This is the profile for the Credit Anonymous:

"Anonymous works are works, such as art or literature, that have an undisclosed, or unknown creator or author. In the case of very old works, the author's name may simply be lost over the course of history and time."

I noticed that the Credit Unknown has recently been used for Works.

In my opinion, Unknown is exactly the same as Anonymous and should be marked as a duplicate. If it is really necessary then users can add an NV to Anonymous.

I added those to Unknown because that's the credit that is used on the book. I've used Anonymous if that has been the credit. If I had to choose between the two, I would go for Unknown, I find it easier to spell and more 'familiar', if that makes sense. But that's just me. :-)

FYI, we also have "Unknown Author" which is actually the earliest entry:
https://www.bookogs.com/credit/19466-unknown-author

I would actually prefer if we had a placeholder entry for these, just like Discogs: https://www.discogs.com/artist/355-Unknown-Artist

The entry is going to be massive. Having an open entry with tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of credits is just going to slow the database down. No one is going to use the entry itself, and we will have to clean up duplicates constantly (based on experience from Discogs before we could mark profiles invalid).

That's a good point you have made. I think a placeholder entry would be far better.

I will contact the staff about this.

I have messaged the staff.

As for the name of it, I really don't care if it is Anonymous or Unknown, as long as everything ends up in the one location. It seems a bit silly to have three database entries for what is essentially the same thing.

I just received word from the staff that they agree the suggestion of a Discogs type placeholder entry is a good idea and they will be pass this on to the developers.

Great news. :-)

The other thing slightly related are 'Traditional English Tale' type of credits. Should these be just 'dumped' under the Anonymous/Unknown entry, or should we create credits for these? I've avoided entering any of them because I'm not sure what to do with them.

I know Discogs has entries for 'Traditional' and 'Folk', but they are quite big, and their usefulness is debatable. There was a suggestion a long time ago to split them by country/area (i.e. Traditional: English, Traditional: Irish, or something like that) in which case they could be more useful if someone is looking for traditional tales from a specific country/area/people.

I can see these being subject material as well, but the Works need an author too. Would there be any problems with sorting them like that?

I have wondered about that as I have encountered a few poems that are described as Traditional Scots, Traditional English, etc.

Maybe if we use an About/Subject type credit so each of these has its own database. Then just credit the author as "Discogs type placeholder entry".

I didn't consider the Work credit when I formulated that reply. Let me think about it!

Sorry mirva, I forgot to give you an answer, but I did give it some thought.

The only solution I can think of is having a set of "Traditional XXX" Credits and treating them both as an About/Subject and as an Author.

Nothing else springs to mind.

I'm in no hurry. :-)

The only solution I can think of is having a set of "Traditional XXX" Credits and treating them both as an About/Subject and as an Author.

Yeah, that was one of my options too. At least that way the stories and the books are grouped up somewhere, it will make spotting duplicates and such a bit easier.

I assume the credits should be formatted in a similar way than has been already suggested in the Native Americans thread, i.e. "Traditional: Irish", "Traditional: Swedish", etc.?

Yes, I think that format would work well.

that seems like a good idea!

I'm in no hurry. :-)

I see you have created the first one, so that was quick 👏

I just had to test it, but I guess we'll see how it works when there will be more credits. :)

Another issue has come up concerning these traditional tales. Should the main work title be in English, or in the language of the country they are from?

Traditional tales are a tiny bit complicated in the sense of the actual original language, as the original language might be dead, or might not even be known.

For example all the fables credited to Aesop were not even written by him, and there's some uncertainty where they exactly come from.

I think we have two options:
- use an "original" language title if it's known, and if not known, then use English
- use an English title always

Of course this would only apply to tales credited as traditional. Neither option is perfect, and I'm ok with either or. Anyone have any thoughts?

I think we have two options:
- use an "original" language title if it's known, and if not known, then use English
- use an English title always

Both options are tricky: Just think about a Chinese user who tries to enter a collection of Southeast Asian tales. For the original language he has to find the collection of tales where it appeared for the first time. And I don't want to think about the difficulty to find the correct English title ;-)

As for the name of it, I really don't care if it is Anonymous or Unknown

We have to take into consideration that there is a difference between these two placeholders.

"Anonymous" was mostly used for works where the author deliberately hid his name, because he feared prosecution or the work shouldn't be connected to his other works.

Maybe this might be important for some works, but I'm not sure about that. In most cases the correct author has been tracked down later.

Both options are tricky

Yeah, there's basically no option that would be problem-free for everyone. I was just wondering what would be the easiest option for most. I do generally prefer the original language title as the work title, but I'm not sure about folk/traditional works.

For example, the first written version of The Three Bears is credited to an author. There are subsequent versions by other authors, but also versions that are credited to traditional, or to no one. How does one find and define the original language or the original title of the 'traditional' version? It might not even be in the same language, or from the country the story originates.

And I don't want to think about the difficulty to find the correct English title

And there might not even be an English title, not everything has been published in English...

I think finding/searching for alternative titles needs to be easier no matter what. Sometimes you have to go to great lengths to find the original language title - even if it's in the database. I've even had problems connecting two titles in languages that I'm familiar with.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.