Suggestions Wiki

Here is a thread to discuss the new suggestions wiki, which can be found here: http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/Group:Dewey_Decimal_Challenge/suggest...

OK, is there a schedule to add the rest of the outline? I have a few ideas for the far end of the list.

Zoe is going to work on adding new pages for the other classes (I don't know how to do that). Anyone can work on filling in the sections, and there isn't any reason why it has to be done in order. So, no, there isn't a particular schedule. Edit away.

It might be a good idea to include little links to the books so people can quickly and easily figure out if a book is of interest to them. Something like the linking on my wikithing page maybe?

I don't mind if others want to do that--it would obviously be useful--but also very time-consuming.

Okay, I've set up links to all the subpages from the main page. There's actually no trick to creating a wiki page; you just type in whatever address you want. If there's currently nothing there, you just have to start editing to make it "real". Pages can also be moved around (though I'm not personally familiar with doing that), so the chosen address doesn't even have to be perfect the first time.

I'll hopefully find time in the near-ish future to actually contribute some titles to the wiki :). I agree that links would be nice but time-consuming.

Oh, one other idea: it might be nice if the comments said who they were from.

I added the page index to all the subpages. Hopefully it looks alright on smaller monitors.

I noticed. :)

I've added the headings for the 900's page, and filled in a few recommendations for some of the 970's.

I like the indexes. Right now the section headings are complete in 000, 100, 200 & 900.

A quick way to "sign" your entries is like this: ~~~

That will convert to your name after you save your edits.

Zoe suggested just bolding titles that someone has read and recommends rather than every book that has been read. I think that's a good idea to help people read the list (especially as it gets longer). What do you think?

I've been bolding the ones I've read too.

Also, what about books we've read but didn't like or just wouldn't recommend? Should they be included in case their listing might be helpful to someone else or just left off unless someone finds them worth recommending?

>14 fundevogel:
If I thought a book was bad enough that it's simply not worth recommending, I've simply been leaving it off.

That said, I'm going back and bolding some of the better ones I've recommended, and adding a few comments,

I've haven't added any that I wouldn't recommend either. If some categories stay empty for a long time, then maybe I'll go back and add something to them.

For ones I've read, I've only included the ones that are at least OK (on the theory that for some of these categories that's the best available), so all those are bolded. I think if the ones that have been read by someone are bolded and the TBR suggestions are not, that is an easy system to follow and understand.

I don't think we should add ones that we didn't like/definitely wouldn't recommend.

I've added the headings to the remaining pages (and, mostly by way of a word processing program and its find/replace function, cleaned up most of the wiki-code stuff).

So, for the sake of usefulness, here's a table of contents:
* Main/000s
* 100s
* 200s
* 300s
* 400s
* 500s
* 600s
* 700s
* 800s
* 900s

Awesome! I'm looking forward to seeing everyone's suggestions (as if I don't have enough unread books for this challenge).

I'm very excited about how this is coming so far. Thanks for suggesting it!

Now if I could just find some time to list books....

Adding suggestions is quite addictive!

I know, I'm afraid to get started or I'll never get any work done this evening!

I've already found a couple of books that I read last year and forgot to list in my challenge, too.

What's the significance of italics? I noticed some people are putting titles in italics.

I've just been doing bold for titles I've read and plain text for ones I haven't.

I've been doing italics for the titles because they're titles.

And all the books I've added are ones that I've read. The ones I listed in bold are the ones I would recommend more readily. (I figure if a book isn't worth recommending period, it isn't worth listing in the first place.)

OK, I thought maybe that was the reason.

I do think it is looking a little confusing, though, because we have plain, italics, bold, links, italicized links, and bolded links. The point of bold/not bold was to indicate read/not read, because it's also useful to have suggestions for different categories from other people's TBR lists but also important to know whether it's a TBR or a recommendation.

I don't care what the system is, but I think it should be consistent (and, preferably, simple) so that users know what everything means. I think the comments can take care of the strength of the recommendation.

If we bold for whether we've read it, how are we going to indicate which books are more heartily recommended? I haven't been doing comments universally; should comments be mandatory for any book we've read?

Comments? Just put in parentheses "just OK" or "great" or whatever. And I think read/not read is a more important distinction than recommended/heartily recommended, and that is now muddled.

I don't want to have to go back and italicize titles (we all know they're titles, so I don't see a need for it), but I'm guessing you don't want to un-italicize yours, either, AnnaClaire, and I don't feel that strongly about it either way.

Can the group reach a consensus on whether to italicize? Because right now it looks like plain vs. italics has a meaning, and it doesn't.

I've had another thought: I seconded Color for 535 (Light & paraphotic phenomena). I've read it, but if I bold the title, won't it look like Dayna's read it too? And isn't who has read it just as important as the mere fact that someone has read it?

In the meantime, I think we should worry more about the unsigned recommendations.

Whatever. The point is that if there is a set of (simple) instructions and someone starts doing something else random, the coding is meaningless and pointless. But I don't have time or interest to fight about it, nor do I worry about unsigned recommendations. I'm not putting my name by unread books because I'm not recommending them; I'm just offering up info that I have collected that might be useful to someone else. If you don't want to read those books because I didn't put my name by them, that's fine with me.

I think plain is better than italicized, but don't want AnnaClaire to need to un-italicize hers.

I've been only adding books I've read, bolded, and with brief comments. I don't think comments should be required but I do think signing your additions is nice.

>29 carlym:
Since I don't add books I haven't read to begin with, I'm not going to bother bolding anything else I add until we have a consensus about what to do with books seconded. Either it makes a difference that we've read it or it doesn't. If you're gonna say it matters, at least you suggest some workaround or other to say who has read it -- and who hasn't.

