User talk:SGale

Virtual Reality
I've accepted the submission to add a record for a new edition of this title. If you are working from a copy of the actual book, leave a message in the "Note to Moderator" field, which will help us avoid having to do additional research. If you are working from secondary source you should record that source in the "Note" field. (This latter field remains visible part of the record, the former one does not.) A question: according to the OCLC record this book has 384 pages. Can you confirm your copy has 415 pages? Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 14:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Sourcing data
Always give the source for your data in the Note field, not the Note to Moderator field. The former is a visible part of the record. The latter is temporary and disappears the moment the submission is accepted. Please read this section of the publication entry help page to understand the purpose of the latter field.

Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 22:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry: I intended to include a Note about using Amazon UK for the details, but forgot about it at the last minute. SGale 23:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

About Time 4
Please confirm the ISBN given in this record. It's an invalid number. Thanks for looking. (Also, do a primary verification of the record as well.) Mhhutchins 20:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting. The ISBN I gave was from the copyright page. However, there is a different one on the back cover, which is 0975944630. That's a bad error by the publisher.SGale 10:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Please make a new submission giving the good ISBN (0975944630) in the record's ISBN field, and then record in the Note field the bad one (0972595930) and where both are located in the book. Also, are you certain these are 10 digit numbers without a preceding "978"? By 2008, most publishers should have switched over to ISBN-13. (Don't forget to add a colon to your message when responding on the wiki.) Mhhutchins 19:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * DoneSGale 15:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

About Time 5
Please see if there is an ISBN-13 given in this book. By 2010 all books were required to carry an ISBN-13. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The ISBN-13 which I managed to find: 9780975944646.SGale 10:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * But is it actually stated in the book? We can always create an ISBN-13 if we want to. But we should only record what is actually stated in the book itself. Mhhutchins 19:10, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * It's from below the barcode.SGale 09:45, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

About Time (6)
Well, it appears you made another submission to create a new record which corrects the problems with the original record. In the future, wait only the first submission is accepted, then make another submission to update it. Now we have two records for the same publication in the database. I'll delete the first after you've read and responded to this message. Mhhutchins 21:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I think I hit CR when I wanted to move to a new field rather than Tab.--SGale 17:49, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I should also have mentioned that, yes, I have a copy of this book. The volume number is not included on the title page. However, the number appears on the spine, in the background to the cover artwork and it's in the listing of other books in the series given on the copyright page. (The comments on volume number also apply to those other volumes in the series.) I was also making it consistent with those other volumes.SGale 19:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The title field of the publication record should match the title page of the publication. When you get a chance please go back and make any necessary corrections in the publication records. I also need a response about the ISBNs in the two earlier posts. Also, add a colon to the beginning of your responses to a wiki post which will indent it and make it easier to read. Add one colon to the number in the previous post. For example, this post has two colons. In your response, you should start with three colons. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 19:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguating generic titles
Generic titles, such as "Introduction", should be disambiguated by parenthetically adding the title of the container to the work's title. For example, the introduction in this record should be titled "Introduction (Players)". Please update the record when you get a chance. Mhhutchins 15:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I should have remembered that. I'll have to edit some others too, as they've already been approved.SGale 19:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Surface Detail by Banks
I'm holding a submission to add a new publication to this title, but it seems to be identical to this one, except for the date. What is the stated date of printing in your copy? (This should be part of the notes.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:43, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Publication history - 'This paperback edition published in 2011 by Orbit. Reprinted 2011 (twice), 2012 (twice).' I;m not sure what's the problem. At the very least, as I point out in the Notes. the cover differs from that shown.SGale 19:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll accept the submission. You should update the record to indicate the publishing history in the note field, so that later users know it's a different printing. Mhhutchins 19:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Essay Dates
When entering contents to a publication, the dates should either be the same as the publication (if you leave the date field blank it will automatically use the publication's date) or the date of the publication it first appeared in (or a special case of previously published, but unknown when, would use 0000-00-00). I have changed the dates on the introductions to and  from the year only to the dates of the respective publication. Let me know if you have questions or if that wasn't clear. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It seems odd that no other moderator mentioned this. But I'll remember it next time.SGale 23:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, you've only been active for a month. Some moderators will do some clean-up on records by newer editors, but will eventually point out consistent mistakes and inform you how to clean-up the records yourself. Mhhutchins 00:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. I thought I must have been missing something.SGale 17:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Entering plates into publication records
Are there illustrations on the front and back of the plates in this publication? If so, then "13+[80]" would be correct. If the backs of the plates are blank, you should only enter the number of plates in the brackets. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry: I thought I'd read that square brackets were used to indicate unnumbered pages. I didn't realise it was different for artbooks. Yes, there are 40 plates, with captions on the facing pages.


