User talk:Prof beard

Mhhutchins 14:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Cover image file uploads
I had to remove the link to the image you uploaded for this publication, and delete it from the database. I will reupload it using the proper method. In the future, when adding a cover image file to the server, you must use the "Upload cover scan" link from the publication record. (At the time the file was uploaded, the publication record had not been created. So you have to wait until a moderator accepts the submission to add the record to the database before uploading the cover image from the record.) Do not use the "Upload file" link on the Wiki pages (that is reserved for files other than cover images).

Also, I'll have to delete (inscription from the Brunner poetry collection) because it is not the cover of the book. Please use the "Upload cover scan" function to only upload cover images. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 15:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It is the "cover" of the book as such... The collection was published privately by the author a set of duplicated pages with a stapled plain brown paper cover.  The copy I have (obtained from Curry some years back) has an inscription written across the front by the author.   The image is of the "front" of the publication - I grant that an unsigned one would be just plain brown page, but that's how it was published? Prof beard 15:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Did every copy of the publication have this same "cover", i.e. did they have the same inscription and signature? Mhhutchins 15:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't think anyone knows, that collection was a private publication in small quantity and was, I understand largely sent by Brunner to friends etc - it is likely he wrote on most/all of them. My copy has "Don" included as JB sent the copy to Donald A Wollheim. I would assume other copies had different names on them! Perhaps if I just put a publication note explaining that rather than a cover picture?


 * I'll add a link from the publication record to the image, but will add a note of explanation. (A tip: When linking an image to a pub record, you must use the complete URL and not just the file name. Also, don't forget to sign each of your wiki posts.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Thanks also for your patience - I'm very IT savvy, but unfamiliar with the conventions of this wiki (my experience is limited to a few small WIkipedia entries) - I'll get there in the end Prof beard 15:45, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, wiki is a whole different language! And I've no doubt you'll catch on easily. You've found the wiki the first day of your account. Sometimes that has taken weeks (and even never) for some users! Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 15:48, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I've linked the cover and updated the publication record for Brunner's poetry collection. If the pages on which the poems appear are numbered, please add them to the record's content section. If not, you can number the poems in the order in which they appear in the publication, but add a note that you're making that exception to the page numbering standard. Mhhutchins 15:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Clarke's Four Great SF Novels
Submission adding this record accepted. A tip: using the Clone function of the original record would have resulted in the transfer of all of the content titles as well. Now that the new record is created, you can add the contents using the Import function. This avoids entering new content titles that will have to be merged with the existing titles. Ask if you need help. Mhhutchins 14:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clone tip, I think I've imported successfully... Prof beard 15:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, it was fine and submission was accepted. A question: how certain are you that the BCA edition has different pagination from Gollancz's trade edition. I just checked the OCLC record for the Gollancz edition and it has the same page count, so I assume the pagination is also the same.
 * Another Wiki mark-up tip: adding a colon at the start of the message indents it from the previous one, make it easier to follow the discussion. Keep adding a colon for each subsequent post. Look at the raw data to see how it's entered. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My version has the number of pages I indicated which differs from the entry in ISFDB for the Gollanz version - I couldn't verify the Gollanz entry was wrong, so commented as I did as the contents are listed as the same.Prof beard 15:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Since I just corrected the ISFDB record's page count field, based on the OCLC record, the note about the different pagination of the BCA edition should be removed. It can't be determined that the pagination is truly different until someone does a primary verification of the Gollancz edition. Mhhutchins 16:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Sounds right, ok will do Prof beard 16:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Brunner's The Man Who Was Secrett and Other Stories
I'm holding your submission to change the title of the introduction to this collection. We normally disambiguate generically-titled introductions by adding the title of work being introduced parenthetically. If the introduction is not generic and has an actual title, then that should be used as the title of the work without parentheses, unless parentheses are actually used in title! You changed it to "Introduction (The Man Who Wrote Marvels)". How is the introduction actually titled? Mhhutchins 14:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. It should be just "The Man Who Wrote Marvels" then. Prof beard 15:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Making changes to verified publication records
Hi, and welcome. Thank you for all of your recent contributions. One procedural policy item for you to be aware of: When you want to make a change that would affect a publication that has Primary verification(s), our policy is to notify the verifier(s) of the changes by leaving a message on the verifier's talk page or by following whatever directions that person may have posted at the top of the talk page. In general, you can submit additions in parallel with notifying the verifier that you have done so, but you should ask a verifier before altering any data that's already there. If you run into a situation where you're adding, but it looks like the verifier missed something that should have been seen, you might want to ask first.

So, for the cover addition to, you should have left a message for Unapersson. For the artist credit addition to, you should have at least left Biomassbob a message, if not checked with him first. Since you didn't add any information about the source of the artist credit, I can't quite judge which would have been more appropriate.

