User talk:Gzuckier

From ISFDB

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Welcome!

Hello, Gzuckier, 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:

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#Making changes to verified pubs. 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! Stonecreek 09:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

My Favorite Horror Story

Thanks very much for adding this new (first?) edition! Alas, the contents are missing, but you can import them, for example from this publication: the ID in question to enter in the Import window would be 265612 (see the right top corner). If all relevant title metadata such as title proper, authors/editors and contents are exactly the same, please consider to clone a publication. It does save one step of editing. Thanks, Stonecreek 04:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I replaced the ISBN-13 with the ISBN-10 in the MJF Books edition. It's not likely that a 2000 publication would have an ISBN-13. Please confirm that your copy matches the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 07:21, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Also, please confirm that the publication date is explicitly stated in the publication. Since the first edition was published by DAW Books in October 2000, it's likely that the MJF Books reprint edition was published later. According to Amazon, it was published in 2007, which means the ISBN-13 may actually be present in the book. Thanks for checking. 07:28, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Dark Matter: Reading the Bones

I have your edits that would impact Dark Matter: Reading the Bones on-hold.

Notifying Primary Verifiers

When making an edit that effects a primary verified publication, ISFDB etiquette is to notify the primary verifier. To accomplish this:

  1. Click on the primary verifier's name on the publication record which will open the verifier's user page
  2. Click the "discussion" tab at the top of the page which will open the verifier's talk page
  3. Click the "+" tab which will open a message box

I have notified Chavey for you in this case.

Content Additions

We typically do not include the content types that you are adding to this publication (see this help) unless they are more than a simple listing. Is that the case here?

In addition, an author credit of "unknown" is only used for data from a secondary source. If the publication does not list a credit, then it should be "uncredited". Bases on the answer to the previous paragraph, if these additions are accepted, they will be changed to "uncredited".

Introduction Date Change

I have rejected the change of date for the introduction. ISFDB dates are based on publication date; not writing date.

Story Date Changes

Were these stories previously published? If so, does the copyright page provide the title of the publication they were originally published in? If so, we would want to add that to the notes as well once they change are accepted.

We do appreciate your submission. ISFDB has some conventions that need learning, but everything should be in the help links in the welcome message above. We hope you will continue to contribute. And please let us know if you have any questions (ISFDB:Help desk is a good resource for asking). -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

As JLaTondre noted, the items you suggested adding are specifically excluded by our standards. The "Contributors" section is a bunch of "About the Author"s, and these are not included unless they are more substantial than occurs in this book. Generally "substantial length" means more than one page about an author, e.g. something like a full interview with the person. The longest one here is for Kiini Iburra Salaam, and it's mostly a bibliographical listing of her publications. (Kiini is a friend of mine, and this doesn't come close to being a biographical sketch of her.) Copyrights and permissions are never included, although we sometimes use that information itself to add data to the database, e.g. when it tells us that some story was originally published in a location that we don't have in the database. The page the LaTondre linked to says of acknowledgements: "Generally do not include. ... if it contains material such as reminiscences, opinionation or anything else likely to interest a reader or researcher, consider including it. There's nothing like that in Sheree's acknowledgements in this book. Chavey 03:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointers, guys. I'll apply them to my edits. gzuckier 03:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Chavey, what about the story changes? 'Jesus Christ in Texas' is not listed on Brendan DuBois website under his short stories. W. E. B. DuBois did publish a story by that name in 1920[1]. Ihsan Bracy published a short story collection with the same title as his story in 1998[2]. Do the credits provide information on prior publications for the remaining 5 edits on hold? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:09, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Almost clear...
is there a way to edit from the "my pending edits" or just go back to the pub page and reedit/
What about when 'A version of this story first appeared in ...' ? (frinstance, the "Buying Prime Time" from "Dark Matter Reading the Bones"?
Thanks gzuckier 02:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
No, unfortunately, there is not a way to change a pending edit. You either need to wait for it to be accepted and then change it or cancel it and re-submit it. In this case, it's best that we sort out the pending ones first. I apologize for the delay. I will ping Chavey again.
If a publication indicates a story has been previously published, at a minimum we would add a note to the title record indicating the prior publication (example). If the first publication was in something that meets our inclusion criteria, then, ideally, we would track down information about the publication and enter it instead of having the note. However, that is not always possible.
Now, 'A version of' leads into one of our grey areas. If a story has only slight changes, we use the same title record for both publications. If the story has major changes, then we would use separate title records (example & example). The grey results in the degree of changes required for which there is an easy rule to establish. In cases that there might be disagreement, editors will hash it out and come to an agreement. Thankfully, those cases are not frequent. In a case where we don't have both version to compare, we would just create a single record.
Hope that helps. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
The author for "Jesus Christ in Texas" should be changed to "W. E. B. Du Bois" -- I have no idea where "Brendan" came from. Notice the space in "Du Bois"; JLaTondre should approve that edit, but Gzuckier should then change the spelling. The first three original publication date changes should be accepted. The last of those, for "Buying Primo Time" should NOT be changed. That story is copyright 2004, and while "a version of this story" was published in 1998, the new copyright implies that it should not have the publication date changed. It is certainly worth noting in the title record for that story, but unless we know more about how close the two versions are, we should not change the date on the one we have. Chavey 07:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks folks. I think i'm getting the hang of this. gzuckier 10:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Submissions accepted with the exception of the one specified by Chavey. For "Jesus Christ in Texas", I added the space to "Du Bois" and added a first appeared note based on the prior information I found. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:55, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Gzuckier, thanks for sticking with it! There's always a bunch to learn as you get started. I found the complexities of collections and anthologies to be surprisingly more challenging than the relatively simple "Novel" when I got started. I recommend trying simple things first; and holding off on anything involving pseudonyms or variant spellings as long as you can :-) Chavey 21:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Indeed; I have come to regret my fondness for anthologies and collections... </humor> Thanks again for the patience, all. gzuckier 04:27, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Nightmare Asylum

How is this publication different from the one you just submitted to add to the database? Both are the same printing, with the same ISBN, publication date, price, publisher, etc. Mhhutchins 21:46, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

hi this one appears to be the first publication of this edition (or is it the other way around?) from the number line; the other one says it's the third. gzuckier 21:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Click on the link I provided and you'll see no mention of a third printing. In fact, it gives a complete number line. Mhhutchins 22:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Aha, I missed that one, cloned it off the bottommost pub which was the third. So, let's pretend mine didn't happen, and i'll just verify. thanks for catching it. gzuckier 22:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll reject the submission. Just so you know in the future, you have the option to cancel a queued submission. Go to the "My Pending Edits" link on the home page, and you'll get a list of all of your submissions which are waiting to be moderated. Mhhutchins 22:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Series

Are you certain that this publication is part of a series of publications created by the publisher? Otherwise, it appears to be a title series of which its title is already a part of (see #9). Title series are created by authors (for the most part) and retain that designation regardless of who publishes them. If you agree that this is a title series and not a publication series, please remove it from the publication record. See this help page to learn more about the different kinds of series. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:58, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

oh yeah, that seems obvious. I had the below on my mind when i was entering thisgzuckier

DAW Collectors is a publication series, so I changed the entry in this publication from "DAW Book Collectors" to "DAW Collectors" which is the ISFDB designation for it. Any deviation from that creates a new publication series. Mhhutchins 23:02, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Works for me. the "daw book collectors" was on the copyright page but i thought it was odd that it didn't already have any entires. gzuckier 02:05, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes a series name doesn't exactly match the one stated on the book because it may have changed over time. We try to keep it the same in cases where the change is small. When it's a major change, we have to create a whole new series. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:53, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Entering SFBC editions

There are special instructions for entering SFBC editions because they lack much bibliographic information. One of them is to record the book club ID number in the ISBN/Catalog # field if there is no SFBC-assigned ISBN. In the case of the SFBC edition of The Garden of Rama, the retail edition's ISBN is stated on the copyright page. I will leave a note on the talk page of that record's verifier to see if the retail ISBN is present on his copy. Your copy is probably the same. If there is any other difference please post a comment here. If there isn't, do another primary verification of the record and cancel the submission I'm holding that adds another record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:35, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

i'm not sure if it's the sfbc or not; it doesn't say it is anywhere, in the copyright page or on the jacket, although it has that number on the back of the jacket. if that's normal for sfbc then i guess it would be the same. gzuckier 03:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Read the special instructions page I linked above, and you'll see that book club reprint editions of retail publications never give the SFBC as the publisher. (Because they're not. They're only reprinting the true publisher's retail edition. We only give the SFBC co-credit in order to distinguish their printing from the retail edition.) Only those books exclusively published by the SFBC for its members credit them as the publisher. I've left a message with the verifier of the first record, so maybe he'll get a chance to check if the ISBN appears on his copy. I'll keep holding your submission in case it doesn't have an ISBN. Thanks. Mhhutchins 06:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
The editor who verified the current record for the SFBC edition confirms that his copy doesn't have an ISBN. So your copy is apparently a later printing. The SFBC increased its practice of including the retail ISBN as the 90s progressed. I will reject the submission to create a new record and add a note to the current one about later printings having the ISBN. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Publication dates of non-first printing copies

