Wikipedia talk:ISBN

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Broadly:

But why do Wiki ISBN links fail so often? Are they always to PriceScan.com ? Perhaps the parser should differentiate based on the first (region) digit. -- Hotlorp

It's not quite as simple as that, but it's close. See http://www.isbn.spk-berlin.de/html/prefix/allpref.htm for details.

Broadly:

0 English speaking areas
1 English speaking areas
2 French speaking areas
3 German speaking areas
4 Japan
5 Former USSR
6 (undefined?)
7 China
8x various: see the cite above for details
9x various: see the cite above for details

Here are some links:

French online booksellers

List of German online booksellers

Article about Japanese online booksellers, with links at the end

Can anyone suggest good French, German, Japanese, Chinese etc. online booksellers that take ISBN links?

A dutch online bookshop is Proxis, to search using an ISBN use this link. Peak Freak 20:47, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Tailoring the links according to the prefix code would be a good start, but perhaps a little more might be done. At the Esperanto wiki we'd certainly love to be able to have ISBN links as well, but there are two problems:

  • First, while there are a number of online Esperanto book services and catalogs, I don't think any of them are actively indexed by ISBN. (This is perhaps fixable; I'm thinking of setting up a meta-index site which could be pointed to if I can't find one that's suitable as-is.)
  • More importantly, those prefixes are by physical region of the publisher with some grouping by the primary local language, not by the language of the published material or the target audience. I have books on my shelf with prefixes 83 (Poland), 88 (Italy/Switzerland), 91 (Sweden), and 92 (International organizations -- publications by the Universal Esperanto Association go in this category, but not most publishers) -- but I'd wager you'll have a hard time finding them in mainstream Polish, Italian etc online bookshops.

We could just make the default link point to an Esperanto catalog site for the eo wiki, but then it gets more difficult to cite books in other languages (or to cite sources/referenced books in articles _about_ Esperanto on the other wikis). An internal list of publisher's codes might help... Just something to think about. --Brion VIBBER

I removed this:

To create a link to AddAll.com, a somewhat better service with links to more booksellers make an external link in the form: [http://www.addall.com/New/Partner.cgi?query=0521258626&type=ISBN ISBN: 0521258626]. Note you must enter the ISBN twice. The colon after ISBN is necessary or a link to Pricescan.com will be created automatically by the wiki software.

Aside from not wanting to say that AddAll is "better", I don't think that we should have links to all sorts of different service running around, unless these are to find different languages and the like. Hardcoded links are also not as good (in general) as links created by the software using ISBN notation. Perhaps AddAll is better than Pricescan; then we should make ISBN links go to AddAll. This (and Wikipedia-L) is precisely the place to discuss it. — Toby 15:04 Aug 21, 2002 (PDT)

After a very brief look, I think that AddAll is indeed better, for this reason: It gives information about the book even when it has no prices to list. So I will suggest this to Wikipedia-L. — Toby 15:08 Aug 21, 2002 (PDT)

AddAll also lists many more booksellers including those offering used books and those in England User:Fredbauder

I came across another price comparison service which looks great. http://www.AAABookSearch.com To find the lowest book prices. — Anon

There are other even better book price comparison sites: http://www.alldiscountbooks.net and http://www.discounttextbooks.net .

Although this reads something like a spam ad (sorry to Anon if that wasn't the intent), looking at the site, I have to agree that it seems pretty fair. I can't edit special pages, but if I did, then I'd add it. — Toby 05:54 Nov 3, 2002 (UTC)

Can I put in a request for that special page to include amazon.co.uk as well? It's only got four links at the mo, so there's lots of space for more. It'd also be a nice way for Bomis/Wikipedia to make a little cash... -Martin

It would be very interesting a link, a page or a section in this article about How include ISBN links in wikipedia. Mac 00:49 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

from village pump

Question/suggestion about http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Booksources

This page only comes up when you click on an ISBN and then it goes from this page directly to a link for the ISBN you clicked on. Mega-handy, but not explained on the page. It would also be mega-handy, to me, anyway, if going to the page directly allowed going to one of the book sources and searching directly. It works on everything but the Barnes and Noble link. Ortolan88

end from village pump


Moved from the main page:

Could Wikipedia make some money with referral payments?

I want to add Powell's used books to the list, but it requires adding a link with that ends 1-ISBN-4. any ideas on how I'd do that, or if it's possible? Koyaanis Qatsi 09:19 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN link - how to?

Hi, how do I link to an ISBN with alternate text? i.e. I want the link ISBN 0767901320 to read Success is a Choice.

