User talk:Darkday

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
 * Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.
 * Wiki Conventions - How things are usually done on this wiki.
 * Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki

Note: Image uploading isn't entirely automated. You're uploading the files to the wiki which will then have to be linked to the database by editing the publication record.

Please be careful in editing publications that have been primary verified by other editors. See Help:How to verify data. But if you have a copy of an unverified publication, verifying it can be quite helpful. See Help:How to verify data for detailed information.

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! Mhhutchins 20:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing data
Whenever you update existing records or create new ones, you should always note the source of your data. If you are working from a book-in-hand, let the moderator know in the "Note to Moderator" that you have a copy of the book. Once the submission has been accepted, you should verify the record (help page here). If you are using a secondary source (Amazon, OCLC, Tuck, Locus, Reginald, etc.) you should note that in the record's note field. I've accepted the submission to update Times Three by Silverberg, and ask that you either do a Primary Verification of the record, or add a note about the source of the changes that you made in the record. If you have the book, you can remove the "Data from Amazon.com as of 2011-02-06" note. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, will do. Darkday 20:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Discovering life
Hi - Welcome to the ISFDB. Thanks for all your submissions today. You've run into a couple of snags that are just peculiar to the way we do things here... let me walk you through a couple of them and help you get up to speed. (please take this all with a light-hearted and friendly tone... I'm gonna jump around and I promise I'm happy to help you get up to speed.) I have a few of your submissions on hold, and I will write up some advice on each of them this evening. Kevin 00:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

First off, I accepted your submission merging the two copies of the title Discovering Life. I noticed when you selected which fields to keep from each record, you chose the date that only had a year. Since we know that the title was published in October (at a minimum) we would normally keep that month in the database. In this case... we actually (Based on the Amazon UK record) can see that this title was published in in January of 2000. Kevin 00:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Normally when we know a new or better date, we go with the more accurate date (Including Month). When we know that book A was published in October, and Book B is published in just 'year', then we would list the story appearing in both books A and B as dated in October... but in this case.. since we have evidence of October and of January... we would want to change the date in another update to be January 2000. If you ever believe it was published earlier in the year, but are unsure of the month, You can put a note in the publication notes field... that way when someone comes along with evidence of an earlier month, they will know that we thought it existed and we were looking for it. I've gone ahead and changed Discovering Life to January 2000, but all the other titles in that book need to be changed also... but we will come back to that. My wife is about ready with Dinner so I will post some more later tonight. Thanks Kevin 00:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for the detailed explanations!
 * This is a tricky case. The book itself doesn't mention an exact date, only the year 2000. However it says in the introduction that all stories are first publications. So I knew it must have been published before October. This is why I kept the 2000 date, October 2000 would have been misleading. I have checked Amazon UK now. It says there that the publication date is January 1, 2000. I doubt that this is the true publication date. My guess is that this is Amazon's equivalent to ISFDB's 2000-00-00. So I'm not sure what to do now. Darkday 16:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Amazon (UK at least) never allowed "00" months or days until a couple of years ago, and even now publishers prefer to use the last day of the previous month rather than use an actual "1st day of month" date (not sure why). Anything in between seems to be accurate, but I never trust a First of January date and mostly don't trust any other "First day or Last day of the month" date either - if in doubt just remember to go by what the book actually says, and leave notes about any secondary source that narrows it down further. BLongley 23:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * What I would recommend, since you have evidence that it was at least prior to October, is that I would change the date on the book to January 2000, and all the contents.... But I would put a note in the collection that 1. Print date must be earlier than October (and why), and 2. "Month of publication does not appear in the printed volume. Month from Amazon UK Record. Month not verified" or something like that. You also might investigate other known reprints of contents. Since everything was original.. if you find one short story reprinted elsewhere in some other month (May for example) you could use that as a new baseline before date. Hope this helps, Kevin 03:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Introductions and other generic titles
I had to reject your submission to change the title of the Introduction in from Introduction (Something Wild is Loose) to simply Introduction. While we strive to record the facts from the printed page, we sometimes stray from that goal for the sake of clarity. In the case of Silverberg, he has written ten's if not almost a hundred essays which all boil down to items titled simple Introduction. So what we do for everyone is we add in parenthesis (The Book Title) so we can tell them apart. This is just one of those quirks of working in the database and it's an easy one to stumble across. I hope my explanation makes sense. We also do this for Afterwords, and other various generic or standard titles. Thanks Kevin 03:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, this makes sense. I had read in the help sections that the title should be entered exactly as it appears in the book, but I missed this exception which was mentioned a few paragraphs further down. Darkday 17:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * There's a lot of help to read, and some of it is probably out of date due to changes in the standards or the software - new editors are usually the best to point out the problems so please do comment when you find an error. Us old fogeys can be a bit "help-blind" and sometimes don't realise where we're misleading people. :-/ But "exactly as stated on the title page" is one of the fundamental rules and we only make exceptions for disambiguation and moving series data to its own field. BLongley 23:51, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Variant Creation
I accepted your submission making 'If I Forget Thee, Oh Earth...' a variant of "If I Forget Thee, Oh Earth . . .", but then I made a correction to the record you were working on. (I don't know where the record came from, this problem was probably there before you submitted any changes, I just wanted to point out the corrections that also needed to be made. I changed the title from ending in "dot dot dot" to ending in "space dot space dot space dot". That is the ISFDB standard for ellipsis. Thanks again for your submission tonight - Cheers Kevin 03:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Indeed the record was already "...". But it's good to know this convention. Darkday 17:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * We have a lot of "..." data still to correct. Indeed, the last time this was discussed we actually had more "..." titles than " . . ." ones and considered changing the standard rather than the entries. I'm not sure we've quite shifted the balance yet, in fact. BLongley 23:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

