1timspalding
Common Knowledge has some major upgrades!
As you know, Common Knowledge is a general system for adding data to LibraryThing. It's a "fielded wiki"—each bit of data is a mini wiki, tracked separately and with a history of updates.
For years now we've had three work-level pages, for Characters (Marilyn Monroe), Events (Salem witch trials), and Places (Isle of Man).
Today, we're introducing twelve new pages, for authors. You can find a survey of all the pages here: https://www.librarything.com/commonknowledge/
The categories are:
We've also introduced a new Common Knowledge homepage and an All Fields page with links and data, including how many edits you've made to each field.
Other changes include:
Please note that, as of now, all of these new pages use only English-language Common Knowledge data. Mixing other languages in made the pages confusing. What we really need is a comprehensive system of aliasing and translations so that, for example, an author's nationality is not listed as United States on the English translation and États-Unis in the French. There should be one answer, and it should be translated at need. All these new translated pages make the situation clear and the need pressing.
As you know, Common Knowledge is a general system for adding data to LibraryThing. It's a "fielded wiki"—each bit of data is a mini wiki, tracked separately and with a history of updates.
For years now we've had three work-level pages, for Characters (Marilyn Monroe), Events (Salem witch trials), and Places (Isle of Man).
Today, we're introducing twelve new pages, for authors. You can find a survey of all the pages here: https://www.librarything.com/commonknowledge/
The categories are:
- Occupations (spy, suffragist, podcaster, sex worker)
- Organizations (Society of Jesus, Freemasons, Phi Beta Kappa)
- Nationalities (New Zealand, Finland, Roman Empire)
- Education (Hampshire College, Sorbonne, Harvard University, Concord Academy)
- Author Awards (OBE, MacArthur Fellowship, Nobel Prize)
- Birth Places (Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, Riga, Latvia)
- Places of Residence (Maine, USA)
- Places of Death (Nashville, Tennessee, USA)
- Burial Locations (Cimetière du Père-Lachaise, Paris, France, Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, Virginia, USA)
- Cause of Death (car crash, tuberculosis)
- Connections (Queen Victoria, Fleming, Ian)
- Gender (female, non-binary)
We've also introduced a new Common Knowledge homepage and an All Fields page with links and data, including how many edits you've made to each field.
Other changes include:
- All CK pages are faster, with the larger ones now cached, with the cache date listed on the page.
- I've added a page for work blurbers—those quotes you see on a book, telling you Stephen King thought the book "excellent!" or whatever. (In fact, Stephen King is king.)
Please note that, as of now, all of these new pages use only English-language Common Knowledge data. Mixing other languages in made the pages confusing. What we really need is a comprehensive system of aliasing and translations so that, for example, an author's nationality is not listed as United States on the English translation and États-Unis in the French. There should be one answer, and it should be translated at need. All these new translated pages make the situation clear and the need pressing.
2timspalding
More images.
3keristars
A way to link CK places, not quite an alias, would be pretty cool.
The book I'm reading right now is about the colonization of Louisiana, New France. I don't think we have a way to search per unit within the commas, right? So "Fort Natchitoches, Louisiana, New France" sits all on its own unless I add a (redundant?) entry for Louisiana, New France, and then maybe even one for New France itself. And none of those are tied to "Natchitoches, Louisiana, USA" though the physical place is the same...
This would probably be useful for all the author place CK, too.
The book I'm reading right now is about the colonization of Louisiana, New France. I don't think we have a way to search per unit within the commas, right? So "Fort Natchitoches, Louisiana, New France" sits all on its own unless I add a (redundant?) entry for Louisiana, New France, and then maybe even one for New France itself. And none of those are tied to "Natchitoches, Louisiana, USA" though the physical place is the same...
This would probably be useful for all the author place CK, too.
4timspalding
I'd think you'd want an "up/down" system. "Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA" is part of "Massachusetts, USA" is part of "USA." And you'd want all places merged in some way, and geolocated.
Anyway, worth doing. Not doing tonight!
Anyway, worth doing. Not doing tonight!
6keristars
>4 timspalding: Yes, up-down!
I'm not fussy about geolocated, just looked at some of the pages (and tried fixing some of the Nationalities) and was reminded of the thoughts I'd had while entering the place CK for these books about 17th century North America.
I love the new pages, and standardizing CK entries is going to be so much easier to work from a field page that lists all the entries.
I'm not fussy about geolocated, just looked at some of the pages (and tried fixing some of the Nationalities) and was reminded of the thoughts I'd had while entering the place CK for these books about 17th century North America.
I love the new pages, and standardizing CK entries is going to be so much easier to work from a field page that lists all the entries.
7timspalding
>5 LeslieWx:
Yeah. We toured it last year. (My son went to an art school instead.) That place punches so far above its weight when it comes to interesting people, especially writers. It's a shame to see it go.
Yeah. We toured it last year. (My son went to an art school instead.) That place punches so far above its weight when it comes to interesting people, especially writers. It's a shame to see it go.
8andyl
>1 timspalding:
It definitely shows some areas which need attention by avid CKers.
There are a number of Awards such as CBE, "Commander, Order of the British Empire", "Commander of the Order of the British Empire" which should be rationalised. There are probably also some that same Order of the British Empire - with the rank in brackets. I guess that is also true of other ranks.
I have also noticed a few in there which shouldn't be Author Awards at all - for example Booker Prize which is awarded for a particular work.
It definitely shows some areas which need attention by avid CKers.
There are a number of Awards such as CBE, "Commander, Order of the British Empire", "Commander of the Order of the British Empire" which should be rationalised. There are probably also some that same Order of the British Empire - with the rank in brackets. I guess that is also true of other ranks.
I have also noticed a few in there which shouldn't be Author Awards at all - for example Booker Prize which is awarded for a particular work.
9PawsforThought
This is such a dangerous new feature - I don't want to think about how much time I could spend on adding Author CK.
10gilroy
I don't know why, but I thought author awards were eventually going to meld into the newer award system.
Has that become a "two weeks" situation?
ETA: Probably important for people using this page for clean up -- how often will the pages refresh?
Has that become a "two weeks" situation?
ETA: Probably important for people using this page for clean up -- how often will the pages refresh?
11Bookmarque
This one caught my attention as a cause of death -
So I looked at it appears the death was of a team of game developers. Funny.
So I looked at it appears the death was of a team of game developers. Funny.
13timspalding
>10 gilroy:
I don't know why, but I thought author awards were eventually going to meld into the newer award system.
Yes, we should move it. It's SO much less complicated that book awards, though. We're not losing a lot having it in CK for now.
I don't know why, but I thought author awards were eventually going to meld into the newer award system.
Yes, we should move it. It's SO much less complicated that book awards, though. We're not losing a lot having it in CK for now.
14keristars
>11 Bookmarque: Cleaning up some nationalities last night led me to https://www.librarything.com/author/sirkaosbarraclough - and trying to research this name led me to 3 different biographies! It appears to be a dog, but maybe not?
Always interesting things to be found, I suppose!
Always interesting things to be found, I suppose!
15TimSharrock
looking at occupations - should they be case-dependent (Professor vs professor was the one I first noticed), or is there a general preference one way or the other?
17r.orrison
>15 TimSharrock: The examples when you edit the field are all in lowercase: "plumber or waiter or engineer"
18TimSharrock
>16 timspalding: & >17 r.orrison: thanks both: I will change the mixed case ones I have just added
22MarthaJeanne
>19 gilroy: If you mass edit tags, you are only editing YOUR tags. CK is work level. Not the same thing at all.
23gilroy
>22 MarthaJeanne: That's why I called it a pony. I would find it helpful for fixing the various forms of the same city to a uniform entry. But I can do each edit alone.
>1 timspalding: Something I've noticed but not sure if it's a bug:
When looking at the specific field pages where you get the list of the top 1000 entries, after the first few items, the pages lock to 60 items, even if the count is notably higher. It would probably be okay if it all stopped at the same level, but the places where they stop listing all is inconsistent.
Occupations - locks at #49. All items below 49 are only listing 60 items, when you may have 500+
Organizations - locks at #2
Nationalities - locks at #30
Education - locks at #19
Birth Places - locks at 7
Places of Residence - locks at #16
Places of Death - locks at #4
Was this done on purpose?
>1 timspalding: Something I've noticed but not sure if it's a bug:
When looking at the specific field pages where you get the list of the top 1000 entries, after the first few items, the pages lock to 60 items, even if the count is notably higher. It would probably be okay if it all stopped at the same level, but the places where they stop listing all is inconsistent.
