User talk:Ofearna/Archive07

I, Strahd
I removed the image you imbedded into the note field of this record. You can link to them, but you cannot imbed them. Mhhutchins 15:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Cool... I'll go revamp that into a link, not an embedded image. Ofearna 19:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Image upload size limits
This image is too large. We ask that you not upload an image larger than 600 pixels on its longest side. This has been brought to your attention before. Mhhutchins 23:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Will you be re-upping a smaller version of this image? Thanks. Mhhutchins

Citing secondary sources
I noticed your "Keith Scaife" credits. If you're basing these off of finding the cover on his Facebook page, you should add that fact to the notes. Otherwise, someone with the pub will come along, find no explicit credit in/on the pub, and will be forced to figure out whether to keep that credit or not. The same goes for publication dates and anything else. Not only "should" the source be documented anyway, but you'll save a lot of head-scratching. Thanks. --MartyD 12:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I usually try to add a link to at least one image if the credit is not in the book -- but if the art's been used about 6 times I go in AFTER and add it to the title-off-artist page so I'm not repeating myself ☺ . Thanks! Ofearna 16:25, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Adding the source to the cover art record doesn't help the situation Marty is referring to. You have to record the source for your data in the note field of the publication record. You don't have to link it. Sourcing should be done in the same submission that updates the pub record, so it's not that much more effort. Mhhutchins 16:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Source data for Fledgling
Please give the source for your data in the note field of this record. If you're working from a book-in-hand, state that in the Note to Moderator field. I don't believe this is the first time you've been asked to do this. Mhhutchins 18:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

This record also. Mhhutchins 18:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Bloody Vampires
What is your source for the editor credit of this pub? Most sources don't give a credit. Also, what is the source for the puff-piece ("synopsis") for the title record? It doesn't seem to be one you wrote, unless you're an employee of the publisher. :) Mhhutchins 18:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Amazon.co.uk Amazon.ca Amazon.com and the Glasshouse books website.Ofearna 18:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Update the record to add the source, and if possible try to make it more objective. The field should not be used as a promotional tool. Mhhutchins 20:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I just checked "Amazon.co.uk Amazon.ca Amazon.com and the Glasshouse books website", and could find no credit for the editor. Below you say you have the book, so why do you give a secondary source? Also, I updated the title record to make the synopsis less subjective. Mhhutchins 17:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Like a Charm
Are all of the stories in this anthology speculative fiction? From the Amazon description they sound like crime/mystery/suspense stories. Mhhutchins 04:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It's a novel in parts by several authors. The main storyline is crime/mystery/suspense with occasional twists of SpecFic, but since all together they tell one story... I wasn't sure how to handle it.  Especially since one of the authors was Kelley Armstrong. Ofearna 07:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * You've entered it into the database as an anthology, which allows you to remove any of the content stories which have no spec-fic elements. There's no rule that you have to include every story in an anthology, and in fact, we encourage editors not to add non spec-fic stories. We also don't create records for non-spec-fic shortfiction even if they are by a well-known spec-fic writer, because there's currently no way to categorize a non-genre piece of shortfiction. Mhhutchins 15:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll go back through and remove the non SpecFic stories... ThnxOfearna 20:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Entering an ellipsis into ISFDB records
According to current ISFDB standards:

''An ellipsis should be entered as the sequence "space", "period", "space", "period", "space", "period". If the ellipsis is in the middle of the title, it should be entered with a space after it as well, prior to the start of the following word.''