This just something to keep in mind for future submissions. For these, I have left notices; I am holding the second one until Bob responds. Thanks. --MartyD 13:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Understood and thanks for the advice Prof beard 13:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've left Bob a note to explain that the artist credit came from the cover of my copy of the publication.Prof beard 13:36, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Adjusting notes on primary verified records
If the price is present on this publication you can remove the note that gives the source of the price. You can do this anytime you do a primary verification of a record. If any of the data fields are not present in the actual book, only then should the source be noted. Thanks. Mhhutchins 13:47, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks and doneProf beard 13:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Cover for The High Crusade
The cover art for this publication is probably Peter Jones, based on your note that it is copyrighted as "Solar Wind". That's the name of a collection of his artwork. I'll leave a note on the primary verifier's page to see if he can look at the cover and see if it's in the collection. (The cover was used after this collection, so the artwork in the book would have a different name.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Turns out that the cover isn't in the collection, BUT Solar Wind is Peter Jones' corporate name. Also, you can see Jones' signature (PAJ) in the center of the rock. You can update the record and credit Jones as the cover artist, and provide the evidence in the Note field. Mhhutchins 15:36, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Dark Light Years
You linked the incorrect image file to this record. (It was probably still in your memory from the previous submission.) Mhhutchins 15:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Oops! I'll sort it now Prof beard 16:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Crash
Does this book give a month publication as stated in the record? If not, you should have adjusted the note to say that the month of publication was from Locus #199 (February 1977), instead of removing the entire note. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Apologies I though I had done that - a slip of the finger - will correctProf beard 19:24, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * One other thing: when starting a new line in the Note field, you have to enter a hard HTML break . Otherwise the sentence runs on from the previous one. Mhhutchins 19:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * BTW, did you miss the added note I made to the message above about the cover art for The High Crusade. Mhhutchins 19:40, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Re Solar wind - Using my magnifying glass it actually says PAJ80 too so I'll update as you suggestProf beard 10:41, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Kinsman
Hello, I've approved your submission regarding this pub, but I'm puzzled by the cover artist credit to Moore as this site favors Hay as artist. Note that a later printing (this one) has a cover clearly in Moore's style. Hauck 16:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * My deepest apologies - I paid too much attention to the publication detail and not enough to the cover image! HOWEVER...   My publication detail are as stated in terms of year and price  etc BUT the image is actual the same as the later one you link too.  Makes me think the cover and artist attribution for this edition may be wrong?   Would I change these or record this as a different edition? Prof beard 17:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It's likely that the image was linked to amazon without the physical copy of the book (cover scan from amazon are sometimes not the correct ones when multiple printings exist). Just upload your own scan or use the later one (if similar). Thanks for your reply. Hauck 17:09, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * will do - thanks. Prof beard 17:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Bradbury's Timeless Stories
Can you confirm the catalog number given in this record? It's 12 digits so it can't be an ISBN, and Bantam didn't start using ISBNs until 1976. At this time, Bantam had a letter (or two) and four numbers in their catalog number, and it was printed on the front cover. The number you gave may have been a precursor to the ISBN that includes the publisher code assigned to Bantam: "553", which usually appears on the spine. In the case of this publisher, it's best to follow the pattern used by other Bantam books for 1972, and enter the front cover catalog number in the ISBN/Catalog # field (starting with the "#" symbol per ISFDB standards), and entering the spine number in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes it's the number on the spine - I did wonder about the length - I added the front 0- myself and thought it couldnt be right. The front cover catalog number is creased and looks like it is NP8102 but I'd like to check it - do you know a source?Prof beard 22:55, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * it's NP 8162 - found a copy for sale on a reputable website which confirmed thatProf beard 23:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Submission accepted. But if you look at the record, you'll see the notes are all in one sentence regardless of how you entered it in the submission. As I explained above, if you want to start a new line, you must enter an HTML break. Mhhutchins 23:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Formatting notes
I noticed you have been doing some note re-formatting. If you're interested in some of the basic "complex" formatting you can do, see Using HTML in Note Fields. You're under no obligation whatsoever to use anything listed there; I'm just mentioning it as an FYI. --MartyD 11:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Marty, I know HTML, but was unsure what limited set worked hereProf beard 14:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussions with other editors
When leaving a message for other editors be sure to post it on their talk pages and not their user pages. Click on the "Discussion" tab on their user page first, then click on the "+" tab to start a new topic. I'll live the two messages you posted here until you've had a chance to see them. Then I'll move them to the editor's talk page. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that - a mistake, I should have spotted thisProf beard 15:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Flow My Tears... cover art credit
Can you confirm the artist is credited as "Clifton-Day" and not "Clifton-Dey" in this publication? Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 18:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Well spotted - that will teach me to do these things in brighter light :) - have submitted a correctionProf beard 18:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect content title
Your update mentions that one of the stories in this publication has a different title on its title page. In that case, you need to remove it and replace it with the correct title. Do you know how to do this? If not, I can walk you through it. Mhhutchins 15:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd appreciate guidance on this - I realised it needed doing but couldn't do it when importing the content. Thanks Prof beard 15:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I note that Stand-By (the title used in this publication) is already listed as a variant to Top Stand-By Job. - don't know if this is important in terms of process? Prof beard 15:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * All records must be entered based on the publication as published. If the story is title "Stand-By" in the book, then the record must reflect that. If that's the case, here's what you should do:


 * Go to the publication record and click on the link "Remove Titles from This Pub".
 * On the next page, check the box(es) of the story(ies) you want to remove. Submit.
 * Go back to the publication record and click on the link "Edit This Pub".
 * On the next page, go to the bottom of the CONTENTS section and click "Add Title"
 * Fill in all of the appropriate fields for the missing content. Submit.


 * This will create a new title record, which will have to be merged with any that may already exist in the database. In this case, there is one. You can make the submission to merge the titles after the previous submissions have been made and approved by a moderator. Or I can do that for you. Mhhutchins 17:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've done steps 1 to 5 - I'd like to merge the title myself - I assume I select the title in the publication listing and select another command - can you confirm which command to use - I'm assuming I provide the title number it is to be merged withProf beard 18:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Titles and publications are different animals. In this case, you want to merge identical titles. Go to the author page for and click the link "Check for Duplicate Titles". You'll get a list of matching titles on the next page. Look for "Stand-By" and check the boxes of the two (sometimes more) titles which you want to merge. On the next screen you have to reconcile any differences between the two records. In this case, choose to keep the variant (this is not the canonical title of the work), and submit. Mhhutchins 18:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * thanks!  I think I'm beginning to get my head around this, I understand the structuring better than the language used - I'm an academic in an IT field and not a librarian :) Prof beard 18:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I wish there were a better way of explaining the structure than with words! After a while and more submissions under your belt, you'll pick up on the concepts more than can be explained in the Help documentation. Something to keep in mind: title records represent the author's work, while publication records represent the presentation by the publisher, i.e. the physical object, or in the case of ebooks, the electronic file. An author's work has a single title record (unless its title is changed, requiring a variant title record), but it can be published dozens of time, with time represented in the database by a unique publication record. Mhhutchins 19:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * very helpfully explained and it matches the concept I had formed! I'm confident I'll pick it up, just bear with me, your help is very much appreciated...  Perhaps a glossary explaining how terms like canonical, variant, pseudonym etc relate to the structure would help?  Prof beard 19:35, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The Men from P.I.G.
Your note in this record states it was reprinted in 1982, yet you gave the publication date as 1983. Is one of the dates incorrect? Mhhutchins 21:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spotting that - correction inbound... Prof beard 21:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

One Step from Earth
Hello, one source here credites David Bergen as artist for the 1975 Arrow pbk. Does it seem likely to you (note for example the similarity with this other Harrison/Arrow title) ? Hauck 15:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Well that is certainly the cover on my copy - I'm no cover artist expert but it does look like Bergen from my limited exposureProf beard 15:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded the scan and modified notes accordingly. Hauck 15:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