Occupations - locks at #49. All items below 49 are only listing 60 items, when you may have 500+
Organizations - locks at #2
Nationalities - locks at #30
Education - locks at #19
Birth Places - locks at 7
Places of Residence - locks at #16
Places of Death - locks at #4
Was this done on purpose?
24waltzmn
>23 gilroy: That's why I called it a pony. I would find it helpful for fixing the various forms of the same city to a uniform entry. But I can do each edit alone.
This may already have been suggested, but what would really help (at least, it would really help me) would be smarter suggestions -- something that would search the whole field, not just the leading words. This is easier to illustrate with names than cities, but it generalizes. If I type
John
it will turn up something like
John, King of England
John I, pope
John II, pope
etc.
and so forth, but it WON'T produce
King John of England
Pope John I
Pope John II
Now the standard seems to be to use Name, comma, Title, which is all right for monarchs and popes, but what about D. H. Hill versus Daniel Harvey Hill? Something that would turn up all names with "Hill" in them would allow us to get the CK right the first time....
This may already have been suggested, but what would really help (at least, it would really help me) would be smarter suggestions -- something that would search the whole field, not just the leading words. This is easier to illustrate with names than cities, but it generalizes. If I type
John
it will turn up something like
John, King of England
John I, pope
John II, pope
etc.
and so forth, but it WON'T produce
King John of England
Pope John I
Pope John II
Now the standard seems to be to use Name, comma, Title, which is all right for monarchs and popes, but what about D. H. Hill versus Daniel Harvey Hill? Something that would turn up all names with "Hill" in them would allow us to get the CK right the first time....
26timspalding
Okay, I've made a number of changes:
1. All the new author fields are now searchable. See the image below, or see https://www.librarything.com/search.php?search=oxford&searchtype=ck&sort...
2. You can now name "parents" and "children" of the author fields. So, for example, I've made "Harvard University" the parent of "Harvard Law School," and I made "The Ivy Leave" the parents of all the ivies. I did the same with the "Seven Sisters." You can find this feature on the right side of these pages.
Example pages:
* https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/education/Harvard%20University
* https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/education/Harvard%20University%20John%20F....
When you make a change in something large, it may take a while to recalculate. So, for example, when I put Harvard Law into Harvard, it took 20 minutes for the change to show up in the authors depicted.
3. You can now rename things. So, for example, I have renamed "Oxford University" to "University of Oxford." This is also on the right side.
Some notes on this:
A. At present all these changes need to be approved by staff.
B. Tomorrow I will make it so that changes that affect less than 100 items don't need to be approved by staff.
C. As with parent/child, any changes that go through will still take 20 minutes to be impemented.
Other notes:
*At present, all the places have different parent/child situations. So if you make Portland, Maine part of Maine on places of death, you have to also do it on place of birth. I will work on that tomorrow.
*All renaming is ascribed to the CKCleanUp. I'll add a note of who asked for that, and make a new badge or badges for all of this.
*Renaming only changes the "base" not the stuff in parentheses. And you can't edit parentheses in. So, for example, you can't change Harvard University Classics BA into "Harvard University (BA|Classics)"
1. All the new author fields are now searchable. See the image below, or see https://www.librarything.com/search.php?search=oxford&searchtype=ck&sort...
2. You can now name "parents" and "children" of the author fields. So, for example, I've made "Harvard University" the parent of "Harvard Law School," and I made "The Ivy Leave" the parents of all the ivies. I did the same with the "Seven Sisters." You can find this feature on the right side of these pages.
Example pages:
* https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/education/Harvard%20University
* https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/education/Harvard%20University%20John%20F....
When you make a change in something large, it may take a while to recalculate. So, for example, when I put Harvard Law into Harvard, it took 20 minutes for the change to show up in the authors depicted.
3. You can now rename things. So, for example, I have renamed "Oxford University" to "University of Oxford." This is also on the right side.
Some notes on this:
A. At present all these changes need to be approved by staff.
B. Tomorrow I will make it so that changes that affect less than 100 items don't need to be approved by staff.
C. As with parent/child, any changes that go through will still take 20 minutes to be impemented.
Other notes:
*At present, all the places have different parent/child situations. So if you make Portland, Maine part of Maine on places of death, you have to also do it on place of birth. I will work on that tomorrow.
*All renaming is ascribed to the CKCleanUp. I'll add a note of who asked for that, and make a new badge or badges for all of this.
*Renaming only changes the "base" not the stuff in parentheses. And you can't edit parentheses in. So, for example, you can't change Harvard University Classics BA into "Harvard University (BA|Classics)"
27timspalding
Oh, I've also made picture mouse-over with the details. Here, for example, when mousing over Jodi Picoult, you can see why she's on the Harvard page, and what else is in her education field.
28keristars
>26 timspalding: Ooh, I love these, thank you!!! I'm looking forward to the kind of connections that will be able to surface from this!
29lilithcat
if you make Portland, Maine part of Maine
As long as you don't make "Portland" part of "Portland, Maine". The Oregonians will come for you!
As long as you don't make "Portland" part of "Portland, Maine". The Oregonians will come for you!
30birder4106
Nationalities, Translation Issues
I'm constantly trying to correct the nationalities of my authors (https://www.librarything.com/stats/birder4106/nationality).
I keep encountering inconsistencies that can't be corrected.
For example, I have two entries for "Rumänien". The one I believe is correct includes the author Liviu Rebreanu. The other, with the author Dana Grigorcea, can't be corrected and is always displayed as "Romania."
How can this be fixed?
Then there's another issue I don't understand.
This is the assignment of authors to: Great Britain, UK, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
I find these assignments in several combinations.
Couldn't the newly created "parent/child relationships" (hierarchical grouping?) be used to standardize this?
My point is not about assigning authors to "their" nationalities, but about a general classification.
I don't presume to interfere in UK affairs. And if I have already done so, I apologize.
UK entries in my catalog:
UK (99); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
England, UK (17); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Schottland (6); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Wales, UK (1); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Großbritannien (3); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
And before my cleanup today, there was also:
Grossbritannien (1); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
I'm constantly trying to correct the nationalities of my authors (https://www.librarything.com/stats/birder4106/nationality).
I keep encountering inconsistencies that can't be corrected.
For example, I have two entries for "Rumänien". The one I believe is correct includes the author Liviu Rebreanu. The other, with the author Dana Grigorcea, can't be corrected and is always displayed as "Romania."
How can this be fixed?
Then there's another issue I don't understand.
This is the assignment of authors to: Great Britain, UK, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
I find these assignments in several combinations.
Couldn't the newly created "parent/child relationships" (hierarchical grouping?) be used to standardize this?
My point is not about assigning authors to "their" nationalities, but about a general classification.
I don't presume to interfere in UK affairs. And if I have already done so, I apologize.
UK entries in my catalog:
UK (99); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
England, UK (17); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Schottland (6); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Wales, UK (1); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
Großbritannien (3); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
And before my cleanup today, there was also:
Grossbritannien (1); Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
31gilroy
>30 birder4106: Please see >1 timspalding:
Please note that, as of now, all of these new pages use only English-language Common Knowledge data.
Please note that, as of now, all of these new pages use only English-language Common Knowledge data.
32keristars
Well, here's a bit of a stress test - https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/Massachusetts%2C%20USA
I think I've caught most of the MA, USA places of residence, though the CK search only brought me 503 results and using "related places" and following paths is inefficient (but did find more!)
I also started on https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/Nazi%20Concentration%20Ca... but had to stop because it was pulling me away from Massachusetts.
I did some Florida, too.
This leads me to
1. Can trailing spaces please be automatically cleaned from CK? (i don't always catch when my phone keyboard does it, and it breaks things)
2. What to do about St Augustine, Florida, USA and St Augustine, Florida, New Spain
or Boston, Massachusetts Bay Colony, etc (which I know I've brought up before - this time, facts have changed! maybe someone has a good idea that works with this system?)
The contains/in works great for seeing connections based on geographical space, not so much chronological.
3. Loading https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/USA to add all 50 states and the territories was not happening. Maybe a temporary wifi issue or just too big? I did add the "contained in" to a few states individually, that might have done it.
edit: never mind, it was a wifi issue :) all 50 states are included, and DC.
I think I've caught most of the MA, USA places of residence, though the CK search only brought me 503 results and using "related places" and following paths is inefficient (but did find more!)