Do you have primary (or secondary) evidence that your second printing of this title was also published in the same month as the first printing? Without that evidence, we consider the publication undated and give "0000" in the publication date field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

at the top of the copyright page it says
A Bantam Book / December 2006
but that might be the copyright date? gzuckier 03:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
No. That's the date of the first printing. Most hardcover publishers only give the date of the first printing. Subsequent printings are given using a number line, but the date isn't changed. Paperback publishers will often give the dates of later printings, but not always. Every publisher is different. The more copyright pages you read, the more you'll become familiar with how major publishers note the dates (or lack thereof) of each printing. Bantam provides dates of paperback printings, but never hardcover printings.
FYI, copyright date should always be preceded by the word "copyright" or the symbol "©". Mhhutchins 03:46, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
ok, thanks. i guess the date is 0000 then. gzuckier 03:48, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Replacing cover images

It looks like you want to replace the link to a different cover image file for another edition of Tom Swift and His Sky Race. Or am I misreading your intentions? Right now you have uploaded two image files on the ISFDB server for this title: here and here. Did you want the second one to be linked to the 1911 publication record? If so, I'll accept the submission. And will you be linking the first image to the 2000 edition published by Quiet Vision? Mhhutchins 03:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Those are both of the 1911 edition; i'm not totally happy with either of them. I liked the second one because i included the spine, but the first one does the cover better. any advice? thanks gzuckier 03:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Then I'm not sure why one was uploaded from the 2000 edition (look at the publication link-back of this file). Perhaps just a mistake? In any case, choose the one you want to keep (I personally prefer the first one without the spine), link it to the 1911 record, and I'll delete the other one. Mhhutchins 06:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC
Gaah, another navigation error by me. I'm glad I'm not a sailor. OK, I swapped over to the other cover on the 1911, I'm pretty sure. thanks. gzuckier 02:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Cover of Maze of Worlds

If it's possible, please upload a higher resolution scan of the covers (within the ISFDB limits, of course). This one seems to be particularly small. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

how's this one? 167k which is almost within the limit...gzuckier 00:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Nope, it can't be larger than 150 kb. We only make exceptions for wraparound cover art. Most scanners and graphic software programs allow you to reduce the resolution without visibly affecting the image. You should be able to make the image dimensions up to 600 pixels tall, and still keep it under 150 kb. I can point you toward free software that can do this. Mhhutchins 00:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll give it another shot. I think i got enough image manglement software.gzuckier 01:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

SFBC ed. of Rama II

Can you confirm the ISBN you want to add to the Note field of this record? The ISBN range 0-295 belongs to a university press. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 02:13, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The ISBN you give is for this book. Mhhutchins 02:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

well, i doublechecked, and thats the isbn they have on the copyright page, alright. gzuckier 16:42, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll accept the submission, but it is an odd duck. I'll ask Bluesman if his copy has the same copyright page. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Definitely not on my copy. An odd duck indeed!! There is one identical copy for sale on AbeBooks, so the ISBN exists on more than one copy. Is there an indentation on the back board, bottom right corner [could be an oval/circle/square/some other geometric shape??] as that would identify the book as a BOMC copy [and does the jacket have the SFBC#15741]. It is much more likely that a BOMC copy would have an incorrect ISBN than an SFBC copy, and it is also quite common for SFBC covers to be used on other editions by booksellers as usually they are in much better condition than library editions [for example]. Just exploring possibilities, here. If all there is to go on is the cover [to include under the SFBC edition's record] then the odd ISBN may need a separate record [else who's going to find it??¿¿??]. Depends on what, if any, results from the above queries? --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
No indentation on the back board. jacket has 15741 on back lower right corner though. Same for my copy of "The Garden of Rama" ISFDB Publication Record #40375 (not the same number, just in same place), which I assume came from the same source though it is lost in the mists of time. I do notice that the font of the ISBN # on the copyright page of both of these is slightly but definitely different from the font of the rest of print on the page, so it's likely it was added at a later time? Neither has a price anywhere on the jacket, which I think is typical of a book club, but I don't know if it's a completely reliable sign...gzuckier 03:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Publication series vs. title series

I accepted the submission updating this record adding publication series data. New Writings in SF is a title series, not a publication series. It remains in this series regardless of which publisher publishes the book. That can be attested to the fact that it was published by three different publishers. The difference between title series and publication series is explained here. Thanks. Mhhutchins 06:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

After posting this, I saw that the differences in series had already been brought to your attention in an earlier message. Mhhutchins 06:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

"It remains in this series regardless of which publisher publishes the book. That can be attested to the fact that it was published by three different publishers." Aha, that's a good test question. Thanks. gzuckier 19:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that a good rule of thumb. If you ask yourself, "If this book is reprinted in ten years by another publisher, would it still be considered part of the same series?" If the answer is yes, 9 times out of 10 it's a title series. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Unnumbered pages

Re this publication: Unnumbered pages should be entered in square brackets, i.e. "[5]+398+[6]". Please make a submission to update the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:58, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. gzuckier 08:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Price field

Re this record: only the primary price should be entered in the Price field. Any secondary prices can be given in the Note field. I rejected an earlier submission for this reason. (The reason for a rejection is given in the notes. Go to the "My Rejected Edits" link to see if you had any other rejections.) Mhhutchins 03:18, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Also check the publication date of your edition. The first hardcover edition was published in 1978. According to most sources, the first Penguin paperback edition was in January 1980. Mhhutchins 03:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

fixed the price thing; re the date thing, I had been in fact using the date for the book in the author's biography in the front matter, which of course would have been the hardcover (duh), but when I looked at the copyright page, it did say published in penguin 1979 so I put that, thanks, gzuckier 07:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
When you create a publication record, the date field is the publication date of the edition you're creating a record for, not the date the work was first published. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Non-genre magazines

You should only enter the speculative fiction content of non-genre magazines. I had to reject the submission to add non-spec-fic contents to an issue of The New Yorker. We also don't credit cover art of non-genre magazines if it isn't spec-fic related. Mhhutchins

OK thanks gzuckier 01:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Koontz's Night Chills

There is sufficient evidence in the data you've given for this publication to state that it is a book club edition, published by Doubleday for its various clubs (though it doesn't appear to be have been a selection of the Science Fiction Book Club.) Also, the ISBN gives a clear indication for a publication date. I have updated the record, giving a year of publication and a revised publisher field, and adding more notes about it being a book club edition. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 02:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Based on my limited experience here, I suspected it was a book club edition, but I didn't have the experience to find the evidence. gzuckier 02:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

i-ROBOT Poetry

Re this publication: please note the source of the data in the record's Note field (or do a primary verification if your source is the book itself.)

Also, I rejected the submission to create a publication record for a non-genre anthology of poems by editors who are not spec-fic authors. In the case where a spec-fic work first appeared in non-genre publication, it is best to just note the source in the title record rather than create a publication record for a publication ineligible for the db. (Exceptions are made for first appearances in non-genre magazines.) Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 08:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks. gzuckier 10:01, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

The Dark Half

Re this record: He may be popular, but I can't imagine that the 26th printing would appear the same month as the first one. Unless you copy states that it was printed in October 1990, please change the date field to "0000". Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 06:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

ok thanks gzuckier 06:47, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Dark River

Hello, I've tweaked quite a lot your submission for this result. Please note that a COLLECTION with one text should be entered as a CHAPBOOK. I've also varianted all the titles to "Dean R. Koontz" (our canonical name) and merged what was needed. Hauck 11:22, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

thanks. i wasn't sure what a single short fict in audio format should be. gzuckier 04:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

The Runes of the Earth

Hello, I've put your submission on hold, please discuss the matter of your additions with the PV. Thanks. Hauck 18:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

ok thanks

gzuckier 07:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Third Tor printing of Jumper

Re this record: If the first printing was in October 1993, the third printing would have to be after that month. If the date of the printing represented by this record isn't stated in the publication, and you don't have a reliable secondary source for the date of the third printing, then the publication date is unknown and the field should be zeroed out. (Entered as "0000", and displayed as "unknown".) I will edit the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 03:35, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

aha, that seems logical. thanks. gzuckier 06:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Classic American Ghost Stories: 200 Years of Ghost Lore from the Great Plains, New England, the South, and the Pacific Northwest

