User talk:Nowickj

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to the ISFDB Wiki! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Help pages
 * Help:Getting Started
 * What the ISFDB Wiki is for
 * ISFDB FAQ
 * Help:Screen:EditPub - Warning and a note on how to update a publication's contents
 * Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -DES Talk 23:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Over the River and Through the Woods by Simak
Thank you for your edit, adding a new publication of Over the River and Through the Woods by Simak.

Unfortunately, your edit is not formulate quite properly. I suspect that you started from the "Add Publication to this title" link. That is an excellent way to add a new printing or edition to a novel, anthology, or collection, and it works for adding a new chapbook (which we currently mis-call "Chapterbook") publication of a work of shortfiction. However, it does not currently do a good job of adding a new collection or anthology that contains a given short story. Your edit would make the collection a publication of Good Night, Mr. James, rather than simply a collection thqt contains such a publication. This is a subtle difference, and I fear the help is not as clear as it might be on this matter.

To enter a new collection, start with the "Add New Collection" link, which is in either the "Add New data" or the "Editing tools" section of the navbar on the left, depending on the page you are on. See Help:Getting Started and Help: How to enter a new book for more information on this process.

However, in this case, we already have an entry for Over the River and Through the Woods which looks like a duplicate of the one you attempted to enter. If you have a copy of the book you might want to check out, and if it is correct and complete, verify it. See Help: How to verify data for more on verification.

I am going to reject your submisison, but I do hope you will enter more records here, checking to see if a book is already on file first to avoid extra work. All contributions are welcome, and we can use nay contributor.

