Discussions on Publishing
Start a New Discussion
-
-
-
We want to enter a lot of faculty into Freebase. For example, one faculty has 650 papers mentioned in his CV, should we enter those as individual Journal Articles? Or perhaps the more general Scholarly Work?
Do we need to put all these in as items before we can link them to the Person page?
-
If they are all, in fact, journal articles, they should be entered as such. Scholary work is an included type of Journal Article, so it'll come along for the ride. More info on scholarly works can be found in the help topic Entering Scholarly Works and Citations
-
Hi Will, each real world entity maps to a topic in Freebase, so if you want to link 650 unique journal articles to their author, the correct way is to enter each article as its own Journal Article topic, and enter the faculty member as Person and Author.
If you have a lot of data, mass import is the route to go. For simple data without a lot of properties you can use Importer, and MQL is your friend for complex datasets. Let us know if you have any questions or would like some assistance.
-
I don't like the way journal articles are cited. There's too many fields. I don't look up journal articles by publisher, and I've never seen the publisher's name in the bibliography of a journal.
-
I don't like the way journal articles are cited. There's too many fields. I don't look up journal articles by publisher, and I've never seen the publisher's name in the bibliography of a journal. Is there any way to hide fields that are not useful?
-
I don't quite understand your issue. Are you talking about the publisher property on the Periodical type? It seems to me that apart from the name of the Journal itself, pretty much any of the properties on Jounal and Periodical are not going to be particularly useful in terms of looking up or citing an article. The useful stuff (e.g. author, journal, volume, issue, subject) is all linked from the Journal publication or Journal Article types, I'd think.
-
-
-
What is proper protocol for listing Charlotte Turgeon as the editor of this edition? Do I need to type it as a written work (the book already is and she wasn't the editor of it) - or should that property reside with the editions?
-
I'm not sure there's a way to link her in to the structured date, but you can certainly include her in the "credited to" field. I think that's intended to included the complete string as it appears on the title page/cover e.g. "by the Great Mage, with foreword by the Magical Wizard and copious editing magic from the Great Goddess herself."
-
Blarg! The history of the English publications of the various versions of "Larousse Gastronomique" is mighty daunting. One thing not especially germane to this discussion is that this is an edition of "Nouveau Larousse Gastronomique", not of the 1938 original.
I think this idea was mooted before, but we never arrived at a satisfactory model: There should probably be an "editor" property of Book Edition, to be used in cases where an edition of a book has an editor who did not work on the original text (such as a variorum edition or critical edition). (Although this comment in New York magazine almost makes me want to suggest that the English version should be a new Book entirely:
-
I've added a property for this now, "Editor of this edition" on the Book Edition type.
-
-
-
Please move the ISFDB key to In Search of the Unknown. I've moved all the relevant data.
-
Theoretically, you should be able to do this, since the key is part of a URL template (if you can't, we have the wrong permissions on the key, so let me know if this doesn't work). First, save the ISFDB URL somewhere so you can paste it into the correct topic. Then, delete the ISFDB URL from the weblinks section of the wrong "In Search of the Unknown" topic. Finally, paste the URL into the weblinks section of the correct "In Search of the Unknown."
-
No option to delete the key, and running this query gives me...
{ "code": "/api/status/error", "messages": [{ "code": "/api/status/error/mql/access", "info": { "user": "/user/pak21" }, "message": "User /user/pak21 does not have permission to connect here", "path": "key", "query": { "id": "/en/in_search_of_the_unknown", "key": { "connect": "delete", "error_inside": ".", "namespace": "/authority/isfdb/title_id", "value": "5596" } } }], "status": "200 OK", "transaction_id": "cache;cache02.p01.sjc1:8101;2009-10-19T19:37:47Z;0012" }
Looks like a permissions issue to me :-)
-
-
-
Hi,
Inputting a Book Edition I realized that the ISBN field is now unique. It makes it harder to enter both the 13-digit and the 10-digit ISBNs on a single volume. Why the change?
-
Enter only the ISBN-13. ISBNs have been refactored -- see discussion here: http://markmail.org/thread/g2spenmiahmkopzu
-
-
-
In some cases cases the cause for a work to be non-extant today is known and can be traced to a date: a fire in August 1900, an earthquake on Jan 11, 1693, etc. Perhaps there should be a dated CVT linking a Lost Work and Cause of Loss?
-
-
-
if we are using 'magazine genre's instead of subjects, magazine genre should then attatch to subject.