So I've reverted the changes you made to this title. Mhhutchins 15:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It was odd, too, b/c in two places (toc and summaries) it has that story as April 7th--of Whatever Year This Happens to Be and on the copyright page and the title/first page of story it's April 7th . . . of Whatever Year This Happens to Be, so... ☺ Ofearna 18:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Because there can be (and frequently are) differences in a work's title within the same publication, we always use the way it appears on its title page. Mhhutchins 18:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Editor of Bloody Vampires
Does the book explicitly credit Nayyaar as the editor? The "Look-Inside" on Amazon shows no editor being credited. If the book shows no editor credit, the ISFDB record must reflect that. If there is reliable secondary evidence that Nayyar is the editor, we can create a variant record giving that credit. But the pub record must show exactly how the book is credited. That is an ISFDB standard from which we can not deviate, regardless of the reliability of the secondary source. Mhhutchins 00:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * the amazon look-inside is to the kindle and doesn't really have the copyright stuff... my copy of the book does say edited by Nayyar... Ofearna 07:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * If it explicitly states "Edited by..." anywhere in the book, you can use the credit. If it's not on the title page, you have to record in the "Note" field where the credit is stated in the book. If you have the book, and are updating the record, you should let the moderator aware of that in the "Note to Moderator" field. Again, it let's us know you're working from the actual book, and keeps us from having to go through the trouble of researching your submissions. Mhhutchins 16:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I have accepted the submission. You need to remove the note giving Amazon as the source, (which you should have done in the original submission) and do a primary verification of the record. You will also have to update the title record for the anthology to change the editor credit. Mhhutchins 16:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * A question: is it a trade paperback? The listing on Amazon gives the height of the book as 17.8 cm which is close to trade paperback size. If it is a trade paperback you should update the record. Mhhutchins 16:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It *is* a trade paperback and I'm waiting for my friend to return the actual book so I can add page numbers and do the final verification...Ofearna 17:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Fangtales subtitle
I accepted your modifications to. In regard to your note about the subtitle, I don't know if it's officially documented anywhere, but a widespread practice for subtitles is to take advantage of the fact that the title record's title text and the publication record's title text are separate and to record the full title + subtitle as the publication's title text, while leaving the title record's title text without the subtitle. Too many "title"s, I know, but I hope that makes sense. --MartyD 12:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * But I've been told I have to match what's on the copyright page... Ofearna 16:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * For titles, Title page, not Copyright page. There is the issue of regularisation - spacing out ellipses, capitalisation of most words, etc - and moving of series data to the series field - but Title page trumps Table of Contents or Copyright Page or Cover. It's OK to leave the sub-title or series information in the Publication title, e.g. still has the series name and number in, but we clean up the Title's title a bit to just 'Ghost Ship' and use the series fields for the rest. If we didn't, we'd have hundreds of titles all starting "Star Trek" or "Star Wars".  BLongley 18:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I've re-written the synopsis that was given in this title record. Try to be more factual than promotional, even if you have to re-write a publisher's description to make it more objective. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

(unindent) Right, info for publications should match what's on the title page (with normalization, as Bill notes). From your note, it looks like what's on the title page includes "Tales of blood, revenge, and vampires" as a subtitle. Titles, however, are more of an absolute/independent thing, and one area of flexibility is whether the title record should include the subtitle or not. So what I was suggesting is that you could edit the publication and make its title text be Fangtales: Tales of Blood, Revenge, and Vampires while leaving it hooked up to the title record whose text is simply the bare Fangtales. And then you wouldn't need the note. For example, the title Baxter has publications with title text. There will be cases where some of the publications have the subtitle and others do not (they're plentiful, but of course I couldn't find one easily on the spot). As Bill points out, this technique is also used with series-oriented titles. --MartyD 11:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Photograph of Berni Stevens
You uploaded using the wrong license tag. That tag is only used for book cover images. Uploading photographs requires either this license (if it is a non-copyrighted photograph) or this one (if the image is copyrighted and you have permission from the owner to upload it to the ISFDB server.) This is required in order to prevent charges of copyright violation being leveled against the ISFB. The image looks like a profession photograph so it is likely copyrighted, but there are copies of it on several websites without a copyright notice. So I think the first license should be sufficient. If you need help, I will gladly assist you in changing the tag. Mhhutchins 19:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Did that fix it?Ofearna 21:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Nope. You have to clear out the current template (CID1) and add this one:


 * I think that did it... Ofearna 21:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The Red Lodge = essay or fiction
I have your submission to make this record a variant of this one. We shouldn't make an ESSAY typed record into a variant of another one which is typed as SHORTFICTION. If you think these two are the same work, and that it is not fiction, the two records should be merged. If they are not the same, the records should be neither merged nor varianted, and each title should be noted so that future editors won't do it. Most of my research has shown that the work in the anthologies and collections is fiction. Perhaps the work in Dancing in the Dark is not the same work of fiction in Wakefield's canon. In the meantime, I'm rejecting the submission to variant them. Mhhutchins 22:25, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * kOfearna 17:35, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

"Chacun sa goule" by Stableford
Are you certain beyond a doubt that this piece is not fiction? Mhhutchins 01:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Same situation with this piece. Mhhutchins 01:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