I also started on https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/Nazi%20Concentration%20Ca... but had to stop because it was pulling me away from Massachusetts.
I did some Florida, too.
This leads me to
1. Can trailing spaces please be automatically cleaned from CK? (i don't always catch when my phone keyboard does it, and it breaks things)
2. What to do about St Augustine, Florida, USA and St Augustine, Florida, New Spain
or Boston, Massachusetts Bay Colony, etc (which I know I've brought up before - this time, facts have changed! maybe someone has a good idea that works with this system?)
The contains/in works great for seeing connections based on geographical space, not so much chronological.
3. Loading https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/USA to add all 50 states and the territories was not happening. Maybe a temporary wifi issue or just too big? I did add the "contained in" to a few states individually, that might have done it.
edit: never mind, it was a wifi issue :) all 50 states are included, and DC.
33keristars
It was a bit satisfying just now to submit a change request for the 1k "New York City, New York" places of residence to "New York, New York" (nearly 8k)
34gilroy
>33 keristars: Oh, I missed that one. I've been cleaning up a lot of the New York City entries.
No wait. I was working on place of birth
No wait. I was working on place of birth
35keristars
>34 gilroy: Yeah, Tim said something in the latest update about having them linked somehow, but for now I think getting them standardized will help that future effort.
Being able to bulk change is great. I found a few misspellings, too, where it looks like it was propagated from the drop-down menu. And Washington, D.C., vs District of Columbia. (D.C. showed up more often in "related places" so that's what I went with)
Being able to bulk change is great. I found a few misspellings, too, where it looks like it was propagated from the drop-down menu. And Washington, D.C., vs District of Columbia. (D.C. showed up more often in "related places" so that's what I went with)
36Maddz
>29 lilithcat: So will the resident of Portland in Dorset...
37keristars
Oooh I just realized I can make Puerto Rico, USA, a subset of both USA and Puerto Rico (general/ambiguous), and Puerto Rico (general) part of Caribbean Islands, and there could be some neat venn diagrams someday!
Plus it's a complement to "Caribbean literature" etc tags
Plus it's a complement to "Caribbean literature" etc tags
38lemontwist
Is there some way I can see this information but for just **my** authors instead of all authors? I think that would be really cool, and also help point to things I can clean up from my authors.
39Nevov
>26 timspalding:
>for example, I have renamed "Oxford University" to "University of Oxford."
You might wish to alter the grey text under the Education field, if that's the desired form – as that particular one is used as an example there!
>for example, I have renamed "Oxford University" to "University of Oxford."
You might wish to alter the grey text under the Education field, if that's the desired form – as that particular one is used as an example there!
41timspalding
There's a lot I need to do here. We need more transparency, and I'm still working on how to make everything cache so it's quick.
42keristars
>41 timspalding:
I'm honestly really pleased with how it's going! I realized a few hours ago that this may help with the gender vocabulary, too, so we can respect authors' individual identity but also get a general/broader picture for author discovery.
(but i am not volunteering! someone(s) else can have the honor of making those decisions)
I'm honestly really pleased with how it's going! I realized a few hours ago that this may help with the gender vocabulary, too, so we can respect authors' individual identity but also get a general/broader picture for author discovery.
(but i am not volunteering! someone(s) else can have the honor of making those decisions)
43timspalding
>42 keristars:
There be dragons. (But yes, someone can make a "nonbinary/non-binary" so we can respect how people have it, but also have something that brings them together.)
There be dragons. (But yes, someone can make a "nonbinary/non-binary" so we can respect how people have it, but also have something that brings them together.)
44birder4106
Am I the only one who can't even find the new edit window?
You might think that anyone too stupid to find the edit location for CK windows shouldn't be editing them at all. If so, please let me know. I won't keep looking and will leave them alone in the future.
Otherwise, I'd be grateful if you could show me the way as described in >26 timspalding:.
Thanks
45gilroy
>44 birder4106: Right hand column. Click on Rename for a light box to appear asking for the update.
46birder4106
>45 gilroy:
Thank you for the very quick reply.
I now know that I have to click "Rename" in the right-hand column of the screen to change entries.
But how do I get to the windows where "Rename" is possible?
Please explain it to me from the beginning.
When I click on "Common Knowledge" at the bottom of the homepage, I don't get to any pages that allow editing.
Thank you for the very quick reply.
I now know that I have to click "Rename" in the right-hand column of the screen to change entries.
But how do I get to the windows where "Rename" is possible?
Please explain it to me from the beginning.
When I click on "Common Knowledge" at the bottom of the homepage, I don't get to any pages that allow editing.
47gilroy
>46 birder4106: Okay simplified version:
Click the item you want to edit on the Common Knowledge page
When the page for the specific common knowledge comes up, you'll see a list of works/authors.
If you have a small number, you can click into the specific item and edit the common knowledge directly.
If you have a large number that needs repaired, then click on the Rename in the right hand column.
Click the item you want to edit on the Common Knowledge page
When the page for the specific common knowledge comes up, you'll see a list of works/authors.
If you have a small number, you can click into the specific item and edit the common knowledge directly.
If you have a large number that needs repaired, then click on the Rename in the right hand column.
48birder4106
>47 gilroy:
I give up!
Whether I go to an author page or a work page, I can find the pencil icon to edit a single entry. But in the right-hand column, I can't find any entry that even remotely resembles "Rename."
So please don't bother trying any further. It's probably best if I don't deal with this any more. Please excuse the inconvenience.
I give up!
Whether I go to an author page or a work page, I can find the pencil icon to edit a single entry. But in the right-hand column, I can't find any entry that even remotely resembles "Rename."
So please don't bother trying any further. It's probably best if I don't deal with this any more. Please excuse the inconvenience.
49gilroy
>48 birder4106: If you are going to the author page or work page, the rename doesn't exist.
It's only on the actual common knowledge page itself.
It's only on the actual common knowledge page itself.
50keristars
>48 birder4106: On an author page, click on a CK item.
That will take you to the page showing every author that has the same piece of data in that field (education, profession, whatever).
You can then examine each of those authors individually by clicking on their name/picture.
Or on the right hand column/bottom of the screen if you don't have columns, you can edit relationships or request a rename of that item. (eg all the New York City into New York)
Also, just to be clear :) This isn't available on CK related to works yet, only authors.
That will take you to the page showing every author that has the same piece of data in that field (education, profession, whatever).
You can then examine each of those authors individually by clicking on their name/picture.
Or on the right hand column/bottom of the screen if you don't have columns, you can edit relationships or request a rename of that item. (eg all the New York City into New York)
Also, just to be clear :) This isn't available on CK related to works yet, only authors.
51keristars
I tried to get the 5 NYC boroughs pulled into New York, New York, USA, but there's a discrepancy if it's Brooklyn NYC or just Brooklyn, for example. As a Floridian, I have no idea what's correct, but hopefully pulling them together in the group will help someone who feels like fixing them. (I'm glad someone else pulled the NYC neighborhoods in!)
Also re: variations of the same place that the Top 1000 makes more visible -
There's several variations on Münich - with or without the ü accent, with or without Bavaria, and a few dozen authors have resided in Münch. Köln/Cologne as well, and I think I saw Florence, Italy with and without Tuscany yesterday.
It seems divided on whether to use the US State example or the Paris, France example. I would happily busy myself with getting the entries to match, but I want a guideline.
I'm hopeless with the wiki, so I'm not sure if there's been a consensus on this? I don't have a preference either way, just want whatever I do to match the other place fields so any future merging/linking of CK places is easy as possible.
Also re: variations of the same place that the Top 1000 makes more visible -
There's several variations on Münich - with or without the ü accent, with or without Bavaria, and a few dozen authors have resided in Münch. Köln/Cologne as well, and I think I saw Florence, Italy with and without Tuscany yesterday.
It seems divided on whether to use the US State example or the Paris, France example. I would happily busy myself with getting the entries to match, but I want a guideline.
I'm hopeless with the wiki, so I'm not sure if there's been a consensus on this? I don't have a preference either way, just want whatever I do to match the other place fields so any future merging/linking of CK places is easy as possible.
52lemontwist
Am I missing something? Is there already a link to see this info just for my authors instead of all authors? I feel like my comment was totally ignored.
53gilroy
>52 lemontwist: As stated in Tim's post >1 timspalding:
All the new pages have a "Your authors" button, so you can see which of YOUR authors are from Hungary, went to Oxford, etc.