-
either way, we should clear this up. is magazine genre the same as subject? it is being used as both 'magazine type' (eg men's magazine) and 'magazine subject' (eg hockey) ambiguously.
-
... if it's a subject property, and its not using our general subject type, it needs a phylogeny.
-
Looks like this type is just badly defined. It really should just be for the genre (and, fortunately, mostly has been used that way) and not the subject. (The two are perhaps more intimately connected for this type than genre and subject usually are, but that's no excuse for bad documentation.)
-
i like genre better too subjects can go into /book/periodical/subject i'll do some work cleaning this up
-
-
-
Would you agree with that?
-
Oops, posted too early.
If so, then there should be a reciprocal property between Literary Series and Book Edition Series, just like there's one between Book and Book Edition.
-
Ack. Browser just ate my clever, detailed response!
Trying again: I disagree with this analogy. The two types are not related. The relationship between Book and Book Edition is one of an abstraction with a (degree of) reification of that abstraction. But editions of a book that is part of a series can also be part of a book edition series. For example, the book The Wild Shore is part of the literary series Three Californias Trilogy. The first edition of The Wild Shore is part of the Ace Science Fiction Specials, Series 3, a series of editions.
There are going to be some cases where a Book Edition Series will represent a set of editions of a particular Literary Series (the Oxford Sherlock Holmes is one example), but I'm reluctant to make a connection between the types for this minority case.
-
Ahh, I see the difference now. It just seems strange that a type called "Book Edition Series" should be unconnected to any actual book or book series. But no matter.
-
-
-
I find it strange that the Written Work type has a non-unique property "Part of series" but unique properties "Previous in series" and "Next in series". If a work can belong to more than one series, then theoretically the order of books within different series can differ as well, no? On the other hand, if the order is fixed, how can a work belong to more than one series? And if all three properties can be non-unique, then wouldn't the permutations involving the three (series, previous, and next) be better represented in a CVT?
-
Hmmm. There seem to be two reasons written works are part of multiple series. One is when there is series/subseries relationship, and the work has both sub- and super-series listed. In these cases, the previous/next should always be the same. The other is when a work is really part of two separate series. The examples of these that I've found in Freebase are all books of the Tanakh/Old Testament. For example, the Book of Ezra is a part of both the Bible and the Ketuvim. (Actually, this is probably not quite entered correctly: it should arguably be part of Ketuvim, Protestant Old Testament, and Catholic/Orthodox Old Testament: that Bible topic is kind of confusing, but that's beside the point.) In these cases, prev/next will likely be different.
Which is too bad -- the prev/next mapping will probably no longer be automatable using the current tools if we refactor it. (And it seems that we might have to, alas.)
-
-
-
Having watched every episode of the TV show "A Bit of Fry and Laurie", I'm pretty sure I would've found out about a book of this title or otherwise related to the TV show. Perhaps this is merely a DVD?
Is there a link to the original openlibrary data behind this data load that I can use to verify?
-
Not not a book: http://www.amazon.com/Bit-Fry-Laurie-Stephen/dp/0749307056/ref=pd_cp_b_1
I stand corrected. Apparently I'm not as big a Fry/Laurie fan as I thought I was.
-
-
-
it is three books and they are already represented as such.
-
Keep. It's an audio omnibus comprising three books. Omnibuses count as separate books.
-
I'll buy that an omnibus is a book but this isn't an omnibus. It is a reading of three existing books - not a reprint. But is an audio book a book? (i'd perhaps agree it is an edition). And a written work? nope. isn't there a type for audio recordings that would be better?
-
An audio book is a Book Edition. The work has to exist before it can be recorded, no? For example, I've captured Alan Rickman's reading of Thomas Hardy's The Return of the Native as a book edition here.
-
Not necessarily. There have been original audiobooks, for one thing. And I would further argue that if an audiobook collects recordings of works that have not been collected together in print then it is necessarily a new book, since there is nothing for it to be an edition of. This particular example is perhaps confusing because what's been collected are novels, but would we be having this discussion if it were an audiobook of poems or stories?
-
OK, previous post from me was regretably phrased. When I said "an audio book is a Book Edition", I meant to answer Jon's question regarding a type for audio recordings. In order to capture data such as audio book reader and binding/format, the use of Book Edition is unavoidable.
But a Book Edition has to hang from a Book, a concept which is basically a product unit and free of format, print or audio or...otherwise. It has to exist, i.e. there's no avoiding the "Book/Book Editiion" relationship, and a book topic must be created in order to enter an audio book (edition).
