User talk:Stonecreek

From ISFDB

Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to my talk page!
For minor changes you don't have to inform me (a found cover art credit does interest me, though).

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4


Contents

Troubleshooting

Here exclusive for you.--Wolfram.winkler 16:05, 14 September 2020 (EDT)

Many thanks for the hint, Wolfram! Christian Stonecreek 16:07, 14 September 2020 (EDT)
And here--Wolfram.winkler 16:11, 14 September 2020 (EDT)
Ah, that one looks okay. Maybe this is one entry that you can learn from. Christian Stonecreek 16:13, 14 September 2020 (EDT)
Oh, that one looks not okay, not a good example to learn something, but a typical example for your excellent work, please find the typo.
But I don't want to take this to extremes, it's just a hint to first recognize your own mistakes before criticizing other users' mistakes. Good luck---Wolfram.winkler 10:39, 15 September 2020 (EDT)
Well, I never stated to be perfect: in fact nobody is. Mistakes do happen, the aim should be to learn from them.
On typos: one shouldn't think that they will never happen again. They have a tendency to creep in. Christian Stonecreek 13:03, 15 September 2020 (EDT)
Still wrong, please look accurate.--Wolfram.winkler 16:55, 1 October 2020 (EDT)
Feel free to correct typos. Christian Stonecreek 23:10, 1 October 2020 (EDT)

Iluustrations in Perry Rhodan #547, 4th printing

Hi Christian, I have just received the info that apparently the fourth printing of PR #547 had a fan illustraion in addition to Bruck's work, references are here. Illustration #1 on p. 27 would not be by Bruck, but the following two would the same two as in the first printing. As I don't own printing #4, perhaps you could check and make the resp. edits? Thanks, John JLochhas 06:51, 19 September 2020 (EDT)

Thanks very much, John! I really did not take the signature into account: the illustration is IMHO very near to Bruck's style, and I thought it was a illustration by him that found no place with the initial publication, which I do think has happened before with PR 308, p. 63. Christian Stonecreek 09:58, 19 September 2020 (EDT)

Peter Fischer Sternaux

Hello Christian, by adding two collections I create two entries for an artist:

I'm not sure, but I think both are wrong or typos. The correct name should be Peter Fischer-Sternaux. I found only three hints: wiki bb-Reihe, wiki Kompass-Bücherei and East German poster artists. Can you help me to add the hyphen to Peter Fischer Sternaux? Sterneaux will then be a variant of Sternaux. Thank you very much Henna 06:09, 30 September 2020 (EDT)

Sure! I added the hyphen. Christian Stonecreek 08:58, 30 September 2020 (EDT)

Atlan 216 -> 217?

Hi Christan, can you check Atlan 216? It looks like the number needs to change to 217, otherwise there will be two pub records with 216. Regards, MagicUnk 02:19, 29 October 2020 (EDT)

Thanks! I'll take care of my error. Christian Stonecreek 05:31, 29 October 2020 (EDT)

Perry Rhodan 18 (2.Aufl.) Note

Hi Christian, now the note has been erased completly. [1] I'm wondering about. Are you prepearing a new note? Can you please check this again? --Norman 03:33, 16 November 2020 (EST)

Hi, Norman. I just removed a now surplus note about the cover art being the same as with the novella's first edition (and the cover design, I guess) which can be seen now with your upload.
I agree that it'd be nice, though, to have some notes, but you seem to be more competent than me regarding statements made in the issue, having the issue at hand. Christian Stonecreek 03:40, 16 November 2020 (EST)

Exodus, #40

Hello Christian, I added the missing interior art, please take a look. Regards Henna 15:03, 16 November 2020 (EST)

Oh, yes! Many thanks for that! Christian Stonecreek 22:42, 16 November 2020 (EST)

Image:GRTMRCNSHR2002.jpg

I have restored Image:GRTMRCNSHR2002.jpg. It is used in a publication and "non-genre publication" is not a valid deletion reason for a book cover. By rule, only non-genre magazine covers are prohibited. Non-genre book covers are allowed and we have plenty of them. This disconnect in the rules has been discussed a number of times with no resolution. It's been awhile since the last discussion so it may be worth starting another rules and standards discussion. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:38, 26 November 2020 (EST)