Hello, I've put your submisison temporarily on hold as I have two concerns : 1) the ISBN 0-87463-115-6 doesn't compute, can you check? 2) there are stories by "uncredited" and other by "unknown", the first use is correct but for the second the story must explicitely be credited on title page to "unknown". Is it the case? Thanks for checking. Hauck 07:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

aha! i was getting the info from the google books image of the book, [3]. I saw when i submitted that the isbn didn't compute and went back to check, but that's the number that's on the image of the copyright page, but I just got the idea to check the UPC on the back cover on the image and it is 0-87483-115-6. which means that that on the copyright page of the printing this was taken from is wrong...
Just to add to the pain, the authors of the stories aren't given in the table of contents, they're cited in a little footnote after each story. however, the whole book doesn't appear in the google image, just the beginning, so all those at the end are unknown because the image doesn't include the pages where the authors are cited. The one story that I listed as uncredited is listed on page 20 without an author. i was thinking a later google effort, perhaps by me, could fill in the blanks for those phantom authors. so, I await your advice.. Thanks. gzuckier 02:27, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
I've approved your submission, changed the ISBN and all the "unknown" to "uncredited". In such cases, IMHO the best is not to enter only partially the contents (and indicating this in the notes), waiting for a PV to come along. Hauck 14:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
ok, thanks. gzuckier 20:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Cogswell's Probability Zero! The Population Implosion

I have put your submissions regarding a change to ESSAY on hold because a) most of the other titles in the title series are considered as SHORTFICTION, and b) this step doesn't seem to have been discussed with the other primary verifiers of publications the title was printed in. Stonecreek 05:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

i'll look at some of the other stuff in the series. the piece in question, like a lot of the probability zero, isn't exactly a story, it's kind of a satirical essay, i.e. it's a mathematical proof that in the year 1000, each human had 500 billion ancestors. anyway, i'll chec it out and if it makes sense to go forward, check with the verifiers. gzuckier 20:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Isaac Bashevis Singer collection

The synopsis states that there are "some" spec-fic stories in the collection. Are you certain that all of the titles you've entered as contents are spec-fic? Mhhutchins|talk 23:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah, no. there are 4 fantasy/supernatural. Should I delete the others? if the entry is posted can i delete the non-sfish or would it be better to start from scratch? is a cover picture still relevant? Thanks. gzuckier 23:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
It's going to be about the same work either way. I'll accept the submission and you'll have to make a submission to remove the non spec-fic stories from the record. Then you'll have to delete each of them from the database. Since Singer isn't considered a spec-fic author, only his spec-fic work is eligible for the database. Please keep this in mind when making future submissions for work which isn't spec-fic. If you're not sure if an author's non-genre work is eligible, post an inquiry on the Moderator Noticeboard. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 00:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
oh i get it... if there are nongenre stories in the TOC they get entries in the database, which is not what we had in mind, so no to that. thanks. gzuckier 02:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
No. Just the opposite. If a story is nongenre (meaning that it's not spec-fic), it isn't eligible for the database, the Internet Speculative Fiction Database. :) Mhhutchins|talk 02:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
yeah, thats what i meant. gzuckier 03:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Try again. You have to use the "Remove Titles" function. Blanking the fields doesn't edit the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 02:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
ok thanks

gzuckier 03:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Do Androids Dream...

I removed the publication date from this record for the second printing, because the first printing was in June 1996. Mhhutchins|talk 00:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

OK thanks.gzuckier 02:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

You and Science Fiction

Are the 7 pages you've entered into the Page Count field of this record in addition to the 349 pages or are they counted among the 349 pages? Mhhutchins|talk 00:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

no, there are [7] unnumbered pages before what would be page 1 (but isn't numbered, numbering starts on page 3) the two page introduction is on page [1] and [2] of the unnumbered pages; the numbered pages run up to 349. This being in the nature of a textbook, pages 3 through 6 of the numbered pages are a lot of teachable essays like "who am i" "you and the future" "finding an identity" etc which is why the story proper doesn't start until 7 in the numbered pages. i'm going to think about whether the content of said essays deserves a contents entry. probably, they're intended to be contentful. gzuckier 04:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Sounds good, thanks for the explanation. About the introductory essays: If each of them are substantial enough to deserve separate content records, then create them. If they're only a paragraph or two, just a single content record, or even just a note in the Note field should suffice. In any case, it's a judgment call. Mhhutchins|talk 05:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Cover image file limits

This file exceeds the ISFDB policy of not uploadiing images that are greater than 600 pixels tall. Please keep all uploaded images to that standard. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 05:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

ok, thanks gzuckier 23:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Changing a work to non-genre

When you flag a work as non-genre, you must follow-through by changing all of its variant title records as well. The three variants of this record need to be flagged as non-genre. Mhhutchins|talk 08:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Because this work was published in a spec-fic collection by the author, it's best to leave it as genre. So I've removed the non-genre flag. In borderline cases where a story could be interpreted by different readers to have fantastic elements, it's best to leave it as originally entered. Mhhutchins|talk 08:21, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


ok thanks gzuckier 01:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Image for Storm from the Shadows

Hello, the cover image that you uploaded here is quite strange. Can you confirm its red hue? Hauck 13:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

it is a little off isn't it? the original is black to the eye, like the other covers. I'll try again in the sunlight. gzuckier 04:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
ok, better version now. thanks. gzuckier 04:15, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Hauck 06:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Deathbird Stories

Hello, I've approved your submission for this collection (result is here) but I'm worried by the date you gave. As it seems that the 1st printing of the Collier pb is dated 1990 here. Perhaps will it be better to give a "0000-00-00" date in this case. What are your sources for the 1989 date? Thanks. Hauck 06:34, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

I see the date you mention. I probably jumped to a wrong conclusion based on the 89- in the OCLC; I also note the 1990 in the LC Classification Number; would that indicate a date of 1990-00-00, or would that 1990 stem from the first printing date for the pb? Thanks. gzuckier 06:38, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes Imho 0000-00-00 is the best option.Hauck 10:27, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
ok, shall do. thanks. gzuckier 20:20, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Publication date

Hello, just FYI, the date of the writing of a given text is not to be used as its date. We use the first date of publication instead. I've reverted your change for the Amis essay. Information about the date of writing should go in the notes as you did. Hauck 08:08, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

  • thanks, did not know that. gzuckier 08:11, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

He Walked Around the Horses (ManyBooks)

Hello, I've approved your submission but made some changes: 1) regularized publisher to manybooks.net, 2) deleted link to image, 're not allowed to deeplink to the site and the image is just a low-res duplicate of Galactic Central's one (exactly same wear marks), peraphs even used illegally.

I've rejected the "Street & Smith" submission which (to me) looks like it concern the original issue of the magazine. Hauck 09:29, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
thanks. i just stumbled into these oddball entries, thought i'd fill in some remote corners of the database as best as possible. so this is likely to be a copy of Astounding, even though that's not clear on the amazon page; makes sense, now that i google street & smith and see they published astounding. gzuckier 19:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Brass Man

Hello, I've put your submission on hold, what is your source for the publication date that you gave. As it's the same as the first printing, perhaps should it be dated "0000-00-00". Thanks. Hauck 10:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Without reply, I've proceeded. Hauck 13:45, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, been not checking in for a while. However, after scouring the book (of which I still have the copy) thoroughly, I have no idea where I got that date from so assume it was some sort of error on my part. Thanks. gzuckier 01:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh I see... the date came along when I cloned this pub [4] although I can't vouch for where that date came from. thanks again. gzuckier 01:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Additions to Forty Signs of Rain

Please discuss the additions with the primary verifier. I've put your submission on hold while waiting for the result. Thanks, Stonecreek 06:48, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note about this. I'm a huge KSR fan, but I'm not sure either of these qualify for inclusion based on the policies outlined here in the What to Include section. For this edition, the About the Author blurb is only about 50 words long, and the Acknowledgments is just a short and simple list of Thank Yous.
Rather than making separate ESSAY entries for these, if you want to draw attention to them I would just add a Publication Note that indicates that they exist and what pages they're on. Albinoflea 19:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

OK makes sense. Thanks. gzuckier 04:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

So I rejected the sudmission accordingly. Stonecreek 14:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

At Home with Inyan

Hi, I've put your submission on hold, as it's not clear if it's a genre magazine. Could you explain something about its nature? Stonecreek 14:57, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

No, most definitely non-genre, it's a magazine for orthodox Jewish families. They run serialized novels among the other content, the whole thing kind of reminiscent of the old Saturday Evening Post. This serial, although I only caught the one chapter, is a space opera. gzuckier 02:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the fill-in! It's just that we don't credit the editors of non-genre magazines in person (see here for an example). I'll approve and change the editor accordingly. Stonecreek 03:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
ok, thanks. gzuckier 02:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

The Magician's Elephant

Hello, I've approved your submission but please remember that, as per this set of rules, we usually do not enter "Adknowledgement"-type essays. I've moderated a lot of your submissions and there is (IMHO & IIRC of course) some items in them (About the author, Ackowledgements) that may clutter the database Hauck 07:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

ok, thanks. gzuckier 07:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Things Not Seen

Hello, I've put your submission on hold. Can you confirm that the 7th printing has the same publishing date as the 1st (as per your notes). Thanks. Hauck 12:41, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