The Green Hills of Earth
Hello, I've put your sub for the 1956 Pan printing on hold. Perhaps are you thinking about this one. Note that it's likely (as it's not PVed) that the author's name is wrongly entered (as per your submission). If it's the same book, you'll have some different steps to take (PV the book, change its author, unmerge the title from the RAH-credited ones, merge it with the RH-credited ones). If you want some guidance, feel free to ask. Hauck 16:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep that's the one - I'll cancel my other submission - and that is indeed how the author appears on the cover. If you could give me the steps needed to do the unmerging and merging I'd be grateful.  I'm very IT literate (I'm a UK Emeritus Professor in an IT/Internet field) but am unsure of the structure of things on here in terms of things like merging etc - I want to learn :) Prof beard 16:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, let's try : 1) go to the collection page here, 2) change author for the target publication here, 3) go back to the collection page and choose (tick box) the publication to unmerge from rest via the "Unmerge Title" item in the "Editing Tools" section on the left, 4) go to the "Robert Heinlein" page here where there should be only the unmerged publication, 5) choose the "view all titles by this pseudonym" display there should be two occurences of the collection (at the bottom of the page), 6) merge the two correspending items. Note that some of the stages will need to be moderated. Hauck 17:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind: we don't credit authorship based on covers or dustjackets (as you state above about the cover author). Only use the author as credited on the title page of the book, and nowhere else (unless there isn't a title page!) Mhhutchins 17:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much both - I'll have a go at this later. Thanks for the reminder re cover author - it is RH on the title page too...  (Reminder to self about being precise in wording of things)Prof beard 17:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Question when I select merge the titles I get a screen showing title year conflict with 1967 and 1956 shown and 1967 selected, and a title parent conflict with the numbered option selected and the un-numbered one not selected.   Are these the right options selected?  What do they mean/refer to? Prof beard 18:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The first conflict is for the publication date => choose the earlier date, the second will keep the link (variant title) of the whole lot to the "canonical" (authored by RAH) collection so don't change it.Hauck 18:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * (In response to the orginal question, after an edit conflict.) No. There are no "right" options chosen. It's arbitrarily buttoned (or for some interior logic of which I'm not aware.) That leaves it up to the editor to determine which one of the conflicting fields to choose. As for dates, 99% of the time, it's best to choose the earliest. But it's good to know that the earliest one is the correct one. If one of the records is a variant (meaning there is a parent record conflict), you should choose to keep the parent record, unless your research has shown that it should not be a variant. If the title and/or author field aren't matching, they probably shouldn't be merged unless your research has determined that one of them is incorrect and should be changed in the merge. In other words, it's entirely up to the editor to resolve the conflicts. If the choices are obviously wrong, it may be caught by the moderator. But, if you are not certain, don't make the submission. First, ask on the Help Desk page. Don't make the submission and expect the moderator to determine if it was correct. Mhhutchins 18:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for advice and explanations both - really helpful - I like to understand what I'm doing and why :) Prof beard 18:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Have Space Suit - Will Travel author credit
A question about your proposed clone of Have Space Suit - Will Travel by Robert A. Heinlein, which I have on hold: I see the note that says "Cover and Spine as by 'Robert Heinlein'". Is that meant to imply the title page does use the "A."? Thanks. --MartyD 11:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Marty - yes title page is RAH, Prof Prof beard 11:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I added that to the note (and accepted the submission, of course!); if I wondered about it, someone else might.  --MartyD 11:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Marty - I'm not yet sure what it is reasonable to imply and when being explicit is essential :) Prof beard 11:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Dune Cover Image
I had to reject to your edit to add a new cover image to this, as the image was of Heinlein's I Will Fear No Evil. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that (had multiple tabs open) - correct one on its wayProf beard 12:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

The Troglodytes
The date change for this record was accepted, but I gave Tuck as the source. I also removed the source for the review in F&SF. Tuck gives the catalog number as "R587". Does the letter appear on your copy? Also, you were correct to suspect an earlier hardcover edition. I created a record using Tuck as the source. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - this is starting to look a bit more sensible... No visible "R" on my copy, but the "R" seems to be the standard for Digit books of this period, so I think it is reasonable to accept it should be thereProf beard 19:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * No. If there is no "R" present on your copy, you should not include it in the Catalog # field. You can add a note that it isn't present although Tuck says it is. We try to record data as present in the publication, but will make corrections to obvious publisher errors (but note them). Mhhutchins 19:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll add an appropriate note later. The cat no appears only on the spine, and as it it rubbed at the does a bit, it may be the "R" is lost, but I'll "tell it like it is"Prof beard 19:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

SF Hall of Fame, Volume 1
Are you certain there is no ISBN stated anywhere in this publication? By 1974, Sphere had started using ISBNs on all of their books. Sometimes they did not have dashes. Or perhaps your copy being a second printing, they may have forgot to add it. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 20:28, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks for pointing this out - after a bit of a search, I found the ISBN - have edited the record accordingly Prof beard 20:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The Man-Kzin Wars
The ISBN in this record has an extra digit. Mhhutchins 20:31, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You are right, but that isn't the edition I verified...   This is the one I edited and which you approved : http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?312118Prof beard 20:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * And you're right. The message was meant for another editor who just made a submission cloning your pub but with a different ISBN. Just a coincidence that two editions of the same title popped up so close to each other. Sorry. Mhhutchins 20:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * no problem - we are all human :)Prof beard 20:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The Stars in Shroud
Added a cover scan to [this] and a couple of 'non'-notes. --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Bill - your "this" link just points to this page? ! Prof beard 19:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Oops! Corrected. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks! Prof Prof beard 20:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Ball in the Family
I think you meant the synopsis added to this title for the Note to Moderator field. Mhhutchins 20:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * partly - I'll tidy it up - thanksProf beard 22:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I hope it was wholly, because such a note should not be part of the visible record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I've created a variant of the title record - what do I do to make the author a pseudonym ?Prof beard 22:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Go to the pseudonym and click on "Make/Remove a Pseudonym" link under Editing Tools menu. On the next page enter the canonical name in the "Parent Name" field and submit.