I'm trying to put this into Rick Pitino.

Thanks! Goodralph 02:12, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

We don't do it that way. A link reading "Success is a Choice" is expected to go to a Wikipedia article with that title (or an external website, if it's a different colour). ISBN links are consciously left to read the actual ISBN so the user knows that it is an ISBN link. -- Timwi 02:26, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
But in some situations, it is already plainly obvious that the number is an ISBN, such as in a table. For example, look at World's Best Reading. Forcing a "ISBN" in front of each number is awkward looking and redundant. Pimlottc (talk) 05:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, why can't Wikipedia make money from ISBN links? It could become an Amazon Associate, for example. I make a few dollars a month from my associate links from my home page, and practically no one visits that. Wikipedia should be able to make much more. I'd be happy to look into this if there's general consensus that we should do it. (Or has this been discussed before?) Lawrence 23:48, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

It has been discussed quite a lot - particularly on the mailing list. Jimbo Wales has now signed Wikipedia as an Amazon affliate for a trial period. This is quite controversial. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 21:48, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Template:ISBN

I created the template to flag articles for cleanup, i.e. those that mentioned books and needed an ISBN added. User:Ctorok has been in touch with me about the category and I put up a suggestion on Template talk:ISBN about what numbers should be cited. I'd appreciate Wikipedians adding their suggestions there. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 19:57, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

re. publisher ranges, the article states that "a complete, up-to-date list is not available at isbn.org"; so what's this: http://www.isbn-international.org/en/identifiers/List-of-Ranges.pdf? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.45.129.21 (talk • contribs) 20 May, 2005

[edit] ISBN

Can a book have more than one ISBN? If so how do I know which one to use? Jaberwocky6669 00:34, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, for various editions of the book (hardcover, paperback, etc.) -- WhiteDragon 20:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd also like to know an answer to this one. is there a preference for first edition, currently in print edition, hardback, paperback, trade, etc ? --Quiddity 21:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
On an article about the book, I try and include as many ISBNs as I can (there's a few articles which are de facto complete publication records for that book because of this), but it's a tedious process. If you're referencing a particular edition, make sure you've the right ISBN. Otherwise, use whatever you feel is best - but it's probably a good idea to go with the edition most likely to be available to a reader, so "current paperback" is a good bet. (For widely published books, it might be a good idea to find ISBNs for UK/Commonwealth editions as well as American ones, or vice versa, since it's common for these to coexist). Shimgray | talk | 22:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

What about in between editions? (Eg. Between edition 6 & 7). Will the ISBN change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.125.157.117 (talk) , 10 January 2007.

The ISBN could be different. I have noticed publishers changing the ISBN when they reprint a book even though the text might be the same. Certainly Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine appears to change ISBNs with each edition. Publishers seem to use the ISBN as a 'stock number', a thing to designate a separately orderable item. Suppose they keep more than one edition in print (for whatever reason). If they have different ISBNs, it makes it easier for the customer to order the one they want. EdJohnston 05:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems, based on what's currently stated on the project page, that a single book (same edition and printing) can have two ISBN's, a 10-digit and a 13-digit one. The project page here says we should use only the 13-digit if available. Am I interpreting this correctly? --Georgeryp 05:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
That's what the project page appears to say. I myself would not agree, unless the book was first issued after 1 January, 2007. I would prefer to see pre-2007 books still listed using their ISBN-10s. Not all booksellers and libraries can yet search for older books by an ISBN-13. EdJohnston 19:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree, in principle, that maximizing the chance someone will find a book (via Wikipedia:Book sources or otherwise) is important. The wording prefering ISBN-13 over ISBN-10 was made on this edit[1]. I did some further digging and on User talk:Tschild it states "...before the end of the year when ISBN-10 become invalid" (written in Dec 2006). What is meant by invalid? Are books with both 10 and 13-digit isbns going to become "unfind-able" under their ISBN-10s? I'm still learning how things work on Wikipedia - what is the next step? - A post to someone's Talk page or waiting for a reply here? A test case: ISBN 0066620384 and ISBN 978-0066620381 are both the same book (according to Amazon.com) but the Internet Book Database only finds it with the 10-digit isbn (assuming the IBD can find some books with 13 digits) --Georgeryp 20:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
You are welcome to write to Rich Farmbrough to see if he still maintains that opinion. I don't believe you'll find any unanimity across Wikipedia on this point. EdJohnston 01:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "SAT test"

"ISBN number" is redundant, much like "PIN number," "ATM machine," or "SAT test".

