Author combination "Are you sure?" page

I'm going to make a "Combine authors?" page, to slow down members seeking to combine authors.

I'm thinking it needs:

* The disambiguation notices for both authors
* A warning for each author that is split

Anything else it needs?

Thank you!

I asked a long time ago that a question mark be placed after "Combine with…" on the author page. Please?

There should be a strongly worded suggestion that each author page sought to be combined should be looked at to verify that it's correct. I often do random checks of authors in my catalogue to see if there are other pages that should be combined, so I'm using the site search for that. I sometimes find that even though the "results" page shows the name I'm looking for, the author page itself is different. One reason this happens is because someone has used a canonical name.

Here's an example. Search for Phair. Click on the single name "Phair", and it will take you to P.E.H. Hair's author page, because someone entered that as the canonical name, despite the URL: https://http://www.librarything.com/author/phair If I had an author "Phair" and didn't bother to look, Id be combining different authors.

>1 timspalding: I'd also like some way of clearly indicating which author's page URL should be the one that gets kept. I could be misremembering, but I think I've seen it occasionally end up keeping the name-parts-in-the-wrong-order version of the URL instead of the correctly-named URL when combining a mangled-name author with the correctly-named author, although the displayed name within the webpage picks up the most popular name.

And this would be more involved, but getting a whole 'authors workbench' similar to the works workbench would be great, so you wouldn't have to do workarounds to combine zero-work authors.

>3 Opteryx: Yes! an authors workbench would be great.

This well help, but I agree with >2 lilithcat: about explicitly saying author pages should be looked at before deciding on combining. It is not infrequent for the name you see in search results not to correspond all too well to the actual page even without canonical name set. Perhaps this middle step should actually be opening the author page to be combined (with the proposed DN notices and split info, and confirmation/cancel button included). If not possible, the need to check the author page should be emphasized

>3 Opteryx: +1

If the potential conbination has been previously "Nevered" - by clicking (never combine) on the list of suggestions - there should be a note to that effect on the confirmation page. https://www.librarything.com/topic/174504

I think canonical names (in all languages) should be at least displayed before authors are combined.

>8 MarthaJeanne: Yes, and it could even also display the list of previously-combined names attached to that author, in small grey text like it does on the author pages.

>3 Opteryx:

It could perhaps report which will be kept, but the system picks the larger one. It can't be gamed and I don't want to allow it be gamed. Also, the URL should be unimportant. I am minded to move to a purely numerical system, because ultimately the URL is just mapped to a number.

>5 SandraArdnas: This well help, but I agree with >2 lilithcat: lilithcat: about explicitly saying author pages should be looked at before deciding on combining. It is not infrequent for the name you see in search results not to correspond all too well to the actual page even without canonical name set. Perhaps this middle step should actually be opening the author page to be combined (with the proposed DN notices and split info, and confirmation/cancel button included). If not possible, the need to check the author page should be emphasized

Actually, I could go farther and REQUIRE people to have visited both pages recently.

>7 r.orrison: If the potential conbination has been previously "Nevered" - by clicking (never combine) on the list of suggestions - there should be a note to that effect on the confirmation page. https://www.librarything.com/topic/174504

That's interesting. Makes sense.

>8 MarthaJeanne: I think canonical names (in all languages) should be at least displayed before authors are combined.

Although this falters on the fact that canonical names aren't really kept separate by language. That's something that needs to be fixed, although it's no small task.

>10 timspalding: I am minded to move to a purely numerical system, because ultimately the URL is just mapped to a number.

If you do that, can you fix the problem where "Jones, Robert A." and "Jones, Roberta" map to the same author page? (Currently they both end up on /author/jonesroberta.)

>10 timspalding:
Actually, I could go farther and REQUIRE people to have visited both pages recently.

I think this is a good idea.

Although this falters on the fact that canonical names aren't really kept separate by language.

I don't think it matters for the purposes of a combination warning. Opterex is right that the names already combined should be listed, and I'd add the legal name might be important now and again.

Just generally, I'm glad this is happening.

While you are about it, you could also add in gender & dates of birth/death when they have been recorded, and possibly also place of birth/death. Basically, any information to distinguish ambiguous authors.

>17 Collectorator: Why are you posting those examples here? Is there some relevance to the proposed new feature of the thread title? If not, it really belongs to https://www.librarything.com/topic/326689 where individual combining issues are currently being discussed

>19 Collectorator:

Yes, but the question asked here is Anything else it {an "are you sure" page} needs?

What is the point you are trying to make with your examples? What, if anything, should be said about them on an "are you sure" page?

Posting examples without explanation is not helpful. We cannot read your mind.

This is a good idea! I would love having a more robust system for combining authors.

I would find these things most helpful
>1 timspalding: - Disambiguation notices & split author warnings
>7 r.orrison: - Nevers
Plus requiring a visit to the relevant author pages.

Tim asked: Anything else?
A thorough and accurate Help page to go with it.

(And yes, I'm volunteering to help write/check/edit/etc. with that wiki page.)

>21 Collectorator: Again, this thread discusses a new feature that should help prevent unwanted author combinations by introducing an additional stage in the process, similar to one when combining works.

FWIW, I personally refuse to even look at your examples

>24 Collectorator: see >1 timspalding:. Do you have thoughts for the new feature?

Because posting links in this thread without an explanation looks as if you're lost, posting to the wrong topic.