The Antarktos Cycle
There is already a record for the 2006 second printing in the database. I'm going to accept your submission (because it contains the contents), and then delete the current record. In the future, in a case like this, you can import the contents from one record to another, and then make the necessary changes (additions or deletions). Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I went via Clarke's story and found only the first edition, therefore I assumed the second was not yet present. That it might be present without content did not occur to me. I'll remember that for the future. Thanks. Darkday 22:08, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, we have hundreds of records in the database for collections and anthologies that don't have the contents...yet. Just waiting for an editor to enter them. Thanks. I'll delete the original record. Mhhutchins 22:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Collected Stories of Robert Silverberg Vol. 4
I have your submission to update this pub record, but there are no changes in the submission, only a note to the moderator that you have a copy of the book. What was the intention of your update? It looks like there's an extraneous content record which should be removed : "D. V. Perrot: How to Speak Swahili". I wonder how in the world that got in there? :) Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wanted to delete this odd record. I tried this by editing the pub and emptying all the fields of this record, but obviously this was the wrong way. I canceled this submission and used the correct method now. Thanks. Darkday 16:57, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Asimov's Afterword to The Stars, Like Dust
You dated this essay as 1982. Is the first publication date stated in this 1986 printing of the book or is that the date given at the end of the essay? Thanks. Mhhutchins