This is not technically true; if you'll look at the SAT article, you will see that it formerly stood for Schoolastic Aptitude Test, or Scholastic Assessment Tests, but currently stands for nothing, just "SAT". Therefore, this bit of information is not true. Yes, it is useful, but it is still untrue. Perhaps another example could be used?

-mysekurity 22:32, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-commercial book database?

The Book sources tool is excellent, but I was wondering if there are efforts to create a non-commercial, non-library database of book information. Amazon and other sites listed on the Book sources page come pretty close to cataloguing the many books and editions of books across the world... however, many times I can't tell if the information about a book (like who narrated the audio versions of The Terrible Hours ISBN 0060194804) is correct or complete. Some of the Category:Online_databases are good, but I don't know of any massive book sites.

[edit] The first 3 paragraphs of this article

are hugely useful to editors trying to figure out how to cite things; please consider not editing them very extensively. -Ikkyu2 20:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links, but no basic info

I think the template should show basic info (title, author, publication date, etc.) at the top before all the links to find the book in various libraries and price comparison sites. As it is, clicking on an ISBN link shows nothing about the book itself. -- WhiteDragon 20:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EAN and 13 digit ISBN

I ran across an article which listed a 13 digit ISBN for the book, prefixed with "ISBN-13". The link didn't work. These 13 digit ISBNs which incorporate an EAN are discussed at Isbn#EAN_format_used_in_barcodes.2C_and_planned_upgrade. Is there a plan to make MediaWiki and/or Wikipedia deal with 13 digit ISBN?--Larrybob 18:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering the same thing. I'm surprised that we haven't seen more discussion about this! --J. J. 20:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
At present, the automatic recognition only works for "ISBN 978-0-394-80016-5" form, not "ISBN-13 978-0-394-80016-5". The important thing is, the number of digits is not a problem. --KSmrqT 07:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
All ISBNs will become 13-digit from January 2007. Would it be possible, or desirable, for a bot to upgrade all the ISBNs in Wikipedia? Alternatively, is there any reason why this should not or could not be done?--Shantavira 11:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this would be desirable. I'd be curious what publication-industry experts would have to say about this. For example, Amazon has not mentioned anything about switching to ISBN-13; they still use a 10-digit ASIN/ISBN. Consequently, a lot of the Special:Booksources external links would be broken. However, it may be possible to tweak the Booksources code so that a Wikipedia ISBN-13 book would automatically link to the corresponding ASIN (using Amazon as an example again). This would be a little tricky since the "check digit" is different for ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 (e.g. ISBN 0-394-80016-8 uses an 8 at the end while the same book ISBN 978-0-394-80016-5 uses a 5 on ISBN-13). I'm not sure what suggest for future ISBN-13 compliance, but I think it's too early for a bot to upgrade all WP ISBNs. --J. J. 20:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Just to clarify, as far as public interfaces are concerned, nothing should be done about this until 2007, but it would be as well to be prepared for the change.--Shantavira 18:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coding of Special:Booksources-like page for chemicals

Dear readers,

I am (mainly) active in the chemistry-area of the Wikipedia, where we have run into a 'content dispute' about external links to suppliers of (and other information about) specific chemicals. As a solution it was suggested to create a page like the Special:Booksources page (unique identifiers like the ISBN exist for chemicals, e.g. CAS-number and InChI). We have (just) started now to create a Wikipedia:Chemical sources-page, but is there anyone here, who could explain us more about the coding of the Special:Booksources (and possibly even help writing the appropriate page for the chemical sources, if that would be feasable???). Would be nice to start it of correctly from the beginning. I think for the coding-help it would be nice that you have some understanding about chemistry (but that is not necessary). Any help would be appreciated.

Could you please answer on Wikipedia Talk:Chemical sources, cheers! --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template: ISBN-13

I created {{ISBN-13}} (unfortunately, AFTER reading the above) without realizing {{ISBN}} and apparently just writing 'ISBN 1-4165-2051-1' worked without aid (I usually like colons too! Shrug). But the reality is the system is parsing both 10 and 13 digit ISBN's, so I'm tempted to just tag it {db-author}, but figured I'd check here to see if there was any use in the auto-cataloging I built into it that would be of use. {{ISBN}} could be easily modified to create an equivilent Category:10-digit ISBN cited, or 'whatever'. // FrankB 18:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Since no one commented on the above, I'm tagging it with db-author for speedy delete.

