Local groups, now better through being shown!
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.
This isn't actually a new feature, but for the first time the feature has some concrete expression.
Basically, groups can now be affiliated with a location. So, the "Bostonians" group can be affiliated with Boston, MA, the "Mainers" group with Maine, the Australians with Australia, etc.
You can see the location field on group pages, ie., http://www.librarything.com/groups/bostonians
Groups local to you now show up on the new group home page (see http://www.librarything.com/groups), and on the local sub-tab http://www.librarything.com/groups/local. Both also show the largest local groups. Boston and Chicago are winning.
Call to action: Groups don't have a location unless it's been filled out. I am empowered to add locations, especially to older groups and when they would not be controversial. Therefore, let me know what groups should have locations but don't!
Ackl! The whole groups page has changed! I went to it to check if the Chicagoans group had a location, and I didn't recognize the page. It's not an improvement.
I doubt adding location to this group would be controversial:
Please make "Maryland Librarythingers" located in Maryland and "National Book Festival" located in Washington, DC.
I think is pretty non-controversial :)
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
I guess I should have put the local above the link instead of below it. ;)
Associate these with Sweden, please:
and this one with Uppsala, Sweden:
http://www.librarything.com/groups/austrianlibrarything should be associated with Austria.
I think currently having 50 closest groups is not very useful. Or there should be an upper limit on the distance. If there isn't anything closer than 500 miles (my closest is 556 miles) just say that there isn't anything close.
I was somewhat surprised by the fact that my closest local group seems to be nearly 3,000 miles away. It also makes me wonder if my own location is registered correctly though.
#12 There must be some kinks in the system or incorrect info somewhere then, because for me it's picking up a half-dozen UK groups, three in continental Europe (mostly private groups and in languages I don't speak) and then some in the US. I would have expected yours to be picking up the same groups.
I like the fact that the city which I live on the outskirts of, is listed as 1085 miles away. For starters, that should be 1746.1 kms away, and secondly, I now realise why the trip to the office in the morning takes so damn long! Somehow I think the system has no idea where I am.
Wow, among the fifty "closest groups" to Vantaa, Finland NOT ONE is from the 28 Finnish groups; for example, I did not notice "Finnish Librarythingers" in that list :D
The closest group seems (according to the list) to be "Biblioteken i Sollentuna" (Sweden)...
I guess most of the Finnish groups don't have the locations filled in, then?
Midwestern Readers (ND, SD, MN, NE, KS, MO, IL, IN, IA, MI, WI, OH): http://www.librarything.com/groups/midwesternreaders. I'm not sure if you can add all those locations . . . .
MinnesotaThings (Minnesota): http://www.librarything.com/groups/minnesotathings
The Carls and Their Penguin Friends (Northfield, MN): http://www.librarything.com/groups/thecarlsandtheirpeng
Minnesota Library Association (Minnesota): http://www.librarything.com/groups/minnesotalibraryasso
Nice! Here are a couple:
For New England (You could probably get away with a MA location for this one): http://www.librarything.com/groups/allthingsnewengland
For Connecticut: http://www.librarything.com/groups/connecticutnutmegge
Could you put this one in Istanbul, not Constantinople.
Cambridge, UK: http://www.librarything.com/groups/englishfacultylibrar
Merrillville, Indiana: http://www.librarything.com/groups/referencelibrariansr
Iowa City, IA:
Iowa in general:
In addition to being not particularly local, several of the groups that show up in my Local Groups module are private groups, which seems pointless. Is there any way you could exclude private groups from appearing?
Why they changed it, I can't say,
Maybe they liked it better that way.
Oh, and to contribute to the actual purpose of the thread:
Northern Virginia (you could possibly go with Arlington or Fairfax):
Clear Lake, Houston, Texas, USA: http://www.librarything.com/groups/clscifibook
Terre Haute, Indiana, USA: http://www.librarything.com/groups/rosepolytechnicinsti
eta: adding groups as I find them.
The citywide group I mentioned in post 30 now has a location. Whoever put it in, to his/her/its credit, did avoid including an extraneous "City" -- but failed to put any capital letters at all.
