This is a list for books that are on quite a few Goodreads lists but have less than 1000 ratings. When you look at what lists a book is on, that means the book has at least 2 full pages of lists. (Up until 2015-11-09 this list was Unknown books on more than 30 Goodreads lists - but 2 full pages is 60 lists, hence the name change).
And if any librarian checks the book and it is not on at least 3 pages of lists (at least one item on the 3rd page), it should be removed with or without comment.
It would be awesome to see this list emptied due to there no longer being books that fit this definition - either because the books were removed from lists or the books received way more than 1000 ratings and deserved to be on at least some of those lists.
Somewhat similar lists:
Unexplicable Listopia Votes
Self Published Spammers
See other lists that may be good alternatives for books on this list:
Best Science Fiction on Goodread with between 100 and 999 ratings
Best Science Fiction on Goodreads with less than 100 ratings
Popular Fantasy on Goodreads with between 100 and 999 ratings
Best Fantasy on Goodreads with less than 100 ratings
REALLY Underrated Books less than 1,000 ratings
And if any librarian checks the book and it is not on at least 3 pages of lists (at least one item on the 3rd page), it should be removed with or without comment.
It would be awesome to see this list emptied due to there no longer being books that fit this definition - either because the books were removed from lists or the books received way more than 1000 ratings and deserved to be on at least some of those lists.
Somewhat similar lists:
Unexplicable Listopia Votes
Self Published Spammers
See other lists that may be good alternatives for books on this list:
Best Science Fiction on Goodread with between 100 and 999 ratings
Best Science Fiction on Goodreads with less than 100 ratings
Popular Fantasy on Goodreads with between 100 and 999 ratings
Best Fantasy on Goodreads with less than 100 ratings
REALLY Underrated Books less than 1,000 ratings
259 books ·
81 voters ·
list created December 20th, 2013
by Mitchell Friedman (votes) .
Comments Showing 1-36 of 36 (36 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Sandra
(new)
Aug 11, 2014 07:13PM
Fixed the duplicates.
reply
|
flag
Mariana wrote: "This
should also be there." That book is only on one list and is really not relevant to this list, unless I missed something.
Linda wrote: "Mariana wrote: "This
should also be there."I don't mean to be rude or anything, but isn't this the book that's been repeatedly spammed, and now it's being ..."
I'm confused. If there's a story going on about this book, it's not one I've heard.
I would love to see this list emptied because some action was taken against all these books - either by goodreads or the list maintainers or the list voters.Or perhaps some of these books are actually great and get thousands of real ratings.
But when it is no longer valid to be on this list, it should be removed from this list.
Mitchell wrote: "I would love to see this list emptied because some action was taken against all these books - either by goodreads or the list maintainers or the list voters.Or perhaps some of these books are act..."
Me too, have you reported any of them?
I have reported a number of books on specific lists. Presumably goodreads did nothing, because the books and their books are still there.
Mitchell wrote: "I have reported a number of books on specific lists. Presumably goodreads did nothing, because the books and their books are still there."Yes, I wouldn't expect GR staff to look into lits. However if you notice that the same people up-vote the same book spamming the lists, or you think the author is paying for the votes, or has asked their friends you can flag the people and let GR look into it.
Ellie [The Empress] wrote: "Mitchell wrote: "I have reported a number of books on specific lists. Presumably goodreads did nothing, because the books and their books are still there."Yes, I wouldn't expect GR staff to look ..."
When I see a book on the first page of a list I care about and it has more votes than ratings and it is also on tons of lists and it has less than 100 ratings overall - I might report it. but GR does nothing for it. And as a librarian I could remove the book from an list - but GR has never given clear guidance whether they think that is acceptable for a librarian to do. So pretty much I only police my lists and other lists with clear criteria.
Mitchell wrote: "When I see a book on the first page of a list I care about and it has more votes than ratings and it is also on tons of lists and it has less than 100 ratings overall - I might report it. but GR does nothing for it. And as a librarian I could remove the book from an list - but GR has never given clear guidance whether they think that is acceptable for a librarian to do. So pretty much I only police my lists and other lists with clear criteria."You can remove the book if it doesn't fit the list criteria, otherwise, as I said, the only thing you can do is flag the sock puppets. It's pointless flagging a list since they are public.
I think the best thing is to start the list over again and set up very strict rules. This is a good example: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1...
Ellie [The Empress] wrote: "I think the best thing is to start the list over again and set up very strict rules. This is a good example: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1..."getting adoption on a new list is tough - just compare
Best Fantasy Books Under the Radar with 1466 voters
to
Popular Fantasy on Goodreads with between 1000 and 9999 ratings with 14 voters
The Most Popular Fantasy on Goodreads has been very successful as a list, in fact is the most popular list I've created, and it only has 332 voters
And yet the first list has IMO one of the most spammed book on this website as N.2. That is a list I will know to look at only to mark books as not-for-me. I think a lot of new users go on lists to vote and then forget. For some of us a list is a resource, for others, just another place where they can rank things or promote themselves and their friends.
Anyways I am jut giving suggestions. I am not trying to be very annoying (just a little :)
Ellie [The Empress] wrote: "And yet the first list has IMO one of the most spammed book on this website as N.2. That is a list I will know to look at only to mark books as not-for-me. I think a lot of new users go on lists ..."
You understand that the "Best Fantasy Books Under the Radar" was a list I gave as an example because it has almost no criteria and it is heavily spammed, right?
And yet if it had the 1000 to 9999 ratings rule and it was enforced, it would be a pretty interesting list. But the list owner is a fantasy author who's book with the highest number of ratings is 94 ratings.
Mitchell wrote: "You understand that the "Best Fantasy Books Under the Radar" was a list I gave as an example because it has almost no criteria and it is heavily spammed, right?"I thought so but I wasn't sure. Stupid me.
Mitchell wrote: "And yet if it had the 1000 to 9999 ratings rule and it was enforced, it would be a pretty interesting list. But the list owner is a fantasy author who's book with the highest number of ratings is 94 ratings. ."
Yeah, I'm also noticing books N2 to 7 are the same author. I'm also convinced that author used to be a goodreads author - no longer is.
Shepherd wrote: "Wow! There are some really concerned and disgruntled readers here. Perhaps we should create a list for all of those Goodreads members who have come here to do nothing but create their little Cyber ..."Pretty good troll comment.
The reality is that Goodreads lists are unfortunately only as good as their Librarian moderators. And that clearly irrelevant books show up on pretty much every list, including this one. Which is why clear criteria in a list description is important.
And it is good to get back to every list - including this one - and remove books that don't fit (though it is always possible that they used to).
Shepherd wrote: "It would seem that you have appointed yourself the Goodreads List Captain. Wow! It must be very lonely being you! Revel in your glory, Oh Genius of Books."I am the creator of this list. And a few others.
You, Shepherd Thorleif Halvorsen, are an author on Goodreads - and may I congratulate you on getting 6 distinct works published (or at least listed on Goodreads) with 26 ratings and 13 reviews with an average of 4.77 as of this post.
Of which the first book, The Bridge Across The River with 15 ratings has been placed on 132 lists or just under 9 lists per rating. And near as I can tell, the first voter on most of these lists for that book is none other than yourself. At the very least it is easy to confirm on the user_votes page that you voted your book on to 130+ lists.
Now some others might accuse you of something. I just note that this book is eligible for this list.
Shepherd wrote: "Accusations. . .spitting sound! Do your worst Mr. McCarthy."I've accused you of nothing. I am but a reader. And I'm happy to be a reader and keep writers in business. And I'm happy to be a reviewer. And to encourage my friends and others to read books that they would appreciate. And to talk about books. And to list books.
As a Goodreads librarian nothing frustrates me more than spamming authors. I can't even do much about it, if people add in the description no author spam, or have a certain number of ratings then I can remove it, otherwise I'm useless. Lick the razor is by far my least favorite, with twenty something pages worth of lists.
So I figure most of the people voting or commenting on this list might find this interesting:https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
GR have disallowed authors voting on or adding their own books. Now if we can just get them to run a script or something that removes all those votes retroactively!
Won't stop the circle jerks, but it's definite progress.
Great news Krazykiwi. Thanks for posting the link here. Do you know if previous votes will be affected by this?
Not sure, but think I am going to ask in Feedback, and also if this means librarians can remove books that have only one vote, from their author :)
Shepherd wrote: "What a pathetic endeavor!"Welcome back. And now with a second profile
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/5...
to go along with your first profile
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
though to be fair, the second profile is a personal one where the first is apparently an author profile.
I have to say, I was surprised when your previous comments on this forum went away.
Krazykiwi wrote: "So I figure most of the people voting or commenting on this list might find this interesting:https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
GR have disa..."
This is an interesting step. The thing is, I don't think that an author putting there book on a list is inherently bad. There are quite a few lists in which a new book by a new author fits - though those are usually focused on low number of ratings or on new authors or on a particular publisher or even on very specialty niches or with very few voters and books. And if an author put their book on some of those lists, perhaps along with their favorite books that fit those lists, that would probably be a good thing.
Your Favorite Angry Robot Books for Angry Robot Publishers
Best Fantasy on Goodreads with <100 ratings
Best Science Fiction on Goodreads with <100 ratings
Super Underrated Books Fewer than 50 Ratings_
The harder problem and the one I find more irritating is the practice of authors voting each other's books up, especially on "best of" lists. These are those books with more votes than ratings, or almost exactly the same number as books as ratings. This practice is also why that on most lists that I create it has a clause like, book later than 2006 (the year goodreads was created) require more ratings to be on the list. Just removing the author voting on their own book won't solve this.
Interesting. A number of these books I've noticed on lists I use, and it's irritating because I like to be a completist, but I'm not going to read a book that clearly doesn't have that many fans but hurtles up lists via spamming. Then when I shelve books according to lists I've (sorta) completed, I have to make it weirdly wordy to feel honest.
I suggest removing JV Jones' "Book of Words" (97) and Kate Constable's "New Guinea Moon" (143). The former is an omnibus of a series from the nineties, all with at least 4000 ratings.The latter is an established author (a popular series of kids books from early 2000s, 4500-9000 ratings), and is mostly on lists like "Characters with the name X", "Books with seasons in the title", "Australian authors", "Characters/authors named X". I think it's on a large number of lists because of name recognition, plus people adding all the books by an author to character/author/series type lists (and the redundancy of a lot of these lists).
removed Catori's Worlds and Switch! The Lost Kingdoms of Karibu and My First Travel Angelic Airline Adventures and Culloo - no longer on 3+ pages of lists.
just added Cult Girls. It is showing up in a lot of places. On the other hand it has made it to an impressive 558 ratings and 83 reviews
What an interesting list . . . and never ending endeavor due to over exuberance and malicious intent.Maintenance side note: While scanning the list I did notice around 10 titles that seem to have surmounted the 1000 rating threshold.
Removed for having more than 1000 ratings:Exotic Neurotic
Phantom Wolf
Possession of My Soul
Bloodlines
Gatsby's Smile
Kerri's War
The Tainted Trust
Explosion in Paris
Fairytales for Wilde Girls









