User talk:Mhhutchins/Archive/2010Sep-Dec

The Humanoids
Added an image to [this] and again have found what seems to be two 'First' Easton editions. There's about 35 of these on AbeBooks and two distinctly different leather colors, though the gold embossing seems the same. Also, Locus has the date as June '88, quite a difference from the '87 in the record. Did not adjust that as it may be a typo, or there were two editions and they recorded the second? Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Same design, but mine is the green leather one. Not sure where Locus got its date, but the book is not dated.  Like all Easton Press books only the copyright is given.  I'm not sure which cover came first, as I may have received later in my subscription.  Another funny thing, there's a note on the copyright page that it is "Published by The Easton Press with permission of Bluejay Books, Inc.".  This title was never published by Bluejay (despite this OCLC record.  They went belly up before the book was actually published! Mhhutchins 19:37, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The ISBN for that record belongs to the pub pictured. Seems every database has its' gremlins!! --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've updated the notes, but kept the cover image. Eventually I'll get around to scanning these images into the database.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be nice! Some of these have gorgeous covers. Usually the ones that show the leather the best are photographs, maybe scanners do not pick up the texture as well? --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's something to consider. When I scanned in the Easton Press edition of Michael Bishop's No Enemy But Time, the image just didn't do the book justice.  I've never really had good luck with photos of books because of the flash flare.  My camera has all of these settings and I only use the auto function.  On my visit to NYC last month I went to both the Met and MOMA, and because you can't take flash photos in museums the photos looked like crap.  My photo of Dali's The Persistence of Memory was so blurry it looked like the Persistence of Alcohol. (Picasso's Seated Harlequin turned out pretty good, though.)  I'll try some different settings on the camera before I start uploading.  I've got about a hundred Easton Press editions, so it won't be soon. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Visiting NYC
I wish I'd known you were coming to NYC, perhaps we could have met. FIY i'm on the railroad line with a straight shot into NYC, about 65-80 mins depending on local vs express. I've had fair luck taking pictures in museums, depending on the circumstances. -DES Talk 06:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I would love to live that close to NYC. It's an amazing city and I never run out of things to do when I visit.  Looks like cheap airline tickets are becoming a thing of the past and I'll have to budget my vacations around that. Mhhutchins
 * Yes it is lovely. Even train fares are rising significantly. I well understand the need to budget both cash and time, but if you do visit again and would like to meet up, drop me a line. I understand it won't be next month. -DES Talk 15:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Image:60-days-and-counting-easton.jpg
On Image:60-days-and-counting-easton.jpg. I see you changed the Artist from "None" to "Unknown". I have been using "None" as the artist when there is no cover art beyond lettering (as here) and so there can be no artist, and also for cases where the cover art is assembled from stock photos (like ), and again there can be no cover artist ever credited, leaving "Unknown" for the more common case where there was (or seems to have been) an actual artist, but the identity is not known. As you can see, Category:Artist:None Images has 31 images in it at this time. I suggest that Image:60-days-and-counting-easton.jpg ought to be #32. -DES Talk 06:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me. Feel free to change it back. I might contend that the cover does have artwork and that the artist is uncredited. Look at it again.  That's more than lettering.  Mhhutchins 14:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You do have a point, there is tooling and not just in a simple geometric pattern. Left as "Unknown". Thanks. -DES Talk 14:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sadly, Easton doesn't acknowledge the artists (engravers?) who create their covers. They do deserve credit as most are quite good, even if they're only patterns.  Most of those in my collection is art, not simply design.  Very often the style matches that of the interior artist, but there's no way of knowing if another artist took the other's art (or detail) to create the cover. Mhhutchins 14:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand. at least more publishers are crediting cover artists today. Unfortunately general (non-genre) secondary sources like OCLC almost never include cover art credits. -DES Talk 15:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Interior Art vs Essay
Hi, I suspect the "Mind Transfer" essay credit in the June 1983 Asimov's here for Judy Mitchell should be for interior art. Jonschaper 23:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Suspicion is valid. I've corrected the error.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ysabeay S. Wilce
In your verified, the essay is credited to Ysabeay S. Wilce instead of Ysabeau S. Wilce. However, is not marked as a pseudonym of. Can you double check whether this is a typo in the record or in the original? Thanks. --JLaTondre 10:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It was a typo, and I've corrected it. Thanks for catching it. Mhhutchins 13:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dylan, Troy Johnson, and the Speed Queen
Does this story title have the 'h' in Johnson [here]? The [earlier] appearance doesn't seem to. OCLC spells it without for both editions as does Locus. Thanks! --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It was a typo. I've merged the two with the correct spelling.  The story was original to this collection, so I'm not sure where the 1989 date came from.  I changed the merged record to 1992.  Thanks for catching the error. Mhhutchins 18:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Artist credit
Saw your note [here]. Locus credits Joe Bergeron with the [paperback] cover which has the same art and that would fit the initials. Unfortunately the pb is not verified. --~ Bill, Bluesman 03:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good find. I'll update the record and source the unverified pb record.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Them Bones
I added Terry Carr's introduction to this verified pub. Also changed the number of pages from 225 to xi+225, and added the Canadian price to the notes. Thanks, --Willem H. 13:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

