LibraryThing for Private Users: Powerful Database, But Too Many Unnecessary Fields and an Outdated Interface

Hi LibraryThing Team and Community,

First of all: LibraryThing is incredibly powerful. The database depth, catalog quality, and editing freedom are genuinely impressive.

But speaking as a normal private book owner rather than a librarian or professional archivist, the user experience can feel overwhelming.

For many everyday users, the current interface often gives off a strong “80s / early internet database” feeling. Functional? Absolutely. Inviting and modern? Not always.

One of the biggest issues is the editing interface. When private users simply want to manage their own home library, they usually need something straightforward like:

Title
Author
ISBN
Publisher
Publication Year
Description / Summary
Cover

That alone would already cover the vast majority of personal collections.

Instead, users are often confronted with a huge number of fields that many private readers either do not understand, do not need, or simply do not want to deal with, such as:

Weight
Dimensions
Dewey Decimal
Library of Congress Classification
Lexile Measure
BCID
LCCN
Barcode / multiple exemplar details
Collector pricing
Acquisition data
Complex classification systems

For libraries or specialist collectors, these fields may absolutely have value. But for the average person cataloging books at home, this can feel more intimidating than helpful.

A possible improvement could be:

Simple Mode (default for most users):
Only essential fields

Advanced Mode (optional):
All specialized cataloging tools for collectors, librarians, and power users

This would make LibraryThing feel far more accessible to modern private users while still preserving its incredible depth.

In short:

LibraryThing has amazing substance, but the interface and field structure can sometimes feel like an old archive system rather than a welcoming personal library platform.

Modernizing the design, simplifying the default editing view, and reducing the “data overload” for casual users could make a fantastic platform feel much more approachable without losing what already makes it special.

LibraryThing has the knowledge.
Now it may simply need a more user-friendly front door.

bye
Friedhelm

So you have apparently missed the fact that you can customize the "Edit books" page.

If all you want to track is your reading and the basics of your collection, sure, you can customize your edit page to limit the fields.

But I disagree that the basic home user doesn't want all those fields.

The dimensions are important, especially when needing to pack up a home library to move it or to purchase new shelving.
Some people actually go through reading challenges based on the Dewey Decimal, Library of Congress, or (for those younger members) the Lexile number.
Some people like to arrange their home library with the above information too.

All the acquisition data may help a person prioritize a to be read list or a shelf cleaning list.

And some people actually have a code for their book's spot on the shelf, which is their "complex classification list."

With as long as you've been here, you have watched all these changes happen. I'm not sure why NOW you chose to complain about the direction the site has gone.
(Also, this belongs more in Recommended Site Improvements.)

>2 lilithcat: Perhaps a clearer design would make it less likely that people would miss that?

If someone says "I think the design could be improved by x, y, and z"

and the response is "but you can do that already"

it may mean that the design is obscuring the functionality.

>4 DuncanHill:

I'm not sure how it could be clearer! When you go to the "Edit Book" page, the options (All | Basic | Dates | Review | Custom) are right above the "Title" field. (If you are doing manual entry from the Add Books page it's "All | Basic | Custom")

>1 Cat_Man_Friedhelm: No offense, but if I wanted just title, author, cover and publisher/ISBN, I would have stuck with Goodreads, instead of jumping ship as soon as I found LT. By now, there are dozens of platforms that do just that, and only one that does what LT does.

To the extent that people who use those platforms would feel more at home on LT, it is more down to ability to pick the edition with appropriate cover and be done with it, rather than 'data overload' on the edit page, which as pointed out can be stripped to just basics. But the fact remains you still have to either import that data from a source or enter it manually. For casual users interested only in tracking their reading, THAT is the issue. They want to pick according to cover and move on because the rest is unimportant for their purposes.

>1 Cat_Man_Friedhelm: bye

Does that mean you have left? Fine. Many of the details and features that you deride are important to me, and the interface is customizable to accommodate those who would rather ignore them.

I see no reason to put stock in your opinions about the needs and desires of "many private readers" or "modern private users" or "average users." Your attempts to conduct a bandwagon here are distasteful. Own your preferences, rather than projecting them onto an anonymous crowd, eh?

I use the fields I need and ignore the others. Your idea of what fields are importanr is going to be different from mine, but neither of us should be able of depriving the other of fields we want.

BTW, the vast majority of English speaking users will be familiar with Dewey Decimal and Library of Conress classifications, and most want one or the other. One of the more common quesrions from new users is, "How do I get a call number for books that don't have them?"

I do think he's got a point, though. If a new user was presented with a question before they started to catalogue, asking "Do you want to use LibraryThing in Basic mode, with just the basic facts about your books, or Advanced mode, with lots of interesting details?" and then have Simple mode by default hide a number of the nerdier options but with an Advanced Mode button highly visible on each page, that were no bad thing.

>9 anglemark: Not really. I bet the vast majority of those who want just basic stuff never even open the edit book page. Whatever imports, that's it. Evidence in the number of people who complain about the tile or author of their book, without ever going in there to edit it. In other words, there's a case to be made to somehow make it more prominent you can edit your record, though I'm not sure how or why it is not obvious. But the edit book page itself, even without changing to 'basic', has the basic stuff right at the top. There's nothing overwhelming there and the first time you open to edit, it's easy and prominent to pick just the fields you want.

>1 Cat_Man_Friedhelm: I agree that I don't need all that stuff so I just skip it. No big deal.
Welcome to LT!

k4k

>10 SandraArdnas: though I'm not sure how or why it is not obvious.

Possibly because you cannot do it in Goodreads so people coming from there do not realize they can and people looking for answers online get mixed up.

>11 krazy4katz: Welcome to LT!

He's been a member for longer than you.

>13 anglemark: Oops...