Put your name by it if you've read it. Don't put your name by it if you haven't read it. Put two names by it if two people have read it. Or put "name-unread" if you feel you have to put your name by a TBR. Put a parenthetical to say how strong your recommendation is.

Other people are putting books they haven't read, and it's not just me saying it matters whether it's unread or a recommendation. That was the whole point of bolding/not bolding. If you, or someone else, decides to do something different with bolding, it affects the ability of those of us who do care about that info. If you want to find a way other than what I suggested to differentiate weak/strong recommendations, it would be nice if you did it in a way that didn't affect the existing coding.

My point boils down to the fact that this whole bolding/not bolding thing came about without any discussion about it, and that we should have discussion about it involving more than just (effectively) two of us.

It would have been better to have had the discussion first; that now being impossible, don't suggest I'm the only one not following it simply because I'm doing things a little different. Keep in mind that I'm not bolding books that I haven't read (since I'm not listing such books in the first place), so it's not like I'm saying I have read stuff that I haven't. And also note that at this point, unbolded items outnumber bolded ones; if everyone were following bolding what we've read, we'd all be much farther "behind" in this challenge than we let on.

There was a discussion. See above. Pretty much everyone who is adding stuff commented on it, and it looked like everyone agreed.

But like I said, do what you want. All I asked in post #27 that started this is that there be a consistent method so that the efforts to code the suggestions actually have meaning, and I tried to make suggestions in a couple of posts about how to include the content you want while maintaining the content others want, but I guess you don't like those suggestions.

Personally I have been following this method

bold - read
default - TBR
(comments - name) - only on books I've read
link - on every book I can find on LT

On comments - I don't think it matters who adds TBR books since they can't offer an informed opinion on them yet. In that case it makes sense that all TBR books remain anonymous and in the default text until someone has read it. In which case any one can bold and add their name and comments to any TBR book on the list without muddling up the relationship of anyone else to the book.

On links - Some links are harder or easier to find and some people don't feel like putting them in. I think it's safe to say that whether or not a book is linked or not shouldn't reflect on the listing. I'm a little OCD so I just might link other people's books if I can find them. Hopefully that won't bother anyone.

On recommendations - I think at this point everyone agrees that except for the occasional dog sections we're only listing read books if we found them to be at least ok. Since there is variation between how different people react to a book I think this establishes a good base. As previously noted if someone else disliked a book that has been recommended a comment to that effect should be added but no one should delete books that others have added.

On deletions (a proposal) - We've got a lot of TBR's and some of them once they been read will not prove worth recommending. In keeping with what I've already suggested it would make sense for when a book is read, but unliked, for the reader to delete the entry, even if they were not the person that originally listed it. However since there is currently no way to keep track of read and discarded TBR's I suggest creating a supplementary wiki page for deletions so people will not only know what is currently TBR and recommended but what TBR's have already been read and found unworthy.

Being deleted and listed on the deletions wiki wouldn't mean a book was forever banned from the suggestions page, but it would need to be read and recommended by someone else. I suggest that the original deleter leave their negative comment on the deletion page so that if it is moved back onto suggestions the recommender can record it next to his own comments on the suggestion page.

--

I would be happy to update and revise my additions if the group settles on a different style of notation, but it is important that we settle on a consistent style so we can understand what eachother's notations mean.

I'm happy for someone else to add links to books I've added and will try to add links to mine as I have time. It is certainly a helpful feature.

Deletions wiki sounds fine to me, and it doesn't bother me at all if someone reads a TBR I listed and deletes it because it wasn't good.

>35 fundevogel: Thanks for that great post!

I think the main thing is for everyone to post suggestions happily, however that can be achieved. So I wouldn't worry much about italics/non-italics, since we know it doesn't mean anything.

Bolding is trickier, since it does actually have a meaning. But I think the different ways of using it are similar enough that there won't really be serious confusion even if people continue using it in their own ways.

I read very quickly, but I think the two ways of using it are for all read books and for specifically good books? So everyone will be using it for their read and liked books, and no one will be using it for unread books or for read and disliked books, since read and disliked books won't be listed anyway. So the only gray area is in what to do about books that were read and considered merely okay. I'd be fine with some people bolding these books and others not. Presumably people who are adding a book that they consider merely okay will add a note to that effect anyway, so there wouldn't be any confusion there.

I like the idea of a separate list for deleted books.

How do you guys feel about adding a link to the MDS pages next to the category headers?

I did the first section as an example - http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/Groups:Dewey_Decimal_Challenge/sugges...

Too crowded?

Two more things:

1. We don't have to rely on text styles alone to convey read/unread or "seconded" recommendation status. We can use icons - like the thumbs up image already used on reviews, for example.

2. So far I haven't added any audio suggestions even though many of my DDC slots have been filled by offerings from The Teaching Company and Modern Scholar. These aren't available in book form, but are held at many libraries. Should I add them to the wiki in places where no other alternative is given?

>39 DaynaRT:
I like the idea of icons for agreement. Presumably there could be a thumbs-up, followed by a list of people who have read such-and-such and think it's a good book, such as:

User1, User2, User3

Since some books seem to inspire as much dislike as they do the reverse (the dreaded T-word trilogy, for example), I wonder if it's worth considering having a pair of lists: one for thumbs up, and one for people who disagree with thumbs-up.

Edited to fix typo.

>40 AnnaClaire: lol, is Tolkien a four letter word now?

>41 fundevogel:
I meant the more recent T-series, the one that's so (distressingly) popular with teenage girls.

ah, I thought there were four of those.

Really? Because I always count The Hobbit as part of the same series as The Lord of the Rings (as in, The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King).

I agree that they go together but it isn't technically part of the trilogy. Plus the Hobbit isn't nearly so difficult to get through as the trilogy. I think I had two false starts on The Fellowship. I blame Tom Bombadil.

