User talk:Funslinger

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
 * 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 ( ~ ); 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! --MartyD 11:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Win Some, Lose Some content
Hi, and welcome. I have your submission of content for on hold. For content entries, we use only each work's title. Parentheticals are only used in two cases: if included in the original title, or to disambiguate from another work of the same title. See Help:Screen:EditPub for details. What we would normally do about individual-work introductions in a collection or anthology is simply record in the notes that each has an introduction and not try to include the introductions as content entries. Here, where each is separately credited and to different well known SF authors, I could see a case for recording them as content (of type ESSAY). It looks like the introductions' titles are conveniently: Introduction to "xxx", which is clear and distinct.

Since the parenthetical information you included has the introductions' authors' names, if you want to make entries for the introductions, I will accept the submission and let you edit the titles (then you cut + paste the names; easier than re-typing). If you don't want to make entries for the introductions, I will accept the submission and fix the titles -- my doing it will save you an edit-and-approve cycle. Let me know which you prefer. You can reply here by editing this section. Indent your response by adding a colon (":") to the front of the text, and sign by using the signature button (2nd button from the right in the editor window) or adding four tildes (" ~ "). Thanks. --MartyD 11:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, go ahead and edit the entries. Thanks, Funslinger 12:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I couldn't let all of that entry of the introduction authors go to waste, so I added the essays while I was fixing the titles. Because they were entered as a second batch, they all would have appeared at the bottom of the listing, so I added fake page numbers to get the display in the right order.  If you have the book and could supply real page numbers, that would be great.  Regardless, please review.  Thanks for all of the work getting that entered.  --MartyD 11:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If you do have the book, would you also double check the spelling of "Torgerson" on the introduction to "The Homecoming"? He spells his name "sen", not "son", but I see on Amazon's Look Inside that the ToC spells it "son".  Unfortunately, the Look Inside does not let me see the credit on the introduction itself (which is what we would go by, not the ToC).  Thanks.  --MartyD 12:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks fine. I don't actually have the book yet so I can't help you there. Funslinger 04:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Notifications to PVs
Hello, I've just approved your change of title for this essay. Please note that, when submitting such changes, it's customary to inform the PVs (eventually according to their preferences as sometimes listed on their talk pages). Hauck 08:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry. PV? Funslinger 08:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry also to use ISFDB jargon. PV = Primary Verifier, one or more contributors listed as "Primary" & "PrimaryN" (N=2 to 5) in the "Verification Staus" area of the publication, they are the persons that indicated having the book and thus easy access to it in case of ulterior verification. In this case, the PV are Alvonruff and myself. Hauck 08:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Magazine dating
It is the ISFDB standard to use the stated date of publication even if that date should be a month or so off based on the actual date of appearance. This is especially the case for magazines which often appear months before the stated date.

The standard is documented here. You have the option of providing the appearance date in the Note field. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 13:49, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, I understand that policy. However, the “stated” publication date isn't present in my July/August 2013 issue. The only thing that hints at a publication date was the Next Issue on Sale from the previous issue. In my mind, the “stated” publication date for the July/August issue is 7 May 2013. Funslinger 22:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The date field of a magazine's ISFDB record gives the issue date, which comes from either the front cover or table of contents page, usually both (this is what I meant by "stated".) Some may consider the on-sale date as the date of publication, but for ISFDB purposes, please use the issue date. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Linking to image files on other servers
We can only link to files on other servers if we have explicit permission from the hosting server. The standard is documented here. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. Funslinger 22:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Asimov essay
If the essay appears as "The Biochemical Knife-Blade" on its title page (page 107 in this edition), you can remove the content from the record and add a new one. The reason why it's not editable is because it appears in another publication under the same name. Use the "Remove Titles from This Pub" function (under the Editing Tools menu), and then do a second edit to add a new content record with the correct title. Then we can make this title into a variant of the original title. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I added an entry with the updated title and deleted the incorrect title. Funslinger 02:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Fine. I've made the new title into a variant. Just to double-check: the essay's title is taken from its title page and not from the book's content page? Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Correct. It's from the title page. Funslinger 06:58, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Making changes to verified publication records
Hi. 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 changes like those to titles of content appearing in the various verified issues of Analog, you would ask the primary verifier(s) first. Tpi is not very active, but Hauck is (he's a moderator, too).

I checked with Hauck and left a note for Tpi, so they're all set, and I have accepted the submissions. This is just something to keep in mind for the future. Thanks. --MartyD 01:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Posting messages on other editors' talk pages
You asked a question in your latest submission (which I had to reject because it changed a primary verified record) about how to contact other editors. In a publication record, you can click on the name of the editor(s) who verified the record. This leads to their User Page. On that page there is a tab at the top labeled "Discussion". Click on that tab which leads to their User Talk Page. On that page, there is a plus (+) tab. Click on that and a dialogue page opens. Enter a title for your post in the "Subject/Headline" box. In the larger box enter your message, and end with four tildes to sign and date it.