[edit] Template:ISBN up for deletion

I ran across {{ISBN}} as nominated for deletion itself last night. If the link is still blue, and the nomination is still active, there's a link there to the Tfd. // FrankB 04:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it would have been polite to inform the person who made the template when you nominated it. Stevage 06:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISSN

Can the same trick be added to software to recognize ISSN as well? Currently we have to use template:ISSN for that. --Irpen 05:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

This would be extremely helpful. Does anyone know if/how this can be done? Skomorokh incite 15:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for assistance

Request for assistance, please. New books are being issued 13-digit ISBN codes. How do we write those into articles (which currently support 10-digit ISBNs nicely)? thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.200.189 (talk • contribs) 8 April, 2007.

Please note that you can sign your comments by appending four tildes ~~~~ to your Talk page message before you hit the 'Save page' button, and it expands automatically into your ID and the date. EdJohnston 20:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
The next section should answer your question. EdJohnston 19:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Using 13-digit ISBNs in Wikipedia articles

In answer to the question above, there is no problem with using 13-digit ISBNs in Wikipedia articles. Currently for 10-digit ISBNs people write ISBN 0123456789. Notice that the ISBN is highlighted in blue, which happens because the Mediawiki software recognizes ISBNs and treats them specially. This behavior is known as 'ISBN magic'. The feature works just as well with 13-digit ISBNs. For instance, you can write ISBN 9780123456789 and this also gets the blue highlighting treatment. Inserting hyphens into the ISBN is accepted and should not affect any results you get by clicking on the ISBN. Just be sure not to write any punctuation after the word 'ISBN', or add anything extraneous, like 'ISBN-13 9780..' because any unexpected punctuation mark will spoil the ISBN magic. EdJohnston 20:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

As 10-digit ISBNs don't exist anymore, it is worth re-thinking whether they should be converted to ISBN-13's within Wikipedia using a robot? Also, it would be useful if the Wiki ISBN magic also worked on the prefixes "ISBN-10" and "ISBN-13" as well as "ISBN". HairyWombat 22:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding this site to external links

Anyone objects adding http://www.barcodeRobot.com/isbn-13.html to the external links section in ISBN article?

Gs1mo 14:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why this would be helpful to our readers. This page assumes you HAVE an ISBN-13, and you are a bookseller who wants to generate a barcode to use on a book. This is a highly-specialized requirement which is unlikely to be found in a typical reader of WP's ISBN articles. EdJohnston 03:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
With all respect - why not? 2/5k books get self-published daily. If you are living in the country that is reasonably well served you have Lulu or Bowker's who do partly your job, but very often you have to do all by yourself (including slapping the barcode on the back). Now this is not so trivial and readers still need a decent tool that does it and is standards compliant. The site I am suggesting, actually, does it right: inline with GS1 and BISG guidelines, providing the right hyphenation above the barcode, right q-zones, OCR-B font etc ... The link that is provided instead (www.cut-the-knot.org) does not produce the standards compliant barcode. I would stop ranting here and would just say that it's worth reconsidering, IMHO. Speaking of the suggested site ISBN10 -> ISBN13 conversion might be useful though. Gs1mo 14:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't see the point of your argument. This page is to help coordinate usage of ISBNs within Wikipedia. Such coordination does not require the ability to generate bar codes for self-published books. Know your audience! EdJohnston 21:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
You are right, my mistake. Chexov29 16:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm verry confused

I've been trying to find the ISBN's a manga, for an article I'm revisioning, but what makes it hard is that it was never published in English, so every page I look up is in Japanese. My Japanese is limited, but what I can make out is I think I found them, but I get some other words; ASIN, ISBN-10, and ISBN-13. I'll just copy n paste what I found (from my sandbox):


[edit] 秋田書店

  • [2] I think volumes 1-3: Publisher: 秋田書店 (1942)

ASIN: B000JBPQH2


  • [3] I think volume two: Publisher 秋田書店 (1974/07)

ASIN: B000J6LZSG


  • [4] unsure of volume: Publisher: 秋田書店

ASIN: B00007CCBN

[edit] 世界文化社

  • [5] volume 1: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1997/05)

ISBN-10: 4418975179 ISBN-13: 978-4418975174


  • [6] volume 2: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1997/08

ISBN-10: 4418975187 ISBN-13: 978-4418975181


  • [7] volume 3: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1997/10)

ISBN-10: 4418975217 ISBN-13: 978-4418975211


  • [8] volume 4: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1998/03)

ISBN-10: 4418975292 ISBN-13: 978-4418975297


  • [9] volume 5: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1998/10)

