User talk:Bluesman/Archive7

Anthology vs Omnibus
Bill – I am completely confused by the difference between Omnibus and Anthology. I put in a change on two listings “Storms of Victory” - http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2963  &  “On Wings of Magic” - http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2965 both by Andre Norton-  which you rejected and referred me to the rules page. Upon reading said rules, I am wondering why a rejection is warranted. On the Help:Screen:NewPub page it clearly states the an Omnibus – “contains multiple works that have previously been published independently”. Clearly neither book contains works that have been previously published; therefore they should NOT qualify as an Omnibus. However if there is something that I am not understanding then the following title “Flight of Vengence” - http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2964 needs to be changed from an Anthology to an Omnibus for like it’s two mates in the “Witch World: The Turning” series it consists of two short novels not previously published. Thank You - Jay --Lotsawatts 19:31, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Where Were You Last Pluterday?
Regarding your verified. You wrote at User_talk:Willem_H.
 * My UQ1051 has a number line, and is a Canadian printing and was published in April 1973.

Is your verified Pluterday the UQ1051 you are referencing here? If so, we should update the publication record to note it's Canadian. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:31, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Pillars of Pentegarn cover
I just tried to upload a cover image and the thumbnail seems to be broken. Here's the isfdb link: http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Image:PLLRSFPNTG1982.jpg and here's where I found the image:  Maybe you could help. Thx. --Astromath 13:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * From your user page, click on Preferences under My Pages, choose Files from the new list of links, then in the two drop-down menus select the largest sizes and save. Right now the default limits are in place for the thumbnail display/size. You did upload the image, it's in the log. A little on the large side but the file size is OK. On the Source line you had added the link to the image which isn't necessary, as this causes the image to display twice. The line is just for the name of the person who did the upload and is automatic. Hope this helps. ~Bill, --Bluesman 13:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello Bill:

I do have several questions, and haven't been able to find an answer to them with a fair bit of looking. I came to ISFDB looking for information on John Wyndham for a long article/even a book that I'm putting together on him and his brother, who was also an author. Got caught up in the Wiki side of the thing, and then poked around a bit. Found my name but nothing listed that I've written, so:
 * 1) I have written several dozen reviews over time in various publications of SF. I note that there are several reviews of many books I had a quick look at, but they seem hardly exhaustive. Is there inclusion criteria for reviews that I can't find, or is it simply that nobody has noticed in the SF DB world that there have been reviews in non-genre publications? I have many of the reviews/articles, and might be able to enter them, but don't want to be putting my stuff here if that is self-promotion and frowned on. That wasn't why I came here.
 * 2) How would one enter a review? There doesn't seem to be a drop-down that labels something "review," although there are reviews on many lists - Forest Ackerman, for instance, reviewed many books, and for many titles, there are reviews listed. Do they come out of the publication listings somehow?
 * 3) There's at least one SF cover that was based on a review of mine in Quill and Quire, a monthly book magazine. It could be scanned and uploaded, if that's within the bounds of the database? It seems that it ought to be.
 * 4) I also have many older magazines, some likely rare enough, such as early copies of On Spec, and at the very least I could upload a cover scan and fish out some of the unlisted bibliographic information, or verify the information already here.
 * 5) Finally, there's a lot of information that I was looking for on Vivian Beynon Harris, but there's nothing here at all about him. This may be/probably is appropriate, but his contribution to the writing of John Wyndham (his brother) was considerable. I am wondering about that as a subject.

Again, thanks for the welcome. I spend a lot of time with SF and Fantasy, so will be able to add a few things here and there, once I get to know how things work. I haven't spent a lot of time doing Wiki-stuff elsewhere, but it seems pretty useful in the SF area.

Regards, John

Areopagiticus 00:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Have to admit that I know practically nothing about reviews beyond coming across them in individual publications. When you open up any publication record in an Edit page, the reviews section is below the contents area at the bottom of the page. That's really my only 'contact' with them. One of the other Moderators here has lots of experience with them, and can probably help you out. He's on British time though, so probably not available until tomorrow. I'll drop a note on his talk page to read this post. I'm sure he can help. He may answer on your talk page to keep the discussion in one place, as other Mods/editors may want to chime in as well. Magazines themselves are treated somewhat differently than books, again an area I'm not too up on, having entered a very small number of them. As for images, that's easy to do, see [here] for the process. There's a link "Upload [new] cover scan" that shows with every publication record and it's almost automatic, just as easy as attaching a picture to an e-mail. There are some restrictions, though. We try to keep the file size below 150kb [no chance of images being pirated that way] and there is a finite list, see [here], of external sites that we can, at the moment, link directly to. Images uploaded from your computer [regardless of original source] are fine. The only ones we won't do this way are author images as they aren't always in the public domain and we do have to be careful about copyrights. ~Bill, --Bluesman 00:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I'll check back tomorrow and see if he has anything to add. As you say, I saw the reviews listed below the other items, but that was it. I'll also get out some of my old magazines over the next few days, see what is and is not here, and I can easily scan and upload any missing issues. ~John, Areopagiticus 01:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Re 1) I don't recall reviews of Genre titles in Non-Genre works having been discussed. But recently we did come up with a workaround for Genre Fiction in Non-Genre magazines: see here. I guess the same method could be used for notable reviews or reviewers. Personally I'd only bother if we didn't have a verified copy of the title - a review is then a nice confirmation of probable existence. BLongley 13:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Chad Hensley
Bill, I heard back from Chad and he has not changed his name. Please reject the updates submitted for that record. --Marc Kupper|talk 19:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The Chalk Giants
Hi Bill, can you take another look at the notes of this verified pub? The numbers on spine (0-345-03115-125) and copyright page (SBN 345-03115-2) don't match my copy of this title, and conflict with the given ISBN. Mine has 425-03115-125 on the spine and SBN 425-03115-2 on the copyright page. Could yours be a canadian printing? Thanks, --Willem H. 20:40, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The only thing Canadian about it is the set of eyes that quite frequently gets the Ballantine and Berkley prefixes mixed up! At least I got the field correct...! Fixed the notes. Good catch. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, saves me a cloning operation. --Willem H. 20:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Tor Doubles & Omnibus
I hope this is the right way to ask. In correcting my edit of Tiptree's Tor Doubles, you referred to the Help:Screen:NewPub page which describes the use of Omnibus. I had based my edit on the ISFDB_FAQ, where (under section 3.2) it says of Tor Doubles "You enter these in ISFDB as omnibuses." As such, it seems one of these pages has the wrong policy listed. It certainly seems odd that James Tiptree, Jr. is in three Tor Doubles: one of which is listed as an omnibus, and two of which are listed as anthologies. And that's especially odd since one of the "anthologies" contains a novella by Tiptree (Houston, Houston) that was published as an independent book. So, the policy seems somewhat confusing to me. [this note unsigned; editor Chavey]


 * Likewise to me. Have moved the discussion to [Rules and Standards]. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Ralph Williams
Hi,