And this Gaiman piece may have been true, but not necessarily an essay. There's a distinction. Mhhutchins 01:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * All the pieces in the Dancing With the Dark were essays and I swung by the library to verify that they're the same item and not a variant with the same title... I even included the thing that Gaiman said for his.Ofearna 06:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm going to accept the changes, but will have also make Dancing in the Dark into NONFICTION instead of ANTHOLOGY, which under ISFDB rules is a collection of fiction. If you don't actually have a copy of the book in your collection, you should remove the primary verification and add a primary (transient) verification. That one was created for situations where you no longer have a copy of the book, but was able to do a physical examination of it. Mhhutchins 13:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Fragile Things cover art credit
I'm holding a submission that wants to credit six people for the cover art of this publication? Are you certain that all siz of these are credited for the cover art? Mhhutchins 04:17, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I have the book in front of me. Each of the items on the cover (heart, butterfly, eggshell, snowflake) have different artist credit then there's the "jacket designed by" credit.Ofearna 06:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Creatures of the Night
I accepted the submission to update this record, but am suspicious of the ISBN-13 in a 2004 book. Are you certain of this? And again, whenever you're updating a record you have to source your data. What is the source for the cover artist credit? Where did you get the ISBN-13 and the new publication month? Why is it so difficult to get you to follow this simple principle? If you're working from a copy of the book, tell us that in the Note to Moderator field. Having to repeat this over and over is really frustrating. Mhhutchins 13:16, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * But my source data is the book... I have it right in front of me (I keep the ones I've edited in a pile to the side of my desk until we're done with them)... the ISBN-13 is on the bar code on the back of the book.Ofearna 16:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * If you're updating or creating a record from a book in hand, do the moderator a favor. There is a field called "Note to Moderator". In the field just say, "Working from the book in hand". You can also do a primary verification of the record before the submission if you're updating a record already in the database.


 * About the ISBN, look at the copyright page and tell me what number is given there. This is where you should always get the ISBN. If it's not on the copyright page, you can get from elsewhere in the book. The number on the back cover or dustjacket may be the barcoded EAN, which also had 13 numbers. Does the barcode print the word "ISBN" followed by the 978+10 numbers? Unless I'm mistaken, if there is an ISBN-13, you may have a later printing, because a 2004 printing would not have an ISBN-13. Mhhutchins 19:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Should I scan and post here the title page, copyright page, the back of the book... sometimes I get confused since it seems we treat different kinds of books differently. Thanks Ofearna 16:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * No need to scan, just do a primary verification of record which indicates you have a copy of the book and can answer questions. All I need now is a response to the above concerns: what ISBN is on the copyright page and is there a notice that this may be a later printing?
 * For your information: title, author, and publisher should come from the book's title page. If there are two ISBNs, the one on the copyright page trumps one on the dustjacket or back cover, unless there's evidence that the publisher has made a mistake. Mhhutchins 18:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

"The Good Summer" synopsis
Please rewrite this using proper capitalization and punctuation. Mhhutchins 13:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I rejected the other submissions because these are not synopses. They're not even completely formed sentences. Also, if you want to change a series name, that should be done by updating the series record, not each individual record in the series. It saves both of us time. Mhhutchins 13:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * with The Blood of Ten Chiefs (ElfQuest) I tried that... now there's a series Blood of Ten Chiefs and another ElfQuest sub-series Blood of Ten Chiefs... and now I'm confused (hah that's hard, huh?) Thanks Ofearna 22:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I fixed it. The series "Blood of Ten Chiefs" had to be deleted first (it was empty so it was easy to delete). Then I changed the name of the "Elfquest: Blood of Ten Chiefs" to Blood of Ten Chiefs. It was already a sub-series of Elfquest. If it really isn't, you can update the series (the first one) and remove its parent. If an anthology's title is part of a series, it's not necessary to update each of the stories' title records, because they're understood to be in the series. But if you want them to be displayed with the anthology titles, you have to update each story's title record and place it into the exact same series as the anthology. That seems to me to be more trouble than it's worth, but that's up to you. Mhhutchins 01:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I deleted the original series, before I saw that you'd made a submission to do the same. So I had to reject your submission because the series no longer existed. Mhhutchins 01:27, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Synopses
Please make an attempt to make the synopses read less like a book blurb, even if that's what they are. I've rewritten the one you submitted for this title. In the future, I will summarily reject any submission in which the synopsis is not an objective summation of the work. Mhhutchins 17:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, please do not use the html code to paragraph within the synopsis or note field. Just use a simple line break. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