The Brooklyn group has no location attached to it yet. (There are only so many Brooklyns in the world, and only one where Marty Markowitz would be seen unveiling a sign on the steps of Borough Hall. The sign's contents are an even clearer indicator of where the photo was taken.)
Pretty useless for me. Pittsburgh? Wisconsin? Somebody's 3rd grade class?*
And missing one rather important Chicago group: http://www.librarything.com/groups/printersrowchicagotr
It also seems a bit pointless to have private groups listed.
*What's a 3rd grade class doing on LT, anyway?
35> Presumably the teacher, other staff, and parents of students are group members rather than the students themselves. I can certainly see how it would be helpful to catalog a classroom library, even a small one.
>35 lilithcat: The school groups bug me, too. I guess it's a little too local for my tastes.
The Wisconsin group is my fault. ;)
Yeah, I'm getting skewed results too - the closest group, 27 miles, is private, and the group that is actually located close to me (SF Bay Area LibraryThingers, which I actually belong to) is not listed.
The first two groups are private, the third one is from Los Angeles and the fourth from Oregon. (You've got me bracketed.) The second to the last under "See More" is New York City, and the last one, at 2,568 miles, is again private. So, not so very useful!
P.S. SF Bay Area LibraryThingers should be located in the San Francisco Bay Area! :-)
I don't see the purpose of including private groups. Some groups are private just because they don't want attention directed towards them or are not appropriate for others to join.
Why make LT Local appear so unfriendly? Please change the settings on this feature so that private groups are excluded. Thanks!
Some group locations to add:
Californians Who LT: http://www.librarything.com/groups/californianswholt
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles Area Book Clubs & Booklovers: http://www.librarything.com/groups/losangelesareabookcl
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Location: Québec (province)
I've changed it so that private groups aren't shown. Public-view, private-join groups are still shown.
I can't see that you added the ones in #10. Am I looking in the wrong place?
Threads in #29 need to be done -- also, looks like some of the threads just after 29 still need help as well.
Sorry. I spaced. I think I hit the thread by mistake, and was using the "read" count as the "up to" count.
All done now, I think :)
I hate to nitpick, but this:
(the western tip of Virginia, near Roanoke)
Is not what this group had in mind when they said "Northern Virginia":
If you don't want to link to a specific city near DC (Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax, Reston . . .) it would probably be more accurate just to put them down as "Virginia" which would (I assume) go to the center of the state, not the opposite corner.
Hi, Tim, here's another that can be tied to a place:
Bennington College is located in the southwest corner of Vermont, on the border of Massachusetts and New York State.
This one's in Windsor, Ontario:
This one's a bit more active!
Sorry, I was looking more at number of members than at how recent the activity was.
Do I recall correctly that private groups would not be listed?
(I bet this one has the same problem as Australia!)
I now know that it must be 1 060 miles from my house to the centre of Australia, 7 959 miles to Los Angles, an extra 9 miles to San Diego (that can't be right!) and 8 652 miles to Ecuador.
I just don't know what a mile is! Any chance of being able to change to units that the rest of the world uses (kilometres)?
When the drop bears start interbreeding with the polar bears, I'M OUTTA HERE!
#63, I could envision that being possibly correct, via a great circle route "down and around" for Alaska.
#64, There are, in fact polar bears here, they sell rum!
>66 justjim: Great circle route straight across the Pacific in fact. It shows up quite plainly on GoogleEarth.
So I've got the reverse of 'no location when there should be one' for two groups. WTF is California Avenue is an empty group (one post with no text), that apparently got a location attached to it (dunno what, but it's 2101 miles from me). And another, Twilight lovers and lovers of all books, which is a fine group but not (as far as I can see) intended to be local to anywhere. That's 2,238 miles from me.
62> 3 miles is 5 kilometers (more or less). I've been using that to translate both ways since I was a kid (there was a particular walk that was that distance, that I did regularly and heard referred to both ways).
WTF is California Avenue is an empty group (one post with no text), that apparently got a location attached to it (dunno what, but it's 2101 miles from me).
The groups page says its in Columbus, OH.
So, I don't know if I missed it, but what is the policy for dormant groups? Are we assigning locations or those or not? It seems not?