 * Same with this afterword. I think these new afterwords first appeared in the 1983 reprints published by Del Rey. Also, is the Del Rey imprint shown in this printing? Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * In both cases the date November 1982 is given at the end of the essay. You're right, the first publication must be 1983. Del Rey is mentioned multiple times, e.g. "A Del Rey Book / Published by Ballantine Books". Darkday 20:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * For ISFDB purposes, we use the date that a piece was first published. I'll merge those 1982 records with the 1983 ones. I'll also update the record of the latter book with "Del Rey / Ballantine" as the publisher. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Title records for novels
You don't have to add new title records in the content sections for novels. They're created automatically when you either "Add a New Novel" or merged with the current one when you "Clone This Pub". If you add a new content record, then the record contains two separate copies of the novel's title record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Darkday 20:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Adding a new printing of a collection or anthology already in the database
When you're doing this, it is better to clone a record in the database that already has the contents. This will keep you from having to merge the newly created content records with the ones already in the database. I've merged all of the new records you created in your submissions of the Foundation collections. Mhhutchins 20:13, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * But I didn't add new pubs, I updated the existing ones that matched my copies. They didn't have content, so I added it. Darkday 21:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Then you can use the "Import Content" function. Click on that link under the Editing Tools menus, and then enter the record number of the record that you wish to import the contents from.  In the case of this publication, you could have imported the contents from 283611.  Just saves us all from some extra work. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Only a Trillion
I have your submission to update this record. First thing I noticed was that you're trying to delete the record's title record (or as it's called in the display, its "title reference"). This is a visible content record in all records typed as NONFICTION and should only be altered with extreme caution. It's the record that links back to the record which is used for all publications of the title, not just this pub. (I hope that makes sense. Reading it back, it sounds murky even to me!) I'm going to accept the submission, and then delete those pieces you've marked "delete", but retain the title record. Please take a look at it when you get a chance to see if it matches your copy. (And do a primary verification if you will. I've noticed you're saying that you have a copy, but I've not seen any that you've actually verified. Thanks.) Mhhutchins 20:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It was not clear to me that this is was the title record. And I will verify everything I entered. But I was waiting to see the outcome of my changes. Thanks. Darkday 21:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The title record is typed as NONFICTION, so you know it's not an ESSAY content, which can be edited. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Asimov's Complete Stories
I'm trying to work out a way to differentiate between the US editions and the UK reprints which split the original contents in half. Is there anything on the title page that indicates something other than "The Complete Stories, Volume 1" in this printing? According to OCLC, the title is "Complete Stories of Isaac Asimov / Vol. 1.". If that's true, we can give the books a separate title from the US editions. Mhhutchins 22:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * On the title page, it says "Isaac Asimov [horizontal rule] The Complete Stories [new line] Volume One". On the cover and on the spine, it says "Volume 1" instead of "Volume One". On the copyright page, the title is not mentioned. I think I should pick some easier books next :) Thanks for you help and your patience. Darkday 23:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The spelling out of the number on the title page gives us a way out. Does Volume 2 spell out the number as well? Mhhutchins 23:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does. Darkday 23:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Great. I've split them up into two subseries for the US and UK editions. Here's a link to the main series. It appears that the 2nd US volume was never published in paperback in the UK, or I was not able to find  volumes 3 and 4 of the UK series.  Have you ever seen such a title? Mhhutchins 23:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice, although it is a bit confusing that the second subseries is called "The Complete Stories (UK)" while the first subseries also contains UK editions (the hardcovers). Volumes 3 and 4 do not exist. But also the US series is incomplete. More volumes were planned, but never realized. The existing two volumes are far from being a complete collection of Asimov's stories. Darkday 00:20, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * All true. But you see, the reason I couldn't (and didn't) name the first series "The Complete Stories (US)" was because they were reprinted intact by a UK publisher.  It was only in the UK that the first volume was split in half. Because of the software limitations (a title can't be in two different series simultaneously, and a pub can't have two different titles), this was the best I could come up with.  Whether they'll really "complete" is irrelevant - that's their title. Maybe some day there really will be a complete set of all of this stories. Mhhutchins 01:45, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