ISBN-10: 441898514X ISBN-13: 978-4418985142


  • [10] unsure of volume: Publisher: 世界文化社

ASIN: B00007CCBP


  • [11] unsure of volume: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1999/10)

ISBN-10: 4418995323 ISBN-13: 978-4418995325


  • [12] unsure of the volume: Publisher: 世界文化社 (1999/10)

ISBN-10: 4418995315 ISBN-13: 978-4418995318

[edit] 角川書店

  • [13] I THINK it this is the Graphical book: Publisher: 角川書店 (1999/07)

ISBN-10: 4047016276 ISBN-13: 978-4047016279


  • [14] unsure of volume: Publisher: 角川書店 (2000/03)

ISBN-10: 4047016292 ISBN-13: 978-4047016293


  • [15] unsure of what it is: 出版社名:

角川書店 ISBNコード: 978-4-04-701629-3 （4-04-701629-2）

  • [16] unsure what it is: 出版社名:

角川書店 ISBNコード: 978-4-04-701627-9 （4-04-701627-6）

  • [17] unsure what it is: 出版社: 角川書店

ISBNコード: 9784047016279 9784047016293


So, what is ASIN, ISBN-10, and ISBN-13, and which code, do I list? Thank you for your help. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 02:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Your signature is a bit large; see WP:SIG for what is generally allowed. In terms of the ISBNs:
  • I suggest you get rid of all the ASIN numbers. They are Amazon-specific, and some editors object to their use, unless they have high reference value for a hard-to-find book.
  • My personal opinion: for books published before 1 Jan 2007, give only the ISBN-10. For books published after that, use only the ISBN-13. If you don't know which it is, it is OK to just use ISBN-10s for all books, or ISBN-13s for all books.
  • Do *not* write "ISBN-10" or "ISBN-13" in your reference list; this will keep Wikimedia software from recognizing the ISBNs.
  • GOOD EXAMPLE ISBN 0123456780
  • BAD EXAMPLES ISBN: 01234567890, ISBN-10 01234567890
  • Do not include any punctuation or any Japanese characters between the word "ISBN" and the number itself. Same reason.
  • Any hyphenation that you find within the ISBN number is OK; Wikimedia software will ignore it. For instance ISBN 0-1234-5678-9 is OK.
EdJohnston 03:31, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
"unless they have high reference value for a hard-to-find book.": The books by 秋田書店 were originally published in the 1960s (dunno why Amazon says otherwise; I did some research); I dont know if Japan used ISBN or what. So ASIN is the only thing I could find. Verry hard to find info on the original publishing. But, when I do find more info, I'll get rid of them.
"My personal opinion: for books published before 1 Jan 2007, give only the ISBN-10.": Well if the books have an ISBN-10 and ISBN-13, wouldnt it indicate that it has been republished after 1 Jan 2007? So, would both still be relevant?

I'm still mainly in the process of finding info about these books, so I have not re-written it Wikipedia software could recognize. But thank you for your help. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 04:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

  • My only concern about BOTH ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 for a single entry is that the information is redundant. You are wasting space in the encyclopedia. (One is easily generated from the other using a simple algorithm).
  • I hope you have registered the problem caused by inserting your own punctuation between "ISBN" and the number.
  • I am still not convinced that your massive listing of Japanese-language references is going to be all that useful to the English-speaking reader. Perhaps you could find some way of summarizing your work, by saying how much was originally released in Japanese, so they could have some idea of whether the English releases match up with the Japanese originals. Also there's a bug in your signature. The 'Justice is served' part links to Special:Contributions/angelofeath275 which appears to me a misspelling of your user name. EdJohnston 17:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

That book itself was not released by an English company. When I try to find info about it in English, its only from people who have reviewed the anime based on it, and say little things like "it was based off of a manga from the 1960s from Satoru Ozawa". And I've said it was originally published in Japanese in my sandbox. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 03:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glitch?

Is there some kind of software glitch that erases ISBN numbers? I've seen this problem on several articles now where I had added the ISBN to the citation and later noticed that all the numbers have disappeared although "ISBN" is still there (see Police, for example). Anyone? bobanny 07:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I put back four ISBNs in Police. (There was an old version from March that still had them). Let me know if they disappear again. EdJohnston 15:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN Checksum Formulas

I dislike using the "double mods" in the ISBN checksum formulas. By making things minus, you can use a single mod.