publication date for Walpole's "Saturnian Celia"?
Hi. Would you do me a favor and see what Tuck (and any of your other references) has to say about "Saturnian Celia" by Horace Walpole? I have this proposed merge on hold that wants to keep a publication date of 1774 vs. 1957. The piece was published in 1957 as an extract from a letter written in 1774, but I can't find any evidence of publication prior to that. Google Books tells me it is in Tuck, but gives no snippets. Swfritter is a verifier of the magazine with the 1774-dated entry, so I am going to ask him about its dating, too. Thanks. --MartyD 10:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I can't find a reference in Tuck for Walpole's piece. It has a short biography for Walpole, and lists only his novel The Castle of Otranto. ... Later... I just checked Tuck's listing for Robert Mills' anthology A Decade of Fantasy and Science Fiction and it lists the title, but doesn't give a date.  Tuck doesn't give original publication dates for pieces reprinted in anthologies.  Because the two records for this essay originated with the F&SF publication, I think Swfritter can tell you how the editors of F&SF introduced the piece.  They should have mentioned the source and date of the original essay.  Sorry for not being much help. Mhhutchins 00:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * That's ok. Thanks much for the research!  --MartyD 00:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Night of the Cooters
This weekend I verified my copy of the Ace edition of Night of the Cooters. In reading the story introductions I came across the story "The Adventure of the Grinder's Whistle", which was Waldrop's contribution to a never published "fictional authors" anthology to be edited by "Kilgore Trout". In the introduction to the story he blames Philip José Farmer for it's existence, so I showed the book to my friend Rias Nuninga (webmaster of the PJF international bibliography) and of course he wants a copy of the story and the introduction for himself. Now the question is, does your verified pub (or the limited edition also have the introductions to the stories, or should he buy the Ace edition? Thanks, --Willem H. 18:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


 * That introduction appears in both the regular and limited editions published by Ziesing. All of the individual story introductions are there as well.  I'll have to go back and add them (merging them with your records).  I didn't realize how substantial they were.  I wouldn't normally do this for a paragraph or two, but these are rather long.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. I'll pass it on. --Willem H. 07:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The Slaying of the Dragon - Artist credit
Is Hieronymus Bosch really credited as Hieronymous Bosch in this pub, or can I merge the two? Thanks, --Willem H. 20:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Mine is a typo, which I'll correct. You'll have to ask the verifiers of the other two pubs before merging the names.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I asked Bill Longley (waiting for an answer). I own the one Bluesman verified, that was certainly a typo, the notes even state the artist is not credited. Thanks, --Willem H. 06:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Robert W. Chambers "The Men at the Next Table"
You verified against Tuck which contains the story The Men at the Next Table. There is also a record for The Man at the Next Table which has the comment "Published in The Maker of Moons, Putnam (New York), 1896" (i.e. the Tuck verified pub). Any idea if one of these is a typo or if the "Man" version should be marked as a variant of the "Men" one? Thanks. --JLaTondre 22:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Tuck was mistaken. The name of the story should have been "The Man at the Next Table" according to the OCLC record.  Variants aren't created for typos in secondary sources.  I've merged it with the correct title record and noted Tuck's typo in the pub record of the 1896 collection.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mhhutchins 22:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