The Century Syndrome
As far as I know, the use of the "(excerpt)" extension is to disambiguate an excerpt from a larger work of the same name. If an excerpt is renamed, i.e. the name differs from the work in which it is excerpted, a note about its origin in the title record is sufficient. Adding the name of the work from which it is excerpted as part of the its title tends toward overkill, IMHO. After all, the information is there in the title record. I'm going to reject the submission. If you feel this should be changed, you can start a discussion on the Rules & Standards page. We're always open to other points of view. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Another submission was rejected based on the premise above. Mhhutchins 04:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The rules, at least on this page, seem to say otherwise: "If the excerpt has a title that makes it clear that it is only an excerpt, use that title. Otherwise, use the title given, but add " (excerpt)" to the end".
 * Also something puzzles me: I'm quite sure that I not only changed the title, but also the year for several excerpts, e.g. for The Deep Range (excerpt) from 1990 to 1957 (the publication date of the novel). But while the title was changed, the year wasn't. How can this be? Did maybe somebody revert my change? Darkday 16:39, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I really don't understand the rule you've stated. How can a title "make it clear that it's only an excerpt" unless the title is "This is an excerpt from X", and I've never seen such a title. I'd really like to know what the writer of that particular line mean by it. My reasoning is that " (excerpt)" is added to the end of a title to disambiguate it from the work from which it is excerpted, which prevents an ISFDB editor from unknowingly merging the two records into one.  If an excerpt is given a new title, it seems clear (at least to me) that the author, editor or publisher, or all three, expect that the reader should accept this as a work which can be read without the knowledge that it is an excerpt.  Noting a work as an excerpt lowers the reader's expectations about character development, plotting, and story resolution. Mhhutchins 17:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * To the last part of your response: all excerpts should be dated the same date as the work from which it is excerpted, unless the excerpt is published before the work from which it is excerpted. Michael Bishop's story The Calling of Paisley Coldpony is an excerpt from his novel Unicorn Mountain. The excerpt is dated January 1988, while the novel is dated June 1988. BTW, I (and the author) would not want to see the excerpted piece titled as "The Calling of Paisley Coldpony (excerpt from Unicorn Mountain)". It has been anthologized twice in English as a self-contained story. Mhhutchins 18:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I've just read the entire section of the help page that you quoted from above. It appears to me that it's help on how to handle the publication of previews of novels. Perhaps we need to be more explicit about how to handle excerpts from works which are part of the main body of the book (anthology or collection) or magazine. Mhhutchins 18:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Regarding the extension: I understand your reasoning, although I also see arguments for the extension. I'll follow your earlier remark and will start a discussion on the Rules & Standards page. I think at least the documentation should be made clearer.
 * Regarding the dates: I know that rule, and I followed it: I changed the year for The Deep Range excerpt from 1990 to 1957, since this is when the novel was published. However although the edit was approved, the year was still (or again) 1990 when I checked the next day. I now made the same changes again, maybe it works this time. Thanks. Darkday 21:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

In Memory Yet Green
I just had a question on you submission for In Memory Yet Green. Is that a Photography credit for the cover, because I thought it was just a picture of Young Asimov on the cover? Is The Weapon a complete story or is it an excerpt? (It's been 20+ years since I read that book). Thanks, Kevin 00:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I took over the artist credit from . But in retrospect I think this credit is wrong: Robert Aulicino is credited in the book as cover designer. This doesn't justify an entry as artist, does it? The cover photograph is uncredited.
 * In the second volume, In Joy Still Felt, the cover design is again credited to Robert Aulicino and the cover photograph is credited to Alex Gotfryd. Should I then enter Gotfryd as cover artist? I think I read somewhere in the help pages "treat photographs as artwork".
 * The Weapon is the complete story, and I think it's important to mention this publication, because the only other publication is difficult to access. Thanks. Darkday 17:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for checking. I approved the edit, but then backed out the cover credit. (I'll be honest.. somewhere in the back of my head is rattling around a factoid that the cover picture was taken by a family member.. but that's a vague un-sourced thought). AS for the other volume with a phot credit, yes feel free to add that as the cover artist. Thanks Kevin 23:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Laughing Space
I approved your submission of, but then I realized you were completely cloning a verified publication down tot he date. I think it's possible (barring some difference in the printing or date) that you and BLongley have the same, and there are just a couple of typos in the titles listed in the older record. Does your book have a printed price (Making it definitely different from his? Or maybe yours has a statement of printing (Second or maybe no statement of printing)? - Thanks for double checking Kevin 00:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