I've got other issues with your diverse submissions: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them , a 18th printing only six months after the 1st? (there also will be a lot of merging to do, you should have cloned a "populated" publication); Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions you give a publishing date in the 60s in your note but a pub date of 1955 in the date field, The Glitch in Sleep you're just cloning this pub and adding some items (cover and interior art), are you sure of what you're doing (IMHO, it's just an update case)?; Paranormalcy you're cloning a pub with a "2011-07-26" and indicate in the notes "First Scholastic printing, September 2011", so what are we led to believe? I'm sorry to be seen as rude but I pray you to lavish more attention on your submissions lest we create a multitude of phantoms. If you're not at ease with the Cloning fuction, you can use the "Add publication to this title". Thanks. Hauck 12:53, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
I guess I need some guidance. In the absence of any indication of date I haven't been changing what I cloned from. I guess that's clearly incorrect. So if there's no indication on the book, I 0000-00-00 it?
Yes. Hauck 08:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Another question: if there's a publication not validated from Locus or something, and I have a copy of that with like 4th printing or something, can I just update the publication? I've been cloning them...
For me, unverified publications are fair game, if all the details match, update it and make it yours. Hauck 08:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Let me get back to these and resubmit. No offense taken, I appreciate the guidance Thanks.
addendum: I'm leaving The Glitch in Sleep as is, this version is apparently the American version, it has a $ price printed on it, the existing listing has a British price. gzuckier 04:35, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
The price entered in £ is very very likely wrong as the "59990" ISBN is usually used by Bloomsbury US and the data comes from amazon UK whose retail price was likely used. I'm quite confident that it's the book that you own, just update it.Hauck 08:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Quidditch Through the Ages

Hello, I was wondering if this publication shouldn't be entered under its "supposed" author like this ones. What are your thoughts on the matter and is Rowling explicitly credited (e.g. along the lines of "a story told to J. K. Rowling")? Hauck 06:52, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

That's a good question. I looked at it and at the Fantastic Beasts book; both have copyright JK Rowling on the copyright page, but otherwise no mention. The back cover of each states that it's a copy of a book in the Hogwarts library, signed by Albus Dumbledore, and the front cover, table of contents, intro, foreword, etc. all stick with the fiction. what to do? gzuckier 02:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
I've no clues about this, let's stick to your first idea. Hauck 08:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Touched with Fire

I'm holding your submission to change Bradbury's "Touched with Fire". There's no problem with the note you added. However, your edit would also add two backticks to the title, i.e. change it to "``Touched with Fire". I'm guessing that this isn't what you intended. However, if your copy has the story reflects the title in that manner, we'd have to get agreement from the many other editors who have verified publications where that story appears. Let me know if this was a typo and I can approve the edit and then remove the backticks after. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 15:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

oh no, that was an Unintended Backtick. Thanks. gzuckier 19:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Approved and fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Micro Maps

Are the maps in your verified Micro actually labeled "Oahu map" and "The Pali map"? If not, the standard for entering maps is 'TITLE (map)' and the records you are proposing for variant should be merged together under the "The Pali (map)" title. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

nope, it's "The Pali", so I'll go fix. thanks. gzuckier 04:21, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

change to your verified pub

I added the frontispiece to Petty Magic --Vasha 21:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

In Other Worlds: SF and the Human Imagination INTERIORART

Hello, I've first approved your submission but had to revert it as there seems that there is a mechanism that doesn't allow the "double" display in the contents of a similarly titled artwork. As we can't dismabiguate them (with [2] as it's the same artowk), it'll stay that way. On a more general level, I really don't see the interest of entering twice the fep and the bep when they're similar but each contributor has his/her own idiosyncrasies.Hauck 09:21, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

tjhanks. I thought about just one entry, but there wasn't a general page # for just endpapers, ep defined as unnumbered pages that follow pagination, so I came up with thew idea of having one entry for the work, and both endpaper listings point to it. oh well. gzuckier 01:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
In such cases (similarly illustrated fep & bep), I usually enter a "general-purpose" INTERIORART item like for the book in this series. Hauck 07:18, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
And I suppose a note in the notes. OK, thanks again. gzuckier 20:15, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Sabotaged

Hello, I've approved this pub but I'm surpised by the last artist's name (perhaps a typo). Hauck 15:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

oops thanks. gzuckier 16:05, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Dune Messiah

Hello, you indicate in the notes "stated 56th printing June 1986 of September 1975 Berkley edition" but propose to enter a "1984-10" date. Can you be more precise? Thanks. Hauck 08:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Whoops I forgot to change it in the cloning process. Can you gfis it? Thanks. gzuckier 21:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Done. Hauck 21:59, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Rot & Ruin

Hello, I rejected your submission to change a pub. record for this. What we have is for the first printing of this edition (and we are interested to keep that information). If you have another printing, please use the clone function. Thanks, Stonecreek 05:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

ok, thanks. gzuckier 05:29, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Series for "The Haunting of Grade Three" interiorart

Hi. I rejected your edit that would have set the series on The Haunting of Grade Three to "Lucky Srar". A later submission of yours -- that I accepted -- set it to "Lucky Star" while I had the first one on hold. I assume you wanted "Star" not "Srar", yes? Thanks, --MartyD 02:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

whoops! thanksgzuckier 03:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Art of the Imagination

I've undone the changes you made to this title record for the book cover of Left Behind as it appears in Art of Imagination. The reason that I did so is that the credit in my book is explicitly listed as "Weslight". That may well be a typo, but it is our policy to list credits as they appear in the book, which is why I changed it back. Since the credit in Left Behind appears to be different, I've also made "Weslight" a pseudonym for "Westlight". I also need to let you know that per our etiquette, you should have asked me about this before making the change, and this should have been done on my regular talk page. Per the note at the top of my regular talk page, the subpage where you informed me that you had made the change is only intended for the addition of cover images or notes. All other changes should be noted on the main talk page, and with this sort of change, it should be discussed before you proceed with the edit. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 03:40, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Aha; I see, and understand. I made the assumption that it was a typo and leapt ahead, on the assumption that it being a typo you'd agree to the fix, then further overgeneralized the note re your subpage. Thanks for the elucidation, I'll be more conservative in my assumptions in the future, and not so overly anxious to jump to conclusions. Apologies for the extra work to straighten out my erroneous "fixes'. gzuckier 04:39, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Eragon

Hi. Your Eragon submission that I have on hold is editing the information for the 52nd printing to reflect the 50th printing. Did you mean to clone it instead, to make a new record for the 50th and leave the 52nd in place? --MartyD 14:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

oops. yes, must have hit the wrong key in my late night stupor. thanks.gzuckier 19:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Epilogue to "the Lottery"

Hi, you verified The Lottery which has an epilogue, a poem, where you gave the author as Shirley Jackson. But actually this is an excerpt from the traditional ballad "James Harris, the Daemon Lover" (Child #243, Text F). If it's all right with you, I'm going to change the author to uncredited. --Vasha 20:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

ok with me, thanks. gzuckier 23:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

'A Conversation with Ray Bradbury'

How would you feel about changing A Conversation with Ray Bradbury from an ESSAY to an INTERVIEW? It is certainly in an interview format, although conducted in an uncredited fashion by "DR", presumably the publisher Del Rey. This title appears in only three pubs that we so far have in the database. What do you think? PeteYoung 20:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

sure! gzuckier 20:16, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
If Waldstein is also in agreement I'll do the changes. Cheers. PeteYoung 20:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

The Darkest Evening of the Year

It appears we have two publication records for the same publication.

  • 315271 is primary verified by two people
  • 586654 is transient-verified by you

The only differences between the records are:

  • Page count is 354+[1] vs 357.
  • Your version includes "357 • About the Author (The Darkest Evening of the Year) • essay by uncredited". Help:Screen:NewPub#Contents included with exceptions has a section for "About the Author". As the "About the Author" in this publication is one sentence I feel it's not of the substantial length or quality that would merit including a record for this in ISFDB.