Again, Thanks. -DES Talk 23:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I see you have uploaded cover art and added it to . I have approved the edit. Thank you very much.
 * Please do also edit Image:Cdsotrattw.jpeg (the page for the uploaded image)) and add one of the Image License Tags, most probably Template:Cover Image Data, to the page. See Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki and Template:Cover Image Data/Doc for more detail. Please ask if you have any questions about this process. -DES Talk 00:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Glory Road image link
Hi, I had to replace the image link, you used the wiki page URL, this gives a blank box when clicked then displays the image. What you need to use is the (URL) found in properties. After you uploading the image right click it and bring up properties. Cut and paste the Address (URL). The image will then be displayed with the pub. Thanks for editing!Kraang 01:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * From the wiki page, you can simnply clik on the image. This brings you to the file page, and you can grap that URL. This has the same result as the method Kraang suggests -- either way works fine. -DES Talk 15:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Easton Press of The Invasion of the Body Snatchers
I accepted your submission updating this pub but had to make a few changes. When adding an introduction or some other generically titled piece, we append the title of the book in order to disambiguate it from other similarly-titled records. So the introduction was changed to "Introduction (The Invasion of the Body Snatchers)". Also I wonder about the credit of Ron Miller as the cover artist. Easton Press editions are leather-bound, not having dustjacket, so no cover artist is credited. I have many Easton Press editions that have interior art, either a color frontispiece or inter-text illustrations. Could the work by Miller be considered interior art rather than cover art? Thanks. MHHutchins 20:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I also changed the date of the introduction to the publication date instead of the date it was written (April 12, 1992). MHHutchins 20:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Image sizes
I noticed that you made several attempts at uploading the cover image for the Gauntlet edition of Psycho. The larger edit may not have appeared on your screen if your preferences haven't been changed. The default is 600 pixels, and the larger one was slightly over 700. You changed it to a smaller one of 440, which is OK if that's the size you want in the db. Your preferences can be changed using the "Preferences" link on any wiki page. After clicking on that, choose "Files". I personally have mine set for the maximum, but in any case, this is a preference for viewing, not for limits on uploading. I believe there is a warning if the size of the file is over 150kb (I think), but the system will still accept it if you choose. We don't want any lawyers coming down on us by having high-resolution files that could be used to reproduce the covers. Still, the larger of the files you uploaded was only 80kb. And by the way, it's best to name files with a .jpg extension (instead of .jpeg), so that it won't be confused with another with the same tag. Thanks for uploading the image. I've just approved your linking it to the pub. MHHutchins 22:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Editor credits for single-author collections
I rejected the submission adding Martin Greenberg as the editor of this publication of The Leiber Chronicles. The author role for single-author collections can only be attributed to the author of the stories. There is currently no field for the editor role of this type of publication (that may change in the future.) As it stands now, we can only give the editor credit in the title record of the publication, which already credits Greenberg as the editor of the collection. Currently these are the types that accept the editor as the author of the work: anthology, nonfiction and magazine/fanzine. Also, adding "(editor)" after Greenberg's name in your submission would have created a new author by the name of "Martin H. Greenberg (editor)" and it would not have been seen on "Martin H. Greenberg"'s author summary page. Thanks for contributing. MHHutchins 03:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Overwriting a title record
I'm going to accept your submission updating this pub because you added much needed information (the contents.) But I'll have to do some major cleaning, because you overwrote the title reference record. This record appears as a content on NOVEL type publications (not on COLLECTIONS). I assume that because you wanted to change the pub from NOVEL to COLLECTION, that you though it would be safe to overwrite this record. Unfortunately, by doing so, the pub is no longer linked to the title record. It's best never to overwrite content records, until you become familiar with how each works for each of the different pub types. In collections, never overwrite content records because when you do you're changing every publication in which that content appears. Here's a link that tells you how to safely change content records. In this case, you could have changed the type of the publication (from NOVEL to COLLECTION) in both the edit pub's headings and in the title reference content record that appeared under Content. By changing that record to the first story in the collection, you also changed the record that connects this pub to a title record from 	Six Problems for Don Isidro Parodi to The Twelve Figures of the World, and there is no content record for the story "The Twelve Figures of the World". I'll let you know when the pub is back in shape (it's going to take several edits), so you can look it over and verify against your copy. MHHutchins 22:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Foreward (as by Gervasio Montenegro)
Is the title for this record as it appears on the piece's title page? Is it spelled "Foreward" or "Foreword"? Is it credited in parentheses as part of the title, or is it "Foreward" with the author's name beneath? Can I assume that "Gervasio Montenegro" is a pseudonym for the co-authors of the collection, with the conceit that another author is introducing their collection? And the same questions also for the last story. Thanks. MHHutchins 22:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I accepted your submission changing this two titles, but I believe the author credit should be changed as well to the name of the fictional authors. Once that's approved we can create a variant record to show that they were actually written by Jorge Luís Borges  and Adolfo Bioy-Casares. Any comments or questions can be asked on this page.  Just click the [edit] button, enter your comment, then sign with four tildes.  Thanks. MHHutchins 23:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have changed the author credits to the fictional names and submitted for approval. Thanks for your patience with me. Nowickj 12:24, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The change has been approved. I guess next we'll need to figure out whether the canonical name of Borges' co-author is "Adolfo Bioy Casares", which is how we currently have him set up, or "Adolfo Bioy-Casares", which is how he is credited in this collection. Unfortunately, it's not easy to undo a pseudonym assignment, so it may be easier to stick with what we have, but I'll wait for Michael to review the pseudonym situation. Ahasuerus 14:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Richard Matheson: Collected Stories
Thanks for taking on the task of entering almost 900 pages (!) of contents for this collection. Now comes the fun part. These new content records will have to be merged with the existing records in the database. The easiest way is to go to Matheson's summary page, and click "Check for Duplicate Titles". This will provide a listing of all title matches. Looking at the first one, you'll see two records for "Born of Man and Woman". The first is the original record, and the second is your newly created record. Check both boxes (making sure that the TYPE matches) and click "Merge Selected Records", which will lead you to a reconciliation page. Most of the time the bullets in the original record should be chosen. It's usually the first published, and has notes and such. Once you've chosen which of the conflicts for the merged record, click "Complete Merge". This will have to be done for each of the duplicate records. If you're not up to the task, just let me know, and I'll gladly do it. In any case, it wouldn't hurt to try a couple merges, as this will become a very common task if you choose to continue working on the database. Again, thanks for your contribution. MHHutchins 23:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Done, although I may have messed up Disappearing Act with the Matheson/Bester confusion. Nowickj 12:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No, it's fine. Bill Longley approved all of the edits earlier today, and everything looks in good shape.  If you have any questions and concerns about merging please don't hesitate to ask.  This is one of the basic db procedures (after entering new pubs and editing existing records), and you seemed to have got the hang of it. MHHutchins 19:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No you didn't mess up, although your first edit would have done if I'd let it through. Sorry, had to reject that. But I've approved the rest (after a lot of checking of "short story/novelette" merges and even a poem/shortfiction merge - must look into making that easier on us mods!) BLongley 19:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you're aware of the ones you missed: you merged two "Shock Wave" titles but there was actually a third, marked as a variant of "Crescendo". "Check for Duplicate Titles" doesn't spot those, you have to "Show All Titles" and look at them manually for when a title appears twice in a row for no adequate reason. (Again, something we should improve - I only found it on page 2 of the results.) BLongley 19:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There's also a few titles that I think should be merged as they only differ in case, e.g. "When Day is Dun" as you entered it is "When Day Is Dun" here. (I know, why do we capitalise "Is" when it's so short? But we do.) You might want to try the "more aggressive [Similar Title Mode]" next. BLongley 19:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, some of the title dates still didn't end up with the date of the first publication we knew about: I checked a couple and found that "Crescendo" could be dated to an exact month in "Gamma 1", so adjusted that title date. And "Button, Button" could be dated to a specific issue of Playboy, so I've adjusted title date there too: we'll want to add the June 1970 issue of Playboy at some point as a non-genre magazine with SF content, but there's a lot of those to catch up on so I thought it could wait. Feel free to try it though, it'll test our Help on that matter! BLongley 19:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hope this isn't too much information, thanks for editing! BLongley 19:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I've used "Show All Titles" and merged a few more that had capitalization or punctuation variations. I did not merge the ones where the 1989 title is similar to an earlier title marked as a "Variant". Should these be merged as the others, or is there some other consideration about these? Nowickj 20:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A Title marked as "variant" is a title that is the same (or closely related) text as another work, which was published under a different title, or with a different author credit (pseudonym, or variant form of author name, or addition or removal of a co-author), or both. See Help: How to record a variant title for more details on variants.
 * If a newly added title is, or seems to be, the same as a title marked as a variant, and therefore ought also to be a variant title, it can be merged with the existing title. One of the differences that will show up on the merge is "parent record" -- this is the record number of the title of which the variant record is a variant, the so-called canonical title. If, in a merge, you keep the parent record, the merged title will be a variant. Such merges are fine, and should be done or not done on the same criteria as other merges. I hope that helps. -DES Talk 20:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Pump Six and Other Stories
You submitted an edit to that would change the ISBN from "159780133X" to "1-59780-133-1" as well as adding content. Now "159780133X" appears to be a valid ISBN-10 -- it correctly connects with Amazon and OCLC/Worldcat. "-1" is the check digit from the ISBN-13 -- is it possible that you confused the two?