If your book is definitely a different printing than his, you will still need to 'Remove Titles From This Pub' to drop the two mis-titled items, then merge and/or make variants of the new titles you've added. Let me know if you want some help stepping through tat process. Thanks Kevin 00:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * BLongley's publication is a first printing and has no stated price. My book has no printing information, but has a price. I submitted changes for the clean-up actions. Thanks. Darkday 17:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I've approved the edits, but will double-check my own copy when I next see it. BLongley 17:55, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay. In my copy, the price is printed at the bottom of the front flap. Darkday 18:02, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Astounding Science Fiction, April 1945
I've placed your submission to change the author of Destiny Times Three (Part 2 of 2) in the verified magazine for a couple of reasons. - Kevin 02:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) You failed to notify (or ask before hand) the primary verifier of this publication. The account name and link to their user pages are provided on the page of that publication. The standard required for changes to verified publications is at a minimum notification, and preferably in the cases of big changes, asking first. - Kevin 02:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) I need you to double check... did you copy the author's name from the table of contents, the cover, or from the title page (starting page) of the published work? This is not an insignificant change and will probably have some other trickle down results (Like people digging the prior issue out of storage to see if the credit changed between part 1 and 2, etc)- Kevin 02:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Kevin 02:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I do typically notify the primary verifier (see e.g. here and here), but so far I did this after the change was approved. While some of my recent changes were approved really quick, others took several hours, and some were even rejected. So I waited for the approval before notifying the verifier to make sure that he can check the result if he wants to. But from your comments I gather that it is desired to do the notification at the same time as the change. I will do so in the future, and will add a comment that the change is still pending. I also agree that in case of big changes it's reasonable to ask beforehand. However changing the author name from "Fritz Leiber" to "Fritz Leiber, Jr." didn't seem that big of a change to me, since this is a known pseudonym. I took the author name from the starting page (as per the help pages). But it's also "Fritz Leiber, Jr." in the table of contents. The name does not appear on the cover. I have canceled my submission now and notified Rkihara on his talk page. Darkday 18:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Cool, Thanks! I think I was the one who approved a few of your date edits the other day, and did that without checking to see if they were in verified pubs (it's not as obvious to the mod when the change is to a title alone, and not to a whole publication). That was a mistake on my part, and I caught myself this time. Thanks for notifying and asking Ron. I'm betting he also has the matching other issue with part 1, so this may kick off some other changes or notes. Thanks for finding this. Kevin 03:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Worlds of If, July-August 1974 [UK]
I've placed your submission to update the notes for on hold. Was the note incorrect that stated "Cover and spine dated August 1974. Contents page dated July-August 1974."? Thanks Kevin 02:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * This statement applies to the US edition. In my UK edition, neither cover nor spine show a date. See here for the cover. Darkday 17:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking the time to help me understand why it was changing. Edit approved - Kevin 03:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Notes (The King of the Elves)
I approved your edit of this title. I thought about this when verifying my copy, but decided to go with the earlier editions of Dick's collected stories (all have the notes credited to Dick alone). A little later we had this discussion. Might be interesting to read. --Willem H. 19:18, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I had no idea that this was already discussed. I entered the contents for the second volume now: In this volume, Dick's part of the notes is maybe 20%, so I think it would not be appropriate to attribute the notes only to him. Darkday 21:29, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I disagree that a work can be credited to one author but uncredited to another author as well. This is a tautological impossibility. If this is the case, every credited work in the database could also have an uncredited co-author, and no one could disprove otherwise. If the work is credited to PKD and no one else, then the ISFDB record should be credited to PKD alone. If the notes are the same as those printed in the earlier editions of the Collected Stories of PKD, they are only a chronological list of the stories, indicating the source of their first publication, with occasional snippets of notes for some of the stories from previously published introductions by PKD. The only uncredited person would be the editor who created the list, and as I stated in the previous discussion, that's an editor's job.  Mhhutchins 21:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * According to Subterranean's catalog page for this book "The King of the Elves is the opening installment of a uniform, five-volume edition of The Collected Stories of Philip K. Dick, expanded from the previous Collected Stories set to incorporate new story notes, and two added tales, one previously unpublished, and one uncollected." So, I'm supposing the story notes are new, if this statement is to be believed.  But are they credited to PKD at all? Mhhutchins 22:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't have one of the previous editions, but the notes seem indeed to be different. They are real notes, half a page to one page per story, and not just publication information. According to this Amazon review, these new notes were written by Gregg Rickman. But this is not stated explicitly in the book. Rickman is mentioned, but only for researching the chronology of the stories. However it does say "All notes in italics are by Philip K. Dick". I agree that "Philip K. Dick and uncredited" sounds strange. Maybe "Philip K. Dick and unknown" is better? Or "Philip K. Dick and Gregg Rickman"? Darkday 22:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Dick's The King of the Elves
You removed the statement that "Publication date is not stated" from this record. Is there a stated date of publication? Mhhutchins 21:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * On the title page, it says "Subterranean Press 2010". Does this qualify as stated date of publication? Darkday 21:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's the stated publication date. You can always note when you received the verified copy. Books published the last and first month of any year will have similar discrepancies. Mhhutchins 21:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Marionettes, Inc.
Do any of the individual pieces of interior art in this collection illustrate specific stories? If so, they should be titled the same as the story they illustrate. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I see. I changed it now. Thanks, Darkday 00:27, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