Thanks for updating the Ralph Williams page with the additions I provided. First of all, the reason I originally put "(see letter)" in parenthesis at the end of the hyperlink was because the SF web page referred to is not totally devoted to Ralph Williams but has a letter from his son that provides a lot of info. about the author. You have to scroll down just a little to view the letter (it's on the left). Unfortunately, that prevented the hyperlink from working so I submitted removing that part and you already corrected it (you're quick :-). (Is there anywhere I can put a note about that web page on the ISFDB author page, or do you think it isn't necessary?) Secondly, the reason I put 1913/1914 for the year of Williams' birth is his son wrote that his father died in 1959 at the age of 45. If his father had already had his birthday at the time of his death, he was born in 1914. But, if he had not yet had his birthday, he would turn 46 that year and would have been born in 1913. I'm not sure which is correct, but if he was 45 in 1959 one of them is (hence 1913/1914). So, is it possible to put 1913/1914 for his birth year? Thanks for your help! Rob --Rob 17:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd have just left the (see letter) note, but the page isn't busy enough not to find it [I did read it so got what you intended], so works either way [as long as the archiving of that website is stable]. As for putting a note, I don't see any way to do that. It seems strange that we can add bibliographic notes to pubs but not to the author that wrote the book. As for the dates, I don't believe that the software will accept two in one field. I had to correct the ones you submitted [they have to have all the numbers: ie: 0000-00-00 or the software reverts it to 'unknown']. For now, until someone finds a source to confirm the birth year, I just picked the earlier one. Sometimes it's the best we can do with limited data and 'particular' software. --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think the people who design the software are able to prognosticate all of the issues that crop up later. You're right the letter will be easy to locate on that page as long as the page doesn't grow any larger (I wondered about that since it was a letters page--I'm hoping its size is fixed). I'm glad you picked a date (it's better than nothing) and even if it's not correct, it's very close. Thanks for answering my questions! Rob--Rob 23:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Forest for the trees! On each author's bibliography page there is a link under the section Other Bibliographies on the left titled Summary which leads to a Wiki page where you could enter the entire letter, with comments if needed. Since it's a Wiki page there's no Moderator to go through. Just keep it factual [and proof-read!!], and it should be just what you want! I had never actually checked that link before. We all learn new things here every day. --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds great! Unfortunately nothing is happening for me here when I click on that link. When I search for Ralph Williams his summary bibliography is the result of my search. Then, when I locate the "Other Bibliographies For This Author:" category on the left and click on "summary" directly underneath it, the same page I'm viewing reloads (I double checked to make sure I was logged in too.). Where is the wiki page? Rob --Rob 21:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried it on another author with the same result, so not sure what the heck happened before??? What I did was create a Wiki page which you will now see linked on his bibliography page under the website you put in before. And there is also the Biography page, also a wiki page, that is probably more suited for the data you want to enter. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I did submit some comments about the year of birth and a copy of the letter on that page. As always, I appreciate your help! Rob --Rob 14:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Swiftly
Hello, don't you think that the title of this should be changed to include _Stories that never were and might not be_ as it's also on title page ? Hervé Hauck 16:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I did pull this one out and it could go either way. I know sometimes the 'sub-title' has been left off if it's placed well away from the main title [more an explanation than an actual sub-title, as when libraries unfailingly add "A Novel" to titles]. Seems a very odd sub-title, too, as the stories do now exist in print, whatever the road to that state they may [or may not] have taken. I remember thinking about adding it at the time I entered the pub, but eventually felt the phrase more a descriptive than a part of the title. Should have mentioned it in the notes. I'd still have no problem accepting a change to the title, as it does technically meet the DB's guidelines. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The martians
As you're "on duty" at this time, is it possible for you to restore my sub for the content of this collection, I deleted it by mistake. Hervé Hauck 14:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Beyond my 'powers' I'm afraid. All we can do at this end is Accept or Reject. Once Accepted, the original submission is vapour! Can the contents be imported from another edition? --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll have tried :-(. Hauck 15:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Publication series
I see that you have put Ace D-516 in publication series Swordsman of Mars. Keep in mind that "publication series" are ways for publishers to group books that are not necessarily related, e.g. Ace Double, Tor Double, etc. Unlike regular series, which encompass multiple Title records, publication series cover multiple Publication records. I don't think Ace had a special "Swordsman of Mars" series, did it? Ahasuerus 04:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * My misunderstanding! I keyed on the "Series" and didn't even think about the "publication" part. I'll remove the two references. --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! :) Ahasuerus 17:58, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Many Colored Land or Many-Colored Land
Does the title page of this not give a hyphen in the title? Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * On all five of them!! Fixed. --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:34, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Edgar Fawcett
I found a unlisted science fiction short story by Edgar Fawcett [] at the following site:. Just click on page 154 which will come up as one of the choices. This is from the June 1892 issue of the magazine. My question is, how do you add shortfiction (that's not a choice under the "Add Data" section)?

Thanks!

Rob --Rob 01:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The only way to add shortfiction is to have a record of the publication it appears in. Can't be entered on its own. If the story is the only SF piece in the magazine, then that's all the contents you would list. I don't know if you've entered a magazine before, but the rules that apply to them are different than for books. And I am definitely not the one to tell you how the rules differ. I've entered virtually none, and probably won't change that any time soon. Best advice is to read all the Magazine Help and try it. Or ask one of the other Mods for help. Swfritter, Mhhutchins, Blongley come to mind. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks, Bill. Rob --Rob 03:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If you took my advice, the entry should be something like:

Title: Short Stories: a Magazine of Select Fiction, Volume 10 Publisher: The Current Literature Pub. Co. Date: 1892-06-00 Editor: Alfred Ludlow White


 * And have a content listing of:

Page: 152 Title: The Man From Mars Author: Edgar Fawcett


 * And Notes saying "Only known SF contents listed".
 * Of course, a proper magazine Mod will tell you how the Magazine title should be entered with proper date formatting and suchlike, and ask about bindings and things - but as the current guidelines are mostly for US pubs and I'm English, I don't conform - but I'd like the data. BLongley 00:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

In the Kingdom of the Beasts
Adjusted as the cover artist is Woodroffe, not Woodruffe. BLongley 21:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just trying to give back one of the missing 'u's... ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * No need, got plenty back here in England. It's that small country to the South of Canada that seems to have a shortage of them... ;-) BLongley

A Statement to Science Fiction Readers
Hi Bill, I'm verifying DAW #3, and I'm running into a small problem with the Wollheim essay on page 1. I think (at least it sounds reasonable to me) that this essay was published in the first batch (#1-4) of DAW books (it's not in #5 or 6). Since you're the one with most of these pubs, you can check this (if you can dig them out). I have first printings of #3 and 4, so of those I'm certain. My third printing of #1 does not have the essay. Can you check the following:
 * 1. Spell of the Witch World gives the author as Wolheim with one "l", I think it should be Wollheim. (Wolheim with one "l" is also credited for this. (corrected now, but please check) Can this be Harry's double (or single) vision :-)?
 * Signed D.A.W.
 * 2. The Mind Behind the Eye doesn't mention the essay. Is it there?
 * Same Essay, also signed D.A.W.
 * 3. The Probability Man has it right I think (the essay as signed as D.A.W., but obviously written by Wollheim)
 * Same essay in CDN edition, signed D.A.W.
 * 4. The Book of van Vogt has the essay as by D.A.W. Should be Wollheim i.m.o. The third printing also thinks it has the essay, but I doubt that. Probably a cloning effect.
 * Just have the first printing [US] and it has the same essay signed D.A.W.
 * I think all essays are identical and should be merged under one title and author. Does any of this make sense? Thanks, --Willem H. 20:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfect. --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Titles added, corrected and merged (as by Donald A. Wollheim). Result is here. Thanks, --Willem H. 06:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Cover artist for "The Time Masters"
You already identified Faragasso as artist for this pub. Jane Frank agrees, so I added the artist and a note, but left your notes as they were. Thanks, --Willem H. 10:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Time:X
I added the author's introduction and corrected the number of pages for your verified Time:X. Thanks, --Willem H. 14:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

DAW Collectors' Number
I was wondering why you asked about the "DAW Collectors' Number" at User talk:Hauck? --Marc Kupper|talk 00:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Trying to pinpoint when DAW started calling the number by that name. So far none up to and including 583 use the name. 585 does use it on the copyright page, and, nearly every edition since has used the designation, though sometimes only in the hardcovers of the newer DAW publications. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Cool. Don Erikson has a copy of  which is #584. I'm confused by "nearly every edition" and "sometimes only". Can you give examples of publications after #584 that did not state the DAW Book number on the copyright page? I could see this happening on reprints of earlier titles though I found "DAW Book Collectors No. 36" on a 16th printing of Darkover Landfall which meant they updated the copyright page for some reprints.


