me later ;))))

Sorry about your OCD issue, but Tim specifically said that is not how canonical title is to be used. Are you going to start a revert war over Harry Potter then?

Are you going to start a revert war over Harry Potter then?
Interesting comment, considering that you then went to the work in question to change it from the author's original title to Sorcerer's Stone. It seems that there already is a revert war and you're one of the participants. (And yes, I have myself participated once.)

My personal philospophy when it comes to canonical titles:

(after having made one miserable foray into just such a dual-naming (US/UK) issue - tried to make everyone happy and just ended up starting an argument)

1. If the title that gets elected is AT ALL reasonable - I leave it alone...
2. If the title that gets elected is a mash up - I separate the works with the mash up title and recombine until something better gets elected and then - I leave it alone...
3. If FORCED to add a canonical title - I copy/paste the one that has been entered by the MOST LTers who have catalogued it
4. One of the only times I feel compelled to enter a canonical name is when the elected name is not in English (since I am LTing on the English language site).

The problem is that once a canonical name has been entered - you end up with some bugginess if it later gets deleted.

PS - this is a good candidate for the discussion/information thread - so I am reposting my post over there:
http://www.librarything.com/talktopic.ph...

Message edited by its author, Jan 11, 2009, 1:48pm.

#15 - OK, the OCD was a bit tongue in cheek - I get cheesed off if changes made for the US market mean that you end up with some kind of market-led alteration of the original title of a work to fit the quirks of the market it is launched into and what I like about LT is that there's usually a certain sense of respect for the author's original choices to title works rather than a 'USA rules because there're are more of us attitude'. I would certainly be respectful enough of the alternative situation for works originally published in the US because I prefer to have things listed as the author intended. It's the same principle behind not wishing the canonical title to reflect books re-titled to tie them in with film adaptations. As long as the English language site is shared between the US and the UK there will always be these kind of issues. As I said, if I come across it, I'll change it. I don't search things out and I have far too many more constructive things to do than indulge in daft, snarky 'revert wars'. Knock yourself out, do.

ETA Also, when it comes to HP, 'most recognisable' could refer to either (unless you've been trapped under something very heavy and soundproofed for the last 8 years) so forcing the US title is really just a case of wanting to have your own way.

Message edited by its author, Jan 11, 2009, 3:37pm.

Sometimes the publisher's editor changes the author's preferred title so it isn't always the original title that is the preferred title.

Tim has made few rules for how to use LT, but three of them are.

- Never combine the tags humor and humour,
- Never combine a work in a dead language with it's modern tongue translation (or vice versa), and
- the canonical title for the first Harry Potter book is Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

So I didn't think it would be a problem to change the canonical title on the latter work (any more than when I was new to the site and combined humor and humour which was very quickly reversed).

#20 you got a source for the HP qupte by Tim, which I haven't seen on any of the green sidebars anywhere?

I don't have the time to look right now, but there was a thread called something like What is Canonical Title where Tim weighed in at message 18. It has had recent activity so it won't be too buried in the past threads.

If you mean this one then he specifically doesn't get into the question.

No rush if you can find it again though.

Ah well, he doesn't say in #18, but reply #15 does say this:


Message 15: lorax
Tim said, at some point (though I have no hope of finding the thread) that his intent for the canonical title feature was the most commonly-used form on LibraryThing, not the original-language title.

He specifically mentioned the case of the first Harry Potter book having the "canonical" title of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone despite that not being the original. He acknowledged that edit wars were a very likely issue but didn't suggest how to deal with them.

So although the thread is lost to time, at least two of us remember Tim using the first HP book as a specific example of how to use Canonical Title.

Message edited by its author, Jan 12, 2009, 1:09pm.

FYI: Some put the title "The Demon's Mistress" as the canonical title for the Anthology "In Praise of Younger Men". (canonical title now removed)

http://www.librarything.com/work/39799

Whilst that book has the 'majority' author of Jo Beverly and her contribution to the book is "The Demon's Mistress" that does not mean that ALL owners of the book want their book listed as only being "The Demon's Mistress".

If someone wants there book or story listed as "The Demon's Mistress" then they can make/create a work with that title & NOT list the ISBN (which creates links/relationships.)

Books that are anthologies should not be listed under only one story in the anthology.... or if you list the one story, it should not be combined with books that also have other stories in them.

I am going to cross post this in the Combiner's information & discussion thread.