For the ISBN-10, I think this simplifies things.

check=(1*a + 2*b + 3*c + 4*d + 5*e + 6*f + 7*g + 8*h * 9*i) mod 11

For the ISBN-13, it might make things clearer or more complicated depending on your viewpoint.

check=(9*a + 7*b + 9*c + 7*d + 9*e + 7*f + 9*g + 7*h * 9*i + 7*j + 9*k + 7*l) mod 10

Temblast 13:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spaces in ISBNs - harmful or okay?

I found some pages that specify ISBN 1 2345 6789 0 and to my surprise, it works even though there are spaces rather than dashes between the digits. However, there are some irregularities with respect to 10/13 digits and whether they start with 978, 979 or something else, and when there are more than 10 or 13 digits. (E.g. ISBN 1234 5678, ISBN 1234 5678 9x, ISBN 1234 5678 90 123, ISBN 978 1234 5678 90, ISBN 978 1234 5678 9x, ISBN 978 1234 5678 90 123, ... can anybody predict how this works?) Without having seen the sourcecode, I suspect black magic regexp tricks. Should I go around and fix these ISBNs, changing the spaces to dashes? Are spaces considered harmful, even if the current regexp magically make them work? Should the regexp be changed, to discourage the use of spaces? --LA2 23:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

No, the spaces are fine. The advantage of the current pattern matching is that anything that looks like a well-formed ISBN to the human will also look like one to the computer, and it will be clickable. The only example you gave that puzzles me is ISBN 1234 5678 90 123, which has the right number of digits to be an ISBN-13. So the matcher must be checking the prefix as well as the number of digits. EdJohnston 00:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to use my script m:User:LA2/Extraktor as a "lint" for ISBNs, but my old regexp (ISBN [-0-9Xx]+) recognizes different patterns than MediaWiki's built-in one. Even if I allow whitespace, I want to catch (and report a warning for) the case where the trailing 123 are silently left unlinked. The ISBN-13 cannot end in an X, so ISBN 978 1234 5678 9x should be an error, just like ISBN 0 1234 x 5678 9. Apparently ISBNs cannot start with a dash or X, but any number of whitespace is OK, and trailing dashes after 10 digits are not included. ISBN -1234567890 ISBN x123456789 ISBN 1234567890 ISBN 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8-9- x. The way I'll solve this is to allow whitespace and any long sequence of digits and X, not starting with a dash or X and not ending in a dash. That gives me ISBN +[0-9][- 0-9Xx]+[0-9Xx]. Does that sound reasonable? Then in the resulting data, I can discover if there are 9, 11 or 14 or 15 digits following the ISBN word, if the checksum is wrong, or if something else is wrong. --LA2 10:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ASIN definition and policy & video i.d. question

I gather from conversations above that the ASIN is an Amazon-specific number, and should only be used when no ISBN is available. Would someone with more experience in this project consider adding this to the main WP:ISBN article? I went there looking for that specific info, and had to pick through this whole talk page instead. Also very helpful in this article would be a statement such as, "Videos do not have ISBN numbers. Instead, Wiki policy is to identify them by....(whatever the answer is)." I'm not being lazy, I'm being honest: I don't know enough about what policy is on these issues to edit the WP:ISBN article myself. -- LisaSmall T/C 02:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to compose a couple of sentences:

It may happen that a book is listed at Amazon with an ASIN (Amazon catalog number) for which the ISBN is hard or impossible to find. An editor who has such a reference should make every effort to locate an ISBN or an OCLC number, and use that in preference. If you find yourself falling back on the ASIN, use the {{ASIN}} template to refer to it, which allows the 'What links here' feature to find all such uses, in case ISBNs may be found later. Usage of ASIN numbers has been controversial in the past, some editors wanting them to be stamped out because of the commercial connection, others believing that ASIN numbers have reference value, and that removal of references is not justified under any circumstances. Hardly anyone would object to an editor going through reference lists and removing ASINs from books by replacing them with ISBNs. Such work is useful but time-consuming.

Comments are welcome. See Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs/Archive2#Eliminate ASINs? for more references to past Talk threads.
The story on videos is that large numbers of DVDs are now being issued with ISBNs printed on them that work perfectly well. Unfortunately Amazon is being puristic and doesn't associate ISBNs with DVDs. Oftentimes you can go into worldcat.org or another service and find an ISBN for a DVD, which you have every right to use. Isbn.org is wishy-washy and doesn't prevent the use of ISBNs for DVDs, though they disallow them for CDs (unless they are audio books), and pretty much everyone observes *that* rule. EdJohnston 03:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another useful discussion about ISBN-10, ISBN-13, and whether to mess with existing ISBN-10 refs

