Mis-identification

TalkFrequently Asked Questions

Join LibraryThing to post.

Mis-identification

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

1icemuff First Message
Dec 6, 2007, 10:07 pm

I have two books that the system thinks are the same book. They have no ISBN, LC or DD numbers as they were made by the US military in the 1950's and were never meant for the masses. Their only identifying numbers are each listed at the bottom on the last page of each book and I've listed them as tags to differentiate the two from one another but it didn't work.

Any suggestions?

2nperrin
Dec 6, 2007, 10:58 pm

I tried looking through your catalogue but the effect you mention didn't pop out at me -- what titles are in question? Also, see if this helps http://www.librarything.com/talktopic.php?topic=24942

3icemuff
Dec 6, 2007, 11:21 pm

They are both Polish: Basic Course Volume I. You'll see the two different numbers under publication.

Thanks so much for the help!

4melannen
Edited: Dec 7, 2007, 12:33 am

Are they really completely different, or are they more like two editions of the same work? In that case, LT does combine them as a work, but you can still have separate data for the two different editions.

Anyway, either way, changing the tags will have no effect on the way they combine; LT doesn't look at that field (or any of the personal info fields) for combining purposes. They have to be different in title, author, and/or ISBN for LT to know that they're different. The easiest way is probably to put some distinguishing information in the title. You could maybe also try putting the publication number in the ISBN field and seeing if it'll let you separate by ISBN, but that's very messy and doesn't usually work.

(Also, why does the title say they're Volume I but the summary field says Volume II ? There's something else going on with your data there that's screwy.)

5kathrynnd
Dec 7, 2007, 3:37 am

msg 2> "I tried looking through your catalogue but the effect you mention didn't pop out at me"

The two were listed separately on the detail page so I was able to separate them. Though the titles are the same the author names were slightly different.

I had a look in the Library of Congress and found a series title by the author for a set of courses published 1955- Perhaps these are part of that set? I entered it to see if I could get some more information but without being able to check the MARC record wasn't able to do. BTW the part after the period in the author name didn't get entered leaving just United States as the author. Touchstone is loading....... Hasn't this kind of entry error been reported before?

6nperrin
Dec 7, 2007, 7:43 am

I saw those books too and had a feeling it was them in question but both were unshared in catalogue view, so I was confused.

7icemuff
Dec 7, 2007, 9:14 am

I was looking at the tally of how many members had the book and LT listed 2 for each book and both were lil' ol' me. The system seems to have resolved it though. Sorry for all the commotion, I just think it's important to record that these are two separate books with different content.

And why would they have the same name and different content - ask Uncle Sam! I can't figure it out myself.

And to melannen: because I'm the Typo Queen. Thanks for catching it!

Thanks for all your help!

8pickupf
Jun 4, 2019, 3:22 pm

LT has connected my book with another unrelated book. I entered Lendemains de conquete by Lionel Groulx (ISBN:0885660749) and LT has connected it with a Laura Wilder title. Please will you fix this for me.

9davidgn
Edited: Jun 4, 2019, 3:28 pm

>8 pickupf: Done. An odd mis-combination of titles on someone's part, but easily fixed. In future, try posting such requests here: https://www.librarything.com/topic/300675 (Or in whatever the current thread is in the Combiners! group: https://www.librarything.com/groups/combiners )

10lorax
Jun 4, 2019, 3:28 pm

pickupf (#8):

This was just a simple combination issue; it looks like someone has already fixed it, since it's no longer combined.

In the future, if you don't feel like fixing this sort of thing yourself, a link to the book makes it faster for us to help.

11MarthaJeanne
Jun 4, 2019, 3:33 pm

It's also usually not a good idea to reopen a topic that is over 10 years old. So much is different now from back then that the old messages aren't really relevant.

12pickupf
Jun 4, 2019, 11:07 pm

Wow! Thank you for the quick fix. And for the other advice, kindly expressed. It never occurred to me that it was something I could fix. Thought it was some big ugly problem!