Category talk:Publisher Continuity Series - Revision history

Amy: /* The Series Conundrum */

2008-04-10T23:28:48Z

The Series Conundrum

Romancewiki: Cleaned Up

2008-04-10T04:27:31Z

Cleaned Up

Kay T: /* The Series Conundrum */

2007-04-04T20:19:20Z

The Series Conundrum

Leigh at 14:46, 4 April 2007

2007-04-04T14:46:24Z

Romancewiki: The Series Conundrum

2007-04-04T03:17:40Z

The Series Conundrum

Kay T at 00:35, 4 April 2007

2007-04-04T00:35:29Z

Leigh at 22:27, 3 April 2007

2007-04-03T22:27:43Z

Leigh at 22:27, 3 April 2007

2007-04-03T22:27:10Z

Leigh at 22:26, 3 April 2007

2007-04-03T22:26:25Z

Leigh at 22:25, 3 April 2007

2007-04-03T22:25:24Z

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 ::People (including me) may use the "series" categories on individual books, but we can just fix those categories if we find them. Does someone want to take a shot at the [[Series (disambiguation)]] page? (Those techie types have a lot to answer for with using the word "disambiguation" to begin with.) --[[User:Kay T|Kay T]] 13:19, 4 April 2007 (PDT)
 == Cleaned Up ==
 I removed the individual titles from the category text -- Leigh had already created the various series pages, so this was redundant info...--[[User:Romancewiki|Romancewiki]] 21:27, 9 April 2008 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:27, 10 April 2008
Line 57:		Line 57:

	::People (including me) may use the "series" categories on individual books, but we can just fix those categories if we find them. Does someone want to take a shot at the [[Series (disambiguation)]] page? (Those techie types have a lot to answer for with using the word "disambiguation" to begin with.) --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 13:19, 4 April 2007 (PDT)		::People (including me) may use the "series" categories on individual books, but we can just fix those categories if we find them. Does someone want to take a shot at the [[Series (disambiguation)]] page? (Those techie types have a lot to answer for with using the word "disambiguation" to begin with.) --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 13:19, 4 April 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	== Cleaned Up ==
		+
		+	I removed the individual titles from the category text -- Leigh had already created the various series pages, so this was redundant info...--[[User:Romancewiki\|Romancewiki]] 21:27, 9 April 2008 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:19, 4 April 2007
Line 46:		Line 46:

	:So basically I would be onboard with either a Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Author Series system or the Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Continuing Series/Connected Series designation. Whichever you all feel is best. --[[User:Leigh\|Leigh]]		:So basically I would be onboard with either a Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Author Series system or the Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Continuing Series/Connected Series designation. Whichever you all feel is best. --[[User:Leigh\|Leigh]]
		+
		+
		+	::I am okay with these. What I think we have are the following categories:
		+	::*Publisher Continuity Series
		+	::*Publisher Promotion
		+	::*some sort of author series designation. Right now it is category "Romantic Series" for those overarching stories and
		+	::*_____ for the merely connected stories.
		+
		+	::We will need to explain the continuing/connected distinction. I was unclear on this concept and am still sort or fuzzy on the continuing authors series (many connected stories also build on each other toward some sort of conclusion, but I see what you are talking about). Whenever you say "Nora Roberts" I think of the JD Robb books which I assume are connected but not continuing?
		+
		+	::People (including me) may use the "series" categories on individual books, but we can just fix those categories if we find them. Does someone want to take a shot at the [[Series (disambiguation)]] page? (Those techie types have a lot to answer for with using the word "disambiguation" to begin with.) --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 13:19, 4 April 2007 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:46, 4 April 2007
Line 40:		Line 40:

	I am so glad the two of you are A-type thinkers. I want to be A, but I haven't quite gotten my brain to agree. I am orderly, however, in my own weird way... --[[User:Romancewiki\|Romancewiki]] 20:17, 3 April 2007 (PDT)		I am so glad the two of you are A-type thinkers. I want to be A, but I haven't quite gotten my brain to agree. I am orderly, however, in my own weird way... --[[User:Romancewiki\|Romancewiki]] 20:17, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	:In my experience, if the series was written by one author, it tends to not be a promotion. If it's by one author and the publisher gives it a series name, it's usually because the author linked the books somehow. Like I'm pretty sure "The Last Roundup" was an actual series by Ruth Wind, not a promotion (although I don't know whether it was connected or continuing). Promotions generally only bring together books by different authors, so it's only when you see different authors listed that it would come into question whether it's a promotion or a continuity series.
		+
		+	:RomanceWiki's definitions are basically the same ones I've always used. I really like the idea of differentiating between ongoing series that are connected but don't necessarily tell one overarching story (like Brockmann's Tall, Dark & Dangerous series) and and those that do (trilogies and the like). I was thinking about that, but didn't know what terms to use. Those work fine for me. And I agree that it's probably not necessary to label individual books with the type of series they belong to. Looking at the Continuity Series page it was a little weird to see both actual series and individual books listed. It would make more sense if people were looking for different series, they would find those on the page and not have to look through individual books as well.
		+
		+	:So basically I would be onboard with either a Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Author Series system or the Publisher Continuity Series/Publisher Promotion/Continuing Series/Connected Series designation. Whichever you all feel is best. --[[User:Leigh\|Leigh]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:17, 4 April 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:

	3. As for the author continuity series, I am still not sure whether to have a separate one for author series v publisher series. Since the books that are not "category" that are also series or related at this time do not have a wiki category on them, would we call them continuity series, too? or author series? I started to take out the "one-author" series from the continuity page, but then was not sure where to classify them. So. Maybe keep publisher continuity series (since that does seem to be a different kind of animal) and make a new "author series" or "author continuity series" page. In looking at more author series, there are not that many separate pages for the series (except that [[Series]] page), but they are listed on the author's page. Would people start putting that category on the individual book pages as well? Do we want that? Should we leave a note for RomanceWiki and see what she thinks? I think as long as we come up with some sort of scheme. This is a great place for us type-A thinkers. --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 17:35, 3 April 2007 (PDT)		3. As for the author continuity series, I am still not sure whether to have a separate one for author series v publisher series. Since the books that are not "category" that are also series or related at this time do not have a wiki category on them, would we call them continuity series, too? or author series? I started to take out the "one-author" series from the continuity page, but then was not sure where to classify them. So. Maybe keep publisher continuity series (since that does seem to be a different kind of animal) and make a new "author series" or "author continuity series" page. In looking at more author series, there are not that many separate pages for the series (except that [[Series]] page), but they are listed on the author's page. Would people start putting that category on the individual book pages as well? Do we want that? Should we leave a note for RomanceWiki and see what she thinks? I think as long as we come up with some sort of scheme. This is a great place for us type-A thinkers. --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 17:35, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	== The Series Conundrum ==
		+
		+	It looks like we have a lot of concepts that are separate and distinct while also overlapping in some ways. I'm going to try to work through it all and the two of you can tell me if I'm missing things or on the right track.
		+
		+	First the different pieces of the puzzle, using my terminology (which is not necessarily the "right" thing, just trying to keep it clear).
		+
		+	:1. ''Publisher Continuity Series'' - These are the series featuring (generally) different authors who pick up an element of an ongoing story. These can be set in a single town or around a single event. Harlequin is particularly noted for these, and, if I recall correctly, has done continuities that cross imprints. An example would be like the Trueblood Texas continuity.
		+
		+	:2. ''Publisher Promotions'' - Would this be something like a so-called "flash" (like a Wrong Bed type series)? A finite number of books with the same label but that is the only element they have in common...different authors, different settings, different ideas?
		+	::A. Using Kay's "Men at Work" example, I would categorize it as Publisher Promotion because there are different authors and settings, etc. In some cases, this is easy to identify, while in other cases, it requires someone who is familiar with the promotion in question.
		+	::B. Though it's an imperfect science, I generally identify promotions by a bright colored "Men at Work" type label on the cover.
		+
		+	:3. ''Series'' - There are three types of series (excluding the above):
		+	::A. ''Category Romance'' -- Category is my preferred term for this as series can mean many things to many people. However, because so many people refer to category romance as series romance, I think it should be acknowledged in some way so that people searching for categories under that label (or vice versa) get where they're going.
		+	::B. ''Connected Stories'' -- These are different from the Continuities in that they are generally written by a single author and feature overlapping characters. Examples would be Jo Beverly's The Mallorens or Jude Devereaux' Montgomeries.
		+	::C. ''Continuing Stories'' - These are the books where the major story arc stretches over multiple books (for examples, pick any of Nora Roberts's trilogies). I mentally differentiate these from Connected Stories because the Continuing Stories don't stand alone as well as Connected Stories. You can skip the romance of this character or that character, but you don't know the fate of humanity until you read all three books in the Circle Trilogy (okay, you ''do'' know, but still...).
		+
		+	So. I like the idea of differentiating between Continuities and Publisher Promotions. I know that I've started "promotions" pages for various category lines as I've encountered them, but hadn't gotten to the point of actually collecting them all in a single category or page. I'm really big on making sure that people can get to content in a variety of ways. No matter how logical you think the map, there is always someone who tries to go sideways.
		+
		+	How do you feel about using the "connected" and "continuing" labels to differentiate between the two? We can flesh out the Series (disambiguation) page to explain our definitions. I think this is a concept that confuses quite a few people -- I bet that it wouldn't be hard to find someone else who has entirely different terminology.
		+
		+	As for Kay's final point about putting the categories on individual title pages, well, I imagine some people will add the categories there, but I think they are labels better suited to the actual continuity/promotion/series -- single titles with this category will stick out as odd.
		+
		+	I am so glad the two of you are A-type thinkers. I want to be A, but I haven't quite gotten my brain to agree. I am orderly, however, in my own weird way... --[[User:Romancewiki\|Romancewiki]] 20:17, 3 April 2007 (PDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:35, 4 April 2007
Line 9:		Line 9:
	::# I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story. I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.		::# I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story. I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
	::# You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series. But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate? If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right? I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh\|Leigh]]		::# You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series. But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate? If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right? I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh\|Leigh]]
		+
		+	I found the category page after I posted! You had so many changes I did not see it!
		+
		+	2. I think that if you know it is one or the other (continuity or flash), then I don't have a problem with you changing the category. Just that it goes in one category or another. The one that I am thinking about is a Ruth Wind book that is in the "Last Roundup" series, or something (without looking it up right now). I don't know if that was a related series or just a promotion. Maybe if we aren't sure leave it in continuity? Or put it in both (probably a better idea unless you want to keep the flash more accurate)? I can understand the anal part (not you necessarily), but my obsession is to make sure they can be found and identified, even if we are not sure. But if we are not sure then making the category more specific makes it less accurate and more misleading.
		+
		+	3. As for the author continuity series, I am still not sure whether to have a separate one for author series v publisher series. Since the books that are not "category" that are also series or related at this time do not have a wiki category on them, would we call them continuity series, too? or author series? I started to take out the "one-author" series from the continuity page, but then was not sure where to classify them. So. Maybe keep publisher continuity series (since that does seem to be a different kind of animal) and make a new "author series" or "author continuity series" page. In looking at more author series, there are not that many separate pages for the series (except that [[Series]] page), but they are listed on the author's page. Would people start putting that category on the individual book pages as well? Do we want that? Should we leave a note for RomanceWiki and see what she thinks? I think as long as we come up with some sort of scheme. This is a great place for us type-A thinkers. --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 17:35, 3 April 2007 (PDT)

