User talk:Dominick Grace

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 10:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Merging and Variants
Hi, and welcome. I found your submission that proposes to merge Rogue's Gambit with Monkey Wrench. When two works are the same but are credited differently (different title and/or different form of the author's name), we use a "variant" instead of merging them. A merge deletes all but one of the titles being merged, essentially saying "all of the publications listed under this title used this exact title and author credit". A variant instead expresses "also appeared with this other title and/or author credit", linking the two but leaving each intact. Here, where the titles are clearly different, a variant is needed instead of a merge.

The one consideration to give a variant is which of the two titles should be "canonical", which is to say the main form of the title. Usually we go with the most commonly used title (which may not be the title given to the work's first publication). Here, it's a little tough to tell because each has only been used once, but I found that Locus1 treats "Rogue's Gambit" as the canonical title and "Monkey Wrench" as a variant, so we may as well follow that precedent.

Making a variant is a little more work than merging, but not much. If you find both titles (as you did), you need to pick the one that will be "canonical" -- we also call this the "parent" -- and find its ID. For example, if you visit "Rogue's Gambit" above, or just hover your mouse pointer over the link, you will see its URL is '' http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi? 54242''. That number at the end is the ID. Once you have that, you would go to "Monkey Wrench" and pick "Make This Title a Variant Title or Pseudonymous Work" from the choices at the left. In the form that comes up, enter the 54242 as the "Parent #" and submit. As is the case with all other submissions, this is moderated, so it's quite safe to give it a try.

Would you like to try it? Reply here by editing this section. Indent your response by putting a colon (":") at the front of the line. I've left your merge submission on hold as a reminder, but you should cancel it when you submit the variant. If you'd rather I made the variant for you, I'm happy to do that (and I can reject the merge submission) -- just let me know. If I don't hear from you I will eventually do that. We definitely want to record the fact that these two titles are related. Thanks, and thank you for contributing. --MartyD 11:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I have gone ahead and done this. I rejected the merge and made "Monkey Wrench" a variant of "Rogue's Gambit" instead.  See here.  If you look in a publication that uses "Monkey Wrench" (for example,, you'll see it highlighted as a variant.  --MartyD 10:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'd say that "Monkey Wrench" should be the canonical title and "Rogue's Gambit" the variant, however. "Rogue's Gambit" was the editorially-imposed title because, apparently, another recent story by a different had been called "Monkey Wrench." Gotlieb restored her preferred title when she put the story in the collection. (Source: Gotlieb's manuscript for the story in the Merril Collection and her hand-written note explaining the dual titles.)


 * Fair enough. We generally make whatever title is more widely known the canonical one.  Here, where neither is widely used, seems appropriate to go with her preference.  I reversed them.  This would be good information to add in the notes for the title.  --MartyD 01:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Next time I'm at the Merril, I'll check the MS again, transcribe Gotlieb's exact comment, and post it to the notes.

"Sunday's Child" and "Saturday's Child"
Perhaps along the same lines as the submission above.... I have on hold your submission that would change "Saturday's Child" to "Sunday's Child" in. What is your source of information for the anthology's contents? You should mention your information source in the "notes to the moderator" to save a round of questions. In this case, I can't find the anthology's contents listed online, but I did find the editor refers to the story as "Saturday's Child", corroborating the current listing. But are you perhaps trying to indicate that Saturday's Child, as titled in this anthology, is actually the same work as Sunday's Child? If so, we would use a variant, as I described in the previous entry; how do you know they are the same work? Thanks. --MartyD 11:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, and thanks. My source is a physical copy of the book, which I sought out because it had a Gotlieb story in it I thought I hadn not read before. However, the table of contents of Fall and Rise list the story as "Sunday's Child," and I checked the story, as well; it is indeed the same stroy.


 * Ok, thanks. Sorry about the delay.  Is the title on the story's title page (which is what we go by) "Saturday's Child" or "Sunday's Child?" --MartyD 01:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The correct title is Sunday's Child; if Khan lists it as "Saturday's Child" in his blog, that is perhaps the source of the error in the bibliography here. Perhaps he relied on memory rather than checking the book, which was published two years prior to the blog entry. However, I have held the book in my hands, looked at the table of contents, and it is listed there as "Sunday's Child." I don't recall the title page for the story, but I did look at the story itself, and it is "Sunday's Child." Since I can't confirm definitively that the story's actual title page in the book gets it right, perhaps list it as a variant title for Sunday's Child? It is without doubt the same story.


 * In the absence of a source for the current information and any verifier or authoritative secondary source, your having seen the TOC is still better than what's there, so I will accept your change. Sorry about the 3rd degree.... It is infrequent, but not exactly rare, for a TOC to list something different from a story's title page, which is why I asked.  Thanks.  --MartyD 00:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)