 * I don't know if you care about variants to the wording. A spot check finds.
 * "DAW Book Collectors' Number 600" (1st printing)
 * "DAW Collectors' Book No. 642" (1st printing)
 * "DAW Book Collectors No. 646." (4th printing and this may not be the wording used in the 1st printing)
 * "DAW Collectors Book No. 658" (1st printing)
 * DAW called them "logo numbers" in the catalogs though I've never seen that term used in their publications.
 * The 1978 DAW catalog has "Numbers in parentheses next to order numbers are DAW logo numbers for collectors."
 * The 1983, 1986, 1988, and 1991 DAW catalogs all have this statement "The numbers in parentheses following the ISBN order numbers are DAW logo numbers for collectors only and should not be used for ordering." --Marc Kupper|talk 23:04, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I was referring to the usage in the pubs only. When I was trying to narrow it down I used to look in every DAW book I came across [new and used] and the odd one [have no recollection of which ones] didn't state "Collectors", even in much higher numbers than 600. Also, snippets of discussions and many edits [of books I don't have, so it could just be a datum un-noted, not necessarily not there]. Have been finding quite a few earlier, unverified records of DAWs that have been incorrectly calling the number "Collectors" when I know the term is not in the book itself. --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll add the "collectors" statement to the list of things I check in DAW publications. I have been capturing the "DAW Books are distributed by Penguin Putnam Inc." style line but did not think about the "collectors" line. I know what you mean by that the term is not stated in the books. I suspect most people call them DAW Book Collectors numbers and just use that to document the number without thinking about duplicating the formatting used on the copyright page. Part of the issue is that the ones with the new logo also say "DAW No. ###" and people just expand that out to include "collectors."  I just don't recall spotting a newish publication that did not have the "DAW Book Collectors No." line. One of my normal verification steps is I check the number stated on the front cover, inside front cover, and copyright page to make sure they match. Hence I normally look for the statement on the copyright page and would have noted had it not been there. --Marc Kupper|talk 08:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Guilty, as charged. I used the term even for pubs that aren't specifically designated as such.   Of course, I never come right out and say that it's stated in the pub that way.  Are there plans to place all DAW Books pubs into a publication series using this number? Might seem superfluous at first, but at least it would provide a list that could be arranged numerically. Mhhutchins 15:16, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Now that would be a huge series!!! Think they're up into the 1600s by now? I hadn't even considered making such a series, when it really encompasses all of DAW's first-printing editions, and from Mark's comments above even much later printings of early editions. Daunting! But then, so was the SFBC "series". --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That publisher's series is already done and is available at Publisher:DAW/Titles though I need to update the wiki plus the main page as DAW is up to #1522. In the early years the number was only on the first printing but DAW has been putting it on all printings since 1984.


 * While I had not considered the DAW title numbers for a publisher series I have thought about making publisher series based on the genre designation DAW puts on the spine. For many years the spines have had the logo as one of "Science Fiction DAW" or "Fantasy DAW" plus a handful of others such as "25 Years", "30 Years", Horror, "TV Tie-in", and sometimes just "DAW". If I really wanted to get picky DAW started the genre thing their logo over "DAW" over "Fantasy" or "Science Fiction".  Later they changed to styling the thing as a pyramid that has the DAW logo over "Fantasy" over DAW.


 * I've held off on doing these genre series as I was waiting for someone to add the publisher series fields to the help as I'm not sure how they should be used. I can see using it where a publisher designates a "series" by name, and even better if they number it like the Tor doubles. Is "Doubleday Science Fiction" a publisher series? --Marc Kupper|talk 03:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The Anarchistic Colossus
About this pub here you state "◦"First Ace printing: April 1977" (it's also in Currey), as this line is not on my copy, can you please verify it and tell me where this is written in the book ?.


 * The statement is on the copyright page about the middle. If yours does not have the statement, look for a number line at the bottom of the copyright page. If there is one it will end in some number other than '1'. I'm assuming all the other data match? [price, ACE #, etc.] --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * A quick check on AbeBooks has what would be a second printing with number 02256-1. --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking. In this case : 1)No statement, 2) No printing line, 3) All other details match including the ISBN 0-441-02255-3 on spine so it's no the second printing you locate. Interesting as this edition is not on Ischi and not in the GCP Bibliography.Hauck 19:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Very interesting, indeed! Since Ace never did any Canadian printings, that's ruled out. Worth a second record, at any rate. One thing that might be different, other than the missing statement: there is no advertising in the back of the book in my copy. I recently corresponded with Isaac, and he's planning on updating the ICSHI website, and to going through ISFDB's Van Vogt bibliography to search for editions/printings he's missed in the past. Even plans expanding the foreign editions listings! I 'volunteered' any help he might want, hinting he just needed to get on here and ask and there'd be all sorts of closet Van Vogt fans willing to bombard him with data. What's the "GCP Bibliography"? --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * A multiple answer : No advertising on my copy / I did help Icshi with some of my data on AEVV / A "GCP Bibliography" is one of the Galactic Central series of bibliographies here where the AEVV one is not listed to some of which I modestly collaborated. Hauck 20:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw a note regarding your assistance on one of the Van Vogt records on ICSHI and mentioned to Isaac that you were editing here now. Priming him for the effort to come! ;-)  --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * We could do with some more GCP bibliographies - not just as entries, but USE them. I'm finding bibliographies as addendums to author interviews in Vector and places like that, and am using them as I find them. OK, not everyone wants to know that Christopher Priest helps write "autobiographies" but if they're "above the threshold" they're in... BLongley 22:14, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The Silkie
Got a reply from Zybahn about the variant ad. His copy would appear to be the one mentioned in the note on my verified copy. I think it might be best to just added a note to my copy about the variant ad and not create a new publication record. What do you think? Thanks.Kraang 04:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That will work. If Zybahn verifies then the note could have [verified - Primary X] attached so questions would go his way. Though, in re-checking the ad, the same two titles that are at the top of his copy's ad are in our copies ad, but about 2/3 down and with previous/earlier ACE #s: G-740 for the Saberhagen and G-753 for the Garner, which would definitely make his copy a later printing even if the rest of the book is the same. Would be so much easier if I could find a record of either of the later numbers, but no luck so far. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Maturin
Thanks for that. If you have time, there are a couple related issues I'd appreciate some help with. First, some checking of various "search inside the book" features has confirmed my suspicion that "The Parricide's Tale" is actually an excerpt from Maturin's novel Melmoth the Wanderer. I assume this should be indicated somewhere, but I don't know precisely how to handle it for a piece with multiple variants. Second, an excerpt published under the name Robert Maturin is linked to the canonical name, but the page for Robert Maturin doesn't indicate that that name is a pseudonym. It should, right? Thanks again, BrendanMoody 17:40, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Created the pseudonym. As for the story being an extract, I think that should probably go in the title notes for the story. It does have it's own title, unlike the other excerpt. Is/was it a chapter from the novel? --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a section of Chapter IX, but not the full chapter. BrendanMoody 18:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * So the title is new to the piece with the 1946 printing. Can't/shouldn't really make it a variant of Chapter IX. Just note the relationship in the title notes of the story. I don't see any other, non-messy, way of doing this. --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Cover credit for How Much for Just the Planet?
According to this website, Enric is the cover artist of this pub. I'm not sure how reliable it is, but it does look like his work. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Same art is used for the book club edition. Mhhutchins 18:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Cover credit for Snow Queen
There appears to be a signature in the lower right of your Snow Queen cover by Joan Vinge. The art looks like Peter Andrew Jones work and the signature, which I cannot enlarge very well, looks like his "Paj" and year signature. Sfbooks52 14:00, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Are you sure you mean Snow Queen? I only have the paperback and there is definitely no signature on the bottom right. There is a 'glyph' of sorts on the bottom left, but mostly cut off. The hardcover has already been verified as being by the Dillons and the paperback has the same cover [cropped slightly]. Without a link I'm not sure which cover you mean. --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You submitted a cover for the Orbit edition of Snow Queen by Joan D. Vinge on 8-7-10. The image is THSNWQNNPH1981.jpg. The link does not show the cover, only if you go to the recently uploaded scans section. What appears to be a signature is by the woman's leg. Hope this helps. Sfbooks52 15:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes and no. :-) Though I uploaded the image, I don't have that edition. If I find a good image on a site we don't have permission for a direct link, then the only option is to download to my computer, then upload to the DB. So, I can't check the cover for the signature any better than you can. Aside: even if it's the image that's of concern, a link to the pub it belongs to would still bring it up. Saves me digging through boxes for the wrong book! --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:15, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. I will try to google it and get a better copy. This love of cover art is a double-edged sword. The more I look for art of particular artists, the more artists I find, thus the more I look. Will it ever end. Hopefully, not :) Sfbooks52 17:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * End?¿?¿ Nope.... we are all doomed...  ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