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ::# Yes, I also made the Publisher Promotion page a Category.
-# I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story.  I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
+::# I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story.  I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
-# You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series.  But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate?  If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right?  I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh|Leigh]]
+::# You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series.  But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate?  If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right?  I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh|Leigh]]

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 # Also, for the author continuity series in the Category-type books where the series are given names, does it matter if it is listed as a Publisher Continuity series? We have a list page already called [[Series]], also see [[Series (disambiguation)]] where I tried to figure out what we were calling different things because I am/was confused. I think that as long as these types of series are identified and CATEGORIZED as a type of series so that they can be found by the wiki-user it probably does not matter. --[[User:Kay T|Kay T]] 14:27, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
-::#1. Yes, I also made the Publisher Promotion page a Category.
+::# Yes, I also made the Publisher Promotion page a Category.
-#2. I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story.  I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
+# I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story.  I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
-#3. You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series.  But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate?  If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right?  I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh|Leigh]]
+# You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series.  But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate?  If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right?  I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself. ----[[User:Leigh|Leigh]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:25, 3 April 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:
	# I don't know how anyone would be able to identify which series are continuity series and which are just flash. In other words, based on the information in RomanceWiki, Amazon, author pages, I can create a page for the series "Men at Work" and list all of the books that are identified as being part of "Men at Work", but I have no way of knowing if Men at Work is related stories or just about men at work. Does it matter?		# I don't know how anyone would be able to identify which series are continuity series and which are just flash. In other words, based on the information in RomanceWiki, Amazon, author pages, I can create a page for the series "Men at Work" and list all of the books that are identified as being part of "Men at Work", but I have no way of knowing if Men at Work is related stories or just about men at work. Does it matter?
	# Also, for the author continuity series in the Category-type books where the series are given names, does it matter if it is listed as a Publisher Continuity series? We have a list page already called [[Series]], also see [[Series (disambiguation)]] where I tried to figure out what we were calling different things because I am/was confused. I think that as long as these types of series are identified and CATEGORIZED as a type of series so that they can be found by the wiki-user it probably does not matter. --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 14:27, 3 April 2007 (PDT)		# Also, for the author continuity series in the Category-type books where the series are given names, does it matter if it is listed as a Publisher Continuity series? We have a list page already called [[Series]], also see [[Series (disambiguation)]] where I tried to figure out what we were calling different things because I am/was confused. I think that as long as these types of series are identified and CATEGORIZED as a type of series so that they can be found by the wiki-user it probably does not matter. --[[User:Kay T\|Kay T]] 14:27, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	1. Yes, I also made the Publisher Promotion page a Category.
		+
		+	2. I admit that I'm anal, but I do think it matters to differentiate between the Continuity Series and Publisher Promotions, just to make it clear to anyone looking up a book that it is unrelated to other books in the "series" or whether it is part of a larger story. I admit it may not be easy to tell which is which unless you're familiar with the series, but I tried to change the ones I knew about.
		+
		+	3. You're right, it probably doesn't matter to differentiate between author-driven and publisher-driven continuity series. But in that case (and I admit this is just me being anal again), can we just make the Category Continuity Series instead of Publisher Continuity Series to be more general and accurate? If it is just a series by one author, there's no reason to call it a Publisher Continuity Series, right? I know you did a lot of work, but I just wanted to make it as accurate as possible and there's really no reason to call, say, Evelyn Vaughn's Grailkeeper's series, a Publisher Continuity Series instead of a Continuity Series since she generated all the books and linked the stories herself.