In the future, ask any questions on the ISFDB:Help desk page, not in the "Note to Moderator" field of a database submission.

I've left a message on the active user's talk page about the change you want to make in the record for the Analog, December 2008 issue. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Ebook eds. of Analog
I saw you had questioned the verifier about the length-designation of a couple of stories in a 2012 issue of Analog. I was wondering, are you able to do word counts of stories in the ebook editions of the magazine? If so, the story length can be easily determined. Sometimes a magazine edition mistakenly designates a story with the wrong length. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 16:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The Analog website listed the two stories as novelettes and they were labeled as novelettes in the ebook. Yes, I can do a word count of the stories. Funslinger 18:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If the count is between 7501 and 17500, it qualifies as a novelette and you can update the title record. Add a note that the length is from an actual word count. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:17, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Short stories are under 7500 words, novellas are 17,500 to 39,999 words and novels are 40,000 or more words. Funslinger 18:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * What is the policy for defining a word? Typically, it is every 6 characters to include spaces. So, "I can not do it." would be 2 words + another word for the remaining 4 characters. Three words as opposed to five, the actually number of words. Counting actual words doesn't really give you a firm grasp on the length of a piece since word lengths can vary greatly. If a document is full of small words, it will have a large word count in relation to it's actual "size" and vice versa. Funslinger 03:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Every word is counted regardless of their size when doing an actual word count. Are you able to copy parts of the file into Microsoft Word? That should give you the actual word count (that's what I meant when I asked you earlier.) If you have a Google account, you can access this shared spreadsheet which estimates word counts from printed sources. I'm not sure how it would work with an ebook unless you're able to paginate it in order to provide the necessary figures that estimates the word count. Mhhutchins 04:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Tom Easton titles
Hold off on varianting these, and I'll check to see if they can be done automatically. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I was hoping there was a way to do them any other way, but it appears the only way is to variant each record individually. Sorry. Please continue if you like. Mhhutchins 01:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * For some reason some of these are appearing as variant titles in addition to a pseudonym. The title appears to be identical so I am pasting the title from the canonical record into the variant record and the variant title reference goes away. Funslinger 14:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * You don't have to paste titles when creating variants for pseudonymous titles. Just change the name of the author in the lower section of the "Make Variant" page. If you're changing the title, you're doing the wrong thing. Mhhutchins 17:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not changing the title. But in some instances, the system creates the title in the new canonical record with an extra space or something along those lines thereby recognizing the pseudonym record title as a variant. Funslinger 17:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't understand. My response was based on your statement that you were "pasting the title from the canonical record into the variant record." You shouldn't be doing that. Just click on the link "Make This Title a Variant Title or Pseudonymous Work" and in the bottom section of the variant form change the Author1 field from the credited author to the canonical author, and submit. No further step is necessary to make a pseudonymously credited title record into a variant of one credited to the canonical author. After the submission is accepted, the variant title record will no longer appear on the pseudonym's summary page. It will now appear only on the canonical author's summary page. Mhhutchins 18:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Apparently you don't understand. I am doing just as you described on EVERY record. The pasting of the title is the fix to the fact that the system doesn't think the titles are identical thus treating it as a variant. I have only had to paste a title on the five occasions that the system thought it was a variant. Funslinger 18:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Since I don't understand what you're trying to do (as I said above), I'll bow out of the discussion and the handling of the submissions. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You understand. You just don't know it yet. I have been making changes as you suggested. After reviewing Thomas A. Easton's biography, I noticed that some entries would read:
 * The Reference Library (Analog, March 1995) [only as by Tom Easton]
 * Variant Title: The Reference Library (Analog, March 1995) - Tom Easton
 * Since the titles looked identical and were supposed to be identical, I copied the title from the canonical record then edited the pseudonym record and pasted the title in so that the system would not think it was a variant title. It worked as the "variant" title is no longer listed. Funslinger 20:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * To see what I've been talking about, check out Thomas A. Easton's biography and look at The Reference Library (Analog, March 30 1981) and The Reference Library (Analog, October 1978) entries. Funslinger 05:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah-ha! I see what you mean. There must have been some hidden character which wasn't copied when the variant was created. It was probably a space, because the system displays two spaces as one, but drops it if you edit the field. Thanks for the explanation and please accept my apology. Continue to correct any more of these you come across. Mhhutchins 14:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Another possibility is that the language didn't match. I saw that original record (Tom) had no language while the variant (Thomas A.) was English. This would also cause it to be displayed as a variant title, even if they're not. All I did was submit an update without any changes, because the system defaults to English (unless you've changed your user preferences). Thanks again. Mhhutchins 