Keep both the book and the edition.
-
-
-
-
no clear path to which book about with Polical Responibility in the title this should be merged with. get rid of it.
-
This book represents this edition, which is clearly a real book.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I was going to flag to merge with the country but the country didn't author these books. Delete and find the various authors?
-
This is tricky. There are going to be a bunch of authors like this. The LoC is happy to call Thailand the author (corporate author, that is) of this book, for example. It seems weird to call the country itself an author, but I'm not sure what other entity it should be ascribed to.
-
What about merging with Government of Thailand?
-
-
-
i can't find a reasonable Churchill to merge...plus the "books" are kinda sketchy.
delete.
-
The first marketing book (and presumably at least some of the others) is by Gilbert A. Churchill http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au:Gilbert+A+Churchill, but I'm pretty suspicioius of all these entries with abbreviated titles and surname-only authors. I think someone needs to make a global decision as to how they are handled, particularly the surname-only authors. I think deleting them on the assumption that there's duplicate data elsewhere to compensate is the right call, but it's not really my call to make.
-
i'll cross post to publishing to see what the admins say. I agree that some direction would be useful in these cases. Lets see what they say.
-
-
-
i am pretty sure Luisa May didn't collaborate with Penguin (or the others) on this "book". Surely it is several books and editions
-
Mostly, this is one book (Little Women), but OL kindly added various illustrators and introducers as authors. However, at least one of the editions compising this book is a stage adaptation. I suppose we can split it when the editions get loaded. Meanwhile, I'm removing all the non-authors.
-
-
-
but is it really the author of these books?
-
In many cases, clearly yes. (Who else would be the author of "Usmarc Format for Authority Data"?) In some cases, it's kind of ambiguous (it shares the copyright with the human author of The House, for example). But there's enough of a case for its authorship of most of these to let it stand for now, I think.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
it is a collection of three books by three different authors
http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Italian-Cookbook-Gift-Set/dp/0684011352/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1248911736&sr=8-13
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
keep - it's a conference http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/fse/fse98.html
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
keep - it's a conference http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/pcrcw/pcrcw1997.html
-
-
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
keep - it's an actual conference http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/esa/esa96.html
-
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
Keep - it was an actual conference of Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/lpnmr/lpnmr95.html
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
Keep - it was an actual conference http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/coordination/coordination1996.html
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
Keep - it is an actual conference http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/eurocast/index.html
-
-
-
-
non-author
-
keep - shoreline publishing is a real publishers. http://shorelinepub.com/
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
so i used the OL key to kind out this is an aka for kay robbins.
http://openlibrary.org/a/OL2750600A/aka-Kay-Hooper
why are we importing "person/authors" whose names contain "aka"?
anyway - merge
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
this Alan Tucker:
http://www.freebase.com/edit/topic/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000bb69f55
has a 1952 DOB (and I am guessing the 1946 in the current one's title is his DOB
and these two have no DOB (or books attributed to them:
http://www.freebase.com/view/en/alan_tucker
http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000ba701da
although the 2nd has a useful middle initial to someone who may want to figure this out.
then there are the two "Allan" (2 L's) Tuckers...
-
Why do you think there needs to be a merge? It's a pretty common-sounding name, and none of these look like the same author. (Well this one almost certainly needs to be split, and some of his books clearly belong to one of the others). Also note that one of the non-author Alan Tuckers is a recording engineer.
-
to be honest I don't but some think I've been too aggressive in my deletion flags when it "could" belong to a valid topic. so I guess I'm being unusually cautious - but will probably tire of that ;)
-
on the other hand - i think I missed your point. Perhaps this really *is* a new Alan Tucker. Well that's a thought. Staying cautious...
-
What do you know. It turns out that Alan C. Tucker and Alan Tucker should be merged. (Library of Congress redirects "Alan C. Tucker" to the other Alan Tucker; some web digging shows that the (no "C") author of Applied Combinatorics is the same person as the (has "C") co-author of Functioning in the Real World)
So caution is good!
-
-
-
I'm thinking yes - but if someone can find a topic to merge - go for it. It certainly isn't a person so I'll delete that type.
-
Agree: delete. This is a proceedings from a Parallel Computing conference held in Leiden: http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/044488386X.
The "your local library" link in Open Library takes you to WorldCat, which often (not always) has more data (for books from US publishers, anyway). Also, if there's a "table of contents" or similar link in the "external links" section that goes to www.loc.com, the Library of Congress website can also be very helpful in sorting people out.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
