This book submission has listed numerous Works: https://books.discogs.com/book/768948-rolling-stone-the-90s that I assume appeared as articles in various Rolling Stone magazines.
According to the Guidelines on Works: https://books.discogs.com/guidelines/work
"A Work is the composition, or creative piece of text published in the physical object. This applies to novels, short stories, poems, articles, or other creative works."
This raises a question about magazine submissions. Should every article in a magazine be allocated its own Works?
Personally, I think it would open the floodgates to an overwhelming number of Works and if the author of these Works is not added at the time of generation, it will be near impossible to verify authorship.
I meant to add that the OS of the Rolling Stone book has completed the details for about half the Works (I hope they finish the rest), so my comment is in no way a criticsm of this user, but a general question on creating Works for magazine articles.
I'd definitely not want to look for an author's works list and only come to his multiple credits as 'Contributing Writer' in issue entries with only a cover photo provided. The 'Author — Title' info, in a good database, should be present in SOME way. And i'd still strongly prefer filling work entries over adding contents scan pictures. That's what the database is for.
should be present in SOME way
Most magazine submissions list the articles in the Chapters section, so there is a method of listing them without creating a Works for them.
Do we really want the database filled with Works that are one-off articles in a magazine? Currently, someone could add every article in a gossip magazine as a Works and they wouldn't be breaching the Guidelines. Maybe users don't have a problem with that.
I don't have a problem with users entering magazine articles as works.
If we allow short fiction alongside long fiction, we have to allow short non-fiction - essays and articles - alongside long non-fiction.
As long as the work is attached to a publication (be it a book or a magazine) in the database, I don't see the problem. If the publication format is allowed, then the written works included should be as well.
When it comes to updating works, of course ideally the user should fill out at least the author, but as long as the system is as slow and buggy as it is, I don't really blame anyone for not updating anything as it can become a test in patience.
As the one submitting the book that generated this topic, let me just chime in with my 50 cent :)
I had the same reservations as you, thethrowback, but seeing that articles were mentioned as Works in the guidelines, I never really thought to ask here, which in retrospect I guess I should have.
I can easily see the point that, if taken literally, a Rolling Stone magazine or other music magazine could be split into dozens if not several hundred articles, if you start counting every album review, minor newsstory, etc., etc. I would not want to use a database with that much clutter myself.
But, my motivation for adding all these articles as Works was that they have appeared in other media and that several of the articles are available online too, both from the RS website, and in some cases from fansites too. My view was that this raised their importance and to some degree validated their existence in the database. On the other hand, I can also see how that makes it hard for the user adding the original magazines to determine which articles to add as Works, and which not to.
Optimally, from a user point of view, someone looking for that Madonna interview might use the database to find out that it also exists in one or several books, and not just in an overpriced second-hand copy of the magazine. That was my wet dream at least, but I have absolutely no problem if that seems too far-fetched a user scenario, or if the price (the database clutter) is deemed too high. :)
And just for the record, thethrowback, I'm extremely grateful for your tireless work to correct errors too numerous to count, on my submissions. And I say that in absolute humble honesty. Thank you.
I never really thought to ask here
The Guidelines support adding Works for articles, so you were doing the right thing.
I'm extremely grateful for your tireless work to correct errors too numerous to count
You're welcome and thanks for the feedback.