Can you do the transient verification on the first publication record and remove it from the second? That'll allow us to delete both the "About the Author" record and the duplicate publication record. Thank you. --Marc Kupper|talk 09:29, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

ok, will do. gzuckier 14:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

The Fires of Heaven

Hello, I've put your submission on hold as your proposed publication looks a lot like this already existing one. What are your thoughts? Hauck 06:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

yeah, looks like i overlooked that one. thanks. gzuckier 06:34, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Maps, etc., and Sword of Truth series

I've accepted your submissions putting various maps (and other interiorart) into one or the other of the "Sword of Truth" series. We don't normally put artwork into the series (unless, I suppose, there were an artwork series), although I know of no prohibition against it. Still, series are meant to be for the written works (fiction series, non-fiction series). Letting them go into the series doesn't damage anything, and it is easy enough to take them out, so I accepted them so that you can see how it looks. --MartyD 10:44, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

ok, thanks. i wasn't sure; looking at a lot of maps, etc some seem to be in the series, some not. series and "universe" seem to overlap somewhat, too... anyway, thanks again. gzuckier 03:36, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Regularization of Publishers

Hello, I've approved some of your submission but reverted the changes of publishers in order to stick to our chosen regularizations as some of your modifications would have created "new" publishers (e.g. "Ace Books / Berkley / Penguin"). Hauck 06:27, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought I had the imprint / publisher thing down, but I couldn't figure out the hierarchy of "Ace Books / Berkley / Penguin" from the copyright page and cover. gzuckier 06:43, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
It's the same for me ^_^. I'm in favor of an heavy simplification in the publisher's field as we're not here to record the capitalistic history of such conglomerates (X was bought by Y then absorbed by Z) and, more importantly, a "standard" user may be confused by such a publisher. Hauck 06:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Lady of the Trillium

Hello, just in case, can you check that the publication that you want to add is not in fact this already existing one? Thanks. Hauck 06:09, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

looks like, except the existing one doesn't list an isbn number; think it might be the same one, though? add the isbn to it?gzuckier 14:16, 20 June 2017 (EDT)
As it's not been PVed, I'd say yes. Hauck 01:53, 21 June 2017 (EDT)
ok thanks.gzuckier 13:07, 21 June 2017 (EDT)

Lady of the Triliium (map)

Hello, I have your varianting request on hold while verifying with the PV if it is not just a typo or if it is indeed spelled differently and need varianting. If you would like to keep an eye on the discussion, it is here. Thanks! Annie 00:57, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

ok, thanks. i didn't want to make any assumptions. gzuckier
Turned out to be a typo so after the update and merge, I had to force reject the varianting. Annie 22:38, 26 June 2017 (EDT)
ok, thanks. gzuckier 22:30, 27 June 2017 (EDT)

The non-genre tag

Hello,

Just a reminder that if you set the non-genre flag for a title (or set any of the other checkboxes), all the variants and translations need the same flag. It does not get set automatically if the variant already exists. It will get fixed when it shows on the report the next day and someone follow up from there but if you are over there already, you may want to submit the whole lot of them :) Annie 01:13, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

ah, didn't know that. OK, thanks. gzuckier 01:17, 8 July 2017 (EDT)
Not very intuitive, I know. Thanks! :) Annie 01:24, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

Dune

I found Your Note "This is a radical departure from previous 'Dune art' by Schoenherr. Attribution may be wrong." for this pub. See also here, where the cover artist George Steinmetz is credited on the rear jacket flap. --Zapp 11:09, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

looks like somebody at the publisher didn't update the copyright page. gzuckier 22:26, 8 July 2017 (EDT)

Glossary of Gothic & Victorian Terms

Hello, I have your submission on hold. You are trying to merge the dictionaries from two different books. Are you sure that they are exactly the same? Thanks! Annie 23:48, 20 July 2017 (EDT)

Same question about Other Recommended Titles and A Taste for the Fantastic? Thanks! Annie 23:50, 20 July 2017 (EDT)
Well...haven't seen the other (than the Mysteries of Udolpho) pub, but I'm convinced that all 3 titles are generic Flame Tree 451 filler. The Taste for the Fantastic is just a 1 page blurb for the Flame Tree 451 publisher. The Glossary and the Other Recommended Titles for another Flame Tree 451 pub are visible https://www.amazon.co.uk/Monk-Fantastic-Fiction-Matthew-Lewis/dp/085775680X/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500654078&sr=1-8&keywords=Flame+Tree+451, mostly, and are the same as the versions in Udolpho, down to the page break locations, so I'm pretty sure the titles referenced in the database are the same generic titles. gzuckier 12:42, 21 July 2017 (EDT)
I wonder if we should record "Other Recommended Titles" at all - we usually do not record this kind of pieces esspecially if it is something the publisher always adds (it is an advertisement of sort). Same for "Taste for the Fantastic" unless if you think it is substantial. See here for some notes. As you are the PV of at least one of them, let me know what you prefer :)
The glossary is substantial so it should stay for sure so I will merge those and wait for your response for the other 2. Annie 12:57, 21 July 2017 (EDT)
I'd be just as happy to remove the "Taste for the Fantastic" entry from the database and make a reference in the notes, I only included it because there was already an entry from the other book. The "Other Recommended Titles" I'm a little more on the fence about; it seems reasonably complete, not just the publisher's titles, so might sort of qualify as an essay. gzuckier 13:10, 21 July 2017 (EDT)
I will approve both merges for now to let you think for that for a while? When you make a decision, go ahead and remove the title from the publication if you decide to? Annie 13:47, 21 July 2017 (EDT)

All the Lovely Bad Ones

Hello, I've put your submission on hold as your intended clone looks to me a lot like this one (where the notes seem self-contradictory). Can you check the matter with Don? Thanks. Hauck 06:50, 4 August 2017 (EDT)

will do, thanks. gzuckier 23:30, 4 August 2017 (EDT)

Beyond the Burning Time

I have your addition of Beyond the Burning Time on hold. Is this genre? It does not appear to be from the reviews. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:26, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

I was also on the fence, but another editor pointed me toward a couple of ghostly apparitions on pages 235-237 https://books.google.com/books?id=y3L7OOc5xLgC&q=235#v=snippet&q=235&f=false. The reader may interpret these as simple hallucinations, but the book just takes the observer's POV of them as ghosts, so I figured that put the book into the genre, barely. gzuckier 11:28, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
Accepted it and added a note to the title record. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:18, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Map Variants

Hello, I've placed two of your MakeVariant submissions on hold as the date of the Dutch variant titles is earlier than the date of the English titles you're making them variants of. Is there some additional merging that needs to happen? Or are there earlier English records missing from the DB? Thanks Albinoflea 17:34, 8 September 2017 (EDT)

Well, that's a good question. I don't have the books to look at, just been going by preponderance of evidence and logic, but... re Drasnia, the earlier English language pubs of "Castle of Wizardry" lump all the maps together as "Castle of Wizardry (maps)", http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?6292 for instance, whereas http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?387183 and http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?515378 both itemize. So I figure the Drasnia map is part of the lumped maps of the earliest pubs, and I varianted the maps of the itemized pubs to each other. I assume the true date for all the maps is the date of the first English pub. (parenthetical question; is there any reasonable way to make the individual maps variants of the grouped, or vice versa?)
"The Elf Queen of Shannara (maps)" is more puzzling; the date on the dutch version is not only long before the dutch pub, it's a few years before the first English pub, so I don't know the reasoning behind that date... ?
Thanks. gzuckier 00:05, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
Okay, I had thought you were varianting them as part of pubs you had entered yourself; I've reached out to the PV for the Dutch volumes for clarification. Thanks, Albinoflea 16:11, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
I used the date that was on the map so it should be the English date that I used, I will update my map records to the date of the Dutch publication, that should be best.William 10:13, 10 September 2017 (EDT)
Excellent, thanks for straightening this out. Albinoflea 00:52, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Firebird (excerpt)

I have accepted your edits to Veils of Time, but have a question on the "Firebird (excerpt)" addition. Based on the reviews (example), this doesn't seem to a genre work? If not, it shouldn't be included as it would create a new author with only non-genre contents. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:41, 9 September 2017 (EDT)

Hi. I was dubious myself, included only on 3 pieces of evidence:
  1. ."Why did Annette always hear music that nobody else could and if it was so painful for her, why did she continue to play at all? Who kept whispering "Annie" throughout the book? Annette's mother? And the ethereal body takeover was a bit over the top" https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/735714637?book_show_action=true&from_review_page=1
  2. ."But she gives her tale an unearthly twist that's disappointingly artificial and requires the reader's leap of faith, not once but twice." in this review https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-399-14404-2
  3. . the fact that it got reviewed in fantasticfiction at all. https://www.fantasticfiction.com/g/janice-graham/firebird.htm
Other reviews make mention of things like "passion that transcends tragedy" https://www.amazon.com/Firebird-Flint-Hills-Novels-Book-ebook/dp/B00E1DO7UQ/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= and "unexpected twist ending" that are ambiguous, but....? So that's my reasoning, thanks. gzuckier 13:56, 9 September 2017 (EDT)

The Fallen and Leviathan

Your edit to The Fallen and Leviathan will have to be rejected. You are editing a first printing and changing it to a 10th printing. Instead, you need to clone the original. The original printing should remain in the database. I will leave the edit on hold so you can copy the information if you wish. Once you make the clone, I'll will reject it. Also, you will need to remove your verification from the first printing and instead verify the new 10th printing record. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:05, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

ok done, thanks. gzuckier 20:15, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

CreateSpace

We no longer use CreateSpace as a publisher for books without a publisher statement. CreateSpace role varies from book to book and they are not always a true publisher. So for books without a publisher listed on the copyright page, we consider them self-published and use the author's name. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:16, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

oh, ok, entered into mental database, thanks. gzuckier 20:17, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

pamphlet

Hello! I am just curious, but is this pub The First Greencloak really a pamphlet? Rudolf Rudam 06:03, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