"The Best New Thing", by Asimov
I'm doing some research on the existence of certain "printing date" codes used by World Publishing Company on their books. You did a verification of one such book, and I was hoping you could look at the copyright page and see if there is such a printing code on that page. It would look something like "HC871" or "8WP71", and would probably be near the top of the copyright information, but somewhere on that page (if it exists). Could you check that for me? Thanks, Chavey 01:17, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I checked, but there is no such code in my copy. Darkday 01:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Otto Toeplitz
I added the following comment: "Otto Toeplitz, the co-author of "The Enjoyment of Mathematics" is listed as "Topelitz" in the body of the review." to your verified [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?58411 ''Future Science Fiction, #33. Summer 1957''] and changed the spelling of the author's name. Ahasuerus 09:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The Antarktos Cycle
I added a cover image to your verified publication of Price's The Antarktos Cycle. I also placed it in the Call of Cthulhu Fiction publication series with a series number of "6039". Since I got the number from secondary sources, I'd appreciate it if you could check that it is the correct catalog number that appears on the book. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can confirm this catalog number: On the spine it says "Call of Cthulhu Fiction 6039", and on the copyright page "Chaosium Publication 6039". Thanks, Darkday 22:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Now that I have acquired a copy, I have made two small changes to this record. First, I removed the disambiguation, "(The Antarktos Cycle)", from the title of the introduction.  Since the title is already unique, the disambiguation is not needed.  I also added the Roman numbered pages to the page count.  Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 01:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Pebble in the Sky
In your verified pub, I changed the publication date of Afterword (Pebble in the Sky) from November 1985, to November 1983, Matching its first appearance in the first Ballantine Books edition. Thanks Kevin 16:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I. Asimov: A Memoir
A minor thing worth checking on your verified pub I. Asimov: my 4th printing has roman numerals to page xii, with Asimov's introduction starting on the unnumbered page xi, whereas your 6th printing has no roman numeral page numbers listed. Cheers. PeteYoung 08:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My copy has indeed roman pages as described by you. In addition, I noticed the line "OPM 0 9 8 7" on the copyright page. I suppose this means this is the 7th printing? Darkday 18:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Asimov Chronicles, vol 3
I just added a cover to, which you verified. Thanks! Ofearna 02:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The Best of Randall Garrett
I added notes to this verified pub, changed the three "Parodies Tossed" entries from shortfiction to Poem and varianted them to their original appearance. Also added Vicki Ann Heydron as author of "Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions: A Calypso in Search of a Rhyme" and changed the author credit for "A Little Intelligence" from Robert Randall to Randall Garrett (as on the titlepages). Please check the changes. Thanks, --Willem H. 21:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Thanks, Darkday 18:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Section from the Draft of Deus Irae Chapter 3
A couple of weeks ago I promised to leave a message for you re. the above. The editor Patrick Clark has just got back to me... he's been sunning himself in Costa Rica to get away from the Minnesota winter.

