User talk:JKeller

BLongley 17:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Cosmos, December 2007-January 2008
Was this the only issue that wasn't edited with Wilson da Silva and Damien Broderick? Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope, I apparently spaced when entering the data. Found the record and put their names in. --BigJim 01:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Cosmos reprints
If you know that some of these stories are reprints, please merge the newly-created records with those that already exist in the database. For example, I know that Bradbury's "There Will Come Soft Rains" is a reprint, so I merged the two records. If you have any questions about merging, you can ask them here on your user talk page. Click the [edit] link, which will open a dialog window, and add your comments below mine, using a colon to offset your remarks from mine. Also check out the links above for other info on entering data. Thanks for contributing and welcome to the ISFDB. Mhhutchins 00:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've merged the three I'm aware of (actually, the Bradbury piece is the only reprint Cosmos has ever run to the best of my knowledge, but they were first publication on several other pieces that were already in the database because of reprints), and I'll give it a more thorough check over the next couple of days. Thanks for the help!  --BigJim 01:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Completed the more thorough search. All the duplicate titles should now be merged. --BigJim 04:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing this. You've really caught on fast.  I've spent weeks with new editors on this subject! Mhhutchins 04:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Editors of Cosmos
We ordinarily use the designation "Editors of..." for non-genre magazines, especially when we choose not to give individual credit (e.g. Playboy. I'm assuming that basically Cosmos is a science magazine that publishes one or two pieces of fiction per issue. According to the magazine's website Wilson da Silva is the editor-in-chief and Damien Broderick is the fiction editor.  In this case, it would probably be best to just give credit to these two persons.  If you agree, I can edit the records to indicate it, while at the same time creating a magazine series for the title. Mhhutchins 03:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You assume correctly. Wilson da Silva is editor-in-chief, Damien Broderick is fiction editor.  I see no reason to use the "Editors of..." except to follow the conventions used for other non-genre magazines.  If it would be clearer to remove that, then I would so say to go for it. --BigJim 04:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As the saying goes, "the exception that proves the rule". Because of his high profile in the SF field, I think an exception should be made for giving Broderick credit for this non-genre magazine, and dispense with the "Editors of..." entirely.  I'll get back to it some time tomorrow.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Placing magazine issues into series
I rejected the submission to place this issue into a publication series titled "Cosmos: The Science of Everything", because magazines are treated differently when it comes to series. We place the editor records into series not the pub records. To accomplish this go to Wilson da Silva's summary page (or Broderick's, it doesn't matter because the record appears on both pages.) Click the "Show All Titles" link on the left-side menu. This will reveal a list of all records for this author/editor. Check the boxes that will merge all 2010 editor records. In this case there are only two records: one that was automatically created when the pub record was recently accepted and the one that had already existed with all of the other 2010 issues. You will have to reconcile the differences between the two records on the next screen. In this case accept all of the first options. This method works only if there already exists a record which had merged all of the year's issues into one record. When the first 2011 issue appears, we'll simply edit the single editor record to become part of the series and then merge it with subsequent editor records when the issue appear later in the year. Please don't hesitate to ask any questions concerning this method. Also, I changed the price from $10.95AUD to A$10.95. The help pages state "Enter Australian dollars with a leading A, for example, A$3.95." Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks!  --BigJim 23:35, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Giganosaurus
I jumpstarted data entry on the mag. It would be nice if it were a little more professional looking but the epub contains enough data to identify the magazine. Feel free to enter the other issues.--swfritter 15:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I put in the other issues. The newest .epub (which became available online after I did the data entry) has a masthead at the bottom of the file, giving the publisher name as "Late Cretaceous." I couldn't figure out a way to edit a pending edit, but I can change the new entries once they're approved.  I updated the first entry to reflect the new information.  Thanks again!  --BigJim 16:37, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I approved them and changed the name back to the correct dinosaur. BLongley 17:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Gigantosaurus appears to be a herbivore. They make better pets.--swfritter 18:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Our punctuation rules generally say to capitalize only the first letter of a title but it would seem to me that GigaNotoSaurus is probably more appropriate since that is the way it is presented in the magazine. Bill did it that way in the updated wiki page so I suspect he also agrees. It is also less likely that the name will be misread as the name of that other dinosaur. --swfritter 23:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I suspected that the rules (which I can't find) that allow for author intentions for capitalisation should apply in this case. Of course, I only decided that AFTER editing the pubs/titles. :-/ BLongley 01:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Good idea to get started on a mag from the beginning. I now find myself with the unenviable task of entering about six hundred issues of "Strange Horizons". Thankfully all the data is online.--swfritter 23:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * My latest Magazine project is for a rather shorter series - four issues. I WILL get back to longer series but I really need to break such tasks up into small sections to avoid going insane. (Like my housemate Napoleon has done.) BLongley 01:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Embarrassed that I missed that... --BigJim 01:16, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't be - we all make mistakes. Those of us that make fewest mistakes might get "promoted" (or "black-jacked") into checking other people's submissions as a moderator, but if you look at any moderator's talk page you'll see where we keep checking on each other and finding faults. A thick skin is an advantage here. BLongley 01:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but what you don't realize is that I used to be a professional copy editor. :)  --BigJim 17:39, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Giganotosaurus, September 1, 2011
Re: your moderator's note to this issue "Word count of story in MS word is just below cutoff for a novelette, which means traditional printed media probably would have considered it a novelette (since white space counts as words in print)." I'm not sure about "traditional media", but most publishers (and the ISFDB) use the traditional method of counting the words, if at all possible, and do not include white space. (Which makes me wonder, how do you count white space?) I copied the story to Word, and came up with 6836 words, making it a short story, just as you entered it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Kindle books with no ISBN
Hi. I accepted your various Kindle edition submissions. For the ISBN/Catalog number field, there's still a debate going on for what to do with ASINs, but independent of that outcome.... In the ISBM/Catalog # field, bare numbers are ISBNs. Anything else should be started with "#" and not labeled. For a book only available on Kindle, using the ASIN there seems appropriate to me, but it should then be entered as "#Bnnnnnnn". You may get others suggesting that you relegate the ASIN to the Notes field. As I said, the debate is going on. :-) Also, for ebooks, be sure to record the available format(s) in the notes.  I did this on those submissions.  Thanks for contributing.  --MartyD 11:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks! --BigJim 15:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Cover of Cosmos
It is ISFDB policy not to link to cover images of non-genre magazines. Also I see that the image you linked for the October-November 2011 issue is on a server for which we don't have permission to deep-link. I'm going to accept the submission but remove the image link. You should also record the source of your data in the record's note field. I've noticed that some of the previous issues (that I checked) also don't have a noted source or a verification. When you get a chance could you go back to the ones you may have entered and update the record to indicate the source, or verify the records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Magazine dates
I had to change the title fields of the two magazines that you submitted. The months should be completely spelled out. Also, I changed the date of this issue from 2011-11-00 to 2011-12-00. Even though magazines appear 1-2 months before the printed date, we always date it as the stated cover date. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Heir Apparent
The submission adding this pub was accepted, but Amazon's ASIN was moved to the note field. The ISBN/Catalog # field is reserved for either the ISBN or the publisher's catalog number. Amazon's ASIN is a merchant's identification number. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks!--BigJim 17:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Merging Editor records by Year
I can email you a set of instructions with diagrams if you supply an address. But basically it goes like this:


 * 1) Go to the/an Editor’s page for the relevant title
 * 2) Click “Show All Titles” and select the EDITOR records to merge
 * 3) There will be conflicts to resolve: don’t worry about different titles or dates, but different editors probably mean you shouldn’t be merging them. (Remember the order of editors doesn’t matter).
 * 4) After approval, go back to the editors page: we’ve done the merge but need to retitle it and put it in the series.
 * 5) Select the lone title
 * 6) Edit this title, add in the series and correct the title to reflect the whole year. You may want to adjust the date too to remove the month (“00”) but that’s not vital, the series will still order correctly.
 * 7) After approval, it should all look OK.

Hope that helps! BLongley 13:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Emerald Sky
This appears to be a web-only based publication. It would not qualify for inclusion in the database under current rules unless it is downloadable and readable on an ebook reading device. I was unable to find anything on the website that allowed a reader to download copies of the magazine. Do you know if it is downloadable other than through a web browser? Mhhutchins 23:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have it downloaded to my computer as a .PDF. You need to click through to the Issuu website to do so, though.  http://issuu.com/tmpublishing/docs/emerald_sky_september_2012  It appears that that option isn't available in embedded instances of the Issuu viewer.


 * So why would the publisher not give the reader the option to download the pdf of the issue from their own website or at least link directly to the site that makes it downloadable? Who would know you had to go through the backdoor to get a copy? Sounds fishy to me. I'll accept the submission, but you'll have to update the publication record to note how to the pdfs are available, and you'll need to do a primary verification of the record in case other users have questions about the record. (Also, remember to sign each of your wiki postings with four tildes.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Done, and thanks! And, yeah, I don't expect these publishers actually know what they're doing, but it's a pro-rate magazine with designs on becoming SFWA-qualifying, so I'm keeping an eye on it in case they figure it out.  --BigJim 22:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Excerpts
Excerpts are entered as SHORTFICTION with no designated length. I've corrected the one in this record. Mhhutchins 01:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --BigJim 02:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Initialed names
You should add a space after each of the periods in an initialed name. I've corrected the author credit for the story in this publication. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Emerald Sky, January 2013
What is the source for the editor credit of this issue? As viewed on the link given in the note field, only Jill Bickham is credited as the editor. Mhhutchins 21:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting. What's on the URL doesn't match the file that I downloaded in January.  Funny that they should edit the editors and not the screwed up table of contents.  I submitted a change to match what's there now, but since it's altering editors, I'm not sure I did it right. --BigJim 02:59, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * If you still have the pdf that matches your original data, then you should only note the change in a later pdf. (I'm assuming you have the pdf since you did a primary verification of the record.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I have added such a note. The altered version is also downloadable by people with an Issuu account, so there are now (at least) two versions of this issue floating around... Thanks! --BigJim 18:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

BN ID
I removed the Barnes & Noble ID number from the ISBN/Catalog # field from this record and entered it into the Note field (along with the Amazon ASIN.) These numbers aren't the publisher's catalog number, but a retailer's identifying number, so they don't belong in the ISBN/Catalog # field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Gigantasaurus, Oct or Dec?
I think you meant to title this record as December 1, to match the date field. We already have a record for October. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 04:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Thank you for catching that. It's updated now.  I suspect the last two issues are going to need to be updated again, since the e-book and the website disagree as to who the editor is, and I went with what's on the e-book instead of who I think actually did it... --BigJim 22:54, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Good. You should also use the stated credit, regardless of who actually did it. If overwhelming evidence proves the credit is wrong, you can create a variant record to credit the proper party. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)