How to update author data
Please refer to this help page for instructions on how to update author data. I have to reject your submission to update the data for George Gissing. The name in the legalname field and the dates in the birth and death fields were in the wrong format. Also, there's no need to update this author's data, because he's only in the database because of a review of a nongenre novel. He will eventually be removed. Mhhutchins 17:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I was going to try to get ahold of the book and see if it was horror, since it was reviewed in 100 Best Horror books, but if you'll be removing him anyway, OK. ^_^ Ofearna 19:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Harelquin Valentine and Murder Mysteries
Hi. Is really a graphic novel as you say in your proposed new notes? (Unfortunately, the Amazon Look Inside mostly only shows Gaiman's notes). If so, this record should be deleted, not updated. Graphic novels are most definitely Out. If you agree, just cancel the submission and submit a deletion instead whose reason says it's a graphic novel. Thanks. --MartyD 11:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The "adapted for comics" in the proposed new notes for leads me to ask a similar question about that one.  Graphic novel?  Thanks.  --MartyD 11:32, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Marty, I believe graphic novels are allowed if they're by authors "above the threshold". That's been discussed several times before and I thought that was the conclusion we came to. Just as a history book by Asimov is allowed into the database, or a computer book by Frank Herbert, or a western by Theodore Sturgeon, or a mystery by Jack Vance. Why should we treat graphic novels differently from those examples? The reason for banning most graphic novels was to keep us from sliding into the comic book domain, but Neil Gaiman's stature in the spec-fic field is great enough that we should include all of his nongenre work, regardless of the form it takes. That would be the case if any number of spec-fic authors were directly involved in the writing of a graphic novel, but not if their work is adapted by another writer to create a graphic novel. Or at least that's where I think we drew the line.
 * The reason I didn't touch these submissions is because she changes the ISBN to an ISBN-13 for a pre-2005 book, similar to an earlier situation in which I questioned her. She has yet to satisfy that request for verification. Mhhutchins 17:04, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. Didn't know that.  Never mind about canceling and deleting then, but I will keep them on hold pending resolution of the ISBN-10 vs. ISBN-13 question.  --MartyD 23:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


 * ok... Harlequin Valentin the copyright page has First Edition: November 2001 ISBN 1-56971-620-6. It's a short story adapted in the "chapbook" into a graphic "novel".  I guess I got the 978 off the back of the book.


 * Murder Mysteries, is another "chapbook"/"graphic novel" of a novella. The copyright pagge said First printing June 2002 ISBN 1-56971-634-X.  Hope we can get his resolved now ^-^ Ofearna 09:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I think the line for graphic novels still excludes collected comics and so we only allow Gaiman's written-as-graphic-novel works and not the collected Sandman comics for instance. But I could be mistaken as to what other mods are allowing now. BLongley 18:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * so, am I supposed to do something? Ofearna 20:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Marty has held these "pending resolution of the ISBN-10 vs. ISBN-13 question." So look in the books, see if there is a stated ISBN-13 in these pre-2005 books, or whether your copy is a later printing. Mhhutchins 21:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Right. Just reply here so I can figure out whether to adjust the submissions.  Thanks.  --MartyD 21:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. I accepted  and reverted the ISBN to the ISBN-10.  Notes on Harlequin Valentine below.  --MartyD 10:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Harlequin Valentine
I accepted your modifications to and made a couple of changes. I restored the ISBN to its ISBN-10 form, based on your description above. I made two other changes, the nature of both of which are good for you to be aware of:


 * Since it contains a second work of short fiction, CHAPTERBOOK is no longer appropriate for it (CHAPTERBOOK is only used for publications of a single short fiction work, plus any attendant essays and illustrations). Regardless of physical format, we treat multi-work chapbooks as COLLECTION.  (Sorry, I don't know why and can't explain).  So I converted it to COLLECTION.


 * The authors listed for an existing publication record are independent of the the authors associated with the title record (just as the publication record's title text and the title record's text are independent). When you create a new publication, the title record is initially set up by copying the information from the publication, but after that, any edits need to be made in both places.  So I changed the title record to also have only Neil Gaiman as author.

Both of these are subtle and frequently bite people. Let me know if you have any questions. --MartyD 10:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Source in the note field, not in the note to moderator field
Please give the source for the cover art credit of this pub in the "Note" field. Everything entered into the "Note to Moderator" field disappears once the submission has been accepted. Mhhutchins 22:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Glimpses
Hi. I accepted your submission of made two corrections: "Glimses" -> "Glimpses" and "TP" -> "tp" (we use lower case for the abbreviations). While researching the submission, I noticed Amazon had a Look Inside, so I added the contents from that and included an additional note about "The Summer Players". --MartyD 16:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Cool... my keyboard's acting up and I didn't notice that typo. I also have an email out to Lynn regarding the "previous publication" of the story "By the River"; I was waiting for her response and the addition of the book itself to add the contents.  Thanks  Ofearna 17:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I've made some corrections in the submissions updating the synopsis and note fields of the content records. Please use standard capitalization in these fields, and try not to personalize. For example, I changed


 * "per copyright page for Glimpses this story was previously published, but other than on her website and some fan-related sites, I can find no location for previous publication"


 * to


 * "Per the copyright page for Glimpses, this story was previously published. An Internet search found no previous publications."


 * Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I just found a previous publication. It was posted on a newsgroup on December 26, 2001. I'll make a correction in the title record. Mhhutchins 18:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I knew about the yahoogroup posting, but wasn't sure it really counted as "previously published"...Ofearna 02:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Joanne Fluke aka Jo Gibson
I am currently holding your submission which would remove the pseudonym relationship between and. I am not entirely sure that I understand your "Note to moderator" comment which reads "is the maiden name / pseudonym of Joanne Fluke". Are you suggesting that we should reverse the canonical name/pseudonym relationship and make "Jo Gibson" into a pseudonym of "Joanne Fluke"? As far as I can tell, she only published 2 SF books as "Fluke" in the 1980s and all of her SF works that have appeared since then (5 of them) were attributed to "Gibson". We generally use the most common in-genre name as the canonical name (e.g. "Murray Leinster" rather than "Will F. Jenkins" or "William Fitzgerald"), so it would appear that it should be Gibson rather than Fluke as discussed over on Author:Jo Gibson. Or did I misunderstand the intent of your submission? Ahasuerus 01:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Joanne Fluke is her name and one of the handful of pseudonyms she wrote under was Jo Gibson (chosen b/c her nickname is Jo and her maiden name was Gibson). She wrote a couple of horror novels as Joanne Fluke and a handful of teen horror as Jo Gibson, but the copyright page says Joanne Fluke (not Jo Gibson) except in Scream: The Dead Girl (which says Jo Gibson).Ofearna 02:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification! The copyright page can be a good source of pseudonym data (especially in the romance field), but we don't use it to determine the author's canonical name. We use the name that the author is best known under in the SF world, which in this case (5 titles out of 7) appears to be "Jo Gibson". As per Help:Screen:MakePseudonym:


 * An author who is widely known by a pseudonym (e.g. Mark Twain or Cordwainer Smith) will have a canonical ISFDB name which is in reality a pseudonym. This can create counter-intuitive situations where the use of a person's real name is listed as a pseudonym.


 * It can be a bit disconcerting at first, but think about it this way: What would happen to the Summary Bibliography page if we changed all of his titles into variants under "Will F. Jenkins", his legal name, which he used on "The Murder of the U.S.A." and various non-genre books? It would be a royal mess, so we are better off using "Murray Leinster", a pseudonym, as his canonical name. In Fluke/Gibson's case it's not as big a deal since we are talking about relatively few titles, but the 5 Gibson titles still outweigh the 2 Fluke titles. Ahasuerus 03:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Short fiction titles in Mean Little Old Lady at Work
I saw your note about the "of" and "the" capitalization on some of the piece in. It doesn't seem very likely there was any special intent on the part of the author with regard to those words, so I applied our regularization to them and made them be lower case. Not really a big deal either way. --MartyD 10:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I was sure that'd happen, but I thought I'd put the notes anyway... THANKS!!! Ofearna 19:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Tagging
I didn't know if you're aware of this feature, so I figured I'd mention it. You can "tag" titles, which can help other people search, filter, etc. I noticed in your notes for, you say "YA Horror". You could go to the title and add "young-adult horror" from the quick list. If you pick "manage tags", you can add any text you want as a tag, and that screen also shows you other tags people have used with counts of how often. This sort of information rightly belongs in the title, instead of on the publication, anyway, since it will be the same across all publications of the work. --MartyD 12:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm glad to see that the "manage tags" is working... this is great! Ofearna 17:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Bloody Vampires again
Still waiting on a response to a question I asked here. Do you have a copy of either edition of the book? Does the title page of the book credit Nayyar as the editor of the anthology? If not, what is the source for your changing the editor credit for these three publications? You've not done a primary verification of any of the records, so I'm assuming your data is from a secondary source. Mhhutchins 17:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)


 * My hardcopy should be back by the end of the week... Thanks for being patient. My e-book doesn't really have a title page (weird UK e-pub)...Ofearna 17:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)