It's okay, the groups I was looking at (Upstate New York and Utica) disappeared from search anyway.
But these need to be located:
New Orleans, LA
Cuyahoga County, OH
Kansas City, MO
Maybe some dormant groups will "wake up" if they get exposure to their intended audiences as local groups.
Dormants found in the complete list:
Upstate New York
(45 users in that one, would definitely be worth location tagging.)
North Carolina, USA
Not that they are very active but...
Philadelphia, PA (Southeastern)
St. Paul, Minneapolis
London, England, UK
Thinking of the large country problem, what would you think of assigning national groups to the national capital? For Australia, that would be Canberra and would put the group closer to a lot more people on the east coast. It would also let the WA sandgropers trot out their favourite 'Nobody remembers us' whinge!
Not sure what it would do for other countries though. Surely national capitals are near to the population centroid?
Surely Washington DC can't be near the population centroid of the US, being so far east of centre there must be a fair proportion trailing away to the west. Maybe someone from America could answer that for me.
Anyone know of a good website that might show population distributions for different countries?
No, probably wouldn't work for the USA. Australia's east and west coasts are nowhere near as equally populated and the centre is, for statistical purposes, almost empty. I imagine Russia would be much the same. Canada, as well, possibly. China, again not so much. Must see if I can find such a website.
eta: Wikipedia has some info, but it's not graphical except on a global scale.
The Connecticut Nutmeggers group I mentioned in #18 is still not showing a location. Is this because the group creator has to change that setting himself?
And am I a total dork for wanting to locate The Green Dragon group in 'Bywater, The Shire?'
Surely Washington DC can't be near the population centroid of the US
It most definitely is not but with all the people moving to this area, it seems as if it is, at times!
I have one question which I'll ask here (even if it means risking an accusation of threadjacking). Is there a way to restrict how far is considered "local"?
The first half-dozen or so groups are fairly local, as they're in New York City or the suburbs thereof. And I won't complain about Philly's inclusion, since I can at least get there by commuter rail. But from there it just gets worse: New Englind isn't local, nor is D.C. Certainly Canadian groups aren't Local for a Brooklyn girl, nor are the half-dozen Indiana-based groups that round out my list.
In short, what is it about being in the top fifty closest groups that makes this one local, when it's nearly 700 miles away?!
Tacoma, Washington, USA
Essex County/Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Some of these noted above are very obscure. My thinking is that it might be better to revive a small/dormant group than start another one just like it. If it can be found, it can feasibly be revived.
Until more local groups are found, started, and posted, you'll get results such as you've found. As this feature grows, the results *should* be more local to your own geographical area.
Question: Is it possible to mark a group as local for more than one country?
(Explanation: I would like to see some Dutch groups marked as local for the Netherlands BUT Dutch is also spoken in neighboring Belgium and most of those groups have members from both countries. Also: both language and "not being from the Netherlands" can be sensitive topics for Belgians. In short: I would hate to do this if it meant they couldn't also be marked as local for Belgium.)
As far as I know, the local groups feature just lists the groups in the order of the distance they are to you and it does not take language into it at all.
#89 -- Not at all. I'd like to have a similarly dorky location for Hogwarts Express, except that the problem with naming a group for a train is that it doesn't have a fixed location. :-)
Wait! Thank you for 'locating' the Nutmeggers group in CT. :o) Okay. Bub-eye!
And hello, Sonya!
>93 SqueakyChu: Then at least shouldn't we have the option of showing fewer results, at least until groups get more... localitied?
A few university groups that could have locations added:
River Forest, Illinois
(multiple campuses in Tennessee, with the central administration based in Knoxville)
Milton Keynes, UK
Cool. I'm on vacation-ishness until Thursday, when I'll attend to the groups here. I'll post when I take care of them.
http://www.librarything.com/groups/austrianlibrarything is still not listed for Austria (message 11).
Though dormant, maybe adding the location
Bangkok, Thailand to
would help to make more LTer in Thailand join it and revive it.
Japan (location currently listed as "Japanese")
Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Rapid City, SD
87> The population center is in southern Missouri, whereas the geographic center (of the lower 48 states) is in northern Kansas, roughly 450 miles away WNW. Not too bad a fit for the size of country. Including Alaska and Hawaii puts it in North Dakota, a thousand miles away and north of all the major population centers.