Okay, but this was what was told to me when I was a beginner here. Christian Stonecreek 13:05, 26 November 2020 (EST)

Exodus, #41

Hello Christian, I have changed a few things in this magazine. Please take a look and check the changes. I think now only the collage on page 54 is missing. Thanks Henna 16:36, 3 December 2020 (EST)

Looks considerably better now! Thanks! Christian Stonecreek 16:52, 3 December 2020 (EST)
No, I made some mistakes, now we have three duplicates. I will take care of it. What you think about p. 54? Sorry for the mess Henna 14:47, 4 December 2020 (EST)

Changes by unknown

(moved to the end of my talk page) Stonecreek 05:07, 5 December 2020 (EST)

Hi Christian. I'm wondering about some changes which has be done by unknowe between my submitting and releasing by a moderator (which takes at the moment 1-3days). Example: [2]. I think a moderator is allthough confused about this circumstances. I've today cancelled myself some of my submitted tasks which should have runed into the void. As you know it's hard to wait with the procedure i has to work actually. It takes some days until a new magazine has been registrated in a propper way. But it is much more confusing if a third party doing some well-intentioned actions in the meantime. What is going on there? Is there perhaps a better way for me? I see you are working daily a you check my work, which is really perfect for me. Would it be perhaps a better way to do in the future some actions in a coordinated way together? Norman 04:06, 5 December 2020 (EST)

Well, yes! Maybe I should wait for a time with actions: the reason this happens is that I tend to deal with things the moment I run across them. Working in some areas at the same time does lead into the danger to forget about things. But if you would like to work in an area for some time on your own, we surely can bundle our actions in a more coordinated way. So, what are your plans for the nearest future (for example the coming week?) Christian Stonecreek 05:07, 5 December 2020 (EST)
Thank you for the explanation. At the moment, the long waiting time between the change request and its approval is my problem, especially if the facts have changed in between. In addition, there is a certain impatience on my part. Now I would like to complete volumes #51 to #60 in both the 2nd and 5th edition. Later also the issues 21 to 60 of the 3rd edition. The magazines are of course all in my possession. It would be of great and welcome help to me, for example, if you could briefly review my changes and perhaps if possible approve them once a day. Since you and me always have to carry out several steps into each other for a magazine and I don't want to lose the overview, I would concentrate 2-3 booklets a day. Would such a procedure be conceivable for you? Norman 03:19, 6 December 2020 (EST)
Yes, I'll wait for your doings and perhaps review and add/change a few things later, if that's okay. Christian Stonecreek 03:33, 6 December 2020 (EST)
It would be perfect! I'm always interested to learn how such few things which could be very special are handled here. But first i've to wait for the still pending edits. Norman 04:17, 6 December 2020 (EST)
It seems Dirk (P. Broer) handled all or a part of the necessary doings overnight. Please take a look which of them still need to be dealt with. Christian Stonecreek 05:54, 6 December 2020 (EST)

PR 53 5.Auflage Essay

I've just submitted this [3]. I didn't found the essay at 3|3.1 Das Perry Rhodan-Lexikon in this magazine. I found 3 Letters instead. But i found the essay in volume #51 instead. But some minutes before i submitted for #51 this. Can you please check and do the fixing, or please tell me how to proceed? Norman 04:04, 9 December 2020 (EST)

Perhaps the essay in #51 (by W. Voltz!) is not identical with the 'Werkstattbericht' by (Horst Hoffmann and Peter Terrid). I will check this! But anyway in #53 this has to be modified or deleted Norman 05:14, 9 December 2020 (EST)
Result of check: the Essay in #1154, #920(2nd) and #51(5th) are identical! And the authors are Horst Hoffmann and Peter Terrid. Norman 05:26, 9 December 2020 (EST)
Many thanks for the corrections! It seemed just logical to assume that the essay on the 'Lexikon' would also appear in this issue (#53). I updated the title per merging and also removed it from issue #53 (5. Auflage). Christian Stonecreek 06:19, 9 December 2020 (EST)
Never mind. I have to thank you for the help that accelerated this. Otherwise it would have taken days again. Norman 07:01, 9 December 2020 (EST)
It might even be faster to import titles that already exist in the database - for example illustrations. It's possible to select contents on importing, or to import specified titles (this is done by entering the title no. in the lower half of the import screen). Basically, if there's only one title to import, I use the latter option, and if there is more than one title to import from one other publication I use the first option: it just requires to remove titles from a publication if there are some imported that don't belong to it (for example in PR #52, 5. Aufl., there were only two of the original four interior pieces of art reproduced). Christian Stonecreek 07:10, 9 December 2020 (EST)
Many thanks again. This is very interesting. I'll try this next. I didn't know this function before. :-) Norman 05:58, 10 December 2020 (EST)