37: Bolding read books seemed like a great suggestion to me because that way someone looking at the page can tell at a glance which ones are being recommended (even recommended with caution) versus suggestions of unread books, so leaving some recommended titles in plain text and bolding others still eliminates that distinction. And some people are, I think, putting their names next to every suggestion, read or not, so that doesn't clarify matters. With the current mix of approaches, it would be better not to bold anything, because it has no meaning and is making the pages look cluttered.

39-40: Does that mean every time a suggestion that has been read is added, the person adding it has to add a thumb icon? How would the pair of lists work? (I just don't understand--two lists of thumbs? Two separate wikis?)

While I see the value of the thumbs for seconding recommendations (or panning them) and am not opposed to them being added, that seems to make the addition of new titles even more complicated. And can't people follow the link to the work page and see the average rating and reviews?

I'm not adding more titles until these things are decided because I don't want to have to redo any more than necessary.

>46 carlym: I guess I just thought that the distinction between "strongly recommended" vs. "cautiously recommended/unknown" was potentially as meaningful as the distinction between "recommended to some extent" vs. "unknown". Either way, the bold ones are deserving of more attention.

I hope this whole thing doesn't fall apart because of a disagreement on formatting.

I like using the bold as well since it makes titles pop out, but if people are concerned about distinguishing between strongly recommended books and cautiously recommended books maybe we could put books that have been strongly recommended in bold and cautiously recommended books in italics.

>48 fundevogel: Then we'll get into a whole new problem of making people agree on italics use!

I think it's probably best to resolve the whole thing with a series of polls, and ask everyone to go along with the majority.

I realized after I started the polls that it would make sense for some to be paired, but hopefully the results will still be useful.

Looking at the various options, I think my personal preference would be for bold and asterisk to indicate read and recommended (in some order), and no italics.

Sorry, a few more polls that might help clarify the issue some more:

Further comments about all this are welcome too, of course, especially since I think we only have six potential voters in the polls.

I just wanted to point out that comments can explain the strength of the recommendation, especially because that's not really a binary choice. I have the impression that's what is being done already, so that information (which I agree is useful) is captured.

And thanks for setting up the polls--I would have done that if I knew how because all I'm interested in is getting a consistent set-up. Otherwise taking the extra time to put in bold, italics, names, whatever is pointless, as is taking the time to go back and re-do what I've done to be consistent with new coding.

Also--as a general question--how do you do asterisks in the wiki that come out as asterisks? In the TIOLI wiki I know asterisks show up as numbers.

You would use (nowiki)*(/nowiki) to make the asterisk show up as an asterisk. Change the parens to angled brackets, of course.

I think there's also something with the spacing that either changes the asterisk into a bullet point or not. Maybe standalone asterisks become bullets while asterisks touching the text remain asterisks?

To make a poll, you put (vote) (/vote) in angled brackets around the question.

Maybe I'm mixing up asterisks and pound signs about which becomes a number and which becomes a bullet. But anyway, to save time, maybe an exclamation point (or whatever other symbol) instead of an asterisk re: post 56 so we don't have to deal with wiki/no wiki instructions?

Been following this group with interest. Though challenges are not my style, I'm finding it interesting the way you dig up books of general interest in obscure Dewey numbers. So I added a few things to the wiki. Hope they help. I put my user name on all of them, in case you don't want them there.

Edited to fix typo

I'd like to get this argument cleared up, so I'd like to suggest a hybrid option: Don't use any formatting on the book itself*, but follow it with (Read by: User1, User2...). Those users who would strongly recommend a book can bold their names, rather than the title. This would give a sense of how many people have read a book, and of how many would recommend it highly.-------
*The exception, of course, would be for a link.
Edited for dropped word.

Continuing the thought:

71: I think that is good and easy. I hope people will still add comments about books they have read as well (although I don't think that should be required).

>71 AnnaClaire: I'd certainly like to see how many people have read the book, but I think that could also come as an addition to the basic bolding to indicate read; it doesn't necessarily have to be one or the other. I'm certainly happy to go with whatever everyone agrees on, though.

>69 carlym: It's definitely possible to use asterisks on the wiki without any additional tags.

71>

It's too late for the "no formatting on the book itself" suggestion, with as many books as have been added. Strong recommendation via name-bolding is implementable, but lots of people have already been using bold-for-read.

Proposal:

bold title to indicate read
list your name if you've read it
add comments liberally

I think this is straightforward and wouldn't require much change from what we already have.

What about adding bold-your-username for books highly recommended?Edited because the thread isn't that long yet.

...But, so we can be clear, vote your preference as...

I think this is a great idea! I'll go back in a minute and answer the polls now that I've had a chance to see the wiki, but here are my initial thoughts about what is important to me.

I want to know if a listed book has been read by someone or not. If so, I'd like to know who read it (so I can contact them or search for their comments) and a general idea of the strength of their recommendation. I'm not sure I like the idea of deletions. I think I'd rather see negative comments or a "not recommended" indicator of some kind. What if someone else comes along and lists/recommends a title after it has already been deleted? I don't want to have to check a "deleted" list for each title I'm thinking of adding. What if I love a book someone else deleted because they hated it?

As far wiki formatting goes, I don't know how to do bolding or italics or anything else. I'll do it if you leave instructions posted where I can see them (i.e., on every page). Otherwise, you'll get plain text from me.

edit - after going back through the discussion and thinking some more, I have these thoughts to add:

I think the format should be as uniform as possible. I don't care that much about bold vs not bold, or italics. I would like to see a protocol about whether only read books are listed or if TBR books can also be listed. And a clear method of telling them apart. I like the user names, and would like to be able to easily see which people have read the book and which are merely listing a title they've found. My preference would be not-bold for unread books, no user name required. Comments such as "recommended to me by univ prof specializing in the field" would be appropriate on TBR books, and may be helpful to others, otherwise none would be expected. Read books are bolded and must include a comment or rating, user name strongly encouraged. Each additional person who has read the book would also add their name and comments, so that popular books will stand out because of their long entry.