I am moving the discussion below to here from my talk page, because I think that it may be useful for other people who look into this same issue in the future. — Lumbercutter 15:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN-13

Regarding this edit of yours: You appear to be misinformed. Yes, the checksum is different, but it is trivial to compute. These are books from 1970--1987 that never had any ISBN-13 and there never was any transition period, either for them or for Wikipedia. The transition period only apply to books published during 2006 or so. In fact, as I think you discovered, writing "ISBN-13" or "ISBN-10" (rather than just "ISBN") before the digits in a Wikipedia article is outright harmful, as it stops the link to the booksources page from being created. If you believe that all old ISBN-10s in Wikipedia (or are these three books special?) should be changed/upgraded to ISBN-13, that would be both a novel idea and a major project, for which you should present some defense, preferrably on the Wikipedia talk:ISBN page. --LA2 01:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi LA2,
It seems like you didn't read the very WP talk page that you referred me to (which, granted, I was not aware of), nor the isbn.org transition page that I cited in my edit summary. Here are responses to your various points:
  1. "These are books from 1970--1987 that never had any ISBN-13": That is half correct: they never had one, until 2005, when it was assigned retroactively, being equivalent to the existing UPC code adaptation of the (old) ISBN (= 978 + ISBN-10 + recalc'd check digit). Now they do have one.
  2. "there never was any transition period, either for them or for Wikipedia": This novel idea is news to the people who run the ISBN system, who created an isbn.org "transition" page several years ago to explain the transition period (which was January 2005 to January 2007) during which booksellers and libraries (and their software suppliers) were tasked with creating and confirming the ability to serve correctly the desired book to a user who inputed either the old ISBN (ISBN-10) or the new one (ISBN-13).
  3. "The transition period only apply to books published during 2006 or so.": Incorrect. It was the period during which systems were updated and tested for the ability to identify any book in the supply chain by a 13-digit ISBN, as explained at the "transition" page.
  4. "In fact, as I think you discovered, writing "ISBN-13" or "ISBN-10" (rather than just "ISBN") before the digits in a Wikipedia article is outright harmful, as it stops the link to the booksources page from being created.": Yes, I was aware of that earlier, and it is true, but (a) there have been discussions at Wikipedia talk:ISBN about whether that should be changed; and (b) those discussions have now become moot, because (1) wiki ISBN magic works with both ISBN-10 and ISBN-13, as long as you head the number with "ISBN#" (# representing a word space); and (2) because, as explained at the "transition" page, "ISBN" now officially means "ISBN-13" anyway. If you click on a 13-digit wiki-magic'd ISBN for a book from the 1966-2006 period, for example, ISBN 978-0-7591-0134-0, you find that it successfully brings you to catalog listings for the correct book (in this case, Harris's Cultural Materialism, although the person who wrote the ref used the rev ed ISBN (2001) while citing the 1st ed (1980), but that's a common, usually harmless mistake).
  5. "If you believe that all old ISBN-10s in Wikipedia […] should be changed/upgraded to ISBN-13,": Yes, actually I do, although there is no rush, and it may take some years, and I don't plan to do it all myself—
  6. "(or are these three books special?)": Of course not—
  7. "that would be both a novel idea […]": Of course it's not novel—several other people mentioned the idea at Wikipedia talk:ISBN over a year ago—
  8. "and a major project, […]": Yes, I agree with that, although, as others have mentioned at Wikipedia talk:ISBN, it could be partially automated with bots—
  9. "for which you should present some defense, preferrably on the Wikipedia talk:ISBN page.": Yes, you're right about that, although in reading the existing discussion there, where this idea has already been presented, I see that this may or may not eventually get done, and may or may not need to ever get done (because the presently existing backwards compatibility of ISBN-10 may not go away in future years), and either way, I'm not worried about making this topic a new priority to-do item for myself.

In sum, IMO, the best thing to do for one average WP editor like myself is just to leave existing ISBNs on Wikipedia alone unless one happens to be editing nearby anyway, in which case, if one cares to bother, one can plug the old ISBN (ISBN-10) into isbn.org's converter and overwrite with the new ISBN, keeping the wiki-magic syntax (ISBN#) (# representing a word space) intact.