Well, I noticed the entry I cloned it off was listed as a trade paperback, which it certainly isn't, so I looked through the definitions. This is quite a bit smaller than a regular paperback, maybe 4X6? 4X5? (haven't got it with me right now), about the size of the instructions that come with electronic gadgets; it's only 48 pages total, and just stapled on the spine, so the entry for pamphlet looked good: "ph - pamphlet. Used for short (in page count), unbound, staple-bound, or otherwise lightly bound publications." It does have glossy covers of slightly thicker stock than the middle pages, though. gzuckier 13:52, 14 September 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for your extensive explanation! Rudolf Rudam 13:56, 14 September 2017 (EDT)
my pleasure. gzuckier 15:03, 14 September 2017 (EDT)

Who's That Ghoulfriend? publisher

Hi. I accepted your Who's That Ghoulfriend? clone, but I changed the publisher to just "Little, Brown" and added a note that it is stated as "Little, Brown and Company" (based on what you provided originally -- please adjust the note if that's not correct). Apparently, we're using "Little, Brown". See the note here. I don't know why that is. --MartyD 06:11, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

okay with me, thanks for the update. I think eventually we'll need some sort of crosswalk table to compile all the names the various publishers use. gzuckier 20:14, 14 October 2017 (EDT)

Tall, Dark & Hungry

I have your clone of Tall, Dark & Hungry on hold. From your publication notes, this seems like its the same version already in the database and not a new one. Is there something else that makes you think it should be cloned vs. edited? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:44, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

looks like i got this and Stay Out of the Basement confused... thanks. gzuckier 23:13, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

The Seeing Stone

I accepted your edits to The Seeing Stone. However, wanted to double check the entries on page viii & ix. They are entered as shortfiction, but from the titles and position within the book, they sound like they could be essays. Since it's an easy mistake to not switch the default, can you please confirm the correct form? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:53, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

The letter from "The Grace Kids" purports to be a letter from the fictional protagonists accompanying their manuscript; the letter from the real author continues about the letter from the Grace Kids. i was tempted to just roll them into the novel, but I'm not sure they're integral or just for this pub or part of the series or something. Anyway, i figured they're too fictional to be an essay. thanks. gzuckier 03:01, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

Stay Out of the Basement

For your edit to Stay Out of the Basement, you are editing the first printing and changing it to the 10th printing. In this case, you need to clone instead. I will leave the edit on hold until you can clone it so you can copy the information from the pending edit vs. re-enter it. After that, I will reject it. You will need to unverify it and verify the new on as well. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:57, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

yeah, see above comment re Tall Dark and Hungry. thanks. gzuckier 23:13, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

Introduction: A Clockwork Orange Resucked

I accepted your edit to Introduction: A Clockwork Orange Resucked, but restored the original date. We use publication date, not the date something was written. I added your moderator note regarding the date to the title notes. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:41, 18 November 2017 (EST)

The Andromeda Strain

I removed "Data from Heritage Auctions, Wikipedia, and WorldCat. Wikipedia has an incorrect page count." from The Andromeda Strain. Secondary source statement should only be present when data is not from the pub directly. Since you verified this, the data should be from the pub. If there is specific data in the record that is not on the pub (pub date, price) than a secondary source statement would be included, but it should state the specific data (ex. "Publication date from Amazon..."). Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:49, 18 November 2017 (EST)

ok, thanks gzuckier 01:17, 20 November 2017 (EST)

Minor changes to Dead After Dark

Hi, I made some very minor changes to Dead After Dark. Added to Notes: detailed information about copyrights for each story. Moved OCLC out into External IDs area. BungalowBarbara 23:46, 19 November 2017 (EST)

ok, thanks for the notice. gzuckier 01:17, 20 November 2017 (EST)

Changes to Tall, Dark & Hungry

Hi, I also have a copy of Tall, Dark & Hungry and it is a mass-market paperback, not a trade paperback. I don't think it was ever available under that ISBN as a trade pb. I have changed this. BungalowBarbara 01:56, 20 November 2017 (EST)

ok thanks. i may well have erred on that field. gzuckier 03:14, 20 November 2017 (EST)
It might have been set that way when the record was first created. Info on Amazon was not clear as to size. Likely you just overlooked it. BungalowBarbara 01:15, 21 November 2017 (EST)

Introduction to Pete Hamilton Story "Watching Trees Grow"

Hello,

I have your submission on hold. The name you are trying to drop is how the Introduction should be called if not specifically called differently in the publication. Do you have one of the PS Publishing books so you can verify the name? If not, can you please discuss with the verifiers? If the non-standard name is not printed in the PS book, a variant should be made instead. Thanks! Annie 16:14, 20 November 2017 (EST)

Niven's Laws

And a similar note for this submission. If this essay is named differently in the two publications, it should be varianted, not merged. Can you please discuss with the verifiers if you would like to merge them? Thanks! Annie 16:16, 20 November 2017 (EST)

Edgar Allan Poe's abridged shortfiction ...

... was merged with the original titles by me, since there is no difference in the titles and the essence seems to be unaltered, and the next editor will merge them anyway. In this cases we add notes to the titles (which I did). Thanks, Stonecreek 02:32, 29 November 2017 (EST)

ok thanks. gzuckier 20:51, 29 November 2017 (EST)

Aboriginal legends synopses

Hi. I accepted your title updates providing synopses that looked to me like translations. Assuming those are translations, it's not really an appropriate use of the Synopsis field -- that should be to provide a short summary of the story. A translation of the title (or explanation of specific words in the title) belongs in the notes instead. You may do with this feedback what you will; there's no harm in having the information as the synopsis instead of in the notes, and someone with access to the stories could always provide a synopsis in the future. --MartyD 07:23, 3 December 2017 (EST)

Hi. yeah, they were translations (i assume) from the australian library listing. i'll probably leave these as is for the nonce, due to there being a zillion of them, but i'll remember it. thanks. gzuckier 20:32, 3 December 2017 (EST)

D'Aulaire's Book of Greek Myths

Hi, I rejected your recent additions of publications for this title; they were seemingly all taken from the same source: all were of the same printing (6oth) and had the same page count, regardless if it was a pb, tp or ebook (the latter is unlikely to have a 'printing' or a page count at all). Thanks, Stonecreek 02:17, 5 December 2017 (EST)

I got them all from the amazon look inside https://www.amazon.com/Daulaires-Greek-Myths-Ingri-dAulaire/dp/0385015836/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=, looking at the copyright page which lists all 3. Not sure how to handle it; is it the ebook edition being look insided? but it is paginated, with the number of pages which matches that listed on the amazon page (although the cover and isbn don't). it has additional content over the earlier printing of the same isbn which i verified. what would be the appropriate listing to use? thanks. gzuckier 17:17, 5 December 2017 (EST)
Hard to say what is displayed. In any case the cover differs from the original. If one can't be sure about the correctness, it's better to leave a publication out; and amazon is not the best adress for bibliographical data. Stonecreek 03:47, 6 December 2017 (EST)
ok, thanks. gzuckier 05:14, 6 December 2017 (EST)

The Seance and Other Stories

I have added two to the speculative stories you listed in The Seance and Other Stories: "Cockadoodledoo" (narrated by a rooster) and "The Slaughterer" (only marginally speculative, since the slaughterer's vision of reproachful animals is a dream, but a few academics and reviewers mention it among Singer's supernatural stories). I don't know the page numbers; could you add them? --Vasha 18:47, 9 December 2017 (EST)

ok, i still have the book around somewhere, will do. thanks. gzuckier 23:16, 9 December 2017 (EST)!

TheTitans

Should this title have a space (i.e. "The Titans")? Or was it that way in the pub? -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2017 (EST)

oops.no, definitely 2 words. thanks. gzuckier 19:47, 10 December 2017 (EST)

"From Bumba" edit

Hi. The system forced me to reject your proposed "From Bumba" edit because the title did not exist anymore (it was probably merged away by an earlier submission). If there is anything you still want from that, you'll need to add it to the surviving record. --MartyD 07:20, 16 December 2017 (EST)

ok thanks. gzuckier 13:03, 16 December 2017 (EST)

Memoirs of an Invisible Man variant

Hi. For the submission I have on hold, making a variant is not the right thing to do. We do not use variants for derived works (except translations). If the Reader's Digest version is a substantial revision, then it stays a separate title. You can note in it that it's a condensation of the other. If it's a very minor revision, we would treat them as the same and merge. By the way, there is some precedent for adding a disambiguating "(abridged)". --MartyD 22:03, 19 December 2017 (EST)

ok, that's a good tecnique. thanks. gzuckier 22:11, 19 December 2017 (EST)

The Zombie Autopsies

Added cover scan, notes and external references to your verified The Zombie Autopsies.SFJuggler 17:07, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Great! thanks. gzuckier 22:24, 20 December 2017 (EST)

Non-Genre Magazines

When entering non-genre magazines, the editor should be credited as 'Editors of MAGAZINE TITLE'. Magazines also have to be placed in series. I have made those updates, as well as setting the non-genre flag, for your St. Nicholas magazine entries. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:57, 28 December 2017 (EST)

Queen Zixi of Ix (Part 3 of 6)

What were you trying to achieve with this edit? It created a new parent that exactly matched the proposed variant. That is not a valid parent - variant. I mistakenly approved and have since gone back and removed the new parent. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:02, 28 December 2017 (EST)

ohj, i didn't realize it was a variant to start with. thanks. gzuckier 14:40, 28 December 2017 (EST)

Cold Snap

I've rejected this submission. Varianting is for the same work under a different title or author credit. Varianting is not for a variation in the work. In this case, the title & the author are exactly the same. Based on your moderator's note, this is a variation in the work. In that case, you have two options:

  1. If the variation is minor, the title records should be merged together and a note added to the combined record explaining the differences.
  2. If the variations are not minor, the title records should remain separate and notes added to each record explaining the differences.