English SFBC
Came upon this webpage by chance.--swfritter 00:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Interesting page. I'm going to link it to our SFBC UK wiki page.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * One of the things I must squeeze out of the Stableford collection is some more UK SFBC info - they used to advertise in "Zenith Speculation" for instance, quoting original price and their price. We don't have many UK SFBC prices. BLongley 03:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, there are quite more than a few for which I entered the prices from Tuck. Mhhutchins 03:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Louisa May Alcott's "Rosy's Journey"
I've got the paperback edition of this pub, and I discovered while entering this from secondary sources, that we've mistakenly listed the Louisa May Alcott story as "Rosy's Journal". I've verified that it should be "Journey" in my edition. If your edition agrees, then we can merge with this title picking up the earlier date reflected in the Thomsen collection. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:50, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be "Rosy's Journey". Please proceed in merging the titles.  Thanks for catching the error. Mhhutchins 21:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Mississippi Review 47/48
I was about to perform a Primary2 verification on Mississippi Review 47/48 but I noticed that the listing for the Bruce Sterling short story 22 Evocations should really be 20 Evocations; I suspect the page number 122 got tangled up into it. That should make it another variant on Life in the Mechanist/Shaper Era: 20 Evocations. Albinoflea 07:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You're correct. It should be "20 Evocations".  I've made it into a variant of the other record.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

The Martians, 1st American ed.
Sorry, this is tiny one, but has $24.95 in the price field but the note lists the jacket price as Price "IN US $25.95 (over) IN CANADA $35.95" Albinoflea 00:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The field is correct, the note is not. Thanks for catching the typo.  I've corrected it. Mhhutchins 00:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Newly indexed SFBC volume
Today I entered, and verified, a Doubleday book club edition of with a gutter code of "52G". This work is not listed in the SFBC tables linked from Publisher:Science Fiction Book Club. I have no way to determine when, or whether, it was ever a club selection -- i don't own a copy of Tuck, and Lotus online doesn't go back that far. I suppose it is possible this was from one of Doubleday's other book clubs that shared the gutter code system. Should this be added to the wiki list, either in Feb 1966, when this copy would have been printed, or in 1962 when the apparently came out? You seem to have done the most work with SFBC entries, so i am asking your advice. -DES Talk 21:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Tuck lists this, but he doesn't give it as an offering of the SFBC. It was probably a selection of the Doubleday Book Club and the Literary Guild, but I can't verify that.  The "Nelson Doubleday" imprint indicates that it was an original publication available only through Doubleday's book clubs.  Your copy is actually a later printing of this record, which was based on Tuck's listing.  I don't think it should be added to the SFBC listings, based on its not being listed by Tuck and not included in the rec.arts.sf.written newsgroup postings that were based on a list provided by SFBC editor Andrew Wheeler. Mhhutchins 22:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Should the publisher be changed from "Nelson Doubleday / SFBC" to "Nelson Doubleday / BCE" or "Nelson Doubleday / Book Club" or some such, then? Or just "Nelson Doubleday"? -DES Talk 15:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Just plain "Nelson Doubleday" should suffice. All books under this imprint are book club editions.  I only added the SFBC to the imprint when the books were intended for their SFBC members. Mhhutchins 15:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I see. I thought they also did trade editions under that imprint. My error. I'll make the needed change. -DES Talk 18:15, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Should the page numbers be used to set page numbers in the unverified earlier printing? -DES Talk 18:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how Tuck handled pages before Page 1. If your copy doesn't have roman-numerals, it might be best to change the earlier edition to match your copy. Mhhutchins 19:00, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My copy has unnumbered pages before page 1 which is why I used [6] in the pages field. The earlier edition currently shows no page numbers at all, safe to assume they are unchanged? -DES Talk 21:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Tuck gives it a roman-numeral of vi, so I'm going to assume it was the same as yours and change it to [6]. Mhhutchins 22:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Denis vs Dennis Beauvais
Hi, could you check if the name here is actually spelled "Dennis"? If it is, I'm pretty sure that's an error by the publisher. Cheers Jonschaper 03:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's credited on the copyright page as "Cover art by Dennis Beauvais". Feel free to make it into a pseudonym and create a variant. Mhhutchins 03:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