Cheers, — Lumbercutter 12:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I will strongly disagree on #5. The project to change all articles is too big and brings no benefits, as ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 work fine side by side. Old printed books have ISBN-10 and that is what people will enter when they cite that book, and there is no reason that ISBN-10 would stop to work in Wikipedia. Therefore, Wikipedia did not have any "transition period" (#2). There was a point in time when Wikipedia started to accept ISBN-13, but ISBN-10 never stopped working, and thus no period. --LA2 12:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Good points. Responses:
  1. "The project to change all articles is too big": I guess that's up to individual opinion, and I do respect your opinion on that. IMO, though, bots could make it manageable. Also, if someone updates individual ISBNs on a non-global basis, that is still OK (even though non-Wikipedia-wide) because it is one step in the direction of "actively discouraging its (ISBN-10's) use".
  2. "[The project] brings no benefits, as ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 work fine side by side": You're right about that at present. I guess that that will still be true 5 or 15 years from now, although my main impetus for liking the idea of Wikipedia-wide conversion is the possibility that eventually (years-decades) it will become unusual to ID books by ISBN-10 and individual sellers and libraries will screw up in supporting the old ISBNs (even though they theoretically are supposed to maintain the capability indefinitely).
  3. "Old printed books have ISBN-10 and that is what people will enter when they cite that book": You are definitely right about that.
  4. "there is no reason that ISBN-10 would stop to work in Wikipedia": I guess that you are probably right about that, as I think about it more—although the same uncertainty as above, regarding possible eventual lack of support outside Wikipedia (which would make Wikipedia's outbound links unusable), applies.
  5. "Wikipedia did not have any "transition period" […]": You're right. (But I was referring to the industry's transition period.)
In sum, I think that you are probably right about the backwards-compatibility being here to stay permanently. At the same time, I think that I will still employ the practice that I mentioned earlier ("the best thing to do for one average WP editor like myself is just to leave existing ISBNs on Wikipedia alone unless one happens to be editing nearby anyway, in which case, if one cares to bother, one can plug the old ISBN (ISBN-10) into isbn.org's converter and overwrite with the new ISBN, keeping the wiki-magic syntax (ISBN#) (# representing a word space) intact"), because it will help to ensure that the link will keep working years or decades into the future. However, I promise not to chastise any WP contributor for entering the ISBN-10 of their references! I will either ignore it or quietly update it in WikiGnome fashion.
Thanks for the discussion—it helped me to think more completely about the issue than I had previously. Ciao!
— Lumbercutter 15:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

In previous discussions on this talk page, one can find phrases such as "All ISBNs will become 13-digit from January 2007" (June 2006) and "10-digit ISBNs don't exist anymore" (August 2007). These are misunderstandings. My old printed books between 1970 and 2006 have printed 10-digit ISBNs and will continue to have this for ever. When I cite these books in Wikipedia, search them in library catalogs, or add them to LibraryThing, I will continue to enter the 10-digit ISBN. What did change in 2007 is that all new books are now assigned 13-digit ISBNs. What ended is that 10-digit ISBNs are not assigned anymore. But existing books didn't stop having their 10-digit ISBNs. Library systems and other tools that handle ISBNs will have to understand both 10- and 13-digit ISBNs for the rest of eternity. This is what the MediaWiki software does, and that is fine. It is possible to convert a 10-digit ISBN to a 13-digit one by prefixing 978- and recomputing the final checksum digit, but people who cite books or search in library catalogs, based on a printed book from 1970-2006, will not do this. --LA2 20:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anyone still see a need to change the page?

The last two entries in this Talk page address ASINs and the 10 versus 13 issues. I actually created some language (see boxed item) for the ASIN issue. My assumption is that the discussion has quiesced, and there is no longer a strong feeling that either of these issues requires an update to WP:ISBN? EdJohnston 00:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why not just fix it? ISBN-13 ISBN-10

The 2 common ISBN formats below (for the same book) are not automatically made into ISBN search links by the wikipedia software:

ISBN-10: 1413304540
ISBN-13: 978-1413304541

I have read comment after comment on several pages, and finally figured out that the wikipedia software will not accept this format. WHY NOT JUST FIX IT?

After 2 years as a Wikipedia editor I figured this out, and only after a determined search.

Most people just paste in whatever ISBN number they find into reference links, ... if they bother to paste in ISBN numbers at all.

Most of them, like me, do not learn of this great auto-ISBN-linking feature except by accident. Then they see that it works inconsistently, and then most people just no longer care, and figure it is just more buggy software. Then many editors stop pasting ISBN numbers in at all. Why bother?

Instead of asking the impossible of millions of editors, why not just change the code for this ISBN function so that it accepts ISBN numbers in this format too?

Please see also the clarified introduction to Wikipedia:Book sources. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Yelling at people is not going to get this fixed. Please instead comment at [18]. Superm401 - Talk 03:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)