I don't remember noticing if they already are or not, but books ought to be listed in a specific order - especially important in populous divisions. Alpha by title would be my choice.

All these "rules" can be listed on each page (together with my wiki formatting instructions, please) for everyone to see. Links to each page should be added to the group page.

#79: Why would you like books listed in a particular order? (I'm not criticizing, I just don't understand what that would add--presumably people will be looking up categories, not trying to locate specific books they already know about within a category.)

Unread books are definitely being added.

I don't think a comment or rating should be required for read books, although I hope people will add comments to the read books. (If someone doesn't add a comment, would we want to delete the book? It would still be valuable as a suggestion.)

We should probably also keep in mind that not that many people are going to be using this wiki, so problems related to massive numbers of suggestions and users are not very likely.

I don't think it's necessary to require a comment or a rating. I don't rate books and sometimes there's not a lot to say about a particular suggestion. Just knowing a book for that classification exists and is worth reading is enough in some cases.

>81 DaynaRT:
That might be what was hanging us up on the whole consensus thing. Is this for people to find books that merely fit a given classification? Or is it a filtered version, containing books that fit and are, in our opinion, a worthwhile read?

As I've said before, I've been filling in as if it were the latter. If I haven't read a book, I haven't listed it, no matter how empty the subheading. And if I'm reasonably familiar with a book but think it too particular or specialized (college textbooks, or books of knitting patterns, for example), I simply didn't bother.

Part of the point to me in suggesting the wiki was that it would be a place to collect suggestions of all types, read and unread. I have been keeping a paper list of potential books, both from suggestions others have made here and from other places where I've seen interesting-looking books that fit into a category I didn't have checked off. I don't just put any book that turns up in a library catalog on my list; I pick ones that look like things I would actually want to read, and then I can look for those books (or they're books already on my shelf).

Likewise, I'm interested in others' suggestions of unread books, especially for the difficult categories, because someone may have come across a readable-looking book in a technical field even though they haven't read it. Also, most of us don't need suggestions for the popular categories, but there have been lots of discussions about finding potential books for difficult categories. For most of those, either no one or maybe one person has read a book in that category, so there won't be any already-read books to recommend.

It's certainly nice to know if someone has also read the book and liked it, so I think that's valuable information as well and should be captured in the wiki.

Okay, so for now there seems to be consensus about bolding the title to indicate read, including your user name if you've read it, and adding comments liberally.

I think the fact that titles read will be bold implies that unread titles should be added unbolded.

So people can go ahead at least with these things while we consider other details.

Various points outstanding:
Should the people who particularly liked a book bold their names?
Should the books be alphabetized?
Should comments be required?
Anything else I've forgotten.

Once everything has been decided, I'll add instructions to every page (or someone else can do this). For now, I'll just note that above the wiki editing box there's a bold button, so you just highlight the text that you want to make bold and click the button.

>88 _Zoe_:

>88 _Zoe_:

>88 _Zoe_:/91

Sorry, I don't know how to make polls. But I personally expect that individual sections will very rarely get enough books to warrant any special organization. As has been said before people will be looking for general suggestions rather than specific books so it isn't really important for navigation. I could however see there being merit in grouping books that have the same author together, assuming of course that they're in the same section.

Also: 813 & 823. I'm sure we all know tons of good books in those sections. Should we cap that number of books people can add there to keep things from getting unwieldy?

To make polls, you put (vote) (/vote) around the question, but with triangular brackets.

I'd personally be inclined just to leave out 813 and 823 altogether. I think we can probably get by just by urging people to show moderation and not setting a hard-and-fast rule.

#94: Agreed. I don't think there is a rule needed, but hope people will recognize that massive suggestions in those types of categories aren't particularly helpful or needed.

I had planned to add a bunch over the weekend but have had internet problems :(

82>

Or is it a filtered version, containing books that fit and are, in our opinion, a worthwhile read?

That's how I'm using it, though I'm not adding anything if there are already several suggestions for a category. It's not going to help anyone to have two dozen 973 to wade through.

>97 lorax: I generally agree, but I think it might be nice to have more than just a few suggestions in each category.

> 6

Hi Zoe,

I just discovered this thread, finished my DD Challenge (Yay! I did the short version, though) but love the "suggestions wiki". I'm adding a few of my own suggestions from the better books I've read for my own challenge.

I agree that links would be nice but time-consuming.

Links don't have to be time consuming. If you add the links to your own challenge thread, later on you can come back and with one click more find the link when you add your suggestions to the "suggestions wiki". At least, that's what I found and did. It was painless. :)

> 12

Zoe suggested just bolding titles that someone has read and recommends rather than every book that has been read.

I don't see the point of listing as a suggestion a book that you do *not* recommend! Why not simply leave those out?! Your books read are listed on your own individual threads anyway.

>100 SqueakyChu:: I think we have generally reached an agreement that we're not going to be listing books we've read and didn't like. You are right that it doesn't make sense to include those!

>99 SqueakyChu:: I'm also listing books on my TBR list (I have a paper list with Dewey numbers and potential reads), so I was thinking more about those. I am going to try to add links but at least just want to get the titles up there.

As Zoe noted above, this is the current set of instructions for adding books: "Okay, so for now there seems to be consensus about bolding the title to indicate read, including your user name if you've read it, and adding comments liberally."

I don't see the point of listing as a suggestion a book that you do *not* recommend! (#100)

I agree, though listing books we haven't read and therefore can't give an opinion about seems equally pointless, IMHO.