All the new pages have a "Your authors" button, so you can see which of YOUR authors are from Hungary, went to Oxford, etc.
54lemontwist
>53 gilroy: Thanks for the response!
I was hoping to see the overall stats for my authors, rather than which of my authors fit into each of the specific items on the overall page.
Like, if I could get that CK page but it only shows the data from my authors.
I was hoping to see the overall stats for my authors, rather than which of my authors fit into each of the specific items on the overall page.
Like, if I could get that CK page but it only shows the data from my authors.
55gilroy
>54 lemontwist: Right now, there is a Nationality page and a US States page, but none others that I see
56lemontwist
>55 gilroy: Thanks again, maybe a "your authors" overall page is something to look forward to in the future!
57gilroy
I'm thinking there might be a bug in the search for the new CK items. There are instances where the same item is being brought up multiple times in the list.
Using Occupations as my example, and author as my search item, note the highlighted lines. Each color is the same item. The first instance works when you click, but the other instances give an error.
Using Occupations as my example, and author as my search item, note the highlighted lines. Each color is the same item. The first instance works when you click, but the other instances give an error.
59keristars
Noticed the places are now showing where they're also used. Nice!
I love the update to Includes lists with 1st order, 2nd order, etc. I noticed it in Germany, where most places don't have the state (1st), but a significant number do (2nd).
https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/Germany
Great for getting everything consistent!
Can anything be done about the ö variations?
Göttingen, Gottingen, and Göttingen get separate entries, and I couldn't merge the two umlauted ones, possibly a phone keyboard thing.
I love the update to Includes lists with 1st order, 2nd order, etc. I noticed it in Germany, where most places don't have the state (1st), but a significant number do (2nd).
https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofresidence/Germany
Great for getting everything consistent!
Can anything be done about the ö variations?
Göttingen, Gottingen, and Göttingen get separate entries, and I couldn't merge the two umlauted ones, possibly a phone keyboard thing.
60Nevov
Regarding places:
I think we could benefit from some way to mark a place as historical/no longer extant, and, for places that still exist under a different name, a way to associate those, I'm not sure the current 'part of' relationship always fits. Borrowing from what we have for awards names, there it's called 'historical name', with an optional date range.
Examples: marking as historical could cover a change of city name (Bombay/Mumbai), states/polities that changed nation (Russian Alaska), places that are just no longer there (Roman Empire) and so on ...actually, if it's no longer there at all, like Roman Empire, just a 'historical' marking of some sort.
The specific example that triggered this, is I've done a piece of CK for place of death Calais (which is a port city in north France) during the 200-some years that it was part of England. It's done as {Calais, Pale of Calais, England}; which no longer exists, but I think is important to keep it recorded as that to reflect facts at the time of the author in question – John Bourchier, and not have it simply fold into the current Calais, Pas-de-Calais, France.
So I'm thinking the system would want to act like a disambiguation note (or even be a CK-editable disambiguation note?) and fire up a warning if someone went to the rename link, and act like a blocker to prevent a historical version of a place, which is already associated to the current version of the place, from being renamed out of existence.
In other words on my above example, some way to a) mark Calais, Pale of Calais, England as historical, b) to associate it to Calais, Pas-de-Calais, France as historical/current 'versions' of the same place, and c) put an obstacle in place to stop inadvertent/unknowing place rename (since the new rename process is 'destructive' and seems not easily undo-able).
Thinking a bit wider, it would be nice to have some CK-like fields on the place pages, that could be used to record all sorts of information, what type of place it is (city, state, nation, building, etc), year founded, and so on, 'historical' could be part of, or derived from (if there's an end date, like an author death date)? Maybe a links section (for such as a Wikipedia page)? Although how to do that without needing multiple versions for when a place is used in multiple CK fields (birthplace, residence,...)? Anyway, some interesting avenues of thought, that the recent changes are opening.
I think we could benefit from some way to mark a place as historical/no longer extant, and, for places that still exist under a different name, a way to associate those, I'm not sure the current 'part of' relationship always fits. Borrowing from what we have for awards names, there it's called 'historical name', with an optional date range.
Examples: marking as historical could cover a change of city name (Bombay/Mumbai), states/polities that changed nation (Russian Alaska), places that are just no longer there (Roman Empire) and so on ...actually, if it's no longer there at all, like Roman Empire, just a 'historical' marking of some sort.
The specific example that triggered this, is I've done a piece of CK for place of death Calais (which is a port city in north France) during the 200-some years that it was part of England. It's done as {Calais, Pale of Calais, England}; which no longer exists, but I think is important to keep it recorded as that to reflect facts at the time of the author in question – John Bourchier, and not have it simply fold into the current Calais, Pas-de-Calais, France.
So I'm thinking the system would want to act like a disambiguation note (or even be a CK-editable disambiguation note?) and fire up a warning if someone went to the rename link, and act like a blocker to prevent a historical version of a place, which is already associated to the current version of the place, from being renamed out of existence.
In other words on my above example, some way to a) mark Calais, Pale of Calais, England as historical, b) to associate it to Calais, Pas-de-Calais, France as historical/current 'versions' of the same place, and c) put an obstacle in place to stop inadvertent/unknowing place rename (since the new rename process is 'destructive' and seems not easily undo-able).
Thinking a bit wider, it would be nice to have some CK-like fields on the place pages, that could be used to record all sorts of information, what type of place it is (city, state, nation, building, etc), year founded, and so on, 'historical' could be part of, or derived from (if there's an end date, like an author death date)? Maybe a links section (for such as a Wikipedia page)? Although how to do that without needing multiple versions for when a place is used in multiple CK fields (birthplace, residence,...)? Anyway, some interesting avenues of thought, that the recent changes are opening.
61gilroy
>60 Nevov: I feel like that's the whole point of the Map Location field. Put the names of the item as it is in the regular fields, but the modern equivalent into the Map Location Field.
Don't make it harder than it needs to be.
Don't make it harder than it needs to be.
62Nevov
>61 gilroy:
I think it's because the Rename feature on the new places page is so potentially powerful, that someone can systematically decide that only current places "should" exist, and wipe out years (or decades) of accurate CK in a blink "correcting" records, and not even necessarily realise that they're doing something wrong.
I think it's because the Rename feature on the new places page is so potentially powerful, that someone can systematically decide that only current places "should" exist, and wipe out years (or decades) of accurate CK in a blink "correcting" records, and not even necessarily realise that they're doing something wrong.
63gilroy
>62 Nevov: Except that the admin verify those Rename requests.
64keristars
I was just thinking about Calais as a historical English place last night, while reading about Henry V.
Anyway, the Calais (England) shouldn't be included in Calais (France), imo. There should be a generic Calais that includes all the historic/current versions. That's how I was treating Puerto Rico (the island) and Boston (before and after 1776), at least.
Anyway, the Calais (England) shouldn't be included in Calais (France), imo. There should be a generic Calais that includes all the historic/current versions. That's how I was treating Puerto Rico (the island) and Boston (before and after 1776), at least.
65andyl
I think there is a bug in the award pages.
Look at the https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/EATCS%20Award page
The paging at the bottom says 1-2 of 3 and has a page next button. There are only 2 authors.
Sometimes it can be off by more than 1 - see https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Allen%20Newell%20Award
Other times it is correct see https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Lemelson-MIT%20Prize and https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Gordon%20Bell%20Prize
Tim - if you want this in the Bug Collectors group I will copy it there.
Look at the https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/EATCS%20Award page
The paging at the bottom says 1-2 of 3 and has a page next button. There are only 2 authors.
Sometimes it can be off by more than 1 - see https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Allen%20Newell%20Award
Other times it is correct see https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Lemelson-MIT%20Prize and https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/award/Gordon%20Bell%20Prize
Tim - if you want this in the Bug Collectors group I will copy it there.
66tallpaul
>30 birder4106: Then there's another issue I don't understand.
This is the assignment of authors to: Great Britain, UK, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
I find these assignments in several combinations.
Couldn't the newly created "parent/child relationships" (hierarchical grouping?) be used to standardize this?
You are not alone. Many of the web pages and maps purporting to explain the difference get it wrong, even Britannica.com (oh, the delicious irony).†
This, from Ordnance Survey, the official mapping agency, shows them correctly: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/whats-the-difference-between-uk-britain-an...
To boot:
England, Scotland and Wales are separate countries but belong to the same nation state.
Great Britain includes England, Scotland and Wales, but excludes Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland/Eire.
