User talk:Mvhetzel

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to the ISFDB Wiki! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Help pages
 * Help:Getting Started
 * What the ISFDB Wiki is for
 * ISFDB FAQ
 * Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.
 * Wiki Conventions - How things are usually done on this wiki.
 * Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki

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

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

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Mhhutchins 16:52, 23 November 2011  (UTC)

Lovecraft's Supernatural Horror in Literature
I'm holding your submission to add a new edition of this title. I believe it's the same as this record which shows the book was published as by "Howard Phillips Lovecraft". Can you confirm that your copy is the same as this record? You can respond here on your user talk page. Click on the [edit] link to the right of this message, write your response in the dialogue that opens, end your message with four tildes (~) which will sign and date it, and then click "Save page". Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Correct -- I did not see an entry for the Dover edition under the title (only the 1945 ed), thus tried to enter it as a new publication. Thank you for tying the two together so as to be available uniformly.  I have verified the newly added Dover addition. Mvhetzel 10:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing the Dover printing to my attention, which made me see that it had not been varianted to the original title. Mhhutchins 16:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Keith Laumer's story The Secret
A question: Laumer's story is shown as present in two titles (correctly). What is not indicated is that they are vastly different VERSIONS of the story. Neither is specifically mentioned or dated in the "previously published" section facing the TP, but the version in Retief: Diplomat at Arms is nearly incomprehensible -- to me, characteristic of later Laumer, whereas the version in The Return of Retief is MUCH more intelligible -- more nearly earlier Laumer (though neither version is his best work). Whole paragraphs and pages are changed, deleted, or added between versions -- nearly every other page is different. Both titles are Baen publications, and Diplomat at Arms is LATER, which I would think would indicate the revision -- but to make it much worse??? The question: should this major variation be indicated somehow? I don't know how to figure out respective dates for the versions, or indicate such in editing. Mvhetzel 11:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments! I'll bring this topic to the attention of two of the primary verifiers, who happen to have both the two editions. They'll probably shed some light into this. You can always post questions like this on the page for verification requests. Stonecreek 13:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I would probably never have noticed the difference. The best way to make it clear, is to add a note to the title record explaining the difference between the two versions. Do you want to try this?
 * One other thing, the Timescape edition of Retief": Diplomat at Arms was published in 1982, before The Return of Retief (1984), so it's possible Laumer received some comments on the first version and decided to rewrite it. The edition of The Return of Retief I own doesn't mention anything about this (or the previous publication), only that it's a "bonus Retief novelette". Thanks again, --Willem H. 14:32, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I had not noticed the earlier printing of the Timescape edition, good point. I did think of simply adding a note to the title as you suggest, but had previously noticed several publications of revised titles with notations like (revised) or (rev 1982) appended to the title (such as Sheffield's Transvergence  and Laumer's Knight of Delusions  so wasn't sure if there was a preferred method of making such differences clear.  One concern with simply adding a note to the title: I only have the two editions I mentioned -- wouldn't this method imply that the differences absolutely apply to all publications with those titles?  Although this is almost certainly true, I cannot verify it. If you feel the simple note on the title record is adequate, I would be happy to make such a note. Mvhetzel 15:10, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Since I have one of the Timescape editions, and you have the Baen, I think it's safe to assume all editions of Retief": Diplomat at Arms have the first version of the story. I'm not completely sure, but I think we use the "(revised)" notation when it's noted in the publication itself. If the difference between the versions is too great, they are treated as two different stories, but I don't think that's the case here. If you think otherwise, we might ask Bill (Bluesman) for his opinion. I think a note should be enough. --Willem H. 15:56, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * This makes sense to me. I have added a short note to the title record as you suggested, which I hope is adequate.  Thank you for your prompt feedback.  Mvhetzel 18:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Pulled out and read the two 'versions' and they are at least 95% identical, if not a higher percentage. I did not notice any 'inconsistencies' that were explained in the later version. I thought the story better in the first version. But that's just an opinion. Unfortunately that's how the current note reads, as an opinion. As a distinctly bibliographic site personal opinions are best kept to individual record notes [if there] rather than Title notes. A simple statement that two versions of a story exist is quite sufficient; it's up to the reader to determine what the extent of the differences are. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I see your point. I defer to your greater experience, and have modified the note to remove the opinion, leaving (I think) a simple factual statement of difference.  Mvhetzel 02:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Use of "Essay"
Hi, and a belated welcome. To answer your question from the moderator notes in your submission, yes, ESSAY is the right thing to use for any non-book-length, non-poem non-fiction, including lists. So what you submitted looked good to me. You could consider adding "(Lovecraft's Library)" to most of them, as the titles are very general, to disambiguate them from other such entries Joshi might have made in other books. In fact, I encourage you to do so for Explanatory Notes -- to see why, do an Advanced Search for Titles (the top 3-field section) using Explanatory Notes as Title AND Joshi as Author. --MartyD 11:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Point well taken. Have submitted slight modifications per your suggestion (leaving the "Index: xxx" titles alone for now, but this too may need tweaking).  Thanks! Mvhetzel 15:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Time and the Gods
The submission to update this record to add the contents had to be rejected. If it had been accepted, you would have had to merge all of the content records with those that are already in the database. It is better to find another pub that has the same (or close to the same) content records, and using the Import function (under the Editing Tools menu), you can copy those contents into another record, and avoid having to type in each of the records and then merging each of them with the database's matching record. Using the import function also carries over all series data of the original records. (This is the record that I used to import the contents from.) I've taken the remaining information from your submission and added it manually to the record (the new notes and the interiorart records.) You asked a lot of questions in the "Note to Moderator" field, which is not the correct place to ask them. This field is used only to give the moderator additional information to help in the decision to accept the submission. The data in this field does not become a visible part of the record. Any questions about submissions to update or add records should be asked at the Help desk before making the submission, which will save you much time and effort.