 * BTW, I fixed the capitalization of the title according to ISFDB standards. Mhhutchins 22:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Got it - thanksProf beard 22:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Amazon actually have a cover image for this rarity. It's not the best, and you may have a better one, so just lettin' ya know. PS. note the exclamation mark. PeteYoung 01:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's is a totally different cover from the edition I have! Could it possibly be that it was printed more than once? AmazingProf beard 10:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

UK priced ed. of The Worm Ouroboros
I'm holding your submission to add a new record for the August 1970 printing of this title. It appears to be identical to this record, except for the UK pricing. Is there any mention of a printing, distribution, publication, etc by a UK publisher? Is the US price "overprinted" by the UK price? Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 16:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * My copy is a fully UK priced edition - no overprinting or US price.  My copy is also printed in Canada not the USA.  I did wonder about about this one but it does see to be be a distinct printing.  The information on the copyright page is contradictory though as it says printed in Canada but does not give the later date for that printing... Prof beard 16:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Is the publisher given as Ballantine Books, New York? Mhhutchins 16:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. But as I said the back cover has UK, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa prices and has "printed in Canada" on the copyright page.  Happy to go with what you think best? Prof beard 16:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * One last question before approval: is the ISBN stated or derived? Mhhutchins 17:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * it has 345-02001-4 on the back cover, so an SBN rather than an ISBN ? Prof beard 17:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * If the ISBN is derived from an SBN, it should be noted (giving the location which is normally on the copyright page as well.) I'll accept the submission and ask that you add further notes, giving the various prices, the ISBN, etc. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok will do - the derived ISBN came across with the cloning, so I left it as was. Would normally mention it. Prof beard 17:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The cloning function allows you to create the new publication record and change any field that doesn't match, including adding/amending notes. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I realise that, and normally changes things - in this case I was "slothful" over the ISBN - will be more vigilant :). Prof beard 17:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

A Voyage to Arcturus
If this was published by Ballantine Books, London, the publisher should be given as "Ballantine Books (UK)". (That's why I asked above if the edition of The Worm Ourobouros was published by Ballantine Books, New York.) Thanks. Mhhutchins


 * ok - will correct, thanks Prof beard 19:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Lilith
I'm holding a submission to update this record, changing the date, removing the publication series, and adding a price. Are you certain you have the same edition/printing and mean to update it, or did you intend on cloning the current record to create a new one? Mhhutchins 19:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * the original record stated it was of the UK reprint of the US edition, which is what I've entered the details of.  The original entry is based entirely on the WorldCat entry which is clearly deficient.   It seemed to me that either I created a new record and edited the original to refer to the us version, or edited the original to be correct for the uk reprint - I chose the latter.   Does that seem right?  Prof beard 19:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * That's OK, I'll accept the submission. (I only questioned it because the changes were so drastic.) How is the publisher given in the book? And is there no mention of "Ballantine Adult Fantasy" at all? Mhhutchins 20:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * the publisher is Ballentine books Ltd with sales and distribution by Pan.  No explicit mention of Ballentine Adult Fantasy except in an advertisement for "Other adult fantasy titles available from Ballantine Books".   It's almost as if someone made a decision to expunge the series from the UK edition Prof beard 21:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Nebula #21
Hello, I've approved your edit but you state in your notes that Brunner's story is in fact titled _Treason_. In this case, you should enter the short story under its correct title (in the usual three step approach : 1) add correctly-titled story, 2) remove "bad" titled item, 3) merge the new text with its canonical title (the longer one in this case). The interior art's title should also be changed. Hauck 14:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - exactly the response I was hoping for! I was wondering how to deal with that...  Will do it Prof beard 14:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Importing a single work
Re this record: It's better to just add the single content at the time the publication record is created and then merge it with the existing title once the submission is accepted. Two submissions. Importing a single title from a publication with several content records is going to require an additional submission to remove the unwanted title records. In the meantime, someone looking at any of those titles are going to think they're in the publication. And you increase the odds of forgetting to do the last submission, and then having a record filled with errors. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I did wonder if that would be better - noted Prof beard 19:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Cover images of non-genre magazines
It is current ISFDB standard to only link to covers of non-genre magazines which illustrate the spec-fic content. I've rejected the submission to add a cover image to this record. Feel free to open a new discussion over the practice on the Rules 7 Standards page. Mhhutchins 18:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I must confess I hadn't picked up on this - that magazine is probably the only non-genre magazine I possess with sf content, so it probably won't impact on me again. I think I would be inclined to have covers regardless of cover story myself, on the grounds it would aid collectors searching for a magazine containing a particular sf story.   I might put this view forward this as you suggest, but I don't feel strongly about it to be honest Prof beard 18:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Science Fantasy, v 6 #17, 1956
Just a note that after approving your changes to Science Fantasy, v 6 #17, 1956 I changed Quinn's "To Touch the Stars" (p. 110) from SHORTFICTION to INTERIORART and added "[2]" to the title. Hopefully it matches your intent :) Ahasuerus 03:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks - I realised I'd slipped up as I clicked "submit" and was going to correct it today Prof beard 08:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Venture 1964-01
Hello, I've approved your submission result here with change from Edotor to Editor but please check if your copy is not the same as this other one. Hauck 10:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi! That's really weird - I searched and searched for that and couldn't find it.  Now when I search it pops up first try!  Yes it is the same - I'll delete mine Prof beard 10:45, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

"Nightmare with Zeppelins"
I had merged the two versions of "Nightmare with Zeppelins", which made your latest submission unapprovable because the 1960-01-00 version of the title no longer existed. Could you please double check that Galaxy Science Fiction (UK), #77 January 1960 still looks OK? Ahasuerus 20:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Amazing Stories UK #1
If the date (month and/or year) of this issue isn't given in the issue, it shouldn't be given in the title field. It's OK to give the date in the date field if you have a secondary source (as you noted). Mhhutchins 23:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Same situation with this record, this record, and this record. If you can remember any more that may have been entered this way, please make the corrections. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice - will take note and check as requested Prof beard 08:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Volume numbering in title field
When entering the volume/issue data in a magazine's title field, please separate the volume from the issue number, e.g. "v1 #1" instead of "v1#1". Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Will do. Thanks Prof beard 15:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

"Based on" cover art
Re this record: If a work of cover art has been "repainted" (this happens often with European and Canadian reprints of US periodicals), you should not credit the original artist in the Artist1 field, but record the information in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! NotedProf beard 15:18, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Vision of Tomorrow #6, March 1970
In your sub (which I've put on hold), you propose to add a SHORTFICTION item titled _Full-Five_ by Eddie Jones, can you confirm ? (It will be the first piece of fiction by this artist). Thanks Hauck 14:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry - should be interior art or course :) If you approve the sub, I'll edit it straight awayProf beard 15:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Hauck 15:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * edit submitted Prof beard 15:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Something Else #2
A few problems with the update to this record.
 * The titles of generically-titled works, like editorials and columns (such as "Editorial" and "Short Reviews"), must be disambiguated by adding the name of the publication parenthetically.
 * The review of the work by Delany misspells his name.
 * Are the works by Ken Reid speculative fiction? (He's not in the database.)
 * Are the titles on pages 28 and 32 correctly entered?

Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:47, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reminding me - I did miss this. I've disambiguated the titles and corrected the typo and titles.  (I obviously wasn't on form when I did those!)  The "Fudge" works by Ken Reid appear to be juvenile speculative fiction, but may well be, in essence, graphical works.  The review isn't the clearest!  Happy to delete these if that's best.Prof beard 10:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * We don't delete them per se. A review of a work which is otherwise not eligible for the database (such as a nongenre work or graphic novel by a nongenre author, films recording, play, etc.) is entered as ESSAY. That would have to be this case because research has shown these are reprinted comic strips. One record of ESSAY type for both would be fine, titled "Review of the Fudge comic strips by Ken Reid", with an uncredited author. I'm still not sure about the pieces on pages 28 and 32, except that maybe your shifted "e" isn't working! :) Mhhutchins 19:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I think those are sorted now - funny about the "E"s - can't explain that at all... Will delete the fudge review entries once this is approvedProf beard 20:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Science Fiction Studies, July 1976
I'm holding your submission to add a record for this issue to the db. Are you certain it was published by Gregg Press (who published facsimile reprints for libraries)? According to most sources it was published by Indiana State University. Mhhutchins 03:05, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this, on careful examination, I have misread the (considerable) text on the copyright page - you are right - it is Indiana State U (but there was a reference to Gregg press in a different context, which I mistakenly picked up as in was in a larger font!) I'll correct it if you approved the submissionProf beard 10:17, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Brunner's 'The Economics of SF'
I've had to reject the edit to make a variant to this essay. The correct edit would be a Title Merge with the later appearance of the same essay, as there is no variation in the title (nor is it appearing in a different language). Go to Brunner's bibliography page, then under Editing Tools click on 'Check for Duplicate Titles'. You'll see all possible candidates for merging and 'The Economics of SF' will be there. Click on both tick boxes for the title then 'Merge Selected Records'. When merging titles, it's ALWAYS worth checking if the merge is a correct edit by double-checking on both titles you're planning to merge. Thanks. PeteYoung 18:51, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * thanks for this - I had trouble find the right help for that process Prof beard 18:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Numbering interiorart records
Only use the numbering system for titling INTERIORART records if they illustrate the same work (fiction or essay). The three pieces titled "Grumblings" in this record do not seem to illustrate anything other than themselves. Or is there a record missing for a work which they illustrate? Mhhutchins 22:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The Grumblings section is the letters section - I was unsure how this should be referenced - I recorded the major letters as indicated in the help, but was unclear how the whole section should be referenced - if you could guide me on that, I'll add it in as a another edit.Prof beard 23:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Columns (like letter sections) can be given a content record titled "Name of Column (Title of the periodical including the date)". So in this case, create a content record titled "Grumblings (Yandro, #173 July 1967)" and giving "various" as the author, unless the column is credited to the editor(s) who provides responses to each of the letters. The illustrations should be titled exactly the same as the work they illustrate, i.e. the column, and there is no need to add a number unless the artist has a second, or third, etc piece in the same issue. That is not the case in this issue, since all three are by three different artists.  Mhhutchins 23:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Yandro #173
The review of the Ace Double by Jack Vance and Tony Russell Wayman in this record should be entered as two separate reviews, unless the reviewer only mentions one of the titles. Be sure to give the full name of the author (Tony Russell Wayman) even if the reviewer doesn't. Once you've added these two review records, you'll have to remove and delete the current one. Thanks. Mhhutchins 05:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Your submission to disambiguate the titles in this issue deletes the link to this cover image. Is that deliberate or a mistake? I will restore it if it's a mistake -- no need to do anything with the submission.  Thanks.  --MartyD 12:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes it is a mistake, thanks for spotting it! Prof beard 13:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * All set. --MartyD 11:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Prof beard 11:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Something Else #2 (redux)
Perhaps you missed my posting concerning this record? Mhhutchins 04:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * See aboveProf beard 10:43, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

World of Ptaavs
Cover artist for [this] edition is Peter Jones. Just entered a record for the first '78 [Futura] printing with a full-cover [image] that shows Jones' initials on the back. Don't know if the second '78 printing has a different back cover or not ... --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! The initials are are on the back cover of my copy too - must do these things in brighter light! :) 09:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Plague Ship
Since the edition used for [this] record is printed in Australia, the record should have the Australian price in the field, not the UK one as it is a separate edition. I have the UK printing and will create another record for it. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Cheers Bill - have sorted that. Prof Prof beard 09:53, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Tome of Fire
I accepted the submission to add the contents to this record. It would have been easier for both of us if you'd imported the contents from this record. You would have avoided having to enter a record for each story, and I would not have had to merge all of the newly created records with the ones in the database. A question: can you confirm the spelling of the story on page 11? In the other collection it is spelled "Vulkan's Shield", but it's not been verified. Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 15:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

"Data from Amazon.UK" vs "Primary Verification"
I've noticed your last few submissions for primary verified records state "Data from Amazon UK", which conflicts with the Primary Verification. Ordinarily the data would be from the book itself, and you would only note any fields which contain data from a secondary source. Mhhutchins 15:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks- so I should say "Month etc" from Amazon rather than date? Prof beard 15:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You're not saying "Date", you're saying "Data". That may be the problem. Mhhutchins 15:24, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * oh dear!  Typo! (Then cut and pasted to compound the felony)  Will correct - sorry!


 * I've been putting a quote of the print year (all that the book provided) in the notes. I'll edit them to say "month" or "month and day" from amazon as appropriate? Prof beard 15:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Whatever data you receive from a secondary source should be noted, whether it be the day, month or year. Mhhutchins 15:24, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Space Hulk The Novel
This record was accepted, but you failed to create a content record for this CHAPTERBOOK-typed publication. Also, "The Novel" is a subtitle (in some opinions), and if you choose to record it in the title field (most editors don't), it should be offset with a colon, e.g. Space Hulk: The Novel. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * noted - will sort that out - I've done two other chapterbooks as well so I'll do the same to them Prof beard 15:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Blood Gorgons
There are two mutually exclusive statements of publishing date in Blood Gorgons.

