"written by/wrote" relationships on Editions and Edition Groups (e.g. Tolkien)

Some more malformed relationships:


Two editions of The Two Towers returning 404’s.

and another:


1 Like

All fixed !
It was a few relationships applied to the wrong entity type.
I’ll be preparing a report of all the instances where this happens, so we can eventually fix them.

Regarding the OpenLibrary identifier, the issue is that you’re trying to add an OL Work ID (OL…W) to an Edition, when they can only be added to a Work entity.
Adding the identifier to the Work instead does work: https://bookbrainz.org/revision/32632

OpenLibrary Books on the other hand (OL…M) can be added to Edition entities.
An example: https://bookbrainz.org/revision/32637

1 Like

That makes sense. Maybe it is time I took a break! Thanks.

A well deserved one, I must point out!
Thanks a lot for fixing all these entities

1 Like

Hmmm. I just tried to add the OpenLibrary edition ID OL17105221M to the Edition of Kkrishnaa’s Konfessions and I am still experiencing the same problem: https://bookbrainz.org/edition/6279baa9-aa2a-43d5-9974-9dd1b670016d

The system removes the ‘M’ and wants to make it an LCCN link.

1 Like

Ah, that looks like a separate issue, but an issue nonetheless !
I was pasting the entire OpenLibrary link in the input (which works; the autodetection mechanism does recognise the website link) and not just the identifier itself.

I’ve created a ticket to investigate that : https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/BB-553
Quite obviously, it’s being wrongly automatically detected as an LCCN identifier.

I’ve made a small change to the automatic detection for LCCN identifiers, and it should not detect other identifiers wrongly anymore.

1 Like

Some more 404’s:


1 Like

I keep getting a time out error (504) for the Edition listed in this EG and Work:



Everything else is responding normally.

Another Edition that refuses to open:



LoTR was written as a single novel, which happens to have been puiblished in several volumes in many cases, which might have a bearing on this :slight_smile:

However, I can’t really find a research consensus over whether to treat volumes as a series (LoTR would itself be part of Tolkien’s legendarium or Middle-Earth canon series), a single work with part works, or a single work with part manifestations (editions).

That might be, but the fact remains that the work was first published as three volumes over a one year period from 29 July 1954 to 20 October 1955. The first omnibus edition was published in December 1965.

On Bookogs, LoTR was treated as both a series and as a Work. However, BB does not regard an omnibus (collection) as a unique Work and therein lies the problem, because by definition it is an omnibus.