Okay, I just skimmed through this entire thread. Phew! What strikes me about the wiki is that it is too confusing and complicated. Here are my suggestions. Take them or leave them! :D

My Humble Opinion Only!! Then I'll hush up. :)

1. Only list books read and recommended. This list will grow much longer,and you will not want to go back to delete entries later. Be proactive about this issue now.
2. Do not list books that are read and not recommended. What for? Those books are listed anyway on individual threads.
3. Do not list TBR books. People who participate in this challenge should know how to find books within the Dewey Decimal system or they would not be here in the first place.
3. Do not list a book more than once. There is no need. This is a list of suggestions only. Everyone has his own list of "books read" and "books TBR". Each person knows what they are.
4. Bold all book titles. That makes for easy visibility. In other words, leave no book titles unbolded.
5. List books under each category in alphabetical order by book title (since it comes first in the listing). As each category of recommendation grows, it will be easier to find specific books.
6. Don't add comments. Too wordy. Keep the conversations about the book to the actual main thread, not the wiki. Live links provide reviews! If comments are wanted, limit them to one to three words. You either recommend the book highly and list it, or you leave it off the list.
7. Add user name. Who recommends a book will make a difference to me whether or not I might want to try that book.

Bottom line: KEEP IT SIMPLE!!

Anyway, I'm done with this challenge. I might be back another time to do it again. It was really fun.

Zoe, it was a nice idea to do this "Suggestions wiki". I hope my suggestions are helpful. I don't intend to force my ideas here, but hope to help if my ideas make any sense at all.

Anyway, great job everyone!! That was quite a task to put that suggestions wiki together in the first place. Kudos to all of you!! It appears to be a mammoth undertaking.

The point of adding unread books is that it is difficult to find books in many of the categories. If someone else has located an interesting-looking book in a difficult category, that is valuable information to me whether or not they have read it. It's not just a matter of finding a book in a Dewey category; it's a matter of finding a readable book in that category, especially in the technical and language categories. When I suggested the wiki on the other thread (which was about finding books in difficult categories), my thought was that it would be a list of unread titles that people had collected, not read books, because I can see what people have read by looking at their threads (although I'm happy for the read/recommended books to be included).

Comments to me are the most helpful part. People are keeping them short. It also preserves the information on the strength of the recommendation.

I still don't see the point in alphabetizing books under a category because presumably if someone is looking for a particular title, they already know about the book and don't need the suggestions wiki. I don't feel strongly about that but just want to keep rules to a minimum.

#102: It might be pointless to you but shouldn't hurt your use of the wiki, right? Because it's clear from the bold/not bold which books have been read and which haven't, you can ignore the unread ones if you want (just like you can ignore suggestions from people who don't have similar tastes). I do agree with your point to some extent: if there are 5 read and recommended books in a category, for example, there is no need to add an unread one. But if there is only one recommended, and the unread book is very different, why not add it? I think folks should use their judgment on adding tons of recommendations (read or unread) in any one category.

Anyway, I think the system already voted on and laid out is simple. (The thread about it is complicated.)

The point of adding unread books is that it is difficult to find books in many of the categories.

Please clarify this: Do you mean that there are some categories which are practically empty, except for books that can only be understood by people with specialist training? Or that are hardly used at all? Or that you simply haven't seen any books in them which you think look interesting to you?

As SqueakyChu pointed out, the list will fill out -- and indeed it has done so quite a bit in the week it's been active. Have faith that at least some of us can find interesting books, even in specialized categories, read them, and add them to the list.

Without TBR books, the wiki becomes a lot less useful to me. So, if it becomes the consensus to only add read books go ahead and delete the TBRs I've added.

#105: There have been many discussions on this thread about how hard it is to find books in certain ranges. Some categories have very few books. Some have mainly books on specialist topics (like metallurgy or things like that). If you look at the wiki, you'll see that suggestions (especially for already-read books) are already heavily concentrated in certain categories and that other long stretches are empty. While over time, those may fill in with books that have been read and recommended, it's going to take quite a while for that to happen. In the interim, it's also helpful just to have a pointer to a possible book for those categories.

Also, if only one person has recommended a book for that category, it might just not be something that's appealing to me, so having a couple of other suggestions is also helpful.

To be clear, I'm not randomly picking books from categories and sticking them in as suggestions. The TBRs I have included are ones on my personal Dewey TBR list--books I have seen recommended in other groups here, on book lists and book reviews, etc., where I checked the Dewey number and saw that it fit into a category I didn't have.

Also, no one is being forced to add TBRs (or to add anything) to the wiki, and as long as you can distinguish between recommendations and TBRs, what's the harm? It's useful info to at least 2 of us.

I second everything carlym just said. Twice for 000 & 400. I updated the instructions we've agreed on on the wiki pages.

Just to be clear, this wasn't my idea; all credit should go to carlym!

I think people are fairly happy with the current simple set of rules; the impression I got from all the earlier polls was that the desire wasn't so much for a new system as for a consistent policy about what exactly should be done. I will add a few polls about TBR books, but I expect that we'll ultimately end up keeping them. I personally find them very useful, anyway ;).

I think the main point I'd like to stress is that I trust people to use their discretion in what to add. I don't think anyone is adding books randomly just because they see a blank category.

Am I the only one whose keyboard tilde is apparently not the same as the tilde used for name-signing on the wiki? It works fine if I copy and paste the characters from elsewhere, but not if I type them directly. Weird.

all credit should go to carlym

Transfer my appreciation from Zoe to Carly, then. The whole set-up was really lots of work, and it was done very well. Just ignore my "squeaks". The wiki boards seem to be working fine just as it is among those who use them the most.

Although I'm done my DD challenge for the time being, I'd be happy to add a book now and then if I find one I think is worthwhile - especially to those categories that have no or few entries.