an SFBC reprint
Hi. I know your time here is limited. This is not urgent. I have this submission from Dsorgen on hold. It's for an SFBC edition with a different gutter code than our existing entry. I assume from Help:How_to_enter_a_SFBC_publication this submission should be rejected and a note about the gutter code recorded on and likewise the known reprint code added to Publisher:SFBC_1980-1984. Is that right? How do I know when a second pub SHOULD be added -- is it just catalog number or ISBN? Leading zero added to catalog number alone enough? Thanks. Oh, who would you suggest as stand-in SFBC caretaker in your absence? --MartyD 02:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As you state and as the rules currently stand, the submission would be rejected and the note field of the current record would be updated to include the additional gutter code. If any of these fields are different then a new record should be created: date, publisher, page count, binding, ISBN, price, cover artist, or additional contents. I readily admit that I pretty much unilaterally created those rules.  Every attempt I made to start a dialog about SFBC entry met with general indifference.  The main reason I wanted the gutter code not to be a basis for a new ISFDB record was because there were attempts to add them to the listings on the wiki page for the SFBC.  I created those pages to provide a listing of SFBC selections, not printings, and it became easier to come up with the rule to exclude records based on gutter codes.  I'm quite willing to participate in a discussion about whether that decision should be reconsidered.  In fact, as the years have gone by, I'm beginning to see the benefit for individual ISFDB records for each gutter code.  Bill (Bluesman) was a major contributor to the SFBC wiki listings and is very familiar with SFBC editions and the rules governing their entry.  He should be able to answer any questions if I'm not available. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:18, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the vote of confidence! Bring 'em on, Marty! ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 03:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, guys. Be careful what you wish for, Bill...  --MartyD 13:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Job: A Comedy of Justice
Just picked up a [seeming] first edition of [this]. The notes have/had a different ISBN than the one on the copyright page [though it matched the one on the back cover]. Changed it in the field and notes and noted the other ISBN, then of course realized our copies may not be the same. Nothing that isn't reversible, though I'd be at a loss to figure out what would be the first edition if they ARE different.... --~ Bill, Bluesman 03:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The record matches my copy as well, so whatever was changed was probably incorrect to start with. One thing though: my copy only prints the SBN on the back cover: "345-31649-5". Was this the number (converted to an ISBN) that was originally in the record's ISBN field? It may have been placed there by the original creator of the file and I failed to catch it when I verified the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, just an SBN on the back cover. Adjusted the note. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:56, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

James Sallis' "Faces & Hands" vs "Faces, Hands"
You verified both and. The first pub contains Faces, Hands while the second pub contains Faces & Hands. Are these the same story so one should be made the variant of the other? --JLaTondre 22:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, they're the same story. I'll make "Faces, Hands" the parent because that's the title Sallis used when it appeared in both of his collections, even though the publication in Nova 1 was its first appearance. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Lynn vs Lynne Fahnestalk
Hi, can you check if the credit here is for Lynn or for Lynne Cheers Jonschaper 01:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Good catch. It should be "Lynne".  I've corrected the error. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Just one short question
Hi, how did you find out that Egan's "Der Andere in meinem Kopf" had to be linked with "Learning to Be Me"? I wanted to fix it, but found that it was already done. Just curious. Stonecreek 15:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The first thing I did was use Google's translate service, which wasn't much help because it wasn't a literal translation of the original title. So I did a Google search for "Der Andere in meinem Kopf" and found it listed on Egan's website. Mhhutchins 16:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So he keeps notice of his publications. I like that. Thank you very much. Stonecreek 19:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan Lethem's Forever, Said the Duck
You verified which contains Forever, Said the Duck. The other versions of this story (and awards) are listed as "Forever," Said the Duck. If I am reading the Locus website correctly, the Asimov and Isaac Asimov’s Cyberdreams versions should be with the quotes and all of the The Wall of the Sky, The Wall of the Eye versions should be without. However, do you mind double checking that your version did not have the quotes before I submit a change to make it a variant. Thanks. --JLaTondre 22:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The version in my Harcourt tp does not have the quotation marks, and I'm 99% certain that is also true for both the Harcourt hc and the Tor tp. I'm going to remove those listings from the original title record and then make the non-quote record a variant of the one with quotes.  Thanks. Mhhutchins

Brian Lumley's Kiss of the Lamia
Mhhutchins verified which contains Kiss of the Lamia. Rtrace verified which contains The Kiss of the Lamia. Before making the latter a variant of the former, I wanted to double check the presence/absence of the "The". I will leave Rtrace a pointer to this discussion. Thanks. --JLaTondre 00:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I double checked mine and the "The" is present on the title page (and the table of contents). --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 00:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * My verified record is "The"-less. You can make a submission creating a variant title. Mhhutchins 03:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Full Spectrum 3
Added OCLC link and translation info to the notes field of. Albinoflea 07:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Anders interview in August 2010 Locus
In, there's an interview with Charlie Jane Anders, which currently shows up as the only item in her bibliography. She's the same person as (and possibly the same as, but I can't confirm that). So you might want to create a pseudonym or alter the interview credit or something. Best, BrendanMoody 04:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * We don't create pseudonyms for interviews, but adjust the name of the interviewee to that of the parent author. I'll do that and it should eliminate the author record for "Charlie Jane Anders", until or if she ever publishes something credited to the full name.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mhhutchins 04:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. I just noticed she's credited as the author of the interview so I will have to create a pseudonym and a variant record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Three Angela Carter Stories
You verified which contains several stories I have questions about:

Alice in Prague or The Curious Room: You also verified which contains Alice in Prague, or The Curious Room. The first title lists the date as 1990 where as the second title lists it as 1992 (and it's in a best of 1992 collection). Is the date on the first one correct and the second one is a new version (to which we should add a note to that affect)? Or are they identical and the date of the first is wrong? Or other? And if identical, is the absence/presence of the comma correct and a variant record should be created? --JLaTondre 22:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no acknowledgements page in the collection, but Locus1 gives the first publication was in SPELL (Swiss Papers in English Language and Literature) Volume 5, 1990. It also appeared in The Village Voice Literary Supplement, March 1992, according to the acknowledgements page in the best of the year anthology.) The title in my collection doesn't have a comma, the title in the anthology does, so a variant should be created. Both should still be dated 1990. (Short stories with variant titles keep the date of the original publication, not the date in which the variant title appeared.) Mhhutchins 23:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Ashputtle or The Mother's Ghost: You also verified which contains Ashputtle: or, The Mother's Ghost. Again, there is a similar date and punctuation issue. Are these the same or different versions? And if the same, is the date and punctuation correct? --JLaTondre 22:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * This story first appeared in The Virago Book of Ghost Stories, ed. Richard Dalby, Virago 1987. The first US appearance was in The Village Voice, March 10, 1990. Both should be dated as 1987, with the punctuated one being a variant of the first published title. Mhhutchins 23:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Puss-in-Boots: The other versions of this story (including the one in the hardcover version of the same publication) are listed without the dashes. I wanted to double check that difference before submitting a variant record change. I'll invite Willem H. (the verifier of a non-dash version) to comment here as well.

Thanks. --JLaTondre 22:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The title in my book has dashes. According to OCLC records so does the hardcover edition.  I'll correct it.  If the title in Willem's verified book doesn't have dashes, a variant should be made. Mhhutchins 23:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Definitely no dashes in my book. I think mine should be the variant, feel free to submit. Thanks, --Willem H. 08:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like someone has already made the variants. My thanks to you both. --JLaTondre 22:19, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Robert Frazier & Tol E. Rant Questions
The following are two question on possible variants.
 * 1) Robert Frazier: Mhhutchins verified  containing "We cannot escape humility.". Rkihara verified  containing "We Cannot Escape Humility". There is a difference in case and a period in the first record.


 * The first record is correct. I've fixed mine.--Rkihara 00:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) Tol E. Rant (Barry B. Longyear): Mhhutchins verified  containing Where a Star is a Ship, or When is a Micron a Parsec?, or When is TV Going To Start Hiring Science Fiction Writers?. Rkihara verified  containing Where a Star Is a Ship or When Is a Micron a Parsec? or When Is TV Going to Start Hiring Science Fiction Writers?. The first one has two commas.


 * No Commas.--Rkihara 00:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Same here. I'll correct the record, so no variant is necessary. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to double check that the difference were valid before submitting variants. I will also leave a note requesting Rkihara participate here.

Thanks. --JLaTondre 21:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Faraway Lures
Hi, it appears from Wikipedia etc that the title for this should be The Faraway Lurs (no "e"). Jonschaper 04:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The title was incorrectly entered. It should have been The Faraway Lurs.  The title and pub records have been updated. Thanks for catching the error. Mhhutchins 15:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Michael P. Belflore vs Belfiore
Hi, could you check the spelling of Michael's name here? Thanks Jonschaper 04:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It should be "Belfiore". I'll correct the error.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Seeklight
Added the introduction by Malzberg to the contents, fleshed out the notes and scanned in an image for [this]. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Eventually I'll go back to add images and notes to my verified paperbacks, but have yet to finish even the hardcovers. Mhhutchins 20:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Cover artist for "Eye in the Sky"
You are the primary verifier for, by Philip K. Dick. In the notes, you mention that the cover artist has a "JHB" monogram on the cover. We appear to have 9 books in the ISFDB database whose covers have that mysterious monogram, and I am adding cover artists attributions for the 4 (including Eye in the Sky) that are not directly linked to that artist's "name". The intent is to connect all of these mysteries into one, esp. in case anyone ever figures out who that artist is. Chavey 21:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't write the note about the artist's signature, one of the other primary verifiers did it. Regardless, I wouldn't object to your trying to tie these records together by crediting them to the mysterious "JHB".  Maybe one day the mystery will be solved. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:35, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I suspect it's J. H. Breslow but don't have those actual covers to compare. BLongley 13:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You're absolutely correct. They're all in a very similar style with similar signatures. I'm going to proceed to credit the JHB records to Breslow.  Thanks for the detective work. Mhhutchins 17:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You're welcome - I love this sort of detective work when I get bored of my own books and magazines, or moderating others. BLongley 21:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Best SF: 1968
Found a nice one in this pub. The essay by Leon E. Stover is titled "Apeman, Superman-or 2001's Answer to the World Riddle", not "Apeman, Spaceman-or 2001's Answer to the World Riddle". --Willem H. 18:54, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The original record was created from Locus1 data. When I verified the pub, I failed to catch their error.  I'll correct it now.  Thanks for catching it. Mhhutchins 03:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Achilles' vs Achille's
Hi, I suspect that this title should be "Achilles'". There's already an entry for that spelling. Jonschaper 02:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Good catch. I've merged the two records with the correct spelling.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