I've also seen that you seem to prefer the statements of the respective publishing date given by amazon over other sources (such as Locus). There's not much harm done if you (as in the case I've seen) just put a distinctive day into the field. In my opinion, amazon should not be given preference above other sources (and especially not above statements in a given publication): I do suspect that selling is here the main emphasis, not giving bibliographical information per se. And we really don't know who is entering the data; he or she may pick the day of entering the data, for example. Thanks for reading so far, Stonecreek 14:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi = thanks for spotting the anomaly - it was a typo and I've submitted a correction.   I don't "prefer" Amazon, I've used it in the main where there is additional (month and/or day) information.   If I've removed any links to Locus, this was over-enthusiastic editing and I'll take note not to in future.  Prof Prof beard 15:13, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the correction, but the statement is still doubled. You may want to delete the surplus one. And with amazon: We should have a source for a publishing date, and we should refer to amazon if we have no other source. But I see some possible trapping involved if we do think this source is reliable per se (obviously, because I thought so only some months ago), knowing that reliabity for bibliographic data doesn't come first for online sellers: they certainly aren't against it, but the person who enters the data may be under time constraints. I do think that they nowadays will use the data supplied by publishers, but we can't be sure of this and it possibly won't be the case for every publisher. I also do think that month of publication is sufficient, if we have a reliable source. Stonecreek 15:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * What came to my mind just a few minutes ago, is that for first publications the date for the title (and also for the cover art) has also to be changed, to have them fitting. This is a lot of work for a (possibly) fine-tuning, I think. Stonecreek 16:00, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I think I've sorted that now (had a bunch of distractions - not helpful!). Re Amazon - I agree with you - I've been taking the view that if that is all there is, use it, but will be happy to follow any consensus view? Prof beard 16:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Planetkill
Is it really printed in 2006 for Planetkill, published in 2008? Stonecreek 15:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Corrected - had someone at the door and got distracted - sorry!Prof beard 15:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, that sort of nuisance does happen; no harm done. Stonecreek 16:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Yandro #174
Who is the author credited with the piece on page 8 of this publication? It currently gives a date in the author field. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 04:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Corrected - thanksProf beard 15:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

HTML problem
I believe you may be using a template for notes with incorrect HTML. I've fixed 8 records which you primary verified that had very similar notes, but one of the lines (the one that starts "First printing...") begins with an angle bracket "<" but is missing the remaining "BR>". Please correct this if you continue to use this template. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Many apologies - not a template but a poor piece of cutting with multiple pastes Prof beard 15:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Ad Astra and "He Who Fights"
I have on hold your submission that adds disambiguation to one of the content titles and that changes "He Who Fights: Part One" to "He Who Fights (Part 1 of 2)". No problem with either of those, but that submission also changes the publication's title field to "He Who Fights (Part 1 of 2)" from "Ad Astra, v3 #15". Clearly not right (correct?), but I'm wondering if it's something you might have done by accident or if the submission software somehow did the wrong thing. What do you think? Thanks. --MartyD 16:20, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmmmm - all I did was edit the entry in Ad Astra v3 #15 from "Part One" to (Part 1 of 2) - I did this because I acquired Ad Astra #16 which contains He Who Fights (Part 2 of 2) and I thought that would be the best thing to keep the story titles meaningful? I didn't try and change the publications title at al!   Hope this helps.  ProfProf beard 16:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. I am going to leave it on hold for Ahasuerus to take a look at.  When he's done, I will accept it and fix it.  --MartyD 16:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I'm pretty sure it is as I say - but given my obvious attack of finger trouble today, anything is possible :) Prof beard 17:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

The Jupiter Theft author in Ad Astra review
In, the spelling of the author of The Jupiter Theft should be "Moffitt", not "Moffit". I have corrected it and linked the review. If the publication misspells it, add a note citing the discrepancy (for reviews, we only use canonical names or existing matching pseudonyms in the review record and don't create additional author entries for misspellings or natural name variations, relegating that info to the notes). Thanks. --MartyD 16:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * p.s. While mentioning reviews in this pub.... Is there any further info in the review about Laumer's The Ultimate Man?  We don't have a record of it, and I can't find it.  I find one sketchy reference to a 1987 Baen edition, but only on Biblio.com and then citing a bookseller.  Nothing at all for a 1979 / 1980 edition.  --MartyD 16:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Both were typos - I submitted a correction which I guess you haven't seen yet - the Laumer title is "The Ultimax Man" - my fingers seem to be playing up today :) sorry Prof beard 17:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Review in Ad Astra v2 #1
I changed "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galxy" to "The Hitchhiker ' s Guide to the Gal a xy" in and linked it to that title. If either of those was not a typo, again record the discrepancy in the notes. Thanks. --MartyD 17:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd spotted I'd made a typo too late! Many thanks. ProfProf beard 17:21, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