The Easton Press edition of The Snow Queen
I saw that you'd placed a cover image for the record of my verified copy of this title and the note on my verifications page. You chose the right cover, as mine has the border and matching title font on the hub. I saw the other one on abebooks and have asked the dealer to confirm that his is part of the "Masterpieces of Science Fiction" series. None of Easton's titles in this series state First Edition, or First Printing, but I suspect that they reprinted the book in another series. Hopefully, the abebooks.com dealer will respond to my inquiry. I haven't had much luck in that area lately. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sort of remembered a comment you had made about another Easton pub turning out not to be a first edition, so left the note. --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

"Suppliant" or "Supplicant"?
The Sheckley story is titled "Suppliant" in the BCE. Is it correctly titled in this paperback edition? Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Title is "Suppliant", so the contents record is incorrect.


 * Can you check this printing also? Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * "Supplicant" in this one, Acknowledgements/TOC and Title page. With the number of pubs to check I'll leave the sorting to you! :-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Pilgrimage to Earth
Hi Bill, this Sheckley collection has two stories as by Finn O'Donnevan. The pseudonym isn't mentioned in the pub, so I would like to change the author credit to Robert Sheckley. Any objections? Thanks, --Willem H. 18:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * None at all! Another Contento leftover, probably. Recovered from the Irish, yet? ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. I find 'em, I zap 'em. Recovered, yes I think. Still miss my daily pint(s) of Guinnes though... --Willem H. 18:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Nectar of the Gods! Quicker than eating, too.....  ‡-))  --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Amen! --Willem H. 18:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

"Autumn Afternoon" in Bradbury's One More for the Road
I'm trying to place Bradbury's Green Town stories into a series, and discovered through a Google Books search that the story "Autumn Afternoon" in this collection was written circa 1947, and was originally intended for the Green Town novel that eventually became Dandelion Wine. Is there anything in the story which corroborates that it should be part of the Green Town series? Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * What would make it a Green Town story? It's very short, read it in a couple of minutes but don't know what to look for. There are only a few stories not original to this collection and only one [Time Intervening] that was written before 1966. [1947 so maybe that's the one? Original title was Interim]. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:45, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I just saw that the story was reprinted in a collection of Green Town stories titled Summer Morning, Summer Night, so I'm going to place it into the series. There's nothing binding the stories except for their setting: a small town in Illinois circa 1930s. Mhhutchins 02:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's nonetheless original to this collection, even though it was written in the late 40s. Mhhutchins 02:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No mention of a town or state. An aunt who cleans out an attic and comes across some old clippings. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:55, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Universe Maker / The World of Null-A
Hi Bill, this Ace Double has one of the titles as "Universe Maker". On the title page however, it's "The Universe Maker", so according to our rules that should be the title. Do you have a problem with me changing it? Thanks, --Willem H. 19:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope [this time....] and of course it was at the bottom of the box....! ;-)  --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Done, result is here. You keep books in boxes? No time to build enough bookcases? :-) --Willem H. 20:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No room left! There is a storage room that will become the permanent library, once I change the slope of the roof above. A month-long project, at least, and we've had so much rain I'm loathe to start and get caught with an open roof amid a monsoon. Possibly in late fall. It will be about four times the size of what I have now, but much more space-usable. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Invited here by Willem H. and I entirely concur. Happily my doubles are on a shelf.  The gaming tie-in novels are the only ones still relegated to boxes!  Good catch. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Giants Unleashed - del introduction/added titled essay
Afternoon! This. . I deleted the "Introduction" in contents and added the titled essay as given on essay title page. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

England Swings SF - Changed page number of story
Afternoon! This. . I changed the start page of "Plan for the Assassination of Jacqueline Kennedy" to page 397, after matching my copy to your ver. Do NOT understand it though. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's British, one sometimes ought NOT to understand... ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The Gardens of Delight
Hi Bill, the cover art for this pub was in the database as by "Hieronymous Bosch" (no credit in the pub, as stated in the notes). I changed that to "Hieronymus Bosch". Thanks, --Willem H. 14:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, someone who knows how the first name was spelled! Thought I'd have to go digging for a Pearls Before Swine album cover..... hmmm, I should anyway! Thanks. --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Gregory Bateson's Mind and Nature
Hi, it's my understanding that Bateson's book is nonfiction. Should the excerpt here be an essay vs shortfiction? Cheers Jonschaper 05:26, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Quite correct and corrected! --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The Future Is Now
Corrected the publication date for The Future Is Now from Locus #104 (January 14, 1972). --Willem H. 17:08, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Danke! --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

