User talk:Dustoff

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: 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! 12:13, 30 Apr 2007 (CDT)
 * Help pages
 * What the ISFDB Wiki is for
 * ISFDB FAQ
 * Help:Screen:EditPub - Warning and a note on how to update a publication's contents

Trullion: Alastor 2262
re: publication - Overall, what you added looks very good. My only comment would be about the Catalog ID where in ISFDB we would enter this as #03308. The leading # sign tells ISFDB that's not an ISBN. Note that in my personal book list I'd have entered it like you did with "Ballantine 03308" but in ISFDB they get entered with a leading "#" and without the publisher's name.

Also, this one is a bit ambiguous but since there is an SBN of the format that can easily be translated into an ISBN we generally do so and enter that ISBN as the Catalog ID. These SBNs are of the form 345-03308-6 or 345-03308-6-125 where you can just put a zero in front to get 0-345-03308-6. The publication is on Amazon at and is also a good source for cover image URLs. While the ISBN was not stated the reason for deriving the ISBN is to allow for links to Amazon and other sites that reference books by their ISBN. When an ISBN is derived a note about this should be added to the comments section so that people don't think the ISBN itself was stated in or on the publication.

This last part is my own thing rather than a ISFDB requirement but what I generally do in cases like this is to note something like "The book is coded Ballantine Books 345-03308-6-125 on the front cover and 03308 on the spine. The ISBN was not stated in this publication but was derived from the SBN for this ISFDB record." The thinking is so that someone will know if a copy of the book they have matches the record or if they should clone it and make a new record with the details matching their copy. 12:53, 30 Apr 2007 (CDT)