The United Kingdom includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but excludes the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland. Between 1801 and 1922 it included the land mass that now forms the Republic of Ireland.
The British Isles includes England, Scotland Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland. (so two separate nation states).
Ireland/Éire is used to refer to both the Island of Ireland (i.e. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland) and the Republic of Ireland by itself (though many refuse to recognsie them as separate entities).
My point is not about assigning authors to "their" nationalities, but about a general classification.
Considering nationalities makes it even more confusing since there is no straight forward mapping between these and the passports people hold/require for residence. People born/resident in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands hold British Passports but live outside the United Kingdom as so people born/resident in England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland, who do. People born in Northern Ireland are entitled to claim Irish Citizenship‡, and British and Irish citizens are allowed to live in or travel (without a passport) in either country.
I have posted at length, elsewhere on LibraryThing, about the eccentricities of British addresses, but suffice it to say that:
Name of House,
Small collection of houses at some distance, or nearby geographic entity someone once named,
near Arbitrarily larger settlement,
County (that: may not be actually applicable, may no longer exist, may have ceased to exist and come into being again, may refer to distinct entities referred to by the same name. With all or any of the above having, had different boundaries at different points in time and/ordepending on what exactly is being referred to (which might be incorrect)).
(England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Island) or (United Kingdom/Great Britain/British Isles)
is a recognisable and acceptable from of (postal) address and you will be able to have mail delivered there (though the Post Office would dearly love you to use the post code and failure to do so may result in delays).
This is after all the country where your legal name is what ever people call you. There is legal paper work, a Deed Poll that recognises a name change but it is not necessary. If I can persuade people to call me Spuds McTater then that's my legal name. (I had to register a death recently and they ask for, and will list any and all variants of names a person used).
I hope this has cleared it up for everyone.
† They show the Channel Islands on their ma of the British Isles, but (incorrectly) outside the area they draw for this. https://www.britannica.com/story/whats-the-difference-between-great-britain-and-...
‡ https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving-country/irish-citizenship/your-righ... The right to Irish Citizenship applied to anyone born on the Island of Ireland prior to 2005, afterwards it only applies to the people whose parents are British or Irish citizens or lived there for at least 3 out of the 4 years immediately before their birth.
This is the assignment of authors to: Great Britain, UK, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
I find these assignments in several combinations.
Couldn't the newly created "parent/child relationships" (hierarchical grouping?) be used to standardize this?
You are not alone. Many of the web pages and maps purporting to explain the difference get it wrong, even Britannica.com (oh, the delicious irony).†
This, from Ordnance Survey, the official mapping agency, shows them correctly: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/whats-the-difference-between-uk-britain-an...
To boot:
England, Scotland and Wales are separate countries but belong to the same nation state.
Great Britain includes England, Scotland and Wales, but excludes Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland/Eire.
The United Kingdom includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but excludes the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland. Between 1801 and 1922 it included the land mass that now forms the Republic of Ireland.
The British Isles includes England, Scotland Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, The Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland. (so two separate nation states).
Ireland/Éire is used to refer to both the Island of Ireland (i.e. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland) and the Republic of Ireland by itself (though many refuse to recognsie them as separate entities).
My point is not about assigning authors to "their" nationalities, but about a general classification.
Considering nationalities makes it even more confusing since there is no straight forward mapping between these and the passports people hold/require for residence. People born/resident in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands hold British Passports but live outside the United Kingdom as so people born/resident in England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland, who do. People born in Northern Ireland are entitled to claim Irish Citizenship‡, and British and Irish citizens are allowed to live in or travel (without a passport) in either country.
I have posted at length, elsewhere on LibraryThing, about the eccentricities of British addresses, but suffice it to say that:
Name of House,
Small collection of houses at some distance, or nearby geographic entity someone once named,
near Arbitrarily larger settlement,
County (that: may not be actually applicable, may no longer exist, may have ceased to exist and come into being again, may refer to distinct entities referred to by the same name. With all or any of the above having, had different boundaries at different points in time and/ordepending on what exactly is being referred to (which might be incorrect)).
(England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Island) or (United Kingdom/Great Britain/British Isles)
is a recognisable and acceptable from of (postal) address and you will be able to have mail delivered there (though the Post Office would dearly love you to use the post code and failure to do so may result in delays).
This is after all the country where your legal name is what ever people call you. There is legal paper work, a Deed Poll that recognises a name change but it is not necessary. If I can persuade people to call me Spuds McTater then that's my legal name. (I had to register a death recently and they ask for, and will list any and all variants of names a person used).
I hope this has cleared it up for everyone.
† They show the Channel Islands on their ma of the British Isles, but (incorrectly) outside the area they draw for this. https://www.britannica.com/story/whats-the-difference-between-great-britain-and-...
‡ https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving-country/irish-citizenship/your-righ... The right to Irish Citizenship applied to anyone born on the Island of Ireland prior to 2005, afterwards it only applies to the people whose parents are British or Irish citizens or lived there for at least 3 out of the 4 years immediately before their birth.
67Nevov
>66 tallpaul:
>I hope this has cleared it up for everyone.
(laugh) I remember clearing up a bit of CK in the past with Channel Islands to remove UK. "Territories for which the United Kingdom is responsible", I think is the phrase (laugh). But it's not in a written constitution, it's through the monarch possessing them, who happens to also be the monarch of the UK. All a bit bizarre really.
>I hope this has cleared it up for everyone.
(laugh) I remember clearing up a bit of CK in the past with Channel Islands to remove UK. "Territories for which the United Kingdom is responsible", I think is the phrase (laugh). But it's not in a written constitution, it's through the monarch possessing them, who happens to also be the monarch of the UK. All a bit bizarre really.
68birder4106
If I've correctly understood the information from >66 tallpaul: and the link he provided (https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/whats-the-difference-between-uk-britain-and-british-isles), Wikipedia, and ChatGPT, there's no hierarchical relationship that accurately represents the six more or less independent entities of the British Isles (excluding the Republic of Ireland).
For fun, one could create the following hierarchical structure for LT:
Great Britain: England, Scotland, Wales.
United Kingdom (UK): Great Britain, Northern Ireland.
United Kingdom+ (UK+): United Kingdom (UK), Isle of Man, Channel Islands.
Perhaps it could also be called: "United Kingdom for people not living in the British Isles."
PS
I don't mean to offend anyone.
For fun, one could create the following hierarchical structure for LT:
Great Britain: England, Scotland, Wales.
United Kingdom (UK): Great Britain, Northern Ireland.
United Kingdom+ (UK+): United Kingdom (UK), Isle of Man, Channel Islands.
Perhaps it could also be called: "United Kingdom for people not living in the British Isles."
PS
I don't mean to offend anyone.
69andyl
>68 birder4106:
Bit more than that.
You have
Bailiwick of Jersey: Jersey
Bailiwick of Guernsey: Guernsey, Alderney, Sark, Herm
Channel Islands: Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey
British Crown Dependencies: Isle of Man, Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey
The better term for your UK+ is British Islands.
Bit more than that.
You have
Bailiwick of Jersey: Jersey
Bailiwick of Guernsey: Guernsey, Alderney, Sark, Herm
Channel Islands: Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey
British Crown Dependencies: Isle of Man, Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey
The better term for your UK+ is British Islands.
70birder4106
>69 andyl:
Thanks. That's better. But doesn't that create a problem with Ireland (the island)?
New suggestion:
Great Britain: England, Scotland, Wales.
United Kingdom (UK): Great Britain, Northern Ireland.
UK+ (British Isles w/o IRL)
It's good when experts chime in. And I don't mean myself.
Thanks. That's better. But doesn't that create a problem with Ireland (the island)?
New suggestion:
Great Britain: England, Scotland, Wales.
United Kingdom (UK): Great Britain, Northern Ireland.
UK+ (British Isles w/o IRL)
It's good when experts chime in. And I don't mean myself.
71andyl
>70 birder4106:
The British Islands are not the same as The British Isles.
The British Islands is a term in UK law to mean the UK + Crown Dependencies. Nothing to do with Ireland.
The British Isles is a somewhat outdated and somewhat misunderstood term for all the islands of the archipelago (so including Ireland). It is a geographic descriptor not a political unit - however it is not a term that is endorsed in Ireland and some find it objectionable as they see it as diminishing Ireland's independence, as if the term was almost a political claim on the territory.
The British Islands are not the same as The British Isles.