Zoe set it up and others added links, text, etc., so it's a team effort.

My internet should be back to full functionality tonight, and I'm looking forward to adding more books!

>115 SqueakyChu: Maybe all the good suggestions will inspire you to return to the challenge sooner rather than later! ;)

For me, it was a really fun challenge. I guess I see things differently because I did this challenge in an odd sort of way. I set it up so that I would either win by reading ten books in one category or one book in ten categories. (See my thread to see what eventually happened!) I then read my nonfiction books at random and afterward plugged them into the Dewey Decimal system. Therefore, I was never "looking up" books to read.

The way I structured my own challenge made it non-stress for me as well as never giving me the "requirement" to "have to" read a certain book. I will probably return to do it again. It will be sooner rather than later, I'm sure!

>118 SqueakyChu: I'm still nowhere near far enough along to feel trapped by the required categories; I can make a fair bit of progress just by chance :)

As I look through for books to list, though, I'm finding that a lot of the categories seem to have changed! Bah. I think I'll redo my whole personal list sometime this week (and continue pestering Tim to restore the work details, too).

Since there was a unanimous vote for a standard format and 6-1 in favour of no italics, it looks like we won't be doing italics on the wiki.

Meanwhile, another issue is what exactly to bold of the books that should be bolded....

I'm jumping into the fray again. I just signed up for another Dewey Decimal challenge. At least I'll be able to legitimately vote in this thread now! :)

Speaking of jumping into the fray (and I'm sorry to beat the horse we've killed several times over, but it's a sore point for me), I wonder if everyone simply assumes that some of the books listed will not have been read by the poster, or if anyone actually expects all of us to be posting our unread books.

I'll concede that some people are posting TBR books, but I refuse on principle do do so myself. Some books are worth reading and some are very much not; these suggestions are, effectively, recommendations, and I don't like the idea of putting name to one before I've determined it's worthwhile.

these suggestions are, effectively, recommendations

To me, they're just suggestions.

I don't expect anyone to list TBRs if they don't want to.

And ditto on #124. I think TBRs mean, "Hey, here's a book you might want to investigate if you're looking for something for this category."

ETA: Also, because unread books are clearly distinguished from read & recommended books by the bold/not bold convention, anyone who wants to ignore unread books on the wiki can do so.

124>

If there's not the implication of "This is a book in the xxx category that people might find interesting" implied by a recommendation, but just a statement of fact ("This is a book in the xxx category"), though, the wiki isn't any different from the MDS browser. Or perhaps you mean something stronger by "recommendation" than I do.

Or perhaps you mean something stronger by "recommendation" than I do.

Probably.

The unread books that are listed have been chosen by someone (from the MDS browser, libraries, their bookshelves, whatever) as something that looks interesting and as something that person is, presumably, thinking about reading for that category--someone has already done some legwork to sort the wheat from the chaff. I own most of the TBRs I'm listing, so I think they look good enough to acquire, for whatever that's worth.

I own most of the TBRs I'm listing, so I think they look good enough to acquire, for whatever that's worth.

Books don't get onto my TBR list until I own them. Anything else is just a wishlist book, and I'm not putting any of those on the wiki.

For people who are adding unread books to the wiki (which I don't have any problem with so long as they're indicated in some way), do you plan to remove them if, when you read them, they turn out to be terrible?

I thought we hadn't decided on what to do with books one wouldn't recommend.

A deleted books page? A negative comment?

I'd suggest a thread rather than a page for deleted books, because I think it would be a lot easier to follow. I wouldn't regularly check a list of deleted books to try to see what was new, but I would pay attention to a thread.

And in the case of books that someone else has listed as read and that we didn't like, I'd add a comment rather than deleting the book.

#130: The way of indicating them is established. Plain text for unread books, bold text for books that have been read. Also, books that have been read should have someone's name next to them.

#132: Agreed 100%. Delete and make a note the thread.

132>

And in the case of books that someone else has listed as read and that we didn't like, I'd add a comment rather than deleting the book.

Absolutely, I wouldn't ever delete a book that I didn't add, even if the person who originally added it hasn't read it.

If there's not the implication of "This is a book in the xxx category that people might find interesting" implied by a recommendation, but just a statement of fact ("This is a book in the xxx category"), though, the wiki isn't any different from the MDS browser. (#126)

That's my point. If you're listing a book you haven't read, a brief comment about why you think this book in particular looks interesting would be nice.

1) It is undisputed that TBR books are useful to some people who are using the wiki. See post #111, poll on whether TBR books should be included.

2) TBR books are easily distinguishable on the wiki from books that have been read, at least if users are following the now agreed-on formatting of bold for read books and not bold for TBR books.

3) People who are not interested in even considering TBR books can ignore them. No one is making anyone read these books.

Why do we need to keep arguing over whether TBR books should be included?

Go re-read my post from this morning. I wasn't talking about whether people should be allowed to include them, but whether people should be expected to. Further comments were about how TBR books should be before they get listed ("I've already bought it" seems to be the consensus, rather than "it happens to fit"), and what to do if they turn out to be crap.

136>

I don't think we are. This particular discussion started with this question:

I'll concede that some people are posting TBR books, but I refuse on principle do do so myself. Some books are worth reading and some are very much not; these suggestions are, effectively, recommendations, and I don't like the idea of putting name to one before I've determined it's worthwhile.

That is, I see it as about whether or not there is an expectation that everyone adding books to the wiki should be including TBR, not about whether people who choose to add them can do so. It then drifted from there, of course, but I don't think the underlying premise that people who want to include TBR books should do so was ever questioned.

Is anyone really suggesting that people should be obligated to add TBR books?

#137: In 135, it sounded like you were again questioning whether other people should be able to include them because you still think they're useless. If they're useless to you, why do you care about the exact parameters? With the exception of what to do about deletions--which is a logistical problem--I don't think anyone who is actually listing or using TBRs has any remaining issues about the parameters.

