This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1Nicole_VanK
Reported in this thread: http://www.librarything.com/topic/99617&newpost=1#lastmsg because the author can indeed not be combined. But I think it's a different bug.
If you look at editions for the work in question (http://www.librarything.com/work/10444453/editions) you see that the author info for the actual copy is different from that of the author page (in this case it's been blanked out).
I think this sometimes happens after user correction / editing of author data. Somehow works sometimes stick to the "before editing" author.
As a consequence the system correctly insists that there is nothing under that "first author", but it hasn't actually removed the work from that page.
(Combining is possible by separating the work from itself, which "corrects" the situation", but leaving it as is - and hope others do the same for now - because its a clear example of this bug).
If you look at editions for the work in question (http://www.librarything.com/work/10444453/editions) you see that the author info for the actual copy is different from that of the author page (in this case it's been blanked out).
I think this sometimes happens after user correction / editing of author data. Somehow works sometimes stick to the "before editing" author.
As a consequence the system correctly insists that there is nothing under that "first author", but it hasn't actually removed the work from that page.
(Combining is possible by separating the work from itself, which "corrects" the situation", but leaving it as is - and hope others do the same for now - because its a clear example of this bug).
2eromsted
See the suggestions of r.orrison and myself here and the longer discussion linked there.
As you note separation can "correct" the problem, but that often means separating zero copy editions, which we have been asked not to do.
As you note separation can "correct" the problem, but that often means separating zero copy editions, which we have been asked not to do.
3Nicole_VanK
Yeah, I'm not fond of the solution either. But I do think it's better than leaving those existing works floating in nowhere land.
4timspalding
I'm sorry, can you put this in a bug form? What exactly is wrong?
5keristars
When you edit a work's details to change the author, perhaps to fix the spelling or to switch the name to one that is unambiguous, that creates a 0-copy work with the old information, plus the copy you have with the corrected information. However, the old information still shows on the work page with the old author as "Also by _____". This is most noticeable on works where there are only one or members with copies.
In some cases, the changed author doesn't move to the new author page, but remains with the old one, until you separate the 0-copy edition, even though it's a 0-copy edition.
In some cases, the changed author doesn't move to the new author page, but remains with the old one, until you separate the 0-copy edition, even though it's a 0-copy edition.
6Nicole_VanK
Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
The system insists that a variant author name is no longer in use (and can therefore not be combined) However there is a work on the page for that variant author name.
This is because in work combining or editing the author name got changed to another variant. But the work still sticks to that first variant.
What's ultimately wrong is that there is no way to get that work to show on the real author page (barring separating it from itself and usually leaving one or more 0 copy editions afloat in the system).
I do think it's a bug though, that works can stick to author pages which the system says they are not assigned to.
The system insists that a variant author name is no longer in use (and can therefore not be combined) However there is a work on the page for that variant author name.
This is because in work combining or editing the author name got changed to another variant. But the work still sticks to that first variant.
What's ultimately wrong is that there is no way to get that work to show on the real author page (barring separating it from itself and usually leaving one or more 0 copy editions afloat in the system).
I do think it's a bug though, that works can stick to author pages which the system says they are not assigned to.
7timspalding
Well, frankly, as much as I want to here you guys, if it relates to authors and combining, and it's not something urgent or newly broken, the answer is "deferred." The system needs to be changed in a larger way.
8Nicole_VanK
works can stick to author pages which the system says they are not assigned to
The system somehow doesn't recognize where the work actually is. That worries me most about it.
Urgent? Well, that's up to you of course. (I'm cool with "deferred" - there are other ways to solve this if/when really needed).
The system somehow doesn't recognize where the work actually is. That worries me most about it.
Urgent? Well, that's up to you of course. (I'm cool with "deferred" - there are other ways to solve this if/when really needed).
9jjwilson61
In the meantime, it should be ok for people to fix this themselves by separating out the zero-copy editions.