The British Islands is a term in UK law to mean the UK + Crown Dependencies. Nothing to do with Ireland.
The British Isles is a somewhat outdated and somewhat misunderstood term for all the islands of the archipelago (so including Ireland). It is a geographic descriptor not a political unit - however it is not a term that is endorsed in Ireland and some find it objectionable as they see it as diminishing Ireland's independence, as if the term was almost a political claim on the territory.
72jjwilson61
Isn't this going a bit overboard? All we're doing is deciding what should go in the Birthplace and other "where" fields. For someone born in England, it could just be city or county, England, UK. There's no need to mention Great Britain or the British Isles.
73tallpaul
>68 birder4106: There isn't an easy relationship, but a better solution might be not to try. The crown dependecies are self governing so we could just go with country, UK; Isle of Man & island, Channel Isles (even if the latter is strictly two distinct entities).
More generally the world isn't organised in neat hierarchies and the about the only thing guaranteed about rules made about data formats for database schemes is that their creator is a. overconfident and b. almost certainly wrong.
My workplace has a data rule that first names must be at least two characters long. Which would come as news to my friend Y, who has a common first name (at least where she was born).
More generally the world isn't organised in neat hierarchies and the about the only thing guaranteed about rules made about data formats for database schemes is that their creator is a. overconfident and b. almost certainly wrong.
My workplace has a data rule that first names must be at least two characters long. Which would come as news to my friend Y, who has a common first name (at least where she was born).
74Nevov
>72 jjwilson61:
True, at least for modern times. Not exactly for before UK existed (-1800) but that is what we can use Map Location to cover, so such as Shakespeare gets city, county, England (no UK) for birthplace, residences, then the Map Location can happily site the current version of Stratford or wherever we want to map him. It's simply got {England, UK} at time of posting. Maybe should be Stratford, Warwickshire, ... or West Midlands... are we using the shire counties, or ceremonial, or... and is that Stratford-on-Avon, -upon-Avon... (joking!)
Actually looking it up, the town is Stratford-upon-Avon, in the district of Stratford-on-Avon. Obviously!
>61 gilroy:
sums it up well:
>Put the names of the item as it is in the regular fields, but the modern equivalent into the Map Location Field.
>Don't make it harder than it needs to be.
Do you think we should maybe set up a topic (or multiple?) in the CK group: https://www.librarything.com/ngroups/3050/Common-Knowledge-WikiThing-HelpThing for anyone to have in-the-weeds conversations there, about counties and such? I'm worried otherwise this is the start of a huge topic derail about just one aspect of the new feature.
True, at least for modern times. Not exactly for before UK existed (-1800) but that is what we can use Map Location to cover, so such as Shakespeare gets city, county, England (no UK) for birthplace, residences, then the Map Location can happily site the current version of Stratford or wherever we want to map him. It's simply got {England, UK} at time of posting. Maybe should be Stratford, Warwickshire, ... or West Midlands... are we using the shire counties, or ceremonial, or... and is that Stratford-on-Avon, -upon-Avon... (joking!)
Actually looking it up, the town is Stratford-upon-Avon, in the district of Stratford-on-Avon. Obviously!
>61 gilroy:
sums it up well:
>Put the names of the item as it is in the regular fields, but the modern equivalent into the Map Location Field.
>Don't make it harder than it needs to be.
Do you think we should maybe set up a topic (or multiple?) in the CK group: https://www.librarything.com/ngroups/3050/Common-Knowledge-WikiThing-HelpThing for anyone to have in-the-weeds conversations there, about counties and such? I'm worried otherwise this is the start of a huge topic derail about just one aspect of the new feature.
75birder4106
Thank you for all your answers and explanations. I believe they are correct and justified, at least as far as I understand them.
Can someone explain why 93 countries are listed for my library in the German LT?
Of these, 10 have an entry for what I now call "UK+ (British Islands w/o IRL)" after correcting >71 andyl: of my suggestion in (>68 birder4106:)+>70 birder4106:.
LT Countries in German: 93 / 9.
LT Countries in English (UK+USA): 112 / 9.
LT Countries in French: 118 / 10.
LT Countries in Spanish: 117 / 9.
LT Countries in Chinese (both): 112 / 8.
To clarify, here are the 10 German country entries (number):
- UK (96).
- England, UK (21).
- Etats-Unis (5).
- Schottland (4).
- Großbritannien (2).
- Scotland, UK (2).
- Northern Ireland, UK (1).
- Wales, UK (1).
- Estats Units (1).
= Total (133)?
And here here are the 10 German country entries (number):
- UK (63)
- England, UK (51).
- Scotland, UK (9).
- Etats-Unis (7).
- Northern Ireland (1).
- Scotland (1).
- Northern Ireland, UK (1).
- Wales, UK (1).
- England (1).
= Total (135)?
Where are the two authors in the English compilation?
I would simply like ONE label like "UK+ (British Islands w/o IRL)" or whatever you suggest so that the authors can be shown on the map of ONE area.
And if that doesn't find favor, which I fear, I have another suggestion:
Divide the authors of the British Isles or British Islands into the following "territories" shown on the map: England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, British Crown Dependencies (Isle of Man, Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey), and, to avoid any gaps, the Republic of Ireland.
Summaries such as UK, United Kingdom, Great Britain, Großbritanien, Grossbritanien etc. should then no longer be allowed.
Can someone explain why 93 countries are listed for my library in the German LT?
Of these, 10 have an entry for what I now call "UK+ (British Islands w/o IRL)" after correcting >71 andyl: of my suggestion in (>68 birder4106:)+>70 birder4106:.
LT Countries in German: 93 / 9.
LT Countries in English (UK+USA): 112 / 9.
LT Countries in French: 118 / 10.
LT Countries in Spanish: 117 / 9.
LT Countries in Chinese (both): 112 / 8.
To clarify, here are the 10 German country entries (number):
- UK (96).
- England, UK (21).
- Etats-Unis (5).
- Schottland (4).
- Großbritannien (2).
- Scotland, UK (2).
- Northern Ireland, UK (1).
- Wales, UK (1).
- Estats Units (1).
= Total (133)?
And here here are the 10 German country entries (number):
- UK (63)
- England, UK (51).
- Scotland, UK (9).
- Etats-Unis (7).
- Northern Ireland (1).
- Scotland (1).
- Northern Ireland, UK (1).
- Wales, UK (1).
- England (1).
= Total (135)?
Where are the two authors in the English compilation?
I would simply like ONE label like "UK+ (British Islands w/o IRL)" or whatever you suggest so that the authors can be shown on the map of ONE area.
And if that doesn't find favor, which I fear, I have another suggestion:
Divide the authors of the British Isles or British Islands into the following "territories" shown on the map: England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, British Crown Dependencies (Isle of Man, Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey), and, to avoid any gaps, the Republic of Ireland.
Summaries such as UK, United Kingdom, Great Britain, Großbritanien, Grossbritanien etc. should then no longer be allowed.
76MarthaJeanne
>75 birder4106: Entries are how they have been entered. In many cases, this is simply how the information was available. While I understand that some users lay a great deal of value on separating England, Scotland, and Wales, I often find that the sites I find the authors on call them 'British', or simply list city or county names. I can enter UK with confidence, but that's all. I wouldn't change the others to UK, or complain if they change my UK to something smaller, although I would prefer they were all under UK. I even found one author recently who was born and resides in Cheshire. I happen to know that Cheshire is in England. But she is also listed as being Welsh.
And natioalities in general aren't alwats as clear as some people would like to think. The rules for who counts as a citizen are different in various countries. I know too many families where the mother comes from country A, the father's parents are from B, but he was born and bfought up in C, and they live in D, where the children were born and raised. What nationality does the child have? Even if the parents have managed to arrange for her to hold one or two passports? If she grows up to write a couple of bestsellers all 4 countries will want to claim her. If she is disabled or homeless probably none of them will feel any responsibility for her.
And natioalities in general aren't alwats as clear as some people would like to think. The rules for who counts as a citizen are different in various countries. I know too many families where the mother comes from country A, the father's parents are from B, but he was born and bfought up in C, and they live in D, where the children were born and raised. What nationality does the child have? Even if the parents have managed to arrange for her to hold one or two passports? If she grows up to write a couple of bestsellers all 4 countries will want to claim her. If she is disabled or homeless probably none of them will feel any responsibility for her.
77thorold
>76 MarthaJeanne: Fortunately we’re readers, not lawyers, so the question of nationality is interesting to debate but not actually crucial.