#139: My thoughts exactly. No one has said that anyone HAS to list anything. I didn't think that was seriously in dispute.

For deletions of TBRs: If you read one you listed and don't like it, delete it and list it in a thread to be created. If someone else listed it, put a comment saying you don't recommend it and your name, but don't delete it.

> 123

I, for one, will not be posting TBR books, but I see now that others will. It's no biggy for me either way as I probably will not pick my reads from what's listed anyway. I'm listing my best past reads in the hopes of directing others to those books I like the best.

Re: Deleting TBRs:

I'm getting the impression that the TBRs are listed just to give some examples of what to read. If one "number" gets "filled up" with a minimum number of recommended suggestions, I'd be all for deleting the TBRs completely at that point as, to me, they're just taking up space.

*ducks and runs out of this thread*

#145: I agree with the principle, and I hope that people will use discretion in adding books to categories with a lot of suggestions already (whether adding read or TBR books). I think the wiki is most helpful for the more obscure categories.

Along those lines, I'm not adding TBRs where there are already a couple of recommended books. I'm not even adding books I read and liked in some of the 300s, 800s, and 900s where there is already a good list; if there are that many suggestions already, no one is going to have trouble finding something for that category.

Unless we start having a problem with excessive numbers of suggestions, I don't think a cap is necessary.

The only issue I see with the proposed deletion method is that we aren't necessarily putting our names with TBR books, so we may not remember who listed it a couple of years down the line. I don't see this as a real problem, since listing the deleted book in a thread would allow for error (if I accidentally deleted a book that I thought I had added, but it turned out someone else had added it, they could always add it back), but I thought I should mention it anyway.

I agree with you that an accidentally-deleted TBR could be added back and thus is not a big problem. Also, if someone isn't sure, they can always just put a negative comment.

Okay, poll results seem pretty conclusive on a few more issues:

*Bold the title only
*No italics
*Add TBR books as you see fit (use your judgement)
*If you read a TBR book that you'd listed and don't like it, remove it from the list and post about it in the TBR-removal thread

It's still unclear whether we want people to optionally bold their user name to indicate a strong recommendation.

Are there any other issues outstanding?

Off to create the TBR-removal thread now....

Okay, here's the thread.

I don't think we need more than one user's name on a recommendation. I think it would just clutter up the wiki. Are you going to post a poll about this issue, Zoe? :)

About the removal thread...

Suppose one person lists the TBR book and another reader reads it first and hates it. Who has the right of removal? The original lister? The actual reader? Both?

Of course; all issues get a poll :D. Personally I like seeing extra names, but I'm not the one making the decisions here!

>152 SqueakyChu: I think we were going to try to limit it to the original lister. I certainly haven't felt comfortable removing someone else's suggestions from the wiki, anyway. In future cases where we've lost track because so much time has passed, anyone who thinks they might have listed it can remove it and mention it on the thread, and if someone else was the original lister and still wants it on the wiki after hearing about how bad it is (unlikely, I think), they can add it back.

Do we need more polls here too? ;)

Trying to clarify the name-bolding issue....

I just noticed this thread.. not been keeping up with LT lately...

just scrolled through this thread and was amazed at how many comments and polls there were about bold and italics..

>157 GoofyOcean110: Ha. Perhaps the people in this group tend a bit towards the obsessive.... Fortunately I think we've mostly settled on a format by now.

>157 GoofyOcean110: Typeface is serious business.

I don't disagree!
I started to put in a few recommendations and then realized I probably won't have a chance to get them all in to the wiki for a while. I will probably save this for later.

Just took another look at the wiki to see how it has evolved in the last 10 days. I love it.

I like the bold titles indicating that someone has read it and liked it well enough to suggest it to the rest of us. I like that I can see unread titles that someone thinks looks good enough to bother typing it in here - regardless of how they became aware of the book or how close they are to reading it themself. I like seeing who has read a book - since we all know of certain people whose taste is similar to our own, or wildly different. I LOVE the comments - both for read and unread books.

Previously I had suggested having a certain order for listing books, either alphabetically by title or by author. I still would like to have that - just so things are neat and tidy.

#154 I still have a small problem with deleting suggestions when the book turns out to be bad. If a TBR is listed, and then the suggester reads the book and hates it, they delete the book and post it on the deleted books thread. But if someone else sees the suggestion, reads the book and loves it, and then goes back to the wiki only to find that the book has been deleted, then what? They can list it again with their personal recommendation, but then the rest of us won't see the negative comment from the original poster/deleter. Because if the person who loved the book reads it first and posts their recommendation, the original lister doesn't still have the right to delete it, do they? They would just post their own un-recommendation and the rest of us would see both comments. I would rather see the book stay on the wiki with a follow-up comment from the lister that, after reading the book, they do not recommend it. Plus, there is always the case when the person who hated the book is someone whose taste is opposite of mine. The very fact that that person didn't like something may be reason enough for me to be interested.

Is this something that can be re-considered, or am I alone on this?

I think there's still plenty of time to reconsider if we want; there's so far been no activity on the deleted books thread.

I don't feel strongly about it either way, since I think it will be a pretty infrequent occurrence anyway.

I agree it will probably be a rare thing, but I can't stop myself from worrying about "what if..."!

I don't feel so strongly about it that I will make a fuss if nothing changes.

If someone wants to alphabetize the entries, I don't mind and will follow that convention in the future (although I still don't quite see the point?). Mainly I don't want to have to redo the existing entries, but if someone else reorders them, that makes me no difference.

On the deletions, leaving the title in with a negative comment is also fine with me. Maybe if it gets to be a problem with too many bad books staying on the list and cluttering things up, we can revisit?

