1Cynfelyn
See Mikhail Sholokhov, And Quiet Flows the Don.
The 'First words' and Quotations' are immense. Does anyone think they are reasonable? Would someone with a copy of the book like to have a look at the record?
The 'First words' and Quotations' are immense. Does anyone think they are reasonable? Would someone with a copy of the book like to have a look at the record?
2AnnieMod
I'd just delete everything after the first sentence if I see such a wall of text in First Words. The help text under the field says "The first sentence of the work.". I'd make an exception for a short sentence or 2 but this is... excessive.
And I'd just delete all the "quotations". That's possibly even copyright violation at that length - the point of the fields is to add a few memorable/important quotes, not to transcribe 10 pages.
And I'd just delete all the "quotations". That's possibly even copyright violation at that length - the point of the fields is to add a few memorable/important quotes, not to transcribe 10 pages.
3andyl
>2 AnnieMod:
Yep agreed about the "quotations". I don't think any of them are particularly quotable or as the help text says "Well-known, relevant or interesting quotations from the work"
Yep agreed about the "quotations". I don't think any of them are particularly quotable or as the help text says "Well-known, relevant or interesting quotations from the work"
4andyl
Also on that work for People/Characters we have "Martin, Alexei and Prokhor Shamil". Maybe they should be on separate entries or maybe not at all if they were not deemed important enough to have their own entry the first time round.
5AnnieMod
>4 andyl: Yep.
And the Original Publication date field needs cleaning.
PS: I just deleted the English(!) title from the Original title field (which very clearly states "The original title in the original language"). Looking at the history, some of these came from a combination, possibly from the copy of a user who really has no idea what these fields are all about and just refuses to read what the help tip under them says (or updated them via the catalog so they never saw the help...)
And the Original Publication date field needs cleaning.
PS: I just deleted the English(!) title from the Original title field (which very clearly states "The original title in the original language"). Looking at the history, some of these came from a combination, possibly from the copy of a user who really has no idea what these fields are all about and just refuses to read what the help tip under them says (or updated them via the catalog so they never saw the help...)
6Cynfelyn
>5 AnnieMod: "And the Original Publication date field needs cleaning."
"1928-1932, 1937-1940" are its dates, and I have split them to separate lines.
Wikipedia (English) says: "The first three volumes were written from 1925 to 1932 and published in the Soviet magazine Oktyabr in 1928–1932, and the fourth volume was finished in 1940."
Wikipedia (Ukrainian) adds: "Том 4 закінчений в 1940 році, опублікований у московському журналі «Новый мир» в 1937—1940 році", whch Google Translate says is "Volume 4 was completed in 1940 and published in the Moscow magazine Novy mir in 1937-1940".
P.S. This is the only time I've ever seen a "Spoiler" field in a Quotation. Hmm.
"1928-1932, 1937-1940" are its dates, and I have split them to separate lines.
Wikipedia (English) says: "The first three volumes were written from 1925 to 1932 and published in the Soviet magazine Oktyabr in 1928–1932, and the fourth volume was finished in 1940."
Wikipedia (Ukrainian) adds: "Том 4 закінчений в 1940 році, опублікований у московському журналі «Новый мир» в 1937—1940 році", whch Google Translate says is "Volume 4 was completed in 1940 and published in the Moscow magazine Novy mir in 1937-1940".
P.S. This is the only time I've ever seen a "Spoiler" field in a Quotation. Hmm.
7AnnieMod
>6 Cynfelyn: So they did need cleaning (aka the split and the now added explanations) and removing the single date that was also on its own line. Note that I said cleaning and not deleting :)