Raumschiff Promet and its publication dates

Hi Christian, I'll be changing the publication date of your #54. The publication date of Astro Science Fiction #53 is stated as 14 November 1973 in #49. Cheers, John. JLochhas 15:28, 13 December 2020 (EST)

Okay, many thanks for the info! Christian Stonecreek 23:03, 13 December 2020 (EST)

New Worlds 9

Cover art for this is Mike Little. Credired on p.165 of this publication. Almost certainly the same artists responsible for the cover of this as well. --Mavmaramis 08:21, 24 December 2020 (EST)

Great find! Many thanks for the detective work, and have a merry Christmas! Christian Stonecreek 08:24, 24 December 2020 (EST)

John Taylor

We have been sorting out the various John Taylors and need a little help. Can you see this discussion and let us know if Beyond This Horizon provides any biographical information about the John Taylor that has a story (p116) and essay (p44) in it? We are trying to determine if they are the same person and whether they are from the UK physicist or the US author. Contento has both by the author. But the physicist supposedly did some science fiction plays and the essay title would align with a physicist. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:15, 28 December 2020 (EST)

Sorry, there's no biographical information, but my best guess is that it's the British physicist: seems quite obvious for the essay, and the convention was something like a British showcase (with a bit of Continental Europe thrown in). Stonecreek 09:53, 29 December 2020 (EST)
Thanks. I added title notes with that information. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:42, 29 December 2020 (EST)

Driftglas in German

Driftglass cover by Barclaw Shaw Susan O'Fearna 02:57, 7 January 2021 (EST)

Thanks! (but the variant / parent is still missing). Christian

Philip K Dick

Added missing series to this as "Writers of the 21st Century Series" (as printed on front) to conform with the rest of the volumes. --Mavmaramis 02:00, 16 January 2021 (EST)

Thanks! I missed out on that one upon verifying. Stonecreek 02:55, 16 January 2021 (EST)

Question

Hello, Rtrace.

I inserted the translation to the Portuguese (#819033) but in the summary of the author (#111330) appear like a new novel, not a translation. How to fix it?

How is the right way to put translations? Its a New Novel or Add Publication to This Title or Variant?

--Paulotecario 09:48, 22 January 2021 (EST)

Hello, and welcome! You seem to have misdirected your question (since I'm not Rtrace).
But to answer: The right way to add translations usually is to enter a publication of the translation (correct title per title page of the publication, author name per title page of the publication, fitting language, translator, and other useful data), and than (after processing), variant to the canonical title. (The exception is if a translation under the exact same title already exists, than one can use the Add Publication or Clone Publication links).
For that reason the novel by N. K. Jemisin appears to be unconnected to its parent: it still needs to be varianted (the feature to use is the 'Make This Title a Variant' link). Since the entry does need some fixing (capitalization of title, price denomination, additional notes), I'll do the fixing and varianting for you. Stonecreek 10:08, 22 January 2021 (EST)

The format

Hi Christian,

Careful with formats outside of Germany: this is Dimensões : 23 x 15.6 x 1.8 cm and a 23 cm book cannot be a pb under ANY definition. :) I fixed it. Also - when you find issues as severe as the ones with this book, please try to leave notes around - in this case both the editor who added and the moderator should have been reminded of what is wrong here. Fixing it is all great but unless someone tells the editor and the moderator, we will end up with more of those (I just caught 5 more of them and cleaned them up on approval). Thanks! Annie 21:02, 22 January 2021 (EST)