Insomnia has resulted in adding a few recommendations based on books I've read into the wiki....

It's always nice when insomnia leads to something productive.

I think this is productive, anyway....

Thanks Zoe.. hope some of them are interesting for others. Will be interesting to see what a 'Best Of DDC' looks like

You know, it can't have escaped any of us that so far no one has completed the challenge and there is serious turnover in the people that attempt it. So, I think it will be a milestone in itself when, as a collective, we manage to complete the challenge. Even that's a ways off but it's a good bit closer than any of us completing the challenge on our own.

So here's to the day when there's a bold title for every section in the suggestions wiki!

That's a great goal!

I'm starting to wish I had kept a separate list of where I was when I started this more than four years ago. I know that at the time I had no books in the 100s or 600s, and now I've done five categories in each. It's nice to see some progress, slow as it may be.

I wonder if LT will even still be around when I finish the challenge!

I completed my own meager challenge!

It was my second challenge I never finished. I just got tired of trying to keep so many individual threads and opted to just stick with just one thread elsewhere.

>170 carlym: It had better be! Also, you know you're doing well when you can speak of "when" you finish the challenge :)

>171 SqueakyChu: I find that I don't make progress quickly enough for thread maintenance to be a burden. I just review my records every few months or so to see if I've completed anything that counts.

so many things are so wide open for me that a ton of my reading in general has wound up counting towards this or other challenges.

I was reading back through the wiki to update some of my entries, and there are so many great suggestions!

I do think that we need to start exercising some restraint in some of the categories to keep things clean and easy to read--if there are three or four recommendations (bolded titles), that probably means that no one will have any trouble finding a book in that category, so maybe we don't need to keep adding more and more titles. I don't want to say that new people can't express their thoughts about the best books in the category, but I don't think we need to list every good book we've read in a category.

>174 carlym: You're probably right; I'm always too reluctant to say anything discouraging at all.

I guess for categories that already have multiple bolded books, the guiding question should be: "If someone is only going to read one book in this category, would you recommend that it be this one?"

I've gone back and deleted one of my bolded suggestions that seemed too niche-y for the category. I don't think there's really a serious problem right down, but it wouldn't hurt to be more cautious in the future.

On the other hand, there are still plenty of categories that have no suggestions at all, so any help at all would be appreciated there!

>174 carlym: & 175 I'm not sure how true that is. Our reading habits are different so just because some people find books in xxx easy doesn't mean everyone does and it doesn't mean just anything they're into will be a good recommendation for someone else. I like seeing multiple books, it gives a section a bit a breadth. That helps a lot when you really don't know what would appeal to you within a section. Lord knows I'd love to see ten or 12 options in some sections because I have nothing of note to pick from on my own list.

Thus far none of the section has become unwieldy or difficult to process as far as I can tell. Though, if you do want to pin down sections no one really needs a recommendation for its going to be 813 and 823.

I'd be more concerned about establishing just how much you should enjoy a book before it's worth adding than capping how much can be added. There was a book or two I added to sections I found difficult, but wasn't too thrilled with based on others advisement that since there was nothing/very little listed I should list it even though it wasn't strongly recommended. Now I'm rambling. blar blurg mmph. I should like to, as the list fills out, revisit my own entries and remove ones that weren't awesome once their sections have filled out a bit.

I don't think there should be any specific rule or cap, just something for people to keep in mind and exercise their good judgment. Mainly I think that if you find yourself listing multiple titles in a single category, and you don't have a reason for doing so (like you think they appeal to different people, or they're hard to find, or there weren't any recommendations in that category and your 2 or 3 are the only 2 or 3), maybe just list your very favorite in that category. I'd rather people listed too many than stopped participating.

For strength of recommendation, I apply a loose and non-scientific sliding scale to the ones I bold/keep on the list depending on whether there are any other possibilities listed and whether there are likely to be others listed in the future, but I try to note where I'm recommending only because the category is difficult. I hope that others will also add notes in cases like that so we're all warned.

Personally, I'd also love to see a dozen suggestions listed for as many numbers as possible, because I enjoy having a wide choice. And if one person is more well-read in one category and another in another, so be it. If somebody has read plenty of books in a given number, I think his/her several reccomendations are no less valuable for it.

However, I don't feel comfortable suggesting books I didn't really enjoy on Wiki, even if there are no bold titles listed - although I appreciate it when others do and insert cautionary notes. After all, some of the books I've loved have been un-reccommended to me by someone else - you never know.

My thought was that, if we can list 10 or 12 books in a category that have been read, probably no one is looking for a recommendation in that category, and so it clutters up the page and makes it harder to read and to see the books in the less-populated categories. I never thought of this wiki as an attempt to inform people of all possible good books in a category but more as a way to help collect possibilities for the more difficult categories, instead of having to look at each person's individual thread. But if people are actually using those longer lists, then great.

Just bumping this thread up so that new participants to the challenge are aware of the suggestions wiki.

Thanks for the bump. I had gotten a little excited and added some books to a section in which I'm well-read, but I think I now have a better understanding of the purpose of the wiki. Cheers!

I have been updating the wiki with books I have read in the last year or so. It would be great if others wanted to add to it as well!

I added the 421 I just finished, but for some reason it shows a lock behind the title. I can't figure out why and the link seems to behave as it should.

The lock just indicates it's an https link.

Thanks!

Bumping the thread, in case anyone is still reading the group.

Bumping it again.

Thanks :)

The wiki page has moved. You can now find it at

https://wiki.librarything.com/index.php/Groups:Dewey_Decimal_Challenge/suggestio...

This took me a long time to find.

Also, I would like to thank everyone who created and updated this wiki. Most of my libraries do not use the Dewey Decimal system anymore, so this is a great way to find great books that fit each category.