David Copperfield: World’s Best Reading

Why is this edition of David Copperfield separate from the main entry? It is not abridged and has no additional material.

No idea. Why don't you give us the URLs so we can look at it?

If both are over 200 members, and you think they need to be combined, you should list the two URLs at https://www.librarything.com/topic/336979#n8544054

>2 MarthaJeanne: How do I identify the URLs in question?

The URL is what shows up at the top of your browser window that says what page you are looking at.

A work URL will look like https://www.librarything.com/work/4209/

>4 MarthaJeanne: https://www.librarything.com/work/29958155 This? If so, this https://www.librarything.com/work/7489/book/78951415 is the main entry for David Copperfield.

According to the work pages, one is an abridged version of the other.

>6 MarthaJeanne: Where do you see this? I am familiar with the Reader’s Digest “World’s Best Reading” series and despite the RD association, they are complete works. One book is shown in a dust jacket which says it is complete and unabridged. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Best_Reading

>7 booksaplenty1949:

Look at the "Series and Work Relationships" field on https://www.librarything.com/work/29958155 It says "Is an abridged version of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens"

>8 lilithcat: Doesn’t now.

>9 booksaplenty1949:

Because YOU removed it.

>10 lilithcat: Of course. Because it was incorrect. Certainly not the first time wrong information was posted under “Relationships,” as I’m sure you’ve seen.

Here’s the Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Best_Reading

And it references this LT thread:
https://www.librarything.com/talktopic.php?topic=2951

>12 2wonderY: Yes, the first post in the linked LT thread notes “they are not the typical RD ‘condensed’ books but complete texts.”

I also note that the main entry for David Copperfield includes “Reader’s Digest World’s Best Reading” as one of the publisher’s series to which it belongs (#20).

Finally dawned on me that since no entry on the “Editions” page had more than 200 entries I could just do this myself!