 * On that point, it seems usual to have a list of the plates so that links can be made to the appropriate books. What information is needed for that and how does it need to be presented? For example, one of the captions reads: A Private Cosmos. 1977. Oil. 17" by 27". I recognise the book as being by Philip Jose Farmer. Also some of the artwork is for historical romances or gothics, so obviously won't be in the database.SGale 17:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Only enter the title of the work (e.g. "A Private Cosmos") in the title field of the content record. If you want, you have the option of adding other data in the note field of the title record once it's in the database. It doesn't matter what the genre of the original publication. You can variant these records with those for the coverart records if you can determine on which book the art was used.. Do not create a publication for the non-genre publications in order to variant the content record in this artbook. I would suggest adding only two or three contents at first. Once it's been determined that they're OK, you can proceed adding the other contents. Of course, all of this is purely voluntary. Nothing in the rules demands that you enter the contents of artbooks. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The Wounded Land
If you have this book, according to what you wrote in the Note to Moderator field, please remove the source given in the Note field, and do a Primary Verification of the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. I was thinking very much about artists and artwork at the time.SGale 09:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

World War Z
According to Amazon.co.uk, this edition is 19.6 centimeters tall which makes it a trade paperback (entered as "tp"). Can you confirm this? Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is 19.6 cm. Sorry: it just looked like all other recent paperbacks.--SGale 18:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Zacherley's Vulture Stew
Thanks for finding the publication month for this book. Two things however, the source of the month is not Locus1 but Contento1 (I agree, they look alike) I changed this note. Second, if you look at the publication again, you will see that it has been primary verified (scroll down to verification status). The help text states: "It is a matter of courtesy to inform the verifier of changes you make to his or her primary verified pubs, unless a specific verifier has requested not to be notified of particular types of changes. It is very strongly encouraged that you notify the verifier first if the change is particularly significant. Many moderators will not approve a "destructive" change -- that is one that removes or alters data in a verified pub record -- unless the verifier has been asked first. Changes that only add data are usually considered less significant, but verifiers should still be notified of such changes." In this case I'm the verifier, so consider me informed, but please remember it for future submissions. And of course, thanks for contributing! --Willem H. 14:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Good grief, two stupid errors in the space of one entry! Sorry about that. If I had been using the print version of Contento, maybe this wouldn't have happened.--SGale 07:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Title capitalization
The ISFDB uses this standard English capitalization rule when entering titles: the first word is capitalized, and all later words are also capitalized except for "and", "or", "the", "a", "an", "for", "of", "in", "on", "by", "at", "from", "with", and "to". Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia of Fantasy
I've added a cover scan to: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?39187 Prof beard 13:58, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Spectrum 19
You verified a copy of Spectrum 19 -- I've made some changes to the Jeffery Jones image here and added a new version (mine is not 1st ed TP) I'm working on adding items to. MHutchins recommended I notify you of this. Susan O&#39;Fearna 05:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know.--SGale 12:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Changing primary-verified records and sourcing data
I have a submission to change the publication date field of this record. It is ISFDB policy to notify the primary verifiers before making a change in a verified record. You must also give the source for your data in the record's "Note" field, not the "Note to Moderator" field. Any message left in the "Note to Moderator" field disappears the moment the submission is accepted. It is used to provide information that helps the moderator in the decision to accept the submission. Information about the publication should not be entered in this field. As a courtesy, this time I'll leave a message on the verifier's talk page, and add a note to the field about the source of the data. Please keep this in mind when making any future submissions. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 20:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Incidentally, what about altering data that appears incorrect but where the edition has *not* been Primary-verified? Should you also query this with the original supplier of the data?--SGale 12:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If a record hasn't been primary-verified, then it's perfectly fine to correct any mistakes, especially if you have the book in hand. If you don't have the book, and are working from a secondary source, you should always provide the source for your data in the record's Note field. If another editor has entered data from another secondary source into a non-primary verified record, which conflicts with your source, then you both should discuss the problem, and try to find further corroborating evidence, and make the changes accordingly, while noting the conflict present in the secondary sources. If one of those secondary source is a dealer listing, i.e. Amazon, noting the conflict is unnecessary, because the data from such listings is more suspect than from one of our verification references. (But even they can have errors.) BTW, the editor who provided data to a non-verified record is usually not known, and usually not human. (We have robot spiders which crawl and gather Amazon's data.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that info.--SGale 10:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Misaligned ISBN
Can you check to see if the ISBN-13 is given in this book? Thanks. Mhhutchins 07:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it's only given in the barcode. It's 978-1934331491, as appears to be generated on the entry's page.--SGale 16:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)