Looks like this is not unusual at all. In general it seems that they are identified by the first line elsewhere, so would this be ok here too, instead of using the numbers? I tested this with Baudelaire's Spleens, and now I've ran into another similar case.

https://www.bookogs.com/work/522726-spleen-pluviose-irrite-contre-la-ville-entiere
https://www.bookogs.com/work/522727-spleen-jai-plus-de-souvenirs-que-si-javais-mille-ans
https://www.bookogs.com/work/521915-spleen-je-suis-comme-le-roi-dun-pays-pluvieux
https://www.bookogs.com/work/522666-spleen-quand-le-ciel-bas-et-lourd-pese-comme-un-couvercle

What do you think?

I like it. Seems a sensible approach for a case where the poet wrote multiple poems that would otherwise be indistinguishable.

I believe this approach would be fairly standard if you were referencing the works in another piece of writing.

I can't recall we had a consensus about not using the suffix? I also do not think you should be doing this first then asking in the forums if you can do it.

I appreciate the fact that the time was taken to provide an illustration prior to asking a question in the forum. It helps with comprehension of the question.

I appreciate the fact that the time was taken to provide an illustration prior to asking a question in the forum. It helps with comprehension of the question.

I believe this approach would be fairly standard if you were referencing the works in another piece of writing.

Yes, and it seems to be also a common way to catalogue them.

I can't recall we had a consensus about not using the suffix?

Last time there was no consensus on using the suffix. It seems many users are not happy with it and wish for a different system, and there are already exceptions in place. For example short stories and collections with the same name:
https://www.bookogs.com/work/499540-a-medicine-for-melancholy-collection
https://www.bookogs.com/work/419264-a-medicine-for-melancholy-short-story

I do think that this makes it easier (and faster) for users to connect to the correct work.

It helps with comprehension of the question.

That is exactly why I did it. I've noticed that it's sometimes difficult to explain all the details of a particular case, so I thought an example would demonstrate the problem better. Everything can always be edited - to me at least it's not a big deal.

You are asking to change a major part of our system that we use across many of the og's sites, a few people not liking the system we use is not a consensus to go forward with any changes, I believe we had a thread on a similar question two weeks ago where no consensus was giving. Such a big change in the system would need staff approval and guideline changes.
https://www.bookogs.com/forum/307708-naming-conventions-for-people

You are asking to change a major part of our system that we use across many of the og's sites

I'm not, at least not here. What I'm suggesting here is an exception, and it shouldn't be used for all works, but only when one poet has written several poems with the same name - a similar solution to the Collection/Short Story problem.

In Baudelaire's case they were even all published at the same time, in the same publication. Without a better solution, users would need to refer to notes to be able to identify which work it is which is hardly ideal.

If I do recall it right, there was the exception allowed, to use a variant of an exact name / title / e.g. if that is generally better known than the accurate one.
In this particular case, I would vote for the way mirva chose, as it seems to be the common approach.

I wonder if it would be useful/possible to add "First Line" or "First Words" field on the work page. First lines are often used to identify at least poems, but they could be also useful when identifying other works.

I came across to this issue with fairy tales and other children's stories, where there are often a gazillion versions of the same story, and the books do not always contain the author credit. The only way to figure out which version is included has been to compare the actual story, and the first line/sentence seems to be sufficient for identification. I've listed it in the Notes at the moment, but wouldn't be opposed to a dedicated field.

would this be ok here too, instead of using the numbers?

Not only ok. It's the only way later users will be able to identify the correct poem. Besides: The title for many old greek or latin poems were given by the different translators. So there are many variations.

I wonder if it would be useful/possible to add "First Line" or "First Words" field on the work page.

I like the idea.

There are many more problems with adding poems, not to speak of tales.
I just tried to add some ancient greek poems. The book contains German translations from the 18th and 19th century. Many of these poems have been translated again in the 20th century. Since I can't add the translator to the work (they all are listed in the credit section), I added the first German line as ANV to the original work. Titles are not helpful at all in these cases.

That's not very elegant, but I have no better idea.

Any ideas what to do with the two versions of "To Helen" by Poe? The differences are very small, as can be seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Helen#Full_poem

Should we have one or two entries in the database?

Any ideas what to do with the two versions of "To Helen" by Poe

Just add "Original 1831 version" and "Revised 1845 version" in brackets. I'm adding any of the identifier attributes within brackets (translators, first lines etc.) It's the only thing we can do at the moment to specify the different variants.

Alright, I'll do that. :-)

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.