If "1-59780-133-1" is what is actually on the pub we will want to note that, but please double check. I have your submission on hold. -DES Talk 22:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You are right. The ISBN-10 digit is not displayed on the book, only the ISBN-13 978-1-59780-133-1.  Sorry about that. Nowickj 23:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Edit approved, ISBN corrected back to 159780133X. Please merge the new stories as needed. if you want to change the stored ISBN to the full ISBN-13 you may, but both -10 and -13 are displayed if either is entered correctly, so it doesn't much matter. -DES Talk 14:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You can most easily do this by going to and using the "check for duplicate titles" link. See also Help: How to merge titles. -DES Talk 14:14, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Dark Dreamers
Just a note that I have approved the addition of the limited edition Dark Dreamers and then changed the price from "$125" to "$125.00". Ahasuerus 03:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Ellison's "Repent, Harlequin!..."
I accepted the submissions adding the trade and limited editions of this title, but I'm assuming they only reproduce the story and should have been entered as a chapbook instead of novel. (I'm not suggesting that Ellison never wrote a novel. A friend asked him that many moons ago and Ellison became somewhat more than perturbed by the implication, though not intentional, that he couldn't write a novel. And this was when he didn't mind being called a science fiction writer.) I didn't want to reject them and have you re-enter all of the info again. But it can be fixed. We need to unmerge these from the title record, change the type and add the story as the content. This may sound complicated, but if you're willing to try, I can give you step-by-step instructions. Otherwise, I'd be glad to do it myself. MHHutchins 23:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No, my mistake. Tell me how to fix it.  Nowickj 00:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Great! Here goes:
 * Go to the title's record page and click "Unmerge Titles" under the Tools menu.
 * On the next page click the two boxes for the newly-created pubs (same titled and dated Oct 1977).
 * Submit merge and wait for submission to be approved.
 * Once approved go back to 's summary page and choose "Check for Duplicate Titles".
 * On the next page there should be a list of matching records, and you may see several under "Repent, Harlequin!...". Click the boxes beside the two records that show 1997 as the date.
 * Click "Merge Selected Records" and wait for the submission to be approved.
 * Once approved go back to Ellison's page and click on the one record of the title that should be listed under 1997.
 * Choose "Edit Title Data" under the Tools menu.
 * Change the Title Type to "Chapbook" on the dropdown menu. Then "Submit Data" and wait for approval.