Patrick tells me it's appearance in PKD Otaku #18 was the first: he transcribed the material directly from a photocopy of Phil's manuscript, now in private hands. As for the publication date of PKD Otaku #18, he initially told me it was published in February of that year, however I pointed out to him the items that are dated April. He believes these were possibly slipped in by another editor (Marc Oberst) without him knowing, for the PDF edition; that's the only explanation he has for the anomalous dates, and he suggests I change the date for the PDF edition to May 2007. Cheers... any other PKD anomalies you find, please let me know! PeteYoung 05:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback! Darkday 01:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Unique Tales
Submission accepted for the record, but the following changes were made for it to comply with ISFDB standards:


 * Title from "Unique Tales" to "Unique Tales, #1 1974"
 * Editor from "unknown" to "Ken Krueger" (from Miller/Contento)
 * "quarto" was removed from the format field. This "unique" format isn't one of the ISFDB standard ones, so the field remains blank and the format is described in the Note field. BTW, "quarto" means 8.5 x 11 inches.

Other data, including the remaining contents, page count and cover artist, from Miller/Contento was added to the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Regarding the format, I followed the help: "If a magazine is between the sizes of these categories, use the closest one and add a note in the record." Leaving the format blank is not mentioned as an option. Please add this to the help section. Thanks, Darkday 18:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That section of the help section will be eventually updated, because of the efforts being made to standardize the format/binding field. There will be a drop-down menu with the various options, one of which should be blank, allowing the editor to describe the publication in the note field. In this case, it was just strange seeing a publication categorized as "quarto" when it was half that size! Thanks for the input. Mhhutchins 20:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Human Reaction
The chapterbook is dated January 2009, while the limited edition of the collection is dated February 2009. Shouldn't they be the same date? Mhhutchins 00:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

And Amazon gives the date as March 29, 2009 for the trade and April 1 for the limited. Is there a stated date in any of the publications? If not, you should provide the source for the date. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That's exactly the point I made here. In the meantime, I checked the homepage of the publisher, which states February 2009 as the publication date (with no distinction between trade and limited edition). So we have the following:


 * Trade:
 * Book copyright page: 2009
 * Book colophon: 2009-01
 * ISFDB: 2009-01
 * Publisher's website: 2009-02
 * Amazon: 2009-03-29


 * Limited:
 * Book copyright page: 2009
 * Book colophon: 2009-01
 * ISFDB: 2009-02
 * Publisher's website: 2009-02
 * Amazon: 2009-04-01


 * Pamphlet:
 * Pamphlet copyright page: 2009-01
 * ISDB: 2009-01


 * What's the correct procedure when there are conflicting publication dates? Darkday 02:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You should use the stated date, unless there's substantial proof that the stated date is wrong, and you're able to provide a reliable secondary source to back it up. If it's within a month or so, there's no need to change that, because that could just mean a delay in getting the books to the public. In this case, it appears that all three give the date as January 2009, so there's no conflict to resolve. You can always note the disparities in the records' Note fields. Mhhutchins 04:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Upon the Dull Earth
Please join this discussion concerning the Subterranean Press edition of this title by Philip K. Dick when you get a chance. Thanks. Mhhutchins

The Complete Robot
I've added a cover art credit for your verified pub The Complete Robot, as per it's appearance in Chris Moore's Journeyman. Thanks. PeteYoung 09:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Opus 200
I accepted the submission updating this record, but removed the story-lengths from two fiction excerpts. Excerpts should not be length-designated, and will display as "shortfiction", instead of "shortstory". Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:53, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks! Darkday 22:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Heavenly Host - Asimov
Added cover scan, LCCN & OCLC links plus a note to The Heavenly Host.SFJuggler 23:04, 16 November 2013 (UTC)