SFBC edition of Sturgeon's Case and the Dreamer
Can you see if the title page matches the cover of this edition? All the paperback reprints give the title as Case and the Dreamer and Other Stories. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * No ...and Other Stories anywhere. --~ Bill, Bluesman 03:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for checking. I've merged the three paperbacks records under one variant title record. Mhhutchins 05:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Vonnegut's God Bless You, Dr. Kervorkian
Is the introduction to this book shortfiction? Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Indeed, it is. --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The Secret of the Martian Moons
Found another puzzling entry. I think I have a copy of this pub. Everything checks out, except the price. Mine is $0.50. There is an entry for this price here, but that should state it's the second printing. Can you check your copy, or is it buried so deep that would take months? It looks like the two editions are switched. Thanks, --Willem H. 14:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It was not common for most publishers to offer later printings at slightly reduced prices, but some of the smaller presses have done so [Tower comes to mind]. It's too bad the 50¢ record isn't verified. And it's not a CDN/US pricing difference as mine was printed in the US. There are no obvious signs of an overprint, the "BOOKS" under the Tempo logo and the 60¢ are the same font size. The list on the page before the title page goes to #T 30. No advertising in the back. The 50¢ price is more consistent with a '63 printing. Any suggestions? --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm as puzzled as you are. All details check out, so I cloned yours and added a note about your edition (see here. I'll add a coverscan one of these days. Thanks for checking. Cheers, --Willem H. 18:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Alan Kobayashi vs Kobayshi
Hi, you have verified two Star Trek publications which appear to have maps by the same artist under variant spellings of his last name (here and here). Could you check if one is in error? Cheers Jonschaper 02:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Credits in the books match the spellings in the records above. The DSN book has a single credit on the copyright page and is very likely the misspelt version. The maps themselves are not signed. In New Worlds there are multiple credits to Kobayashi. The situation pretty much demands a Variant/Pseudonym be created, though I dislike them when it's an obvious spelling error. --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Judith Merril's 9th Annual Best SF
You are the verifier for the of this book, so I'll ask you. It is listed as a hc from Simon & Schuster. I have a hc Simon & Schuster Book Club Edition. It has the same cover & same page count as pictured on the 1st edition, but has "Book Club Edition" on the jacket, and has no price listed. Is that a different publication? Also, it has a attribution that the "Jacket Design" is by Lawrence Ratzkin, but I don't know whether that's the cover artist as well. (For some mysterious reason, I originally posted this question in an archive page of yours; I have moved it from there to here.) Chavey 06:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There is a separate record for your copy of the title, although yours may be a later printing with a different gutter code. And  has several credits as the cover artist of other publications. Mhhutchins 17:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Michael! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Out of the Deeps
I added the afterword (About John Wyndham) to this verified pub, because it's quite interesting (about the birth of John Wyndham in 1949). I have the author as John Wyndham, but for some mysterious reason that doesn't feel right. Maybe it should be as by "John Wyndham Parkes Lucas Beynon Harris", or any combination of these names, or as "uncredited" since it's not signed (it is mostly written by the author though). Any suggestions? Oh, I also added the LCCN. Muchos gracias, --Willem H. 18:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Since it's "About John Wyndham" it seems a little much to add all the extra names. Perhaps if the book was credited to the full name it would make sense, but I don't think anyone will be at sea over the credit as is. De nada. --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Tales of Gooseflesh and Laughter
I'm happily nitpicking again, so I changed the title of the 10th story in Tales of Gooseflesh and Laughter from Opposite Numbers to Opposite Number. --Willem H. 20:35, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Tiptree's "The Starry Rift"
You are the verifier for the SFBC edition of. This book consists of three previously published novellas, plus three small linking/introductory segments: In the Great Central Library of Deneb University (pp. 1-3), At the Library, pp. 56-58, and The Library Desk, pp. 101-103. Most other editions of this book include at least some of these segments as separate content elements. Do you mind if I add them to this record? Chavey 23:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: I see that the person entering data for at least one of the editions treated it as if those three segments were all segments of the same 9 page short story. I suspect that may be the right way to handle the content listing, but I'm not sure. Chavey 00:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Since each 'segment' has its own title, all three should be added as content. As to designation, I would leave each as 'shortfiction' with a note that all are interstitial material. Someday we may have a separate category for this type of material, but it really doesn't qualify as a short story, even in three parts. Checking the other records/editions, none include all three parts, and all treat the segment[s] as short stories. This might be worth a posting on Rules and Standards just to get a consensus on how to treat this? --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Jack Williamson's "Chivaree" or "The Chivaree"
You are the Locus1 verifier for both and. The first one does not have a primary verifier and lists the story Chivaree. The second one does have a primary verifier and lists the story The Chivaree. As these seem to be the same book except that the first is a signed edition, it seems likely that the titles would have appeared the same. All the other references I've seen use "The". How do you feel about merging them? --JLaTondre 21:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Check with at least one of the primary verifiers of the other edition, just to make sure the merge goes the right way. Locus does list the contents without the "The". --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I rechecked my copy and it's "The Chivaree."--Rkihara 00:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Ron! --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've gone ahead and submitted the merge. --JLaTondre 22:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Murray Leinster's "The Grandfather's War"
As a primary verifier of a publication containing The Grandfather's War, you input on this discussion is requested. A question has been raised about the proper location of the apostrophe. Thanks. --JLaTondre 00:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The Sunspacers Trilogy
We both verified this pub, but after a second look, the title page of my copy reads "The Sunpacers Trilogy" (without the middle s), can you have a look at yours ? (and, as it's visibly a misprint, do you think we need to change something ?). Hauck 13:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Good pick-up! I had to look at it twice to even notice. Since it is spelled correctly everywhere else in the book I would think a mention in the notes of the misspelling would be sufficient. Only the typesetter of the book would ever search the title as "Sunpacer"!! ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:28, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Hervé


 * Your note on the pub now says "misprinted on title page as _The Supacers Trilogy_." Didn't you delete a few too many letters on that claimed misprint? It sounded, from your discussion, that it was misprinted as "Sunpacers", not "Supacers". Chavey 17:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that's the, um, French version...¿¿¿¿¿! ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:13, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Tss. Hervé

Message about "N/A in Primary Verifications?"
I'm slightly confused. I left you a message about some odd verifications that you did (marking Primary entries as N/A). You removed it without any comment or explanation. You also just modified the verifications on a few of the publications I mentioned, but they still look odd -- one has you listed as verifying both Primary (Transient) and Primary2. What's going on? Can I help? JesseW 05:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Winona McClintic & Margaret St. Clair Questions
Please see this discussion. I have two questions for both Swfritter and you. Thanks. --JLaTondre 22:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Magic May Return
According to the listing in Locus #249 (October 1981), this anthology appeared in September 1981. This has to be the first book I've ever known to give a seasonal dating (that's not a magazine.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! First and only one I've ever seen as well, but then it is Ace!! Added the source and updated the date. --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Macro-Life or Macrolife
Is the title split by a dash on the title page of this pub or is the dash on the cover only there because of the cover designer's choice? Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * An odd one. The dash is in all the sort of official places, cover/spine/title page but in all the blurbs, copyright and page header it's Macrolife without the dash. Part II is Macrolife: 3000. I think the designer just wanted the title bigger and the only way it fit was with the dash. Even on the spine the two parts are on top of each other, not one long word split by the dash. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And finally, a book that was on my desk when a question arose!!!! It's the little things.... ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Keith R. A. DeCandido's Many Splendors
You verified which contains Many Splendors. The date for "Many Splendors" is given as 0610-08-24 which I'm guessing is a typo given the author was born in 1969? Thanks. --JLaTondre 13:25, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Again, Engineman
OK, Engineman (by Eric Brown) as I edited it is a tp (not a pb), but what is different is the ISBN (978-1-906735-42-0 in my edition) and that puzzles me, because I can find the book with the given ISBN at amazon, but not the one I purchased. What could have happened? Has the ISBN changed at the last moment and amazon hasn't noticed or is my copy maybe in fact another edition, aimed at bookstores? What do you think? Stonecreek 19:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A different ISBN means a different edition. What country did you buy it in? What is the country of printing on the copyright page? The TP may have been farmed out for sales other then the UK. It's too new for the BLIC to have a record, under any ISBN and they often note "Export Only" editions. At the least it should have a separate record. The other UK TP with ISBN 9781907519420 can stay as is for now. Thing is 906735 isn't a Solaris prefix, that I know of. I can't think of anywhere else to dig. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I bought it in a German bookstore but in the foreign language section. The copyright page states 'First published 2010 by Solaris' and features the typographically altered S and their internet address solarisbooks.com. So, I will file it anew and hope for clearance on the mysterious ISBN in the future. Stonecreek 20:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll drop a note on [Willem's] page. Maybe he has some insight. --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't find any reference to this ISBN. Solaris has it under 978-1-907519-42-0, the one we have in the database, and ISBNDB only has the mass market paperback. According to ISBNDB, Solaris does use the 906735 prefix for books published in 2010. (but not for this one???). Very odd, but I would say, add the publication to the database with a note about the odd ISBN. --Willem H. 22:06, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I have just written an e-mail to Solaris on the matter, maybe they are willing to clarify things. Stonecreek 15:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This is what they answered: HI Christian, Thanks for alerting us to this. We’ve been examining all our editions and has seen that it is a typo in the indicia in one edition.  Thankfully the ISBN on the back of the book is correct.  We are looking in to what we can do to on this. Thanks again for letting us know. Kind regards.
 * The question remains what's correct for us, the ISBN on the copyright page or on the back? Stonecreek 20:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The 'correct' one, of course! ;-) Since the one on the back cover is deemed by the publisher as the correct one, AND it's the one that 'searches' properly, I'd use that one. With notes, as extensive as needed to describe the 'mistake'. Good research! --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Slan
I found this oddity when entering a new book of mine Slan. The number seemed wrong. It looks like the number was entered while looking at the book upside down. :-)Kraang 02:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Just one of those 'senior' moments..... ;-) Corrected! Thanks. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Cover art credit for To Ride Pegasus
I added a note about the mistaken cover credit for this pub. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Works for me! --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Fantasy: The Best of 2002
You uploaded this cover image for. However, you didn't mark a primary verification for it. I have the book and was going to verify it, but my cover is different. My cover has a different picture (see for an example) and actually has the editors' names on it. It is marked as being the first edition & first printing (per number line) and is the same publisher, same ISBN, same format, etc. It also credits Ciruelo per Locus1 and does not have Grimando's signature.