Sorry about the format: that one slipped through my radar surveillance. I had seen that you reminded the moderator about issues, and the editor was informed in the item just above this one (bare that false format I didn't pay attention to). Christian Stonecreek 03:44, 23 January 2021 (EST)
Well, a day later when they came asking :) It makes it easier to do it when the change is done - that way we do not miss these. :) I think we are all good now. Hope you are doing well! :) Annie 04:08, 23 January 2021 (EST)
Yes, I cope (as you'll likely also do): waiting for things to normalize the news came in that vaccination over here in Europe for the majority of people will take longer than expected, due to organizational & production complications, but otherwise health is still good in the family: no one got seriously ill so far. So it will take some more time of clenching one's teeth and staying calm. Hope you're doing as good as circumstances allow (or better). Christian Stonecreek 04:18, 23 January 2021 (EST)
That's good to hear. :) Pretty much -- living in one of the biggest counties in this country (biggest in the state) and not being old enough means that I am stuck home for the foreseeable future - they will take awhile to get to me for the vaccines. It all shall pass - hopefully... Oh well - stay safe - people tend to get even more careless than usual if they believe the end is close and that can cause problems even for the ones who are careful :( At least I can work from home... :) Annie 04:28, 23 January 2021 (EST)
I hope you stay healthy in all the time waiting: that's the important thing, I'd think! Over here the old-aged are the first in line when it comes to the cure, then the system-sustaining persons, and pretty much later we normalized ones are thought of. Thought it would be sometime in Spring when it comes to our group, but it seems it will get hotter than that ... - just hoping the barbers will open before that, else there'll be much sweating (and much blindsight). Christian Stonecreek 08:03, 23 January 2021 (EST)

Galery of Lem's star diaries illustrations

Hello Christian, here you can see the most illustration from the Star Diaries. Regards Henna 06:12, 31 January 2021 (EST)

Thanks! That does indeed help! Christian Stonecreek 06:18, 31 January 2021 (EST)

Overcorrecting again

Hi Christian,

Please stop "correcting" things without even looking at the covers and title pages. This series is not called "Mack 'n' Me" but "Mack 'n' Me 'n' Odyssey". Because of that we cannot strip "Mack 'n' Me" from the titles unless you want to do an internal set of series but the numbering may go wrong in the future so leaving them as they are is the cleanest way. I just spent some time fixing these again. I will appreciate if in the future instead of just going and removing anything that has ":" in the title, you either do some research OR ask the editor who actually worked on these (or both) and if I do not need to spend time correcting corrections. Thanks in advance! Annie 16:47, 1 February 2021 (EST)

PS: And the fact that you again changed someone's work without bothering to consult and/or at least notify the person is as unacceptable as it always had been. Annie 16:49, 1 February 2021 (EST)
Just a reminder that all record types -- pubs, titles, series, publication series, authors, awards, etc -- support Edit History as of 2021-01-14. When planning changes to a record, you can now review record history to see who else has worked on it.
Due to the way submissions work, sometimes you need to check other submission types to see full history. In this case, the Edit History page associated with this series doesn't tell you who created it. However, you can use Edit History pages associated with the titles in the series -- like this page -- to see who added the series information.
Hopefully, this will become one of our standard operating procedures as editors become used to this functionality and help lower everybody's stress level :-) Ahasuerus 17:59, 1 February 2021 (EST)
Sorry, but I took the longe name as some kind of pub. series (yes, then it should have been put into that field - it didn't feel quite correct also). Christian Stonecreek 23:05, 1 February 2021 (EST)
Then come and discuss before changing. My edits are all over this series and all its books, I've spent enough time with it to have an idea what is what (plus this is a known pattern with some series lately...). Annie 23:25, 1 February 2021 (EST)

Etemenanki oder Die Fundamente von Himmel und Erde

Hello Christian, is this the same text like in Etemenanki? Here is the first paragraph of Etemenanki. Thanks for looking it up Henna 15:21, 3 February 2021 (EST)

Sure! I'll variant the title(s). Thanks, I just overlooked this. Christian Stonecreek 04:08, 4 February 2021 (EST)

Secondhand Charm

What was with this change? Did you even look at the publication before making this change? I don't understand why you would change the credit on the verified pub without asking the verifier, but had you looked at the pub notes, it would have been clear that there are two separate artists involved. I restored the proper credit. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2021 (EST)