14:50, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah-ha! I see what you mean. There must have been some hidden character which wasn't copied when the variant was created. It was probably a space, because the system displays two spaces as one, but drops it if you edit the field. Thanks for the explanation and please accept my apology. Continue to correct any more of these you come across. Mhhutchins 14:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Another possibility is that the language didn't match. I saw that original record (Tom) had no language while the variant (Thomas A.) was English. This would also cause it to be displayed as a variant title, even if they're not. All I did was submit an update without any changes, because the system defaults to English (unless you've changed your user preferences). Thanks again. Mhhutchins 14:50, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * There was two such cases (the 06-1997 & 07-08-1997 columns), I've taken the liberty to correct them. Hauck 14:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Before you go any further with these variant creations, let's see if we can get them done at least semi-automatically. I've asked one of the other editors to try and come up with a script which would create variants. The submissions would have to be moderated, but that's the easier part of the process. I'll keep you aware of the progress. Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:53, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Change in title field of Analog, February 1961
I'm holding a submission to change the title of this record from Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, February 1961 to Analog Science Fact ⩜ Fiction, February 1961. Was this your intention? Mhhutchins 14:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Because that symbol looks more like the actual symbol on the cover than does "->". Funslinger 14:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Not on my computer. It's just a blank box. The symbol on the cover is an arc with an arrow pointing right. Mhhutchins 14:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks similar to an arc with an arrow pointing through it on my computer. Since it doesn't appear to work on all computers, I guess we shouldn't change it. Funslinger 15:01, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Working on a script to create variants
Perhaps you missed the posting I added earlier today (at the end of "Tom Easton titles"), but I've asked a fellow editor to look into writing a script which would semi-automate the creation of variants. Please hold off on making these variants until we can determine if this is possible. I'll let you know if it doesn't work it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks. Funslinger 22:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Bear's Quantum Logic series
What is the source for adding the Forge of God novels to this series? Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A discussion board post by Bear himself. I could be reading it wrong, however. After looking at it again, I see that what I thought was a comma is a period. Based on my re-reading of the post, I'm going to add a parent series called "Thistledown" and add the series Eon to it as well as the novelette "The Wind From a Burning Woman". Funslinger 12:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Semi-related follow-up: I accepted the submission putting The Wind from a Burning Woman into a new Thistledown, but then I see the proposal to make Eon a sub-series of that.  And I see Eon contains The Way of All Ghosts, which seems should be treated the same way as "The Wind from a Burning Woman".  Reading the post linked to above, I'm wondering if instead of having two series (and, presumably, moving "The Way of All Ghosts"), we should just rename the Eon series to Thistledown.  It doesn't look like Bear considers the novels a series in their own right.  I'm not big on series definition and management, so I'll leave it to the two of you.  Thanks.  --MartyD 12:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If you go to Bear's website, he listed the three novels in a series called Eon. Funslinger 12:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I accepted that submission and the other one.  Thanks for the pointer.  --MartyD 13:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Introduction to The 1988 Annual World's Best SF
I rejected your submission to drop the parentheses of Wollheim's Introduction. You are probably right that it isn't part of the title as stated in the book. However, we keep (or rather add) the suffix to avoid mixing up with same-titled essays: we would end up with lots of Introductions by Wollheim and we have a need to tell them apart. For details, please refer to the penultimate paragraph of this help chapter. Thanks, Stonecreek 18:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Title fields of Analog records
I'm accepting the submissions to change the titles of issues of Analog, based on the cover image. I'm hoping you're making these changes based on the interior title, which trumps the cover title. Are you working from the actual copies? Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I assumed that you were using the title that appears on the cover because the cover title is listed for issues between February 1960 and September 1960 (Astounding/Analog Science Fact & Fiction) when the title in the TOC was still Astounding Science Fact & Fiction. Plus, if the policy is to use the actual story title at the top of the story overriding the title listed in the TOC, why wouldn't the actual title on the cover override the title in the TOC? Funslinger 15:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Apples and oranges. The titles of all publications (as opposed to their contents) are from their title pages, not from their covers. We consider the page on which the publisher's colophon appears to be the title page of a periodical. The titles of contents are from the page on which the content begins. I was not involved in the creation or updating of any issues of Analog, even though I have all issues between 1970 and circa 2005, when I stopped subscribing. I can pull out my issues to check them, but I would hope the editors who've done primary verifications of the records did that. I would suggest contacting those who are still active to ask them what was their basis for title entry before making any further changes (unless you have copies and can verify the changes in the records). Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:44, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. I won't change any more titles until I can verify what is on the title page. Thanks. Funslinger 17:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)