Do you actually have the book and just not mark the primary verification? Or did you get the image elsewhere? It's certainly widespread on the web, but without a physical book, I'm not convinced it was a published cover. Thanks. --JLaTondre 14:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Cover was likely one of Amazon's unstable ones with the ZZZZZs in the URL. When I find one of those and there isn't another image available I simply download it to my computer and reload it right back on the DB. Then the image is stable, whether it's the correct one is impossible to tell. Since you have the book, feel free to correct the image. And, since the artwork is different, do correct the note [or just delete it] about the artist credit. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The Best of John W. Campbell
I've got the paperback reprint of The Best of John W. Campbell. Since my copy has Campbell's name without the "jr." suffix, and the cover scan of your copy doesn't use the suffix, I thought you may want to check to see if we have it listed wrong. It's certainly easier to change the title of the anthology as on rather than setting up the variants (I think we can assume the unverified Del Rey edition match the Ballantine). I've got a note on Willem H.'s page asking about the copy he and I both own. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 23:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a "Jr." to be found anywhere in the pub, not even in the Acknowledgements. A Variant would still need to be created as "Jr." is the canonical. None of the stories should be touched as they all existed before the estate dropped the Jr. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bill. I'll proceed once I've heard from Willem.  When you say that none of the stories should be touched, I assume that you mean that the title records with suffix should not be edited.  I would argue, however, that the titles contained in this collection need to be swapped for their suffixless variants.  If we always went with originally published author credit, we would only ever need author name variants to link to the canonical name.  My understanding is that we should credit the author as the name appears in the publication.  I'll happily fix all three pubs. Once I've fixed one, the other two should be easy (provided I note the page numbers) by using the import content tool.  Let me know if my understanding is off.  I hope not, since that's how I've been editing for quite a while now.  Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 00:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

McCaffrey's "Dragonflight" (verified pub)
In looking at your verified record for the first edition of Anne McCaffrey's "Dragonflight", I added an "About the Author" content listing, since that essay seems to have a reasonable amount of biographical data of interest. Chavey 17:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * That same blurb is in at least a dozen or more different titles, word for word, which is why I didn't add it. It's also in many more titles with some of it, an extra line about a horse, or with the leading line "This is what Anne McCaffrey has to say about herself". It disappeared in the 80s. The number of titles, one for each time it appeared, plus all the variants for a little biographical blurb, just didn't/doesn't seem worth it. And that's just the paperbacks! The same blurb is on the inside flap of many of the hardcovers, too! We never include those in contents, but if it's a paperback it's put inside [wouldn't want to waste valuable advertising space from the back cover!] and seems to be fair game. Saw the submission in the queue and just can't quite hit "Approved" and open that particular can of worms...... ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Bluejay edition of Brunner's Traveller in Black
Can you see if this pub is part of the Bluejay Illustrated Editions series? Perhaps the only designation would be on the spine. I'm assuming this may be number 15 or later in the series. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 00:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is, noted on the back cover and the spine . #15 as you surmised. --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, that was fast! It appears that was the last in the series, as I've found no further illustrated books from Bluejay. Thanks again. Mhhutchins 00:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Book just happened to be out, though at the absolute bottom of the pile! :-)--~ Bill, Bluesman 00:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, at least it was out. In my case, 9 times out of 10 the book someone is inquiring about has been stored away. Mhhutchins 00:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Gene Wolfe's War Beneath the Tree
You verified which contains War Beneath the Tree. The other printings of this story are titled The War Beneath the Tree (including one in which you were the second verifier). Would you mind double checking that the first version (which looks like the original publication) didn't have a "The" before I make a variant record? Thanks. --JLaTondre 23:37, 23 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No "The" in TOC or title page of the story, and yes, it is the original publication so should be the 'true' title and the others the variant. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. I submitted the variant change. --JLaTondre 20:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

50.000!!
You made it this year! Finally got the decoder ring? --Willem H. 23:21, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You just had to mention that..... ;-) Yeah, work slowed down a little so have had a few extra days to waste, er, while away here. Need a life.... --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:25, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * We are sorry, the NF/F copy of "life" that you requested is currently out of stock, please check back later. In the meantime, could we interest you in this VG/VG+ copy?.. Ahasuerus 00:01, 25 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Bribery will only work some of the time, well, most of the time.... (-; --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:05, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Robert Bloch's Lucy Comes to Stay
You verified (as second verifier) which contains "Lucy Comes To Stay". Other versions of this story are listed as Lucy Comes to Stay. I wanted to double check the presence/absence of the quotes in your version before I submitted a change to make it a variant record. Would you mind checking? Thanks. --JLaTondre 14:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * TOC and Acknowledgments have no quotation marks but the title page and the page headers for the story itself do have them. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 04:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Variant submitted. Thank you. --JLaTondre 18:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Shadows Over Baker Street
I promise this time to properly link the short stories in the anthology! --AlHazred 19:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

England Swings SF
I added Donald A. Wollheim's essay and a note to this verified pub. Thanks, --Willem H. 20:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The Shrouded Planet
Can you check to see if the Mayflower-Dell pb of this title is credited to "Robert Randall" or Garrett and Silverberg? Your verified record of the second book in the series credits "Robert Randall", not Garrett and Silverberg. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That depends on where one looks! Cover, spine and title page credit "Randall" only. The copyright page has "Copyright 1957 by Robert Silverberg & Randall Garrett". --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Title page credit has the final word. Copyright credit is never used. Mhhutchins 05:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Really! I'm such a rookie...... ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Artist for Doctor to the Stars
I added Peter Bramley (from the signature) as cover artist to this verified pub. Also adapted the notes. Thanks, --Willem H. 11:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Buffalo Gals, by Ursula K. Le Guin
The anthology Buffalo Gals has 5 different verified editions. Three of those include a content listing for "Come Into Animal Presence", poem by Denise Levertov, on p. 14. Two publications, including your verified edition does not include that content listing. Could you check your copy to see if that belongs in there? Chavey 01:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Indeed it does, and now it is! --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

pseudonym
I was trying to remove the extraneous pseudonym linkage of. If you look at the pseudonym, you will notice it is linked to both  and to. Yes, they are both pseudonyms but they should not link around in trees and circles for no good reason. Look at this and tell me it is supposed to be this way: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/mkpseudo.cgi?42161 In a related edit I was also clearing data from pseudonym so he does not show up on birth and death lists with  since they are the same person. I figure pseudonyms do not need to have birthday's etc.