 * After this has been done you can add the content to each pub record, and then merge these newly created shortfiction title records with the current title record. Let me know if you need help with those two functions. MHHutchins 00:42, 3 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Updated the instructions. MHHutchins 02:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Notifying primary verifiers
I notice that you have added notes to by Card, and a cover image to. Thanks for your contributions. However, both of these are primary verified publications, so please leave a note of the changes on the user talk page of the primary verifier for each pub. There is a link in the list of verifications to the verifier's user page, and from there click the "discussions" to get to the user talk page. See Help: How to verify data for details. -DES Talk 02:10, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Adding new pubs that have a similar edition
I've accepted the submission adding this new pub. Looking at the record, it would have been easier to have cloned this edition making changes in the applicable fields. This would have automatically added the contents (which I'm assuming are the same for the two editions, if not you could add or remove contents on the cloned pub.) Here's a help page showing how to clone publications. The second best way to enter the contents for the new publication is to import contents from the old one. Here's a help page to show you how to import contents. The hardest way to add contents is to edit the pubs and add the content records manually. This would also require each newly created content record to be merged with its matching pre-existing title record. Too much work, but necessary if you follow the third and least-desired method. MHHutchins 02:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Nebula Awards 30
I accepted your edit of [this] and then removed the length assigned to the extract. These aren't really meant to stand on their own, so typically they are left as "Shortfiction" only. I also changed the title to "Moving Mars (excerpt)" which is also the typical method/standard. Thanks for the work! ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

A. E. van Vogt Appreciation, essay
Have to ask which essay you are removing as the submission page doesn't show the authors. I am assuming it's the Ellison one? Thanks! ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. The previous contributor had Ellison as the author of both Van Vogt essays. Harness wrote the appreciation. Thanks. ~Jack Nowickj 00:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Merging content records
Re: the Nebula Award anthologies. Are you familiar with the methods used in merging content records when entering new contents for anthologies, collections and magazines? I'd be glad to give you some pointers, if not. Thanks. MHHutchins 22:33, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've done it before. Maybe I'm doing these ass-backwards, but I been putting all the anthologies in first, then will merge the titles.  Two more anthologies left, which will be done tonight, then I will attack the merges.  Everything hopefully will be done by the end of the week.  Nowickj 23:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * No, I didn't mean to imply you were doing it incorrectly. You're doing it in the correct order.  Because there was no other record that contained the same contents, you have to add the contents individually.  If there had been another publication with the same (or close) contents you could have imported them, and not have to merge them.  Thanks for entering the contents for these and merging them.  I know how tedious this can be.  MHHutchins 00:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Merging authors(James Gunn/James E. Gunn)
Hi, I believe your intent is to create a new variant for these three titles, and an author merge would remove the existing variants for publications using "James Gunn". If you scroll down to "Editing Tools" and click on "Show All Titles" you'll see all the variant titles under this pseudonym. What you need to do is click on "The Listeners" then in "Editing Tools" click "Make This Title...Pseudonym Work", on the bottom form change "James Gunn" to "James E. Gunn" and submit. If you have any questions let me know. Thanks.Kraang 01:26, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Nowickj 02:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