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2018 (EST)

Oh, Ok, thanks. gzuckier 21:43, 8 January 2018 (EST)

Hard Rejects

Hello,

I had to hard reject two of your update requests. This happens when the element you are trying to change does not exist anymore due to merges or deletions. I tried to work through your requests in order but it is possible that another moderator finalized a few from the bottom of the list or that someone else submitted and got approved a change in a record. Can you check your history and see if you still need to submit a change for something?

Thanks! Annie 18:06, 10 January 2018 (EST)

OK, thanks.went through a lot of involved stuff yesterday. gzuckier 22:28, 10 January 2018 (EST)

Unmerging Frankenstein

Hello, I have put your submission on hold, as the title is already a variant. What's your idea behind this? Stonecreek 14:35, 16 January 2018 (EST)

hi. i was looking to generate a variant for the 1831 version vs the 1818 version. the barnes & noble reprints say they're the 1831 version, not sure about the rest of these. thanks. gzuckier 15:00, 16 January 2018 (EST)
Wouldn't that lead to a variant of a variant (which aren't allowed)? Stonecreek 00:17, 17 January 2018 (EST)
oh yeah, i guess so. i'll have to see if i can find something on how different the two versions are. thanks. gzuckier 00:23, 17 January 2018 (EST)
I suggest consulting Chavey--this area of literature is her specialty. --Vasha 00:53, 30 January 2018 (EST)

Robert Ludlum's The Paris Option

Hi, I've put your submission for Robert Ludlum's The Paris Option on hold because according to the publication's Amazon page it looks like Robert Ludlum should also credited as author, not only Gayle Lynds. Can you please check with your copy if you still have it? Jens Hitspacebar 08:39, 29 January 2018 (EST)

I question if this even belongs. Techno-thrillers are specifically excluded by policy. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2018 (EST)

Under the Dome

This title was added to the contents of our verified edition of Under the Dome as a piece of shortfiction. Since it is only a list of personages in the novel, I removed it. --Willem 13:59, 17 February 2018 (EST)

OK, I'm not so compulsive about listing such things these days. thanks. gzuckier 00:28, 18 February 2018 (EST)

Laszlo Kobinyi vs Laszlo Kubinyi

Hi, your verified copy of Deep Blue contains a map Deep Blue (map) and a Deep Blue (Chapter opener), both given by you as done by Laszlo Kobinyi. Using Amazon's LookInside! I see Laszlo Kubinyi however.--Dirk P Broer 19:18, 1 March 2018 (EST)

You are correct sir! i'll edit it. thanks. gzuckier 11:20, 6 March 2018 (EST)

A Chapter of the Psalms

I accepted your edit to A Chapter of the Psalms, but there is a typo in the notes. The year is missing a digit (190). These stories will all need to be varianted from I. L. Peretz to י. ל. פרץ, preferably under the original title if listed in your source. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2018 (EDT)

Thanks. Unfortunately, getting the original titles requires some digging, but I did it before. gzuckier 23:54, 25 March 2018 (EDT)

Children of the Vampire cover art

Added cover artist (Bob Larkin) to your verified. Cheers ! Linguist 05:03, 3 April 2018 (EDT).

Thanks gzuckier 13:30, 3 April 2018 (EDT)

Under the Black Ensign

Hello,

Did two changes in your verified:

  • Foreword needed to be disambiguated (so we do not end up with 10 essays with the same name on the author page)
  • Fixed the publication title to match the title one (as per your latest change).

Feel free to edit it more if needed. Annie 21:48, 17 May 2018 (EDT)

Thanks gzuckier 21:50, 17 May 2018 (EDT)

Galileo's Daughter

Hi-- I was a bit surprised to find this history/biography book in the database. I've read it, and as far as I can recall, it has nothing to do with speculative fiction. Noneteheless, someone clearly went to a lot of trouble adding multiple editions to the database; was that you? Normally, I would post a request to the notice boards asking for an irrelevant book like this to be removed, but I'd like to hear from whoever added it first. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 18:37, 17 June 2018 (EDT)

Peter and the Shadow Thieves

Hi. You verified a copy of the 2007 paperback ed. P311240 as publisher Disney / Hyperion Books. Does the title page actually show "Disney-Hyperion" (hyphen) or something longer, as your cited WorldCat record suggests?

See also publisher Disney/Hyperion Books (unspaced). --Pwendt|talk 20:02, 18 June 2018 (EDT)

hi. sorry, i don't have the book available any more. It's quite possible I got the publisher details wrong, if you feel so, please feel free to correct. thanks. gzuckier 23:11, 19 June 2018 (EDT)

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Other Classic Novels

You had made a transient verification of this publication. I am at the beginning of a long process to identify the particular English translations of the Jules Verne novels and have so far completed Five Weeks in a Balloon. If you still have access to your transient copy, would it be possible to get the initial paragraph of the contained novels? Thanks. ../Doug H 21:20, 12 July 2018 (EDT)

Mount Dragon

Hello! I hold your submission of Mount Dragon, because the title [Mount Dragon] seems to be already in our DB.Could you please check it out? Thanks Rudolf Rudam 15:54, 13 August 2018 (EDT)

indeed. i shall launch an update instead. thanks. gzuckier 21:05, 13 August 2018 (EDT)

Dark Matter

Hello! I am holding your change because I am not fully understanding the driver: The cover artwork by Chen Liu is available [here] and from the notes Christopher Brand and Michael Morris are responsible for the cover's layout but not for the artwork. So why would you want to remove Chen Liu as the cover artist? Thanks, John. JLochhas 11:07, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

couldn't make out the photo in the cover but now i see it. i think maybe Brand and Morris should get referenced as well as liu, since the cover is heavily designed and looks like brand's other covers. agree? gzuckier 15:39, 30 August 2018 (EDT)
My understanding of the definition is to only to reference the creator of the artwork. I would only add the "designers" if they actually contributed to the picture, e.g. by creating a collage from various sources. In your particular case several copies of a picture by Chen Liu have been overlayed by some nicely crafted text. So I would only quote Chen as the artist. I hope that this helps... JLochhas 17:50, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

American Heritage Vol. VIII, No. 4, Autumn 1966

Does the cover of American Heritage Vol. VIII, No. 4, Autumn 1966 illustrate the speculative fiction content inside? For non-genre magazines, we only list cover art credits and cover images if the artwork is for the genre contents. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:41, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Ah, that would be a no. thanks. gzuckier 14:43, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Lord Kelvin's Machine

Hi, we do account shortfictions and novels as substantially different, so both of the titles have to be kept separate (no merger, no varianting). Stonecreek 05:00, 27 September 2018 (EDT)

OK, thanks gzuckier 15:31, 27 September 2018 (EDT)

Separating simplified Beauty and the Beast

In your transient-verified publication Beauty and the Beast, you indicated that this was an "abridged and simplified" version; so I separated it into a different title record from the full version. You don't happen to know when the simplified version was first published, by chance? --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 14:45, 27 October 2018 (EDT)

Hi. The only pub and date I have for that version is that one pub, 2017-05-04. Thanks for the attention. gzuckier 00:18, 28 October 2018 (EDT)

Maria, or The Wrongs of Woman (excerpt)

Hi, it seems possible that this title, which is included here, is in fact an essay, since the source text from which it was excerpted is nonfiction. Could you take a second look?

