User talk:Ofearna/Archive05

Cinefantastique
Sorry, I didn't realize that you archived your Talk page so frequently, so I missed the last few comments at first.

Based on the archived discussion, I have rejected the addition of the following two cover images:


 * 1) ofearna.us/books/king/cfq-carrie.jpg (from Cinefantastique V6#4) to this INTERIORART record
 * 2) ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51kBEIA88fL.jpg (for Cinefantastique Feb 1991, V21#4) to this other INTERIORART record.

Please feel free to submit these non-genre magazines if they contain material related to written SF, e.g. articles about or interviews with SF writers like King. Thanks! Ahasuerus 15:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Please follow the standards as outlined on this help page to enter non-genre magazines into the database. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

None of the contents that you describe for Cinefantastique v6#1 would qualify this issue for entry into the database. Is there anything else in the issue that might be considered spec-fic related that is neither film nor media-related? Perhaps a work of fiction or an interview with an author of speculative fiction? Mhhutchins 21:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

So far, the only thing that's spec-fic related is an interview with Stephen King. Otherwise I can see no reason to create records for this title. Also, "mag" is not a standard binding for magazines. Publication entry standards are here. Please make some time to read it when you get a chance. Mhhutchins 21:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I will go through the mags and enter covers and appropriate content once they've been created. Ofearna 23:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm having a problem about accepting these submissions for several reasons, the most important one is that this is a nongenre magazine, and the contents you're adding are only media-related and not fiction-related. (A film based on an sf work is still media not fiction.) If you look at the help page about the acceptance of records for nongenre magazines into the database, it's clear that they're only allowed if they contain speculative fiction. We can accept an issue of Boys Life with a story by Robert Heinlein, but not an issue of Starlog because it has an article about the film of Starship Troopers. We're not going to accept a record for an issue of TV Guide with an article about the television film of Stephen King's The Stand, but if it contained a reprint of a Stephen King story, then it would be eligible. I hope the distinction is clear.

In the most complete submission (for Cinefantastique v29#4/5) you have records for three articles about films based on novels by Heinlein, Koontz and James Herbert. There are other articles about science fiction and horror films, that you chose to list only in the note field. I don't see any difference between those that you made content records for and the ones you didn't. None of them are fiction, which as I mentioned before, is the only reason for creating records for nongenre magazines. If you believe these standards are too restrictive, and that an exception should be made for Cinefantastique (a movie magazine, not a speculative fiction magazine), feel free to voice your opinion on the Rules and Standards page. I'll keep the submissions on hold if you choose to take that course of action. Otherwise, you can cancel the submissions. Mhhutchins 04:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The articles I chose from the few (I have over 100 issues of CFQ/Cinefantastique) I chose because they actually deal with the books AND the movies/shows and not just the adaptations/movies... Ofearna 07:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * But they're not fiction. See the rules about inclusion of nongenre magazines and the explanation I give above. Mhhutchins 14:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I need you two to get together and decide if I can add these notes to the interior art field, which is what I was trying to do but kept being told I have to add them as magazines and now you placed the magazine adds on hold. Please help me decide which way is which.  I tried doing it Mhhutchins' way but Ahauserus and BLongley rejected that and I get this message "Note should be on the main publication as a cover, i.e. on Cinefantastique.", but when I try adding the magazines I get placed on hold.  My brain is melting, guys ! ☻ ☺ ☻ Ofearna 17:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the confusion and/or mixed signals from various moderators. I think the others just didn't think you should add a link to the images in the note field. You're free to continue to state in the note field when and where the art was first used. This may have also led you to believe that you have to variant an interiorart record to a parent record (one for its first appearance). This is not necessary. If you want to go to the trouble of creating interiorart records that are contained in an artbook (few of us do), then just do it. But don't worry about having to create parent records. If one already exists in the database, feel free to variant the interiorart record to it. But don't go out of your way to find the first use of the artwork and create publication records just so that you can variant the interioart record to it. If an artwork was originally used on the cover of a fashion / sports / romance magazine (you get the picture), and then later reprinted in a collection of the artist's work, would you feel it necessary to create a publication record for that magazine? I hope not, and frankly, no moderator would accept the submission. So why go to the effort of creating pub records for a nongenre magazine that has no connection to speculative fiction? After all, that's what the "SF" in ISFDB stands for. It's not an art database, even though that appears to be the emphasis of the bulk of your latest submissions. And I'm not knocking that. We all have our areas of expertise.  And don't think you're alone about art. There's another editor whose sole purpose is to create a database for the work of a single artist. So far, he's not attempted to add non-sf-related work. When he does, I'll be just as firm with him. I'm an equal opportunity asshole. :) Mhhutchins 18:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think you're an asshole at all, but even when I WASN'T trying to add a cover link to the notes of the content I got "Note should be on the main publication as a cover, i.e. on Cinefantastique" -- this after you recommended I *not* add CFQ as most of what they covered was almost entirely tv/film stuff. I did go through the 100 or so issues I have and re-read the articles.  Those that did not deal at ALL with the author/book I didn't even try to add, so...  Are the 10 issues I thought had merit going to be accepted?Ofearna 19:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I've made my opinion clear: there should not be records for nongenre magazines in the database if the issues do not contain speculative fiction. Other editors might disagree, but if they do, along with the consensus of the group, then the standards need to be changed. That can only be done if you start a discussion on the Rules and Standards page. I'm not going to reject the submissions, but I'm not going to accept them under the current standards. They'll stay on hold until you decide to pursue the matter or cancel them. Mhhutchins 20:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm gonna cancel those and then re-add the notes to Carrie and Stephen King On Hollywood; can you please approve them? NO image links, I promise.Ofearna 20:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Knowing Darkness
Is the reference to "Cemetary Dance" [sic] in the notes of this record correctly attributed? The book was published by Centipede Press. Cemetery Dance was selling the "slightly dinged" copies of the first edition (see this posting on their website). What is the source for the information that they (Cemetery Dance) published a second printing of the title? Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 19:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I ordered one of those "slightly dinged" copies... and had to wait like 4 months! so yes, the notes are all accurate and correct. Ofearna 23:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe I'm not making myself clear, so I'll try again. You ordered a copy of a book from Cemetery Dance, but that doesn't mean that they published a new printing of it, or that they published it at all. How could Cemetery Dance have "changed their minds and had a second print run issued" for a book published by Centipede Press. Is there any indication in your copy that the book is a second printing with a price of $99.00? Or is it just a discounted price from a reseller for a damaged copy of the original printing of another publisher? If the latter, then you should not create a new record for it. There's already a record for the first printing. It would be like creating a new record for a book published by Random House that Amazon sold at a discounted price. If your copy indicates that it's a second printing with a list price of $99, then the whole story about Cemetery Dance's "dinged" copies is irrelevant to the record. Mhhutchins 03:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Centipede Press is the printer/publisher, but Cemetery Dance was the distributor; they ordered a second print run, as per the email they sent me. This is a SECOND printing and I've added notes explaining this. There is no copyright page in the book itself.  Ofearna 19:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * In other words, your book has no printed price and no printing statement. So how can you tell the difference between the two printings unless you do a side by side comparison? Perhaps you should email the verifier of the first printing to compare copies. If there isn't a difference, there should not be two records, just a note with an explanation about an unstated, discounted "second print run". It would also be a good idea to do a primary verification of the record you're working on so that other users will know who to talk to if they have questions. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:38, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I checked with Sunnikay who says I can take over and if you tell me how to do that (merge the two records) I'll verify it even tho I'm not even close to finished with it... Ofearna 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Publication records can't be merged, just updated or deleted. (Only title records can be merged.) If you've determined that there should only be one record, you can delete Sunnikay's, and continue adding contents to the record you've been working on. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm holding the submission to import the contents from your record to Sunnikay's record. Guess I'm confused. I thought you wanted to "merge" the records, not create two records with identical contents. Also, it's better to wait until you've completely added the contents before you import them to another record. It's going to be impossible to do the same thing if you continue adding records to one because you can't pick and choose which ones to import. This function imports everything from one record to another. I need to know what your intentions are before I proceed. Mhhutchins 22:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Was gonna switch to the original edition and then delete the new one... All editing on hold till pending clears.Ofearna 22:51, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, but you could have just deleted the old one and continued editing the one you'd been working on. Submission accepted. Mhhutchins 23:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Cover art credit
It is the ISFDB standard to leave the Artist1 (cover artist) field blank, if the cover artist is either unknown or uncredited. I removed the credit for "unknown" in this publication record. Linking it to a reprint is not a strong enough reason to break the standard. Mhhutchins 21:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I have to have SOMETHING in the artist field to variant the cover art as it appears in Knowing Darkness, don't I? HELP, then?  Please ☺☻

Ofearna 23:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, you don't have to variant any record. Just create an interiorart record for the work and leave it at that. There's no point in varianting a record to an unknown work. Let it stand as it is. Mhhutchins 03:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Warrior Title Merge
I'm going to reject your merge of the repeated piece of artwork titled Warrior. The database actually has display problems if the same title record is contained in a publication more than once. Also, as I mentioned in my notes on your earlier submission, I'm not sure where you got the title "Warrior" from. Our policy is to title artwork with the title of the story it illustrates. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 15:37, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Valor's Choice
I added the publication month, some notes regarding the printing statement and Canadian price and a pub series to Huff's Valor's Choice. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Own Goal
You entered this publication under the wrong title record. Author and title must match EXACTLY before you use the "Add Publication to This Title" function. It will have to be unmerged so that it creates its own title record. Mhhutchins 20:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * This looks like an odd situation altogether. Are there really two books with the same title but different authors in the same share-cropped series? And are these SF at all? (I haven't read them, so i don't know.) Remember the exclusion of Techno-thrillers set "in a future indistinguishable from the present". -DES Talk 22:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * From what I can see some of these books are credited simply to Tom Clancy and/or Piez(spelling?)cansi AND (esp in reprints) to the actual author, so it created a LOT of confusion... Ofearna 19:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The problem is not with the credit, it's with the way you entered the publication into the database. If the book was written by Diane Duane, which from your record appears to be the case, you should have used the "Add New Novel" function, and not added it to a title record which credits Steve R. Pieczenik as the author. I'll unmerge the publication record so that it has its own title record. In the future, do not use the "Add Publication to This Title" function unless the title and author match EXACTLY. If you have to correct either one, then you're using the wrong function.


 * Here's the path you should take before adding a publication record to the database:
 * Is there a title record for the same title and is it by the same author?
 * Yes: Is there a similar pub?
 * Yes: Use the "Clone" function.
 * No: Use the "Add Publication to This Title" function.
 * No: Use the appropriate "Add New..." function.


 * Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course, if it is the same work but with different author credits or a different title, you will need to make it a variant after the "add new..." entry has been made and approved, or get help with that step. -DES Talk 01:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Intro to "Whispers of Immortality"
I have your edit to change the title of this essay to "Whispers of Immortality (Introduction)" on hold. It's not a huge point, but our usual format would be "Introduction (Whispers of Immortality)". See Help:Screen:EditTitle, the bullet on "Standard" titles.

Is there a particular reason you didn't follow this pattern on this title? -DES Talk 01:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * No reason, but usually when it's Introduction (title) the title is of the book... Ofearna 07:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That is true, because we enter far more book intros. Often story intros are mere blurbs that editors don't enter at all. When a story intro is worth entering into the db, it should IMO follow the usual form. I'm going to approve the edit so it isn't dangling, and then re-edit to "Introduction (Whispers of Immortality)". If you object, I'll ask on the community portal and do whatever the consensus says. -DES Talk 12:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * As per this discussion, I would prefer that this essay be titled simply "Whispers of Immortality". The title page of the essay "Whispers of Immortality" over "Introduction by Arnie Fenner".  We don't ordinarily disambiguate titles unless they are generic (introduction, preface, bibliography, etc.). When the introductory essay has a unique title, there is no need to add a parenthetical statement. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

More on ...and Their Memory Was a Bitter Tree...
I also note that the page numbers for many of the interior art items in are given in [brackets]. I presume this is because the pages don't carry actual page numbers. But I recall recent discussion to the effect that if pages 141 and 143 (say) carry numbers, a credit for 142 (which does not) should not use brackets. And the use of brackets makes the interior art pile up at the top of the pub listing, instead of adjacent to the items illustrated. I'm not sure enough of this as a standard to insist on the change, but i urge you to make it. Please don't forget to notify Ron, the primary verifier, of whatever changes in this pub you do make. -DES Talk 12:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * This is actually OK. The illustrations on the bracketed pages are plates that are inserted between two consecutively numbered pages.  The pages would run something like 141, [141], [142], 142, 143.  If this is confusing, we could enter text like "fcg 141".  I've done this in the past ("facing" is too long for the field). --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I see. I didn't realize they were plates, I suspected they were just unnumbered pages, like 141 [142] 143 144. Often the first page of a story or the page facing it, particularly if a full page illo, is unpaginated, but is not a tipped-in plate. The ISFDB doesn't really handle plates well, none of the above solutions puts the plate after 141 and before 142. I recall a suggestion of "141a" some time ago, but I'm not sure how well that works in the software. -DES Talk 19:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Cover artist credit
Hi. If you add a cover artist credit whose source is not the publication itself, please be sure to record the source in the notes. Don't forget that notes to the moderator are not preserved. I took the info from your moderator note and added it to. Thanks. --MartyD 10:21, 26 July 2012 (UTC)