Sorry for that! ... and I even don't know what it was that has driven me to that. Christian Stonecreek 02:48, 7 February 2021 (EST)

Image:PRRRHDNMZT1985.jpg

Image:PRRRHDNMZT1985.jpg was deleted by you, but it is still used in this pub. Please check whether you forget to remove the image link or if it was used in multiple pubs and it is correct/incorrect for this one. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:36, 13 February 2021 (EST)

Alan PETER Ryan

Alan Ryan started using his full name, [4], when he returned to writing in 2010. "Sexual Exploration Is a Crime" was published under his full name in 2019's Shivers VIII just like it was in Ryan's 2012 collection The Back of Beyond. It was never published as by Alan Ryan. --Username 17:35, 14 February 2021 (EST)

I'm inclined to believe you. However, the thing is that the title appears with the short name in a primary verified publication. So you have to ask the primary verifier first if this is an overlooked mistake, before we could accept this change. Thanks, Stonecreek 00:17, 15 February 2021 (EST)

Follow-up from the Moderator Noticeboard discussion

To follow up on the last Moderator Noticeboard discussion:

  • As per the 2020 agreement, please limit your moderatorial activities to self-moderation until I change the software to support an explicit "self-moderation only" flag for editors
  • Please do not change the data in recently added/edited records without discussing it with the moderator who approved the submission. Doing so effectively circumvents the agreement and leaves both the approving moderator and the submitting user out of the loop.

These issues have been occurring for a long time now. Please make sure that they do not re-occur or else I will have to take administrative action. Ahasuerus 14:58, 6 March 2021 (EST)

La trama celeste

Hi Christian,

Can you share your sources for your statements of "First printing" and "Apparent first Edition" which you added here today? None of the linked sources (OCLC and LTF) claim any of that (the Trantor is a later reprint and was used to verify the contents), your edit had no moderator notes and no notes identifying where these statements are coming from. Did you miss to add your sources?

On a separate note (less important but still valid) - reordering the statements in a publication notes field to fit your idea of what goes where in the notes (you moved the sources statement from the top to the bottom) is disrespectful to other editors - we all have our own styles of writing notes and we do not enforce style in this field. If you want ISFDB to start enforcing style, please go to R&S and find support. In the meantime, please respect your fellow editors (unless you are verifying of course - if you are PVing and there are no other PVs, you can change the note anyway you want). Thanks! Annie 18:06, 6 March 2021 (EST)

Sorry, but the missing information is vital for out db and follows for the edition from Wikpedia.
The printing is necessary to add for a db that goes to index different ones. Stonecreek 00:39, 7 March 2021 (EST)
Can you please point to a source that identifies this as a definitive first printing? Because what you are describing is an assumed first printing - unless it is confirmed somewhere, there is a possibility for an earlier printing run in the same year that is different. Statements of printing which lack the qualification “assumed” should have a source. Your opinion that this must be a first printing is just your opinion and not a fact unless it is supported by a source (primary or secondary). Otherwise we become the source of that specific information - and being a source of unverified information is not what this DB is supposed to be. Annie 01:51, 7 March 2021 (EST)
I think it's quite clear that it's a first edition, but for the faint possibilty that there was a previous edition within the same year, I'll update the note.
On the printing rank: unless you know that there's more than one printing of this edition within the same year it should be noted that our entry is for the first one. And if there are more printings in 1948 we should clarify it for the sake of an editor supplying a higher one. It's quite unlike you to make things more difficult for additional publications and to be content with stub notes. Stonecreek 04:31, 7 March 2021 (EST)
Re:
  • unless you know that there's more than one printing of this edition within the same year it should be noted that our entry is for the first one
it's the other way around. Like other statements that we make in Notes, we add an unqualified "First printing" statement if -- and only if -- we have a source indicating that the publication is the first printing of the given edition. That source can be either the publication itself or a secondary source. Without a source, we can, at most, enter "Assumed first printing" or words to that effect. This is explained in the "Printings" section of Template:PublicationFields:PubNote, e.g.:
  • If there is no printing information beyond the edition date, and no specific "first printing" statement, it is likely that this is a first printing, and you can put "Appears to be first printing of 1974 Puffin edition."
Checking the database, I see that you have created 9263 EditