Goodreads Hack: The Power of the Want to Read Shelf

What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it first than the other one. (short memory i have, you know)

lol i will have over 20,000 books in my want to read in 3 years

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

You could use the "#" column to assign a number to your books in "want to read" order. You can always change the number for a book and shift things around.

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

Use the position field to order the list.

lol this is going to be viral

???

I don't think it's ever a good idea to tell people to spam books so they become popular. Greedier publishers will just hire people to do that and then (as usual) no-one will be able to trust the ratings.

There's a problem with the Young Adult years shelves for example. If you look at the list for Young Adult, 2013, 2014 etc you'll quickly find that the majority of the books are erotic novels and nothing to do with Young Adult, something that Goodreads still hasn't fixed.

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

Yes definitely--I already have too many books on my shelf to deal with reordering them by number, and it would be much easier to either rate them with stars or a verbal ranking (such as want to read very badly, want to read someday, etc.) right when I add them to the list, as opposed to comparing them to every other book I'd like to read someday.

I just mark as "Want to read" every book i buy :/ 368 Books "To-Read" is too much, so i do nothig with their position field and i just stack on the table the ones i want to read within the next months xD

I would love to have a field where I could mark how I heard about a book as I add to my Want To Read shelf. Then I could look back and see what were my favorite sources for new reading material!

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

You can add a star rating to any book on your Want to Read Shelf! Just make sure to add it to that shelf before rating it; otherwise it'll automatically be added to your Read shelf.

With over 1,000 books on my "Want to Read" shelf, it's become pretty useless to me. I almost wish there was some other way to organize them.

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

what you can do is sort your to-read shelf in a numberical order!

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

I love this idea Sara!

JoEllen wrote: "I would love to have a field where I could mark how I heard about a book as I add to my Want To Read shelf. Then I could look back and see what were my favorite sources for new reading material!"

Ooo that is a great idea too!

JoEllen wrote: "I would love to have a field where I could mark how I heard about a book as I add to my Want To Read shelf. Then I could look back and see what were my favorite sources for new reading material!"

There's actually a field "recommended by" but it's kinda deep down in the review page, so it may be kinda bothersome to do that for each book you add (especially when you're very lazy like me). But it does exist.

I had no idea there was a system to notify you when a book you've shelved before publication is released. Is this a new feature? do I have to turn this feature on? I've never had this happen, but it would be fantastic.

Sean wrote: "With over 1,000 books on my "Want to Read" shelf, it's become pretty useless to me. I almost wish there was some other way to organize them."

You could always make more shelves for whatever categories you want - "2018-upcoming-releases," "want-to-read-top-priority," "anticipated-sequels," etc.

(Personally, I don't use the Want to Read function because it bothers me to have books I haven't read on my Goodreads list. It feels wrong, you know? So instead I keep a list in notepad. But this is just a personal quirk - I don't expect anyone else does it this way.)

I would like a function so when you finish a book it adds the next book(s) in the series to Want to Read

Emily wrote: "You can add a star rating to any book on your Want to Read Shelf! Just make sure to add it to that shelf before rating it; otherwise it'll automatically be added to your Read shelf.*

Wait...why suggest someone rate a book they haven't read? According to the GR system, four stars is "I really liked it," which implies past tense "read it and so am giving an informed opinion." It's not "I'm planning to really like it at some point in the future." For that, we have both the notes function and the # column, neither of which affects the review system.

If someone has too many books to use the # function, there's always the option of creating multiple to-read shelves by creating exclusive shelves and naming them something like Want to Read Most, Want to Read Medium, etc.

I'm not being snarky or combative; it's an honest question.. Why knowingly compromise the rating system when there are so many other workarounds? Or am I missing something and ratings only count if the book is marked as Read? Because if that's the case, I've probably discounted a lot of books that show up with one and two star ratings.

JoEllen wrote: "I would love to have a field where I could mark how I heard about a book as I add to my Want To Read shelf. Then I could look back and see what were my favorite sources for new reading material!"

Each book has a private note field where you can add this info! From the My Books page, click the "edit" link next to the book on your shelf and it will bring up the "My Activity" screen where you can add a private note, as well as who recommended it to you.

This is also accessible from the book page if you click "Edit" on the My Activity section.

The Carrion Librarian wrote: "I had no idea there was a system to notify you when a book you've shelved before publication is released. Is this a new feature? do I have to turn this feature on? I've never had this happen, but i..."

This is not a new feature. You can turn it on in your Account Settings by checking the box next to "Email me when a book on my To-Read shelf becomes available" under "Newsletters and Other Email."

JoEllen wrote: "I would love to have a field where I could mark how I heard about a book as I add to my Want To Read shelf. Then I could look back and see what were my favorite sources for new reading material!"

Would the notes field work for you? Then when you rate or review the book after reading it, you could move that info to the Recommended By field, which is sortable (although public, whereas Notes remains hidden to all but the user).

Emily wrote: "Each book has a private note field where you can add this info! Just go to the book page and click "Edit" on the My Activity section, and you'll be able to add a private note. "

It could be useful to be able to edit this directly from our bookshelves page(s). Like have the edit button the same way we can edit directly from there "date read" or the shelves the book is in. (It's kinda troublesome to have to go to the book page, to get the activity page to edit this.) Or at least, directly from the book page.

Or maybe just have the "more details" working on the activity editing pop-up.

Viraphone wrote: "It could be useful to be able to edit this directly from our bookshelves page(s). Like have the edit button the same way we can edit directly from there "date read" or the shelves the book is in."

Sorry, I should have included that this is already possible from the My Books page; just click the "Edit" link and it'll bring up the same screen with those options.

I'll update my answer above to include this info.

Speaking of the Want to Read shelf, does anyone know if there is a way to force shelves to load with 100 entries per page by default?

I know I can change settings to 10, 20, 30 or infinite scroll via Settings, but to get it to display 100, I have to change it every time from the bottom of the page. I've got over 500 books on the to-read list, so 30 entries per page (or fewer) is not really helpful and Infinite scroll is cumbersome.

Tonk82 wrote: "I just mark as "Want to read" every book i buy :/ 368 Books "To-Read" is too much, so i do nothig with their position field and i just stack on the table the ones i want to read within the next mon..."

I've created shelf called own-to-read for books I've bought to keep separate from to-read books.

I also have a kindle-unlimited shelf to keep track of books I want to read that I don't have to buy...

Emily wrote: "Viraphone wrote: "It could be useful to be able to edit this directly from our bookshelves page(s). Like have the edit button the same way we can edit directly from there "date read" or the shelves..."

I've actually tried it many times, and while I can edit my review, read date and all, I can't edit the extra fields like "recommended by" or notes.

That's what I meant by "Or maybe just have the "more details" working on the activity editing pop-up." :)

Omg nooo stop using the star ratings as a sorting system. That is not what they are for. It’s a rating system. To rate how much you enjoyed the book. If you rate it 1 star because you want to read it later, then your bringing the rating for that book down. It’s not a classification system. The stars mean I really liked the book I just read or I hated the book I just read. Please stop using the stars to bookmark what books you want to read.

Cillian wrote: ""And that's exactly why GR ratings can't be trusted: you just encouraged users to give books the "WANT TO READ"--haven't read yet-- a fake rating."

Goodreads policy allows members to rate books as soon as they are listed on the site. Many of our members receive ARCs (Advanced Reading Copies) from publishers, which means they tend to write reviews of books pre-publication. Other members like to use the rating system to indicate their level of interest or excitement in a book. As there is no one set way to use the rating system, we view this as a valid use of the site. You can find more information in our Review Guidelines.

This seems more promotion than "hack". I don't use Goodreads to help publishers generate buzz.

Vee ♔Under Mountain Books♔ wrote: "I don't think it's ever a good idea to tell people to spam books so they become popular. Greedier publishers will just hire people to do that and then (as usual) no-one will be able to trust the ra..."

I entirely agree.

Cillian wrote: "I am aware of what ARCs are. But when you READ the ARC, the book is exactly that: Read. Want to read implies you haven't read it; why is it okay to rate books based on...what exactly? The cover; th..."

As I mentioned, other members use the rating system to indicate their level of interest or excitement in a book. We see this as a valid use of the site, and these ratings do not violate our rules.

Bridgett wrote: "Omg nooo stop using the star ratings as a sorting system. That is not what they are for. It’s a rating system. To rate how much you enjoyed the book. If you rate it 1 star because you want to read ..."

This explains why I often go to books that are not released for over a year and people have rated them.

Emily wrote: "Cillian wrote: "I am aware of what ARCs are. But when you READ the ARC, the book is exactly that: Read. Want to read implies you haven't read it; why is it okay to rate books based on...what exactl..."

It's not "valid" because what I'm seeing is spam. I no longer trust the overall Goodreads ratings because they are obviously skewed and apparently Goodreads is fine with this! (Or should I say Amazon)

Cillian wrote: "I am aware of what ARCs are. But when you READ the ARC, the book is exactly that: Read. Want to Read implies you haven't read it; why is it okay to rate books based on...what, exactly? The cover; t..."

YES, exactly!

Vee ♔Under Mountain Books♔ wrote: "Emily wrote: "Cillian wrote: "I am aware of what ARCs are. But when you READ the ARC, the book is exactly that: Read. Want to read implies you haven't read it; why is it okay to rate books based on..."

Please feel free to flag any review that seem to be spam or otherwise violate our policies so that a member of our team can review it and take action if needed.

Emily wrote: "Vee ♔Under Mountain Books♔ wrote: "Emily wrote: "Cillian wrote: "I am aware of what ARCs are. But when you READ the ARC, the book is exactly that: Read. Want to read implies you haven't read it; wh..."

This isn't anything to do with what I wrote? I'm glad Goodreads (amazon) cares so little about it's users. I honestly wish that there was an alternative I could use that actually listened to what it's readers wanted.

Emily wrote: "Cillian wrote: ""And that's exactly why GR ratings can't be trusted: you just encouraged users to give books the "WANT TO READ"--haven't read yet-- a fake rating."

Goodreads policy allows members ..."

Okaaay...so you've really just said, in effect, "We're not even pretending anymore that the ratings system serves any real purpose to the reading community at large or that the courteous thing for users to do is use it to convey any real information about what they really read." I realize it can't be policed, but people in large groups tend to behave in accordance to set expectations. What you just said set the expectation to "shrug. whatever. as long as it can be manipulated for marketing buzz." So if I see a book description that says there are 5000 five star ratings on Goodreads, it now officially means bugger-all nothing.

Wow. Even though I knew the system wasn't perfect, I assumed most of us wanted it to be useful to the community at large. Suddenly, I just don't see the point in bothering to rate or review at all. I certainly won't be deciding whether to take a closer look at a book based on the ratings going forward.

Yaaresse wrote: Okaaay...so you've really just said, in effect, "We're not even pretending anymore that the ratings system serves any real purpose to the reading community at large or that the courteous thing for users to do is use it to convey any real information about what they really read." I realize it can't be policed, but people in large groups tend to behave in accordance to set expectations. What you just said set the expectation to "shrug. whatever. as long as it can be manipulated for marketing buzz." So if I see a book description that says there are 5000 five star ratings on Goodreads, it now officially means bugger-all nothing. "

This could be solved quite easily by not allowing reviews or ratings of a book until one month before it's release date, to prevent spam. Also there should be something in place so that if a book suddenly receives 500 ratings in one day, someone gets an alert and checks it out to make sure it's not promotional spam?

Goodreads is an old website and problems like these should be fixed by now.

I use my "want to read" shelf for anything that piques my interest. If I'm really interested in a book and I want to buy it as soon as possible, it goes on my "looking for it" shelf. If I'm interested but I'm gonna pass the book over two dozen times before getting to it maybe a year from now, it goes on my "want to read but not that badly" shelf. Hasn't been published yet, it goes on my "waiting game" shelf until it's released and then I move it, or read it, or read reviews and change my mind about reading it at all, etc.

I'm just saying, there's no reason every single book you maybe want to read has to go on the "want to read" shelf - you can make other shelves.

Vee ♔Under Mountain Books♔ wrote: "This could be solved quite easily by not allowing reviews or ratings of a book until one month before it's release date, to prevent spam. Also there should be something in place so that if a book suddenly receives 500 ratings in one day, someone gets an alert and checks it out to make sure it's not promotional spam?

Goodreads is an old website and problems like these should be fixed by now.."

I like your ideas; however, I think they don't stand a chance. She just implied that it's all about "creating buzz" rather than sharing information or maintaining integrity of the review system. Until someone in upper management decides integrity contributes to profitability, it's an adorable idea that is useless to the corporate Powers That Be. If the illusion suits their marketing needs, there is no incentive to actually have valid information. Why bother?

Oh, wait...because it's the honest, ethical, customer-focused thing to do? Right. Yeah. I getting the idea doesn't mean anything anymore.

Emily wrote: "...other members use the rating system to indicate their level of interest or excitement in a book. We see this as a valid use of the site, and these ratings do not violate our rules. "
So why even show the average rating for a book, when it's a complete mix of ratings based on reading the book and ratings based on excitement? It doesn't help anyone to have this system that's neither fish nor fowl.

I think its apretty good article.

I don't use it. Actually, other than the "read" shelf, I don't use the executive shelves. I made my own executive shelves and organized everything by the year I added them. Makes going through and finding something to read so much easier.

Yaaresse wrote: "I like your ideas; however, I think they don't stand a chance. She just implied that it's all about "creating buzz" rather than sharing information or maintaining integrity of the review system. Until someone in upper management decides integrity contributes to profitability, it's an adorable idea that is useless to the corporate Powers That Be. If the illusion suits their marketing needs, there is no incentive to actually have valid information. Why bother? "

Oh I know. None of my ideas are new - I've seen them in Goodreads forums repeated over and over and over and over and nothing ever changes. I can't believe that it was only in the last year that Goodreads finally allowed us to add re-reads of a book!

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

I would love this!!!!!

I'm trying really hard to understand Emily's position. Admittedly, I'm not having much luck. But to that end, I did go read the TOS. It seems the gist of the problem is twofold: GR's goal (whether they want valid reviews or just buzz) and semantics. I'm cynical enough about social media to be dubious on the first. On the second, I think there is room for improvement.

For example, this from the TOS:
"Pre-publication reviews. Many of our members receive advance copies of books to review, either through Goodreads giveaways or another source. We have no way of knowing the exact date that review copies are available. As such, each book is eligible to be reviewed as soon as it appears on the site. "

Does it seem to anyone else that the intent of this paragraph and it's literal wording are at odds? "As such" points back to the idea of advance copies received by members. The implication of the sentence is that said ARCS were read and reviewed, thus the members who do such are contributing informed opinions based on having read the ARC. I'm reading this to say "We don't know when you got the ARC, so as soon as the book is listed, you can post your review of the ARC. You don't have to wait for the official publication date." Nothing here about rating books that have not been read just because someone is excited about reading it someday...maybe.

Then there is this further down:
"We will not tolerate abuse of our ratings system, such as rating the same work more than once for the purpose of inflating or deflating the book's average rating. Multiple ratings we determine to be abusive will be removed. "

Ok, fair enough. And I know this targets multiple ratings, but, again, let's look at intent versus specific wording. Doesn't suggesting it is OK to rate a book that has not been read serve to artificially inflate or deflate the book's average rating? If that is undesirable, then isn't it always undesirable?

The TOS repeatedly uses the words "quality" and "review." To review something means to critique, examine, judge, or make informed comment based on knowledge of the subject. By the definition of the word, you can't "review" what you haven't viewed in the first place.

So is it possible that we are all right in what we think we're saying, but what we're saying isn't what we mean?

I have to admit, if Goodreads (or its designated representatives) is really saying that anything goes on the ratings system, I see no value in it on any level and won't bother to use it anymore.

Sara wrote: "What I need aside from that is a button or stars indicating how much I want to read that. Because maybe that book is interesting but the next one is even more interesting and I want to read it firs..."

I created a shelf called Next Please. That's where I shelve books from my Want to Read shelf that I am most excited about and want to read soon. I set a limit of how many books I can put on my Next Please shelf so it doesn't get out of control like my Want to Read shelf. It's my way of prioritizing.

Oh I know. None of my ideas are new - I've seen them in Goodreads forums repeated over and over and over and over and nothing ever changes. I can't believe that it was only in the last year that Goodreads finally allowed us to add re-reads of a book! "

I can't decide if I'm having a rare moment of idealism trying to wrap my brain around the idea that validity of reviews is worth speaking up about or if I'm being a lot more cynical than usual.
The first is unlikely and the second probably not possible. :)