Detroit, MI, USA
Leighton Buzzard, UK
Okay, I admit I just skimmed the thread, but i have a question not pertaining to pinning locations to groups.
Is there an uper-limit, milage-wise, of what counts as "local"? Because the "Local Groups" that I'm seeing on the groups page is just REDICULOUS. The *closest* one is more then 300 miles away from me, and the farthest more then ONE THOUSAND MILES away from me.
Is that "local"? No, it's not. Not in any sense of the word. If there ARE no "local" groups, if there ARE no Arizona groups, it should show nothing! NOT groups from 1k miles away that aren't "local" in the least! When you do that, the "local groups" completely loses it's name. Local my butt.
I'm sorry, but it's just stupid to think that somewhere 1,000 miles away from me would be considered local!
#110: Yes, it is local in many senses of the word. Certainly Georgia and Montreal are more local to me than Nigeria and India. In some cases, putting an upper limit on it would hide large-scale local groups, even when they are the closest local group; think of a group for Australia, or Africa or China.
#111: Agreed. I'm in Melbourne, and all the groups pinned to the centre of Australia are listed as 1085 miles away from me.
ETA: Also, as more groups have a location added, results will become more local over time.
I wish I had a better solution. I mean, we could hide the number, so it wasn't so absurd. But it would still be a problem.
Can groups be pinned to two locations?
Washington DC as well as Berlin, Germany.
Czech Republic and Slovak Republic
You need an algorithm that tells you how close to some area you are (or in) not just some point. Hasn't Google solved that problem yet?
Maybe there could be a drop-down menu -- such as in the "find venues" search on Local (though perhaps with a different selection of distances). People could use it to see only those venues within a certain distance of their location.
A "multiple locations" option would help with the "Australia" problem as well -- put in a half-dozen or so cities for a countrywide group and show the distance for the closest one. (This would help with a hypothetical similar "Canada" problem as well, which also suffers from being huge with a population concentrated nowhere near the geographic center).
#116: I would regard a group devoted to my entire country as less "local" than one about a town 10 miles away (even though my distance from the country is zero), but more "local" than one about a town 500 miles away. I've no suggestion for how to take account of this rather subjective distinction in an algorithm, short of moving national-level groups into a separate list.
A few geographic-based groups that don't have a 'local' link yet:
another Twin Cities
Locations added up to this point. Unless I missed some.
Also, I didn't create a location for the midwest group. I also chose to add one location for the DC/Berling and Czech/Slovak Republics rather than leave them blank. Multiple locations would be good.
Harrisburg and Central Pennsylvania
Annapolis, Maryland; Santa Fe, new Mexico
Chungju, South Korea
Incheon, South Korea
A group for residents of Washington state is showing up local for Washington, DC.
>126 WildMaggie: thanks for the catch. A quick search doesn't tell me how to label so the correct state comes up. WA doesn't do it. Someone with a little free time want to help? I'm testing by using Local to search.
I changed it to Seattle, Washington for now, so at least it's pointing to the right coast.
I feel like this group should definitely be tagged with a location:
Of course, that's a big area to cover. My best guess would be to place it in West Virginia, as the description says that Appalachia covers all of the state.
This group's location is funky:
It says "Korea," but links to somewhere in Kentucky:
Incidentally, I'm not sure the option to set a new group as a "local" group and then set its location (ETA: on the "Start a group" page) is actually working. When I tried to do a test group the other day, I'm pretty sure I set a location, but it never showed up. I'm guessing some of these location-based groups from the last few days might have tried to do the same.
I actually have some groups close to me now - I suppose that most of the close ones are in Czech or Hungarian, neither of which I read, is beside the point.
For the Netherlands:
Hmpf. My nearest group is in Berlin, and it's semi-dormant...
To further the request in #62: Is there any chance of getting metric measurements? You are grabbing the distances off Google Maps, I believe, and they do metric. ... please?