A few small issues about verified pubs
1. Is this story from the Jan 2011 Asimov's really credited to "steve resnic tem," rather than the usual ?

2. In, what is the exact title the Steve Rasnic/Melanie Tem story appears under? I have in which it appears as "This Icy Region My Heart Encircles," while The Ultimate Frankenstein currently lists it as "The Icy Region My Heat Encircles." I think "Heat" vs. "Heart" might be a data entry error, but I don't know about "This" vs. "The."

3. In the, this review credits the book's co-author as "Forrest Aguire" rather than the usual "Forrest Aguirre," resulting in an empty author record for the alternate spelling.

4. In, which you've verified via a secondary source, the author of the Divine Comedy is listed as "Dante Alighier" rather than. Was this correct?

Sorry about the explosion of small queries. Thanks for any help you can provide. BrendanMoody 00:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The first three are typos which I've corrected. The fourth is probably a typo, but I don't have access to the original publication and did not create the record.  A verification for Reginald includes the following: title, author, year, publisher, page count and binding.  He doesn't give contents.  Here's a chart that I created which shows just what is being verified from each of the secondary verification sources. Thanks for catching the typos. I'll try to find another source for the pub that credits "Dante Alighier". Mhhutchins 00:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for pointing out that chart. It'll be a big help. BrendanMoody 00:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * FWIW, Google Books has enough of the 1975 Lothrop, Lee, & Shepard edition to see "Alighieri". Unfortunately, the 1974 edition has no snippets.  Curiously, there's this AbeBooks entry that spells it "Alighier", but that's for the 1975 Lothrop, et al, which Google's scans show included the "i".  --MartyD 01:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Martin Gardner's The Doctor's Dilemma
You verified containing The Doctor's Dilemma. You also verified containing The Doctors' Dilemma. Are these titles the same work and is the apostrophe difference correct? Thanks. --JLaTondre 14:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * They both should be "...Doctors'...". I've corrected the typo and merged the two records.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Anatomy of Wonder: A Critical Guide to Science Fiction, Second Edition
As I recall, "Core Collection Checklist" in your verified Anatomy of Wonder: A Critical Guide to Science Fiction, Second Edition was an Essay rather than short fiction :-) Ahasuerus 06:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You recall correctly. :) Thanks for pointing out the slip. I'll correct it. Mhhutchins 18:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Liavek: Wizard's Row change
You're the primary verifier for . In comparing my copy against the contents listing (and we both appear to have a 1st printing by number line), the page numbers for two of the stories (Green is the Color and The World in the Rock) are off by 1, and I've updated those. Also, the Appendix One: A Liavekan Songbook on p. 204 of that book is listed in ISFDB as uncredited, but it seems to be part of the song/poem immediately following it, which is attributed to Jane Yolen. It seems to me that the song introduction should be credited to Jane also, but that step I wouldn't want to do without your approval. Chavey 20:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, the Appendix Two is listed in ISFDB as uncredited, which it is at that page. But this Appendix is credited to Will Shetterly and Emma Bull on the copyrights page, so I've updated that entry. Similarly, the song mentioned above credited to Jane Yolen also lists Adam Stemple as a "co-author" on p. 204 (on the score opposite where Jane Yolen appears), and Adam is also listed in the copyrights for that poem on the copyrights page, so I've added him there as well. Chavey 20:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Mindswap
Added artist, Howard Darden, to Mindswap witth the note: "Artist not credited but signature is visible". Signature appears to be identical to the one on this cover. Thanks. P-Brane 01:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC).
 * Thanks. Good catch.  BTW, you can also use this template to link to pub records: , replacing  with the ID tag of the record, and  with the title of the book or whatever you want to call the link. So the first link would be  and the second would be  and the links would display like this:  and . Mhhutchins 01:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