A Hallowe'en Anthology: Literary and Historical Writings Over the Centuries
I have approved the addition of A Hallowe'en Anthology: Literary and Historical Writings Over the Centuries, but could you plese check whether the page count is 208, as currently entered, or vi+208 as OCLC states? Also, will you be in a position to enter the stories and articles that are listed by OCLC? Thanks! Ahasuerus 01:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I will upload the cover image and, yes, the page count is vi + 208. I can certainly enter the contents.  I was going to ask about that because most of the authors of the pieces are non-genre writers from the 19th and early 20th centuries.  Should I change the pub from non-fiction (the category it won the Stoker Award for) to anthology?  Nowickj 04:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * We do enter speculative stories by non-genre authors, we just don't enter everything else they wrote. (Otherwise 's page would be very very long :-) ) Ahasuerus 04:09, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Everything is in. I changed the type of pub to Anthology since that seemed more appropriate.  Hope that doesn't cause problems.Nowickj 05:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! The only thing that I had to adjust was the main NONFICTION Title in the Publication, which you wanted to convert to an Essay in order to record the preface. I changed it to an ANTHOLOGY Title instead and added a new Essay for the preface. Every Publication record needs to have a matching Title record, i.e. a Nonfiction pub need a Nonfiction Title, an Anthology pub needs an Anthology Title, a Novel pub needs a Novel Title, etc, so when we change the type of a pub, we need to change the type of the associated "reference" Title accordingly. Everything else looks good! Ahasuerus 06:26, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Writers' Workshop of Horror
Approved the submission for [this] but in the Artist field you put the Roman numeral 'xii'. I know artists can be rather odd but doubt any would call themselves that!! ;-) Went looking for an image that might give me a clue, found one on Amazon [and added that to the record] but no sign of Mr/Ms 'xii' so removed that from the field. If you know/added the artist it didn't come through. ~Bill, --Bluesman 00:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Easton edition of Camouflage
I accepted the submission adding this new pub, but have a couple of questions. Is the Easton catalog number actually printed in the book itself? If not, that information (and its source) should be recorded in the note field. The same goes for the price. If it's not printed in the book (none of my Easton Press editions give a printed price), then you should move that info to the note field and give the source, even if it's a dated billing statement or receipt. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Leiber's Conjure Wife
I accepted your submission adding the Centipede Press edition of this title. What is the source of your data? If you have a copy of the book, please do a primary verification of the record. If you don't have a copy, please enter your the secondary sources in the record's note field. One other question: is the biography significant enough to warrant its own content record. If so, please update the record. If not, please credit the author (if the book does so) in the note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Same situation as above with Our Lady of Darkness. Plus, the record gives no publication date. If the book doesn't have a stated publication date, and there is a reliable secondary source for the date (such as the publisher's website), you can update the record and give your source in the note field. Also, it would be good to add the essays to the pub record as individual content records.  If you need any help in doing this, just ask here on your user talk page. Mhhutchins 23:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do own both books and have now verified and entered in the essays. The essays in Our Lady of Darkness are reprints, so I will look at merging them. Nowickj 04:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

"Those Wild Alien Words I and II"
I have just double checked my copies of The Book of Fritz Leiber and The Second Book of Fritz Leiber. These essays appear there as "Those Wild Alien Words: I" and "Those Wild Alien Words: II" respectively, so I set up your titles as variant titles instead of letting the merge submissions through. Looks like we should be all set now, thanks for editing! Ahasuerus 06:32, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing data
When you're adding new data, either updating a current record or adding a new record, you should always source your data, unless you intend to do a primary verification of the record. If the latter is true, leave a note in the "Note to Moderator" field that you're working from the book-in-hand. This will help the moderator in determining whether to accept the submission or the need to ask further questions before accepting it. It also keeps us from doing unnecessary research to source the data ourselves. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Got you. Just sent another Centipede Press edition, The Sound of Midnight by Grant.

Hell House
Submission accepted, but again, you should note the source of your data or do a primary verification of the record. Sorry to keep harping on this. Mhhutchins 21:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, once again I forgot to leave you a comment. Verification and additional contents have been added.Nowickj 22:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Creating a record for interior art
When adding a record for interior art, you can create one record which represents the complete work or several records for individual pieces of art. The last is recommended when each piece illustrates a single content work (like in magazines, collections, and anthologies). In the case of this record, the single record method was used. In either case, the title of the record should be the same as the title of the work which it illustrates. Adding "Interior Art" to the record is redundant, because this record's type has already been specialized as "interior art". So the title of this record should be "Hell House". It should also be dated the same as the publication record in which it first appears (2011-10-31), just as the record for the introduction should also be dated the same. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

DoneNowickj 02:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Correcting data from primary sources
Don't hesitate to replace the data for unverified pubs if you're working from the actual book. If it's primary verified, talk it over with the editor who verified it. So proceed to change anything about this record that doesn't match your copy. Mhhutchins 04:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Conjure Wife
I added a cover scan and internal art to the contents of http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?370093 Conjure Wife. Bob 18:15, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.```

Stand on Zanzibar
I accepted the submission to update this record, but there are some discrepancies that need to ironed out or explained in the note field. It is important to record data exactly as stated in the book. When stated data is in error (publisher's mistake) or certain data is missing from the book (price, cover art credit, publication date, etc.), you can change data or add data but you must note the source of the information in the record's note field. So, some questions:


 * 1) The note field says "Data from Amazon.com as of 2010-04-11" but you've done a Primary Verification, so you have a copy of the book. Therefore, this note can be removed, unless there is specific data that is not present in the book but Amazon is the source for it, e. g. if there is no stated publication date, you can add "Publication date from Amazon.com".
 * 2) You changed the price from $275 to $225 without noting a source, so a db user has to assume that this is the printed price in the book. If not, that must be noted in the record, and you must give your secondary source for the price. Noting it in the Note to Moderator doesn't work. That field is not to provide data about the book. That field is for data about the submission. Any information in that field is lost forever when the submission is accepted. If the Centipede Press website is your source for the price as of 2012-10-27, you must give that date. It is quite possible that in the three intervening years the publisher may have discounted the price. That might explain why Amazon gives the list price as $275.
 * 3) You changed the publication date from 2010-06-01 (the Amazon-sourced date) to 2009-08-01 (the stated date according to your Note to the Moderator.) If that exact date is stated in the book then there's no need to source it, but a source that gives a contrary date should be removed from the record. (Or you can note the discrepancy to avoid other users from questioning you about the date.)

Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Done. Discrepancy to Amazon data is noted. Thanks.Nowickj 14:41, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Submission accepted. But the note doesn't explain what price, if any, is printed in the book. Mhhutchins 14:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

The Sheep Look Up
Same situation about the publication date with this record. There's a contradictory note in the note field. And it gives the publisher's website as the source for the data of a primary verified pub. The pub itself is the source for the data and only non-stated data has to be sourced. Feel free to remove any note from an existing non-primary-verified record if it doesn't pertain to a book which you have in your hand. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Removed discrepancy. Thanks. Nowickj 14:41, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Sixth Column
I just added a cover to, which you verified. Ofearna 10:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Nowickj 15:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Centipede Press ed. of The Forever War
Were the supplementary contents of this record previously published? You dated them as 2011. About the introduction dated 2008: do you know where it was previously published? Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, there's no need to disambiguate the interior artwork, unless it's a frontispiece or map. Use the note field of the record if you feel it's necessary to describe the work. Mhhutchins 21:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think they were previously published. Those were the dates either listed on the copyright page or at the end of the piece itself.  As I stated in the note, though the supplementary materials are mentioned on the copyright page as being 2011, the book was not shipped until this month.  If you prefer they be dated 2013 I will make the change.  I only put Color illustrations in the field because that is how it was listed on the title page.  I can change that also.  Thanks. Nowickj 22:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Copyright should not be used to date a work. The ISFDB uses the first date of publication. Interior art records should have the title of the work they illustrate, unless it has a captioned title. Mhhutchins 22:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I will change.Nowickj 00:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

New Moon on the Water
I accepted the submission adding this publication to the database, but had to research it and find a source for the data. In the future, please provide the source for your data in the record's Note field. If you're working from a book-in-hand, tell the moderator that in the "Note to Moderator" field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have verified the tp edition. Nowickj 21:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

All Heads Turn When the Hunt Goes By
You verified this pub, but there is no scan of the cover art. In Spectrum 19, there is an illustration with the same title by David Ho that shows the torso of a man wrapped in the coils of a snake(p. 60). Can you tell me if this is the cover art, or if interiorart, what page it falls on? Bob 19:33, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The man wrapped in the coils of a snake is interior art, on an unnumbered page before the introduction. The front and back cover art are both close-ups of illustrations from the interior. Nowickj 19:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Bob 15:17, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Pet Sematary
I've accepted this publication into the database. When giving additional pagination in the page count field, there should be no separation between the sets of numbers, so it should be "xii+400". Also, you will notice that the sentences in the Note field run together. A simple keyboard "enter" doesn't create new lines. You must add an HTML break, entered as   at the end of a line in order for a new line to start. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Nowickj 23:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I left the record as submitted so that you could see what I was talking about, and ordinarily give the editor to opportunity make the corrections. (Otherwise I could have just updated it myself, and let you know I'd done so.) I will go ahead and make the changes. Mhhutchins 23:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I made the changes when I added in additional data. Thanks. Nowickj 23:43, 21 Jan. uary 2014 (UTC)


 * Hopefully all is okay now. Stonecreek 15:56, 22 January 2014 (UTC)