Location for HMS Surprise Group:
(that is 500 metres off the south-western coast of England, any place you like, Tim. Reference to this fictional location as the home port of HMS Surprise in the first paragraph here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Letter_of_Marque#Plot_summary )
Erlesenes Deutschland Group (books about/set in the various states of Germany):
The central point of Germany
I don't like the idea of setting a location for a group that isn't, in fact, local. I'd rather leave HMS Surprise unlocalized -- people looking for a local group won't be happy with it, and people looking for a subject-oriented group (which it is) won't find it by looking for a local group.
I'm not giving locations for places that aren't google-mappable (like Appalachia). Same for The Shire, or fictional places.
On Google Maps, "Washington state" brings you to Washington state, but in Local it does not. Rar.
Actually, "Appalachia" maps to a town in Virginia near the border with Kentucky.
I'm actually surprised, though I shouldn't be.
Fredericksburg Academy, Fredericksburg, Virginia
New Hope middle school , New Hope, Pennsylvania
University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign.
University of South Carolina
Shanghai, China (Shanghai American School)
Colchester Sixth Form College, Colchester, UK
The Sixth Form College, North Hill, Colchester, CO1 1SN
Bishop O’Dowd High School, Oakland, CA
9500 Stearns Avenue
Oakland, CA 94605-4799
#62 justjim - Regarding kilometres instead of miles.
Why should we use a system that was propogated by Robespierre and Napoleon Bonaparte? Was Robespierre a role model? Did Napoleon win?
#146: Well, you're one of four countries (well, three and a half) on this planet that still use "imperial" (USA, Nigeria, Burma, and half of UK --Nigeria and Burma are in fact using metric, but haven't codified the change-over). The other 188 countries use metric. But I guess that doesn't count much.
But I have got used to this weird system Americans use (the Brits at least are bi-lingual in this respect). They throw miles and ounces at me, they'll have to live with me quoting kilometres and grams. Except at work, where we have to program our product to fit the US standards, of course. Because they are the customers.
Wait. I am a customer at LT as well, aren't I?
#148: As long as they don't mix them, I'm fine. Watching Air Crash Investigations, where they mix miles and nautical miles and feet and meters is pretty bad at times, especially when they mention something like the plane flying at 33,000 meters, just to prove that they're getting confused too.
149> And of course the Mars ship that crashed because of mixing systems.
146> But that whole mess must have been good for something - must have been the metric system! :) (yeah, yeah, lots of philosophical/political learning experiences, if nothing else)
I'm in the US and I think in inches and miles and pounds and ounces...and look longingly at the metric system where I wouldn't have to keep clear in my mind the difference between ounces and fluid ounces and that 64 ounces is a half-gallon and...
I got the 24-hour clock because my job used it. I need to work on getting (grokking, conocer (I forget how to conjugate that) the metric system and Celsius (though Fahrenheit has an advantage there, smaller degrees). It is just easier to think in tens than in random patterns. And most stuff in the US (things-you-buy-in-stores) has sizes in both Imperial and metric. Most roads don't, though. Ah well.
And of course the Mars ship that crashed because of mixing systems.
The Mars Climate Orbiter - one group was using metric measures, one used English and it couldn't end up in the right place. Look here.
When we have jazz musicians called Kilometres Davis, movie directors called Oliver Kilogram, actresses called Sharon Kilogram and Vera Kilometres and poets called Ezra Gram, when the Metropolitan police in London relocate their HQ to Scotland Metre, then I'll accept the metric system.
(And we won't even mention Michael, Dingle, Hugh, John and Paul Decimetre.)
Don't forget people putting beer in their gardens to kill hyls...
> 153: You can use those clumsy non-decimal systems all you like - as long as I don't have to.
More groups that could be put on Local:
A school in Fredericksburg, Virginia
Fredericksburg Academy • 10800 Academy Drive, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22408
Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas
Oxford Methodist Circuit
Circuit Office, Wesley Memorial Church
New Inn Hall Street, OXFORD OX1 2DH
Ballarat Leadership and Ministry College
Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
Sacramento Friends (Quakers)
890 57th Street, Sacramento, CA
American Turkish Association, Raleigh, NC
Regent College, Vancouver, BC
5800 University Blvd., Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6T 2E4
#155 - If I used my fingers and toes for mathematics, I'd also favour the decimal systems.
This group does not accept members.
This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.