SFBC The Star Trek Reader III gutter code
I'm sure you watch the SFBC pages, but just in case... WeAreGray updated your verified to record a gutter code of "H46". I went to record that on Publisher:SFBC_1975-1979, and I saw we had no original printing gutter code, and H46 looked somewhat consistent with the H51 for another January selection, Orbit 19. So I recorded H46 as the primary gutter code. --MartyD 15:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That's great. Even after years of trying to find every gutter code for the first SFBC printing, there are still a few (relatively speaking) that we've been unable to find.  Now there's one less.  I'm going to update the notes to state that "H47" was the first printing for that title. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Locus, August 2010
Just checking to see if really interviewed herself in Locus, August 2010. Self-interviews are not very common, but have been known to happen! Ahasuerus 22:12, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Locus has been crediting the interviewee as the author of the piece since sometime in the mid-90s. These are not typical interviews, none having the usual Q&A format. All are presented in the first person and appear to be more personal essays than interviews.  Each begin with a biographical sketch, sometimes of considerable length.  This has been the case since the mid-80s, when the pieces were not credited at all.  It was about ten years after Locus began this form of "interview" that the author began to be credited.  I'm only recording them as interviews because that's how they're listed in the table of contents, and promoted in ads, etc.  Otherwise I would have entered them as essays and there'd be no question that the "interviewee" was actually the author of the piece.  When I began entering the contents of Locus, I brought up this situation on the message boards here and we didn't seem to arrive at any consensus about how these pieces should be recorded.  As the person who has taken upon the task of indexing Locus's contents, I made a decision, perhaps unilaterally I admit, about how to enter these "interviews."  The basis for my decision was the ISFDB standard of recording credit as shown in the publication. When the interviews were not credited, I didn't credit them. When they began crediting the interviewee as the author of the pieces, I followed suit.  If the group thinks they should be handled differently, the records can be changed, not easily though. I've entered approximately 250 such pieces.  There's another 15 years of Locus to be entered (15 years x 12 issues per year x 2 pieces per issue = 360 pieces). Mhhutchins 14:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see! I never followed Locus very closely (although I do have a very large and very heavy box full of them sitting somewhere), so I didn't realize that was the convention they have been using. No worries! Ahasuerus 16:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

First Channel, Jean Lorrah & Jacqueline Lichtenberg
Can you please check the price on your verified copy of ""? I have what appears to be the same edition, but my copy has a price of $10.00 on the jacket flap, while you have a price of $10.95. All other data on my copy appears to be identical to the verified copy, including the claim to be a First Edition. So, of course, the question is whether that price is a typo, or whether we really have two different "first editions". Chavey 04:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * My copy has a publisher printed sticker over the price as it was originally printed on the upper right corner of the dustjacket's front flap. I didn't know if there had been a misprint, and the publisher was correcting the price, so I entered the stickered price in the ISFDB record.  I just checked Locus #230 which gives $10.00 as the price, as does the Library of Congress catalog record.  I'm thinking now my copy may have been warehoused at the point that the publisher decided to increase the price, even though the book itself is still one of the first edition print-run copies.  I'll correct the record and give the facts about my copy in the notes, which will allow you to do another primary verification of the same record. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mhhutchins 14:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, does your copy look like a sticker may have been removed from the dustjacket's flap? Mhhutchins 14:51, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No, no evidence of such. I felt under the Brodart protective cover, and there's no feel of any sort of residue, and no visual impression of such. Chavey 18:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Interzone 134
Made some additions to IZ 134 and dropped the 134 from the title to make it congruent with the other ones from the magazine. I hope that's okay. I think there are two more items to change: First, I'm quite sure that the interview with Mary Doria Russell was conducted by Anne Gay. Second (of which I'm not so sure) the photocollage by Paul Brazier on p.18 would be better interiorart instead of essay, or is the standard otherwise? Stonecreek 14:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Issues of Interzone are currently being amended by another editor (Hauck) who is adding the number to the title. (See this issue grid to see his progress.] Because the number is prominently featured on the cover of each issue, I agree with his decision to include the number in the issue's title.
 * 2) The Russell interview is clearly credited to both Nicholls and Gay on the first page of the piece. Is there any evidence that this may be an error?
 * 3) There is no established standard about such pieces like the photocollage should be handled. I made it into an essay because it's listed in the table of contents.  Also, the piece is only titled on the contents page.  Ordinarily, I do not record photographs as no standard has been established.
 * 4) Another issue: adding the subject of the essay in the piece's title. I'm personally opposed to this practice.  Such information can be added in the note field, but by the present standards would not be added to the record's title field.


 * Perhaps you and Hauck can work together to establish a set of entry standards for this title. Mhhutchins 15:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note that there needs to be a comma after "Interzone" for the number to appear in the grid. BLongley 16:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * That's a software display issue. Not a data entry issue. Either way, Hauck seems to have created a standard that other editors should either follow or discuss with him if they disagree. Mhhutchins 20:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * My apologies if that looked like a criticism of your work. Yes, we can probably improve the software, but in the meantime we can work around it. I should probably spend some time away from editing and moderating and see how the software improvements are going - that might be fixable. Or spend some time on "Help" improvements (Wiki stuff is not my strongest point though.) Just communicating a bit more might be a good idea for me - I haven't won the lottery yet so will need to become a more-human-like creature again if I want future employment. (I'd prefer to be paid for this, but I've not found a sponsor yet.) BLongley 00:30, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No, I didn't take the statement to be critical, but just wanted to point out that the software's limitation was the lesser of the issues here. And let me know when you've found that patron.  I hear Emperor Joseph II has an opening for a court data entry clerk. Mhhutchins 00:44, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed, I will discuss the IZ topic with Hauck and change the interviewer from Gray to Gay (clearly a typo), or will you do that, since you are still holding the edit? What's nice about adding the subject to a title is that you can directly decide if it's interesting, although I can understand your position. Would you like to be involved in this discussion under the IZ banner? Thanks, Stonecreek 08:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it should be presented to the entire group on the Rules and Standards page, as it appears to touch on a greater subject than IZ alone. I've accepted the submission, changed "Gray" to "Gay", and placed the number back in the title. The subject in the titles I left intact, pending the group discussion. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:44, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

another gutter code uncovered
I noticed this submission identifies gutter code "M36" and a "First Edition" statement for, and the existing notes for that pub cite an "M44" code and a Locus claim of 1982-09-00 for the publication date. I see it's listed as an April, 1983 selection and a known reprint code of "N42" in Publisher:SFBC_1980-1984, with no original gutter code. I didn't touch anything -- I wasn't sure what should be done with regard to the date on the pub entry itself (plus Willem is the primary verifier on it anyway), and I didn't know if a September printing's not being a selection until more than 1/2 a year later would be normal or might indicate a problem (or a missing previous appearance as a selection). --MartyD 02:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Back in those days, it may have taken up to a year before a title would be offered as a book club selection, even if Doubleday was the publisher of the trade edition. (These days they're almost simultaneous.) Keep in mind that the book club printing would have a different gutter code.  Doubleday used gutter codes for all of their printings, not just their book club printings, from mid-1958 to mid-1987.  The first book club printing of Foundation's Edge may have even been offered to one of Doubleday's "prestige" clubs (e.g. The Literary Guild) before it became a selection for the SFBC in April 1983. It could have a gutter code anywhere from "M50" through "N10".
 * Here's another example of a Doubleday title that had both trade and book club printings: PKD's A Scanner Darkly was published in January 1977 (printed in the third week of December 1976) with a gutter code "G51". It was a book club selection for April 1977, with the gutter code "H05" in the first BC printing during the last week of January 1977.  The trade edition was printed again with gutter code "H13" (printed in the last week of March 1977.)
 * To summarize, Markwood's changes to the trade printing would have no effect on what's recorded on the title's listing on the SFBC pages. But it would affect Willem's primary verification. He needs to check it out before anyone approves the submission.  Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Duh. I guess it would have helped if I had noticed it wasn't SFBC.  Don't mind me.  --MartyD 10:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Amazing how fast things go sometimes. I bought (and edited) the book yesterday and already my questions are answered. I cloned the first printing, moved my verification and notes, and approved (and edited) Markwood's submission. Results are here and here. I didn't notify you yesterday because it wasn't a book club edition. Thanks, --Willem H. 11:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

New Dimensions 12
I'm adding a content item to your verified book, ed. by Marta Randall and Robert Silverberg. This is to add a 2-page interior art drawing, which is listed in the table of contents, and credited on the copyright page. Chavey 06:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Submission approved. Thanks for adding it. I'd overlooked it because back then we weren't adding interiorart credits. Mhhutchins 16:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)