You can clearly see here: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?9998 "Kelly Freas":
 * "Used As Alternate Name By: Frank Kelly Freas"
 * "Used These Alternate Names: Freas"

Are you trying to tell me a pseudonym should have a pseudonym!? Uzume 00:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

-
 * It is not extraneous. There are more than a few publications/editions that credit him this way. The pseudonym is quite proper and should not be deleted. The problem is that there seems to be no "real" canonical name. He is most frequently credited as Kelly Freas, only occasionally as Frank Kelly Freas, but the tendency [which I disagree with] is to make the longest form the canonical. 99% of the time, since he stopped using the "KF inside a circle" rune/ideograph he has been credited as Kelly Freas while signing the art as simply Freas. Clearing up the Canonical would be nice, but the pseudonym absolutely should not be deleted, no matter how many directions it may point. It should only point to one, but it still has to be there. I am curious why you submitted an edit to remove all the data from his biographical page? --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:14, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The likely history of the name tree is that Freas was made a pseudonym before Frank Kelly Freas was made the Canonical and thus the double "pseudonym" case. Though I understand the necessity of creating the pseudonyms [frankly they should be called Variants] I think we go way overboard in creating them, especially with artists. My 2¢. --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't see this discussion before I approved Uzume's submission to remove the author data from the "Kelly Freas" pseudonym. It rightfully should not have any data.  I also saw the "Freas" pseudonym wrongfully pointed to "Kelly Freas" when it should point to "Frank Kelly Freas" the canonical name. Mhhutchins 00:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think Uzume was killing the pseudonym "Freas" (which is impossible as long as there are title records credited to "Freas"). He only wanted it to point to the canonical name.  I had to reject another submission only because I'd seen the wrong connection and had already submitted the change on my own before I went back to the submission queue and saw that Uzume had made a submission to do the same thing. Mhhutchins 00:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yet that is what the edit was attempting. Making it point to a different parent was the correct way, though I disagree with what that parent is. --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * His website is called "The Official Frank Kelly Freas Website", and every book he ever published used that byline, so we can safely assume that's the name he wanted to be known as. The number of records shouldn't be used to determine which is the canonical name, in this case (although I admit to have used that argument in the past).  And it looks like many of the Kelly Freas records have already been varianted as by Frank Kelly Freas.  Someone, somewhere, sometime in the past has already determined that Frank Kelly Freas is the canonical name. And again, the edit can not have been an attempt to kill a pseudonym, it was only redirecting it. If subsequent submissions had attempted to change pub records, then we could start rejecting. Mhhutchins 02:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I certainly did not want to kill the pseudonym, I just wanted that obvious mess straightened out (as it now seems to be). I too wondered which should be the "canonical" name and the longer version seemed to win out. Thanks again. Uzume 14:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Medea's World
Can you check the credit for the individual art pieces in this pub? I have the trade pb of this edition and the art is credited to Frank Kelly Freas rather than Kelly Frank Freas. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 02:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Cover painting is credited to Frank Kelly Freas on the inside rear flap; interior illustrations are credited to Kelly Freas on the title page. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:43, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Blood Sport
You rejected my change to Blood Sport with the message "no changes??" However, there was a change, which was to fix the spelling of Corporation (currently Corporatin). AndonSage 12:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I did not see that. Whenever I see edits to Harry's work I look for typos and just missed that one. I'll fix both of the records. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Omni
I see you've started entering issues of Omni, which has been woefully neglected till now. Thanks for the effort. You may not be aware of certain standards regarding magazine entry, one of which I've noticed isn't being used. The full month of publication should be used in the title, and in any disambiguation of content titles. So the title of this issue would be Omni, August 1979 and the first content entry would be "First Word (Omni, August 1979". A trivial matter, perhaps, in the long run, when you consider all the effort you're making, but telling you now will save you from having to go back and make the corrections on many more issues. If you need assistance in correcting those already entered, I'd be glad to help. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:35, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Rats! That was the way they were, so just continued the same way. That's about 73 issues to correct. Which end do you want? Since we're on the subject, I'm having a little trouble deciding on the Editor[s] that should be mentioned. Since Omni seems to have changed them every couple of years, and even changes the titles somewhat. I've tried to be consistent by adding the Fiction Editor [which applies most directly to us] but the others? Guccione is always listed, though has been noted as largely ceremonial. Bova, Sheckley, Datlow are all names related to spec-fic. I don't want to create too much in the way of fix-ups when I finally get to the end. Have eight more years of issues to enter. --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's my take on editor credit. Fiction editor definitely should be credited, as well as the executive editor (who I'm assuming edits the non-fiction portion of the magazine). I don't think Guccione should be credited at all. That gives the three fiction editors (in order): Bova, Sheckley, and Datlow. Executive editors were Kending, Bova, then Teresi.  For the months of changeover, I'll have to pull out my copies (I have only the first 8-10 years so I can do a second Primary Verification when I get a chance.) I'm not sure who Patrice Adcroft was, so he/she may have become executive editor after Teresi.Mhhutchins 19:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That's where I started, up to Jan. '82. Editor credits are fine until about '84 when Teresi leaves. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:35, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Are you missing the November 1981 issue? I'm pretty sure I have it, but it may take awhile to dig it out. Mhhutchins 19:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No, but I am missing April '87 and Oct '83 and '90. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * For some reason the November 1981 issue is not showing up on the Grid List. It may be missing an editor record. Let me see if that's the problem. 20:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Got it. The editor record gives Dick Teresi and Bob Guccione.  I'll replace Guccione with Datlow and merge the record with the 1981 editor record so it'll show up on the grid list. Mhhutchins 20:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That's also why all of those 1984 issues aren't showing up on the grid list. Mhhutchins 20:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I've just been tackling them from the individual issue records. There seem to be a number missing from that grid, but not [this one] which is the one I'm using. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Caught up to you. Changed the editors for the last four issues as Gurney Williams III had the Executive Editor [then just Editor in October] title for the few with Guccione's name listed. I've been putting the Editor's in the notes of every record I've done, with titles, so you shouldn't have to dig out your copies just yet! Thanks for the help! --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

[unindent] The database's Omni issue grid has been fixed. Some ISFDB editors forget that even though you can change the editor credit in the issue's pub record, the unseen editor title record that was created with the pub has to be changed also. (I'll correct those 1984 Gurney Williams issues.) I've pretty much abandoned the Wiki magazine grids since the database grids were created. Those pages were only created because of the inability of the database proper to display all of the issues. Now that the database has that ability, I don't see the point in maintaining those Wiki pages (some magazine editors here would strongly disagree with that point of view). Mhhutchins 20:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, forgot to mention, authors who have "III" in their name should have a comma after their last name. There's already records for "Gurney Williams, III" so I'll merge the two authors' records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I wasn't sure about that one. There are a few contents records that may have to be checked, as well, as there have been a number of "IIs" and "IIIs". I still have to go back and do some variants and pseudonyms as the issues were not consistent with several of the regular editors. James [E.] Oberg comes to mind. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I've found copies of the October 1983 and October 1990 issues, but April 1987 is missing. I subscribed for the first 7 or 8 years, then got tired of the pseudo-science paranormal/ESP crap that started creeping into the contents.  I would still pick up issues now and again for the stories, but their fiction content dropped along the same time. And for some reason I subscribed again in the early 90s.  So let me know what other issues you may need help with. Mhhutchins 21:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I noticed a lot of orphaned title records on the summary page for who did the games and competition page for Omni.  It looks like the title records have been removed from the pub records and not deleted.  I personally feel they are more important than cartoons (which I did not add to the October 1983 issue I just entered and verified.) But I suppose that's a subjective decision. Mhhutchins 21:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Once past May '93 the only issue I have is Dec. '94. If I hadn't paid for multiple years subscription I'd have given up on OMNI far earlier for pretty much the same reasons you did. The cartoons were mostly entered with the first few issues that I did and I have considered going back and deleting them. Now it has to be a full-page and extremely interesting to even think about it. "The Artist" ones were usually very funny but seldom had much to do with science. I had entered all of the Games but didn't really feel they were anything but games, much the same as the Competitions that were prevalent in the first couple of years, so went back and deleted those contents. Had figured to catch orphans/etc. after entering all the issues I have. There are still some things [Laurels & Hardys come to mind] that I'm still not sure of as a lot of what is already listed is marginally associative at best. Over-all I much prefer Discover to Omni. Much more in-depth but no fiction whatsoever. --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