Also, the displayed cover image doesn't seem to fit the publication. Stonecreek 05:08, 2 February 2019 (EST)

Hi OK, I still have that in my pile. Don't know what's up with that cover, that's a picture of a book I've never seen in my life. I'll update the photo too. thanks. gzuckier 16:43, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Well, the strange cover could have been caused by an internal shift within amazon. That's really just possible. Stonecreek 00:23, 3 February 2019 (EST)
I had wondered what happens to all our covers from Amazon if they decide to shift things.. gzuckier
OK, found it... it seems to be fiction; it's a memoir in first person of a woman named Jemima. The editor refers to the original book as a novel. gzuckier 00:39, 10 February 2019 (EST)
Thanks! Stonecreek 03:05, 11 February 2019 (EST)

The New York Times Book Review, September 3, 2017

Hello, I have put your recent submission for a new issue on hold since there are some unresolved problems with the one stated above: unlikely shortfictions and an unlinked review. Please take a look into the matter. Stonecreek 04:23, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Not sure exactly which? thanks gzuckier 12:10, 22 February 2019 (EST)
Are those really shortfictions in that issue? Stonecreek 00:37, 23 February 2019 (EST)
Ah, thank you. I thought I checked those things each time... the unlinked review now linked, also. Thanks again. gzuckier 02:19, 23 February 2019 (EST)

The Weird Gathering and Other Tales

I've got a few questions about your verified publication of Curran's The Weird Gathering and Other Tales. I notice that you have a note: "First Ballantine Books Edition: October 1989". However, the date of the publication record is 1979. Assuming the note is correct, you should update the publication date to "1989-10-00". Also, you list the publisher as "Fawcett Crest / Ballantine", though that isn't required. I'm thinking that your record is actually a duplicate of this record, which appears to have an incorrect cover. If you agree, I'll delete the other record. Aside from the date and publisher, your record is more complete. I have one other question regarding the author credits. I notice that some of them are "uncredited" while others are "Anonymous". Is there an actual credit to "Anonymous" on the title page of these stories? If not, then we should change the author to "uncredited". I would expect all the stories of unknown authorship to be credited similarly in the book, so if these should be "Anonymous", then the uncredited stories probably need to be changed. Actual "Anonymous" credits are unusual. Thanks for taking a look at this. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:57, 23 February 2019 (EST)

One other: Could you check the credit for "The Magic Mirror; or, The Lady of the Crystal Spring" on page 360. We have it as "R. R. W.". Bleiler reviews it in The Guide to Supernatural Fiction but has the credit as "R. W. W." Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:10, 23 February 2019 (EST)
ok, i'll see if i still have it around.gzuckier 12:34, 23 February 2019 (EST)

The Hartford Courant, March 10, 2019

What are your intentions with the book review in The Hartford Courant, March 10, 2019? Is the reviewer reviewing his own review?--Dirk P Broer 22:29, 10 March 2019 (EDT)

Reviewer is reviewing Gingerbread by Helen Oyeyemi gzuckier 12:10, 11 March 2019 (EDT)

American Heritage Vol. VIII, No. 4, Autumn 1966

Hi. You verified this issue of American Heritage P2429781 as Transient, which hints that your source may be Volume VIII as bound in a library collection. Anyway, I suppose this isn't a hardcover magazine, or is it?

I am certain that "The Editors of American Heritage" should be "Editors of American Heritage" and I suppose but don't know (is it considered optional?) that the Title and Publication should be entered parallel to the 1964 year and December 1964 issue of American Heritage. --Pwendt|talk 16:53, 20 March 2019 (EDT)

I posted a more general inquiry concerning names and directory entries such as "The Editors ..." vs. "Editors ..." at ISFDB:Community Portal#The Author and The Earl. --Pwendt|talk 18:14, 20 March 2019 (EDT)

Ah, I see what I did. The actual title of the mag is "Horizon",but published by American Heritage magazine. It's a quarterly hardcover magazine, at least in the 60s. I changed to "Editors of Horizon", might as well be consistent. Thanks. gzuckier 18:46, 26 March 2019 (EDT)

The World's Classics, XXI

Chris J and I created the first of these three publication records for The World's Classics, XXI (Poe, Tales of Mystery and Imagination). I am not sure how you and I cooperated to create the two records as Oxford U.P.

1902 as Grant Richards P591199 -- (1902) title page at HDL (there mis-catalogued as Oxford U.P.) --contains list of TWC #I to XX
1902 as Oxford P694000
1928 as Oxford P694180

You verified the latter a few months ago, Transient. Probably we cooperated on the Note, as with the copyright page in view you modified something I wrote. Compare the Note for "1902 as Oxford". I recognize both as my probable wording and format but I doubt that I had a source for either of the records as Oxford. Do you recall?

Anyway, I expect to eliminate the "1902 as Oxford" as spurious, to add the 1903 as Henry Frowde ((1903) title page at HDL), and with newspaper help to explain in a series Note the multiple early publisher/imprints. --Pwendt|talk 15:01, 27 March 2019 (EDT)

The Devil Aspect

Hi, taking a closer look at the description of this novel at amazon, it's questionable if it's speculative fiction as to be included in our database. Do you have any hint that it's more than a normal-setted thriller? Stonecreek 04:22, 31 March 2019 (EDT)

With no answer on your side I have deleted the publication. Stonecreek 00:25, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
Yeah, thanks. I was searching reviews online... the closest I could find was some reference to whether or not various serial killers were possessed by the devil but it seemed like it might be a subjective perception thing rather than "reality"; there was lot of reference to a twist ending but until somebody reads the book who know. so, thanks. gzuckier 23:52, 2 April 2019 (EDT)

The Electric Church

Since there are some extra items like an interview and an essay, why didn't you include them? Stonecreek 14:21, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

OK, might as well I guess. Thanks. gzuckier 14:21, 10 April 2019 (EDT)

Dragon Tears

I added some notes to Dragon Tears -- if there is no numline, it's not the 1993 printing... Susan O'Fearna 01:51, 15 May 2019 (EDT)

ok, thanks. gzuckier 13:17, 15 May 2019 (EDT)

Rot & Ruin

I'm going to change the status from Juvenile, which refers to elementary-aged children, since that series is aimed toward teens Susan O'Fearna 01:43, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

Ok. (that's good to know, I think I've been juveniling too much then) thanks. gzuckier 02:11, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

The New York Times - 2019 / The New York Times Magazine - 2019

Hi, you want to change The New York Times - 2019 into The New York Times Magazine - 2019. According to me there's quite a lot under the title, not all of it The New York Times Magazine.--Dirk P Broer 06:05, 25 June 2019 (EDT)

Yeah, I'm trying to get the 2 items that are really magazine sections out of the new york times series, and into the magazine series, and the only way i could think of was to duplicate it, edit both of them, and convert the one to magazine. is there a better way? please say yes... thanks. gzuckier 23:08, 25 June 2019 (EDT)
You can un-merge the items not belonging into the the new york times series and make these the new the new york times magazine series. I'll try to help.--Dirk P Broer 06:14, 26 June 2019 (EDT)
thanks gzuckier 22:14, 27 June 2019 (EDT)

Titling for serials

Sorry that I rejected your bunch of submissions, but there was either that or the tedious retitling of all the titles and issues entered. If you feel like it, please resubmit correct versions. You just can't go around and copy the information stated at one site into ISFDB. The rules are different, and in this case, Phil Stephenson-Payne has his idiosyncracies as we have ours! Please take a more intensive look at the rules as how we enter magazines. Stonecreek 00:23, 4 July 2019 (EDT)

Plus: "SOS International: The Death of a Tanker" is not ensured to be speculative. Do you have any more information? Stonecreek 05:46, 4 July 2019 (EDT)

Phantoms cover art

Hi. I have added cover artist (Don Brautigam) to your verified, as per later publications. Cheers ! Linguist 09:57, 18 July 2019 (EDT).

Twilight Eyes cover artist

Hi. I have added the cover artist (Don Brautigam again) to your verified, as per this record, confirmed here and here. Cheers ! Linguist 09:27, 10 August 2019 (EDT).

Lightning cover art

Added artist (Don Brautigam) to your verified, as per other editions. Cheers, Linguist 10:35, 11 August 2019 (EDT).

Midnight cover art

Ditto ! Linguist 04:50, 13 August 2019 (EDT).

The Funhouse

I made some changes to The Funhouse that you transient-verified.

  • Change the Publisher from "Berkley Books" to "Berkley Books / SFBC"
  • Added Catalog ID: 00401
  • Added content record for page 328 "Afterword (The Funhouse)"
  • Added notes:
    • "ISBN: 0-425-14248-5" plus the barcode on the rear cover is for "ISBN 0-425-14248-5". However, the publication also has an SFBC style Catalog # "00401" on the rear cover.
    • No price stated.
    • The cover artist is not credited nor is a signature visible.

--Marc Kupper 01:51, 15 September 2019 (EDT)

Prison Ship

You primary-verified this edition: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?306151 I just submitted OCLC info about it. Mike 3:13, 16 September 2019 (CST)

Tagged in error...

Hi Gzuckier, a very minor detail: you have a tag 'Thailand' for Garry Kilworth's short story The Invisible Foe, when in fact it is set in Singapore (which I've already tagged). Thanks. PeteYoung 09:01, 22 September 2019 (EDT)

The Martian : Andy Weir

Hi, I have the 28th printing of your similar PV here.

I infer from your use of roman numerals in the 'Pages:' and 'Contents' fields that in your print the pages preceding page 1 are numbered with same. In my print these pages are unnumbered. Could you check this?

Btw, when I submit my 28th, my 'Pages:' will be '[12]+387' and 'Contents' will use the pipe to ensure the contents are listed in the order in which they appear; '[5]|1' '[8]|2' and '1|3'. Thanks, Kev BanjoKev 12:47, 6 November 2019 (EST)

Personal tools