"Driftglass" review in Ad Astra v2 #3
I changed the author's name from "Samu a l R. Delany" to "Samu e l R. Delany" in your and linked it to the collection of the same title. Again, if it wasn't a typo, record the discrepancy in the notes. I see he also has a piece of short fiction by that title, so if it's not a review of the collection, link the review to the other title. Thanks. --MartyD 17:15, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * No it was the collection being reviewed - very sorry about my attack of typos !!!  Prof beard 17:20, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Ad Astra, V3 #13
Can you confirm the spelling of the author credit for the story on page 21 of this issue? (There is an author . Note the two "r"s in his first name.) Also, are you certain that the volume numbering should be the way to go in titling the issues of this periodical? Looking at the cover images you've provided, it appears that only the issue number is given. And one last thing, can you confirm the volume numbering in the title field of this issue? It doesn't align with the other issues. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 17:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. Yes it is misspelled in the publication - on checking it IS the Garry K - I' ll correct in the listing and add a note about the misspelling?  Prof beard 18:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I accepted the submission to change this before I read your response. As has been pointed out, and made clear throughout all of the ISFDB help pages, it is the standard to record credits as presented in the publication. If the story is credited to "Gary Kilworth" on page 21 (as I originally asked), then it should be entered as "Gary Kilworth" in the ISFDB record of this publication. We then create a variant record so that it is correctly attributed to the author's canonical name. If this is the case, I'll need to fix it, because I've already merged it with the title record under the author's canonical name, and it will take several submissions to clean it. So again, how is the author credited on page 21? Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * the author Kilworth is credited as "Gary" on p21 - sorry about the change, but I thought I'd had conflicting guidance from moderators on this in the past - in hindsight I'm wrong though - In future I'll stick to quoting the publication verbatim. Thanks Prof beard 19:05, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The issue numbering for Ad Astra is all over the place - the issue is correctly cited, but it does indeed not align - if you look here on GC you will see what I mean - http://www.philsp.com/mags/sf_a.html#ad_astra     That list is reflected in the printed publications.  Prof beard 18:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Since the volume numbering of the periodical is incorrect, I would suggest using only the issue number given in the issue. Is "Issue Fourteen" given in the interior in either the publisher's colophon or the contents page? In order to make the titles of all issues consistent, I would suggest that only the issue number be given in them as well. When publications which give a combination of dating, the order of preference should be 1) month/year ("January 2013"), 2) issue number ("Issue 14"), and 3) volume numbering ("Vol. 21, No. 2"). The last should only be used if neither of the first two are present in the publication. We only use secondary sources (like Galactic Central or Locus) for the date field, if the date is not present in the publication. When we have the publication in hand, we do not use secondary sources for the title field, which follows the ISFDB standard of entering data as given in the publication. Thanks.  Mhhutchins 18:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * the publications have "Issue 14" etc on the outside cover only - that is the only consistent thing about them. The contents list etc have no date of any sort.  The v2 #3 etc are what is given in the contents pages and are completely inconsistent (the GC  list merely gives the content page versions and the front cover numbering).   Shall I change all the issues entries to reflect front cover numbering?Prof beard 19:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I would suggest that because of the inconsistency, the title fields should just give just the issue number, i.e. "Ad Astra, Issue Thirteen". Also, please check the HTML in the Note field of this record, which has a display problem. Thanks. Mhhutchins 05:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * OK Thanks - will do that. Have sorted the other display problem too.Prof beard 12:07, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Name check in Ad Astra, V2 #1
Can you confirm the author credit given on page 25 of this publication? Is it spelled "Ricahrd Dell"? Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 18:46, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks - it's a typo - I've submitted a correction.  I must apologise, I've suffered an attack of typos today, despite thinking I'd checked things Prof beard 19:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

The Masque of Vyle
Please confirm the publisher given in this record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:15, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Done - thanksProf beard 15:20, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Links in pub/title notes
Apologies if you already know this. For your : If you want to put a clickable link in publication or title (or other database record) notes, you cannot use the Wiki-style: Visco but must use HTML: Visco instead. More details at Help:Using_HTML_in_Note_Fields. If you didn't want to put a clickable link in the notes, then don't mind me. --MartyD 12:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes I did know that, but forgot to edit the note! Will do that thanks! Prof beard 12:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Startling Stories, [January] 1954 (UK)
I've approved your edit for this magazine but the value of the "image" field was unusable please see the result. Can you resubmit your link ? (I suppose it's for this image). Thanks. Hauck 12:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks I've re-uploaded the scan and resubmitted Prof beard 12:56, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Soul of the Robot
Found precise pub date for your verified here. Hauck 15:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Excellent! ThanksProf beard 15:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Survival world
Hello, I've approved your submission for this pub as I think that images hosted by us are better than amazon ones, but in this case I wonder about the poor state of the book. Perhaps was it better to copy amazon's on your computer image and upload it instead. I've also seen that you changed some amazon scan, please don't forget to notify (according to their preferences) all the PVs and not only PV1 (in my case you can consider me informed).Hauck 15:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this - in that case, I think your advice is sound and I'll do that. Must confess, I have been informing PV1 mainly - will correct this in future.Prof beard 14:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Replacing the cover of More Women of Wonder
Hello, I had to reject your submission. You gave the URL for the publication with no. 178177, not the one for the uploaded cover. Thanks, Stonecreek 15:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ooops - will correct thanksProf beard 15:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

John Brunner's Round Trip
You verified which contains Round Trip and  which contains The Round Trip. Are these the same story? If so, the second should be variented to the first. If not, it would be good to add a note to the title records indicating that. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I hadn't spotted that - the result of not PV1-ing either of them and focusing too much on content and page numbers and the expense of detail! They are the same.  Will create variant as suggested Prof Prof beard 13:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Soul Drinker
Hello, don't you think that the title of thid pub should be shortened to just _Soul Drinker_ ?. Hauck 13:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree - that was the entry when I verified it, but I'll change itProf beard 18:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguating Robert Mason
1. Happy Christmas! 2. We had a bunch of unverified artist records listed under the bibliography for Robert Mason, the author and Vietnam helicopter pilot, that needed disambiguating to Robert Mason (artist), the British illustrator. The only remaining record is for your verified pub Interzone: The 1st Anthology. Thanks. PeteYoung 10:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. - I'm not sure what you want/ you need me to do? The disambiguation is fine with me! Prof beard 20:44, 25 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I wasn't about to change the field in a record verified by others, and simply needed to suggest to the verifiers that it needed changing. Hauck has done it, so no worries. Back to the mince pies… ;) PeteYoung 21:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Walter M. Miller
If this book was published as by "Walter M. Miller", the pub record was entered under the wrong title record. Also, all of the stories would have to be changed to credit the penname (unless the stories have individual author credit). This is going to take several submissions to accomplish. If you want me to do it, I will, or I go step you through the process. Also, did the 1973 reprint credit the author without "Jr."? Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * The 1968 Panther was, as I noted, published with "Walter M. Miller" on both the cover and title page, with the "Jr" only appearing on the copyright page. Happy to do the required changes if you will describe the steps involved.  Good point about the reprint - I should have picked this up (I wasn't pv1 for the reprint and may have overlooked it because the pv1 was much more experienced) but that is the same as the 1968 - ie it has Walter M. Miller on cover and title page and "copyright Walter M. Miller Jr" on the copyright pageProf beard 19:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * you can see the wording on the reprint cover scan, by the way.Prof beard 19:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I wasn't doubting the credit that you gave on the record, only that it was entered under a title record credited to "Walter M. Miller, Jr.". If a book is published under a name different from the canonical name (title page credit of course, front cover credit is irrelevant), it has to be varianted to the canonical name. Here are the steps to make corrections to the records:
 * Correct the credit in the 1973 reprint's author field. (Leave a note on the other primary verifier's talk page.)
 * Use the "Unmerge Titles" function to remove both the 1968 and 1973 editions of these books from the parent title record.
 * Use the Remove Titles From This Pub" function to remove all contents from both pub records. (Two separate submissions.)
 * Update the 1968 record to add the content records, crediting "Walter M. Miller" with each of the stories.
 * Once the above submission is accepted, use the "Import Content" function to copy the contents from the 1968 record to the 1973 record.
 * Merge the two newly-created title records for A View from the Stars credited to "Walter M. Miller".
 * Variant this title record (credited to "Miller") to the one credited to "Miller, Jr.".
 * Variant each story's title record credited to "Miller" to its counterpart credited to "Miller, Jr." (Nine separate submissions.)