H. R. Wakefield's Imagine a Man in a Box
I have a question about that you uploaded for the US Philip Allan edition of H.R. Wakefield's Imagine a Man in a Box. The Tartarus Press Guide to Supernatural Fiction has the same dust-jacket associated with the UK Appleton edition. They have no image for the US edition. I was wondering if you recall where you found the image and if you are fairly confident that it is associated with the correct edition. Also, Tartarus could have it wrong (I suspect their contents are incomplete for the 1931 editions), or the jackets could be identical in both editions (though I think that's unlikely). If think the image is on the right edition, I'll leave it alone. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Most likely from a seller on AbeBooks. Checked there and none have an image. L.W. Currey has one for sale and he has been quite forthcoming about questions in a few e-mails I've sent. The home page is [here] with a link for contact. I would assume the Tartarus Guide is correct, though the US edition may have had the same cover. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like to copy offered by Currey doesn't have a jacket. However, I did find this copy on Library Thing, which has our image associated with the Allan edition.  Until and unless we find effort to the contrary, I'm going to assume that both editions have the same jacket art.  I'll copy the image from the Tartarus site, in case there are any subtle differences.  Thanks again. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Tor Books merged into Tor
Please see this message when you get a chance. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Correction to verified publication
In the thrice verified (once by you) 1973 Annual World's Best SF by Wollheim, Vernor Vinge's "Long Shot" is listed as being on p. 9. It isn't. My copy pretty clearly has it on p. 239, while everything else is on the same pages as listed. I have submitted a correction to this page number. Chavey 03:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The Future of the Jovian System
In your two verified The Planets -- and  is a SHORTFICTION The Future of the Jovian System by Benford. In the twice-verified (Rkihara and Albinoflea), is an ESSAY The Future of the Jovian System by Benford. I'm supposing these are the same, and it's either not an essay or not a short story. Would you like to pursue? I will post a link to this on the other two talk pages. --MartyD 13:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The piece is described as "Speculation", and though written in essay form it is set after the colonization of the outer planets/asteroids/moons and is thus fiction. A very pragmatic piece of fiction to be sure, but spec-fic absolutely. --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Going back to the source I'm in agreement with Bluesman, while it does not appear in the Novella, Novellette, or Short Story portions of the table of contents, and is part of the Viewpoint series of articles, it is a piece of speculative fiction written in the form of a history or encyclopedia article. Albinoflea 04:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Unusual Suspects: Stories of Mystery & Fantasy
You marked as Locus1 and OCLC/Worldcat verified. I have the book and was going to update the record. However, there is an issue with the artist. The book copyright lists him as Johnathan Barket. I believe this to be a mistake and the currently listed is correct.

I don't see the book in the on-line Locus1 (which only goes to 2007?) and I don't see the artist credit in OCLC/Worldcat. I haven't used either of these sources that much so I was wondering if I was missing something. Since it says "Data from Locus1", I'm hoping you added that and can verify a secondary source lists the artist as Jonathan Barkat which I can use in the notes. If not, I'll change the credit to Johnathan Barket and add a comment that this might be an error for Jonathan Barkat.

Thanks. --JLaTondre 17:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I have the CD-ROM from Locus that includes all of 2008 and about the first third of 2009, petering out in June/July and nothing past August. They do indeed list the artist as spelt in the record. If the copyright page has a different spelling, that should be used [assuming the name isn't also on the back cover correctly spelled, or if the cover is signed]. Also a pseudonym should be set up as so far only the name without the 'h' is in the database. Locus will nearly always put what we call the canonical, not always the exact spelling [or misspelling] of artists' names. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks. --JLaTondre 03:10, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

More than Human
I have submitted an update to adding another edition with a gutter code half hidden, and adding OCLC and LCCN links. WeAreGray 01:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

SFBC edition of More Than Human
When you get a chance, can you add anything to this discussion? Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Dreaming Again
Hi NBill, can you take a look at this? My edition of Dreaming Again credits Angela Slatter as author of The Jacaranda Wife. Is the credit in your edition the same? If so, A.G.Slatter can be merged with Angela Slatter. Thanks, --Willem H. 20:50, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Peter Garrison in Omni
Hi Bill. User:Chavey is separating into two people, moving the essays, such as Space: Harvested Moon from your verified  to a new. I went to Craig Shaw Gardner's site and see no mention of anything Omni-related, so I convinced myself the separation is correct and approved the changes. You may want to see what you think. Thanks. --MartyD 12:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Fine by me. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * For more discussion on this separation, there's a conversation between Mike Hutchins and me at my talk page.
 * Oops. That last comment was from Chavey 14:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Gods of Amyrantha
I got the date for Gods of Amyrantha at the publisher's website if you are looking to verify the submission info I poisted for that title and publication dates. Zvar 22:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I was wondering where it came from. Sources for Australian editions are sometimes scant. Generally we only put the month in a date without solid secondary source(s) [and Amazon never counts as such]. It is a good idea/practice to note where data comes from, especially when there's not an edition in-hand or if the data is not in the book. Thanks for the info. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Bantam pb of The Syndic
Can you verify that the note in this record about the printing history of the title actually appeared in your verified pub? If you can respond in this discussion I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 05:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

PKD co-author?
Since Dick is not only the subject but is a partner in conversation in this pub, shouldn't he be credited also? Stonecreek 15:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * My first reaction is no, though the whole book could be considered an interview with commentary. I don't think we credit someone as co-author in a biography [which this also is in part] even if quoted/interviewed. Just an opinion. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, that works for me, too. I wasn't clear on the standards. But for another of your verified pubs: The Gollancz edition of PKD's collected stories has Notes credited only to PKD. Less than half of them are commented on by Dick and in all five volumes it is stated in the introduction to the notes that research for chronology of the stories was done by Gregg Rickman & Paul Williams. Moreover, all these essays bear the same title ('Notes') for all five volumes, whereas the contents naturally differ. So, for your verified pub I'd like to change the edit from:  'Notes' by Philip K. Dick to 'Notes (Beyond Lies the Wub)' by Philip K. Dick, Gregg Rickman, Paul Williams. Stonecreek 10:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Their research may be note-worthy, but clearly they are not co-authors. The only parts not written by Dick are the first three paragraphs [which mention Rickman and Williams in one place]. As for differentiating the "Notes" by volume name, that's absolutely the right thing to do. I thought they were all the same, but each does a chronology for the stories of a particular volume. I will do this one. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Other Worlds, Other Seas
I'm in the process of verifying this anthology, and would like to change a few things. "The Master Builder" is credited to Genrikh Altov, not his alias Henrik Altov and the last three stories are as by Anatoliy Dneprov, an as yet unknown pseudonym of Anatoly Dnieprov. Any problems with this? Thanks, --Willem H. 19:28, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * None whatsoever. Glad your eyes are sharper than mine, had to look carefully to see the 'i' in Anatoliy. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:38, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Changes made. I think the I from "Dnieprov" mysteriously disappeared, and surfaced in "Anatoliy", but as the rules say, enter exactly as it actually appears in the publication. :-) --Willem H. 20:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * One more thing, I thought the cover looked a lot like Paul Lehr's work, and Jane Frank thinks so too, so I added the credit and a note. --Willem H. 20:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Reading my mind... again! ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)