I expect your Welsh writer in Cheshire had parents who moved from North Wales — a lot of people of Welsh background live there.
I expect your Welsh writer in Cheshire had parents who moved from North Wales — a lot of people of Welsh background live there.
78LeslieWx
>66 tallpaul: The Ordnance Survey link, and your subsequent explanations (including follow-up to this initial post) are fabulous. Thank you!
79birder4106
Based on your replies, I realize I wasn't careful with my wording when writing my posts, especially the first one.
My point is about how authors are represented on the map. A map showing where the author would live if they were alive today—a purely geographical assignment.
Currently, I still consider Taiwan a separate country. However, I now consider Hong Kong part of China.
It's also less important whether this or that small island is claimed by Japan, Korea, China, or Russia.
But in the "Countries for Map" compilation, I'd like, for example, ONE section for authors who are generally considered to be from Great Britain (see the lists in post >75 birder4106:).
And by "Great Britain," I mean a "Great Britain for Dummies," without all the political, legal, and geographical subtleties.
Please don't misunderstand me. These have their place and are important, but not in this context.
Since the map with its country divisions is provided by LT and cannot be changed, I think LT could also offer a list encompassing the regions shown.
Users would then have to select from this list.
I suspect this would allow the vast majority of authors to be represented to the satisfaction of most users.
I would prefer the country name to correspond to the respective Wikipedia entries in LT's display language.
Wouldn't it be nice in CK to know how the inhabitants of a country refer to themselves? This could, of course, be quite different in multi-ethnic countries.
And why not also include a data field for the culture to which the author identifies? This isn't always the culture in which the author was born or raised, and to which their parents felt they belonged.
My point is about how authors are represented on the map. A map showing where the author would live if they were alive today—a purely geographical assignment.
Currently, I still consider Taiwan a separate country. However, I now consider Hong Kong part of China.
It's also less important whether this or that small island is claimed by Japan, Korea, China, or Russia.
But in the "Countries for Map" compilation, I'd like, for example, ONE section for authors who are generally considered to be from Great Britain (see the lists in post >75 birder4106:).
And by "Great Britain," I mean a "Great Britain for Dummies," without all the political, legal, and geographical subtleties.
Please don't misunderstand me. These have their place and are important, but not in this context.
Since the map with its country divisions is provided by LT and cannot be changed, I think LT could also offer a list encompassing the regions shown.
Users would then have to select from this list.
I suspect this would allow the vast majority of authors to be represented to the satisfaction of most users.
I would prefer the country name to correspond to the respective Wikipedia entries in LT's display language.
Wouldn't it be nice in CK to know how the inhabitants of a country refer to themselves? This could, of course, be quite different in multi-ethnic countries.
And why not also include a data field for the culture to which the author identifies? This isn't always the culture in which the author was born or raised, and to which their parents felt they belonged.
80Nevov
>79 birder4106:
Some of what you ask, is already programmed in for the map in our charts and graphs:
Your map: https://www.librarything.com/stats/birder4106/nationality
Beneath the map, the lists of data indicate what is happening, one example for yours is:
Northern Ireland, UK (1)
Maps to United Kingdom (UK) – or in German LT: Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
C. S. Lewis
So C. S. Lewis is placed on the map for UK because the system knows to map Northern Ireland, UK onto the UK part of the map. Similar happens when an author's CK Map Location includes Great Britain, GB, UK, United Kingdom, England, Scotland,... all varieties should still map onto the map correctly, and this is indicated with the "Maps to..."/"Abbildung auf..." label.
>79 birder4106:
>why not also include a data field for the culture to which the author identifies?
There was thought of adding similar to this, a few years ago: https://www.librarything.com/topic/345540
Some of what you ask, is already programmed in for the map in our charts and graphs:
Your map: https://www.librarything.com/stats/birder4106/nationality
Beneath the map, the lists of data indicate what is happening, one example for yours is:
Northern Ireland, UK (1)
Maps to United Kingdom (UK) – or in German LT: Abbildung auf Vereinigtes Königreich
C. S. Lewis
So C. S. Lewis is placed on the map for UK because the system knows to map Northern Ireland, UK onto the UK part of the map. Similar happens when an author's CK Map Location includes Great Britain, GB, UK, United Kingdom, England, Scotland,... all varieties should still map onto the map correctly, and this is indicated with the "Maps to..."/"Abbildung auf..." label.
>79 birder4106:
>why not also include a data field for the culture to which the author identifies?
There was thought of adding similar to this, a few years ago: https://www.librarything.com/topic/345540
81rodneyvc
I've been tidying up the capitalisation of occupations. There are some in there that seem to be tags, rather than occupations, such as Esperanto and Yiddish. Any thoughts on how to deal with these?
82Maddz
>81 rodneyvc: Are those the languages associated with the author?
83rodneyvc
>82 Maddz: Yes - a random check suggests that these are languages associated with the author, and with their books. It seems that the bulk of these have been used by one LT member as a way of tagging the author, given that the CK fields don't obviously have another way of doing so.
84Maddz
>83 rodneyvc: Maybe a RSI to add an Original Language CK field for authors? My great-aunt was born in the Lebanon, moved to Egypt on her marriage and wrote her poetry in French. I don't believe she ever wrote in Arabic; her family were Francophone.
85PawsforThought
>84 Maddz: But authors can write in different languages (most don't, of course). It's the books that have an original language, not authors. They might have a native language (one would hope!) or multiple ones, but they might also use a different languages as their primary "writing language".
86SandraArdnas
>81 rodneyvc: I'd delete those. Some people put all sorts of strange things in CK. E.g. several put numerous dates in 'events', the record one having almost a thousand, of which less than a dozen were actual events. The rest were just years, centuries and occasional exact date. Aside from 9/11, I struggle to think of an actual event referred to as a date. Similarly, if you can't see how those could be occupations, in which case I'd reword them into something indicating an actual occupation, rather than just language, I'd delete them.
Playing Trivia Thing surfaces many nonsense CK values :) That's how I discovered '20th century' is an event, haha
Playing Trivia Thing surfaces many nonsense CK values :) That's how I discovered '20th century' is an event, haha
87MarthaJeanne
>85 PawsforThought: CK can have multiple values. Originaj language is not the best wording, but the idea is good.
88AnnieMod
>87 MarthaJeanne: Working language - especially if it allows multi-values - will be a very useful field on the author level indeed.
89MarthaJeanne
>88 AnnieMod: Working Language! Yes, that's right term!
90lilithcat
>88 AnnieMod:
Definitely would need multi-values. I'm thinking of authors like Jhumpa Lahiri, who writes in English and Italian.
Definitely would need multi-values. I'm thinking of authors like Jhumpa Lahiri, who writes in English and Italian.
91keristars
>86 SandraArdnas: Sometimes it can be useful to have a year or other time period in "events" if that's what the book is about, or is historical fiction set in a specific period, without other major events to signal such. I suppose a book dealing with the aftermath of the 1904 San Francisco earthquake, but doesn't actually speak of the earthquake itself, might be an example. (But that's just the first maybe I thought of - and I would be inclined to still put the earthquake in Important Events.)
But I think that's a rarity, and would be in the description or should be in the tag cloud. Even a book set solely on Nov. 22 1963 would still have an important event that indicates the date. (why else choose that day to write about?)
I like historical fiction and history non-fiction, so tagging books with the decade they're set/about is interesting data for me. It's just not good CK data for "important events".
But I think that's a rarity, and would be in the description or should be in the tag cloud. Even a book set solely on Nov. 22 1963 would still have an important event that indicates the date. (why else choose that day to write about?)
I like historical fiction and history non-fiction, so tagging books with the decade they're set/about is interesting data for me. It's just not good CK data for "important events".
92SandraArdnas
>91 keristars: Well, precisely. Tags cover any and all personal uses anyone might find useful. CK OTOH is community data, so using the fields for something else than intended because you'd rather have it there then among your tags for some mysterious reason, makes no sense whatsoever to me. Not to mention there's no indication what the vast majority of those refer to. Is the 20th c the timeline covered or the timeline when research was done and the book published? What is the significance of 876, 1003 and 1455 in a given book? Etc, etc. I kid you not one art history/archeology book had over 950 such entries among events. I am baffled why anyone would spend time entering that and how it could possibly be useful even to that one person. There's probably more out there, I just haven't stumbled into them
94MarthaJeanne
Also, of course, if you are going to enter all that, wouldn't it be better to put it into tags so that nobody else can come along and mess it up. This also goes for those who enter 9-- names from the Bible in alphabetical order. If I take out Aaron or Abraham and you want to fix it, you have to delete everything and start over.
95gilroy
Whoa. Just went back and resurrected all the CK help guidelines.
Some new user had first tried to put their details into the help page.
Then deleted the help page entirely.
I'm not sure if I reverted all the bad edits, but I think I got most of them.
Some new user had first tried to put their details into the help page.
Then deleted the help page entirely.
I'm not sure if I reverted all the bad edits, but I think I got most of them.
96JMK2020
>85 PawsforThought: Yes Works or book before Author or writer for the original language.
Even if Switzerland (and numbers of country) have several (3 for Sw) official languages and some authors (rare in fact) wrote in different languages (Nabokov, Graham Greene,...)
Even if Switzerland (and numbers of country) have several (3 for Sw) official languages and some authors (rare in fact) wrote in different languages (Nabokov, Graham Greene,...)
97birder4106
>96 JMK2020:
Switzerland has four official national languages. Although Romansh speakers are a very small minority, their language is fully recognized and legally equal to its three larger siblings (counterparts).
Quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Switzerland:
Switzerland has four official national languages. Although Romansh speakers are a very small minority, their language is fully recognized and legally equal to its three larger siblings (counterparts).
Quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Switzerland:
In 2020, 62.3% of the population of Switzerland were native speakers of German (either Swiss or Standard German) at home; 22.8% French (mostly Swiss French, but including some Franco-Provençal dialects); 8% Italian (mostly Swiss Italian, but including Lombard); and 0.5% Romansh.
98MarthaJeanne
>97 birder4106: But it's more complicated than that.
"Romansh is divided into five different regional dialect groups (Sursilvan, Vallader, Putèr, Surmiran, and Sutsilvan), each with its own standardized written language. In addition, a pan-regional variety called Rumantsch Grischun was introduced in 1982, which is controversial among Romansh speakers." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language
Since rhese dialects are not all mutually understandable they are not very useful for communicating outside of a very limited area.
"Romansh is divided into five different regional dialect groups (Sursilvan, Vallader, Putèr, Surmiran, and Sutsilvan), each with its own standardized written language. In addition, a pan-regional variety called Rumantsch Grischun was introduced in 1982, which is controversial among Romansh speakers." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language
Since rhese dialects are not all mutually understandable they are not very useful for communicating outside of a very limited area.
99JMK2020
>97 birder4106:
>98 MarthaJeanne:
Sorry 4 official languages (with romanche for romanche)
Official text (WKPD is not primary source ;-) )
See Art 5
"Les langues officielles de la Confédération sont l’allemand, le français et l’italien. Le romanche est langue officielle dans les rapports avec les personnes de cette langue"
an Art 10
"Les documents sont publiés simultanément en allemand, en français et en italien"
art 12
"Les documents sont publiés simultanément en allemand, en français et en italien"
https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2009/821/fr
https://www.bak.admin.ch/bak/fr/home/sprachen-und-gesellschaft/langues.html
>98 MarthaJeanne:
Sorry 4 official languages (with romanche for romanche)
Official text (WKPD is not primary source ;-) )
See Art 5
"Les langues officielles de la Confédération sont l’allemand, le français et l’italien. Le romanche est langue officielle dans les rapports avec les personnes de cette langue"
an Art 10
"Les documents sont publiés simultanément en allemand, en français et en italien"
art 12
"Les documents sont publiés simultanément en allemand, en français et en italien"
https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2009/821/fr
https://www.bak.admin.ch/bak/fr/home/sprachen-und-gesellschaft/langues.html
100waltzmn
>99 JMK2020: Sorry 4 official languages (with romanche for romanche)
And even that underestimates things, in a way. Romanche is not a very unified language. Encyclopedia of the Languages of Europe, p. 389, referring to Romanche-speaking areas, says that "Almost every village has its own vernacular, and five varieties have been successfully normalized in a written form." They are mostly mutually intelligible, but just barely. In other political circumstances, they might well be considered separate languages.
As witness the fact that I was taught to call it Rhaeto-Romansch. :-) Or Romansch for short. (No, I'm not Swiss; I'm American. This was in the context of understanding the languages of Switzerland in the context of broader German culture.)
And even that underestimates things, in a way. Romanche is not a very unified language. Encyclopedia of the Languages of Europe, p. 389, referring to Romanche-speaking areas, says that "Almost every village has its own vernacular, and five varieties have been successfully normalized in a written form." They are mostly mutually intelligible, but just barely. In other political circumstances, they might well be considered separate languages.
As witness the fact that I was taught to call it Rhaeto-Romansch. :-) Or Romansch for short. (No, I'm not Swiss; I'm American. This was in the context of understanding the languages of Switzerland in the context of broader German culture.)
101gilroy
>41 timspalding: Cause I needed a reference to a Tim post to make sure this gets seen.
My search issue remains from >57 gilroy:. Not sure why it duplicates in that manner.
But I ran into a second question:
When a place has been cleared (my picture evidence will show residence, but I see it in birthplace, place of death, and burial as well) it may still show an open edit, but no way to know how to find the author to fix it. Is this a foreign language catch issue, a cache issue, or something else?
My search issue remains from >57 gilroy:. Not sure why it duplicates in that manner.
But I ran into a second question:
When a place has been cleared (my picture evidence will show residence, but I see it in birthplace, place of death, and burial as well) it may still show an open edit, but no way to know how to find the author to fix it. Is this a foreign language catch issue, a cache issue, or something else?
102andyl
>101 gilroy:
Could that be related to my msg >65 andyl: ?
I too have noticed that even when all references are cleared the page still sometimes shows 1-0
Could that be related to my msg >65 andyl: ?
I too have noticed that even when all references are cleared the page still sometimes shows 1-0
103gilroy
>102 andyl: I think it's the same thing, yes.
Maybe the photo will help??
Maybe the photo will help??
104JMK2020
>100 waltzmn:
Giant or Great : Playing and understanding languages is a source of wealth and happiness.
Giant or Great : Playing and understanding languages is a source of wealth and happiness.
105Nevov
>101 gilroy:
>When a place has been cleared ... it may still show an open edit, but no way to know how to find the author to fix it.
I suspect these might be when the author has no works currently catalogued, or maybe the author is only on a book record without being confirmed on the corresponding work page.
They can sometimes be found via the Search CK box, visible in your screenshot, if the CK data is unique enough; the one in your example appears to be: https://www.librarything.com/author/sarahbethpfeifer which I found via that search.
>When a place has been cleared ... it may still show an open edit, but no way to know how to find the author to fix it.
I suspect these might be when the author has no works currently catalogued, or maybe the author is only on a book record without being confirmed on the corresponding work page.
They can sometimes be found via the Search CK box, visible in your screenshot, if the CK data is unique enough; the one in your example appears to be: https://www.librarything.com/author/sarahbethpfeifer which I found via that search.
106gilroy
>105 Nevov: That works for most, but not all.
As an example:
https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofdeath/Manhattan%2C%20New%20York%20C...
https://www.librarything.com/a/171820/Leigh-Blackmore
This comes from an author who had been split, then the split was removed, but the CK appears stuck in place.
As an example:
https://www.librarything.com/ckauthor/placeofdeath/Manhattan%2C%20New%20York%20C...
https://www.librarything.com/a/171820/Leigh-Blackmore
This comes from an author who had been split, then the split was removed, but the CK appears stuck in place.
107Nevov
>106 gilroy:
Yeah...these are annoying, because the CK is still there, as you say the split has been removed but the CK wasn't erased, so it's sat there on a now-inaccessible split. Apart from if we resplit the author, we could get to the 1-split page and erase it. I wonder would a rename work on this place page? Whether the CK edit bot can edit it regardless. I'm going to try that as a test here.
Edit: yes that has worked, the example page in >106 gilroy: has changed into a blue "No authors found" after the rename.
Yeah...these are annoying, because the CK is still there, as you say the split has been removed but the CK wasn't erased, so it's sat there on a now-inaccessible split. Apart from if we resplit the author, we could get to the 1-split page and erase it. I wonder would a rename work on this place page? Whether the CK edit bot can edit it regardless. I'm going to try that as a test here.
Edit: yes that has worked, the example page in >106 gilroy: has changed into a blue "No authors found" after the rename.