 * Mhhutchins 19:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * thanks! I'm fairly sure I follow that... I'll start doing it tomorrow morning when I'm fresh :). Will post here if I need to ask for any follow-up adviceProf beard 20:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi - I've done steps 1) and 2) so far. A question re step 4) - when added the content do I give the stories the date of the publication of the 1968 edition? Prof beard 10:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I approved the pub edit (step 1)), but put the other edits on hold for Michael to review. I believe there is a bug when you try to unmerge publications from these title records. Step 2) was meant for the collection's title record, which Michael linked to.
 * Re your question about step 4), when you add contents, leave the date field blank. The date of the publication of the 1968 edition is added automatically. Please try step 2) again first. Thanks, --Willem H. 11:08, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I think Ive submitted step 2) correctly now - shall I cancel the others or leave them for Michael? Prof beard 11:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you leave the edits for now? I'm not really sure the bug still exists. The remove and then add titles method is better anyway. Step 2) approved. Thanks, --Willem H. 11:28, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * OK thanks - will carry on then Prof beard 11:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I should have known. The last edits emptied the ones on hold. You can cancel them now, nothing to see anymore. --Willem H. 11:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

[unindent] Step 4 submission accepted. Please proceed. (Willem, yes, there once was a bug when "unmerging" a pub from one of its content title records. Although I think it's been fixed, I don't do it and advice editors to use the "Remove Titles from This Pub" function which accomplishes the same thing cleanly. As you say, the advice I gave here was to unmerge a pub record from its title record. I believe the function is incorrectly titled as it should be "Unmerge Publication Records from This Title" instead of "Unmerge Titles". I'd mentioned this before, but it never got much traction in discussion. Maybe one day it will be corrected. Thanks.) Mhhutchins 16:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the list of cancelled/rejected submissions I see that Prof Beard attempted something which wasn't one of the steps that I outlined above, i.e. "unmerging" pub records from content title records, one submission for each of contents. Even if this method works, and I'm not sure if it does or not, the number of submissions and moderations make it an unwise choice. Thanks Willem for catching them. Mhhutchins 17:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * indeed - thanks Willem - not having unmerged things before, I went for what was obviously a long-winded approach - I've learnt now :) Prof beard 17:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Submissions for Step 8 accepted, except for the first two which varianted to new records with the same author credit. I had to reject them. Please try again. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * thanks - have tried again... Prof beard 18:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry. They weren't correct. I've given you the correct title record to variant to in the reject notices of each. Mhhutchins 18:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * thanks - oddly, a couple of the submissions flagged up that I was trying to make a variant of variant, but one of these last two didn't. It's been a good learning experience Prof beard 18:09, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * The flags appeared because you can only create a variant to the parent record. (Three of the stories were retitled from their original publication appearance.) If you try to make a variant to a title record which is itself a variant of another record, you'll get the warning. The one that didn't get a flag ("The Will") was because it kept the same name. Everything now looks good. Let me know if you need any further assistance with unmerging and varianting records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks - that makes sense! Prof beard 19:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Richard Davis (Ed.) - Space 1 (pb)
Hi, I refer to here which you recently verified as "Primary 3". The Primary 1 & Primary 2 verifiers are no longer active, so you are now the authority for this publication! :-))) . I have some changes that I'd like to make with your agreement:

First the easy one: Would you please check the Canadian price on the back of your copy. Mine has $1.98, not $1.95 (my copy doesn't have anything about different printings, but publishers have been known to change things without changing the printing details!).

The other changes I'd like to make are:

My copy has the author of "Teddysaurs" to be James Hamilton-Paterson (not J. Hamilton-Patterson [with 2 ts] put in as a variant of James Hamilton-Patterson [again with 2 ts]). What does your copy have? (normally I'd add "above the story itself", but my copy only has the author in the TOC - rather unusually)

The trickiest change is: My copy has the 2nd last story to be "Neighbour" by Clifford Simak. This is a variant of ("Neighbor" by Clifford D. Simak), not ("Neighbor" by Clifford D. Simak). (I suspect it slipped through in the early days of ISFDB when we were learning the ways to do things.) What does your copy have?

I have both this pb and the earlier hc. The hc's only verifier is no longer active, so, being a moderator, I've already made the changes to the stories on the hc - here. I'm not sure how much you've picked up on "changing" story titles & authors in anthologies or collections, and on variant titles. (Being in Australia, when I'm working on ISFDB, most other editors aren't, so I don't do much moderating of other editor's submissions.) Let me know if I need to explain more. --clarkmci / j_clark 08:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi! I've checked and you are right about the Canadian price - well spotted!  Ditto - I've have "Hamilton-Paterson" too.  (And authors on contents page only)  Your are right about "Neighbour" too (I probably just assumed it was right - being spelled correctly from my point of view as a Brit :) ).  Very grateful for this - I must have had an off day when I PV'ed this one! Whilst I could do the changes myself, I'm more than happy for you to do them if you are willing. Prof Prof beard 10:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Was quicker for me to do it with all the Remove Titles, Find Duplicates, and Make Variants required. Changes done. Thanks for your prompt reply. --clarkmci / j_clark 23:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Legends / Victories of the Space Marines
I just noticed that the title stated on the cover differs from the publication's title as entered here. In these cases it's better to note the reason (for example: 'title as stated on title page differs from cover'). Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 14:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually - it was the wrong cover! Corrected now :) Prof beard 14:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, well, things such as that do happen! Stonecreek 15:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * They certainly do - I was in the process of correcting it when your first message arrived, so I'm only "a bit" embarrassed :) Prof beard 15:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Protectorate by Farren
I've accepted a submission from a non-verifying editor which gives the month of publication for this record, based on data from Locus1. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Roadside Picnic
I've added the SF Masterworks series no. "68" that was missing from the record for your verified pub. Thanks. PeteYoung 23:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Prof beard 10:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)