Difference between revisions of "Feature:90163"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
DESiegel60 (talk | contribs) (Don't return coverart records in basic searches) |
(COVERART bigger problem than REVIEW) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
In many cases, particularly when a title has many publications with different cover artists, the number of coverart results retuened by a basic title search overwhelmes the actual title records, and confuses or frustrates the average user or newcommer, Particularly when a title search returns multiple titles, some of them may well be squeezed out of the 100 result limit on a basic search. Basic title searches should return only titles of types that have actual publications, such as novels, shortfiction, anthologies, collections, and chap(ter)books. art records should not be returned, and neither should reviews, Leave those to advanced searches. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 19:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC) | In many cases, particularly when a title has many publications with different cover artists, the number of coverart results retuened by a basic title search overwhelmes the actual title records, and confuses or frustrates the average user or newcommer, Particularly when a title search returns multiple titles, some of them may well be squeezed out of the 100 result limit on a basic search. Basic title searches should return only titles of types that have actual publications, such as novels, shortfiction, anthologies, collections, and chap(ter)books. art records should not be returned, and neither should reviews, Leave those to advanced searches. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 19:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Agreed. Reviews are a pain too, although often smaller in number. The unwillingness to merge COVERART records (presumably as we have no agreement on what the "art" actually means) compounds the problem - we upload exact covers showing title or price differences but with the same coverart. But we rarely have more reviews for a title than we have fingers. Is a separate feature request required for reviews? COVERART is multiplying via cloning, REVIEWS aren't.[[User:BLongley|BLongley]] 19:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:51, 30 September 2008
Don't return coverart records in basic searches.
In many cases, particularly when a title has many publications with different cover artists, the number of coverart results retuened by a basic title search overwhelmes the actual title records, and confuses or frustrates the average user or newcommer, Particularly when a title search returns multiple titles, some of them may well be squeezed out of the 100 result limit on a basic search. Basic title searches should return only titles of types that have actual publications, such as novels, shortfiction, anthologies, collections, and chap(ter)books. art records should not be returned, and neither should reviews, Leave those to advanced searches. -DES Talk 19:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. Reviews are a pain too, although often smaller in number. The unwillingness to merge COVERART records (presumably as we have no agreement on what the "art" actually means) compounds the problem - we upload exact covers showing title or price differences but with the same coverart. But we rarely have more reviews for a title than we have fingers. Is a separate feature request required for reviews? COVERART is multiplying via cloning, REVIEWS aren't.BLongley 19:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)