Now to the questions you asked. First, we don't create separate content records for a list of illustrations, as you suspected, just as we don't create records for a table of contents or an index. Second, about page count, the pages of interior art which are not numbered should be added to the page count field using brackets (look at the record to see how I did it). You also see that I gave the page number of the facing page for each illustration. Using "facing 20" (for example) in the page number field will cause all of the illustrations to be listed before any page-numbered content record. The method I used orders them along with the stories (and I added a note to indicate this, based on the data you provided in your submission.)

Next a question for you: on which page does the frontispiece (The Opulence of Yahn) appear. You gave "frontispiece" in the page number field, but it has to be a number, even if that number is roman. Is it on one of the twelve (xii) roman-numeraled pages?

Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 05:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, one more question: can you recheck the number of roman-numeraled pages. According to most OCLC records there's only eight (viii) pages. Thanks. Mhhutchins 05:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * And thank you for so politely handling my beginning efforts! I had actually thought of cloning The Gutenberg entry, but realized that wasn't appropriate because of the inability to modify contents.  Import is new to me, but I see how it does the trick nicely.  Your addition to page count via +[20] handles the situation nicely, and I'll keep it in mind.  Using the facing page number, when noted as you did, is clear as well.  Specific answers to your questions: the frontispiece (assuming it to be an unnumbered plate like all the others) is FACING page iii, so presumably should be entered as page iii (this counts backwards from the very first numbered page vii (the ToC), which makes the title page number i.  So far as the number of roman-numeralled pages, I believe I have made another mistake: the LAST-NUMBERED page is page viii, but I was adding subsequent unnumbered pages before page 1, which apparently is not correct (they should be ignored, instead, even though they have content (the List of Illustrations, in this case)).  Based on this, I will submit a correction to the data later today.  I'll take some time and read the help in more depth before wasting any more moderator time. Thanks again! Mvhetzel 16:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the quick response. I'm glad to see that all this nitpicking doesn't put you off editing the database.  There is a pretty steep learning curve in your first few months, but eventually all of these little things will become more clear and second nature when you're updating or adding records.  Just stick around and you'll be fine.  We need all the help we can get and it's enthusiastic new editors like you that keep the rest of us going, or rather, keeps me going. This How to... page will lead you almost everything you'll need to know about editing the ISFDB. But there will be things you'll learn by simply doing, and occasionally making mistakes (and learning from them, just like we all did!) Thanks again. Mhhutchins 18:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Fungi from Yuggoth And Other Poems
I replaced the general interior art title in Fungi from Yuggoth And Other Poems with individual titles for each drawing. I considered using the line of the poem appearing in the caption for the title, but decided to use the title of the poem they illustrate per this help item. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 01:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I nearly forgot I also added the subtitle to "The Poe-et's Nightmare: A Fable" and removed the quotation marks from "Drinking Song from the Tomb" which was listed as Drinking Song from "The Tomb". Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 01:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

The Coils of Time
Re: The Coils of Time

Adding pricing info to notes found on back of book.--Astromath 14:21, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Dunsany's Gods, Men and Ghosts
Expanded the notes for Dunsany's Gods, Men and Ghosts. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 02:54, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The Charwoman's Shadow
Have replaced Amazon link with a scan of my verified copy in The Charwoman's Shadow http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?258117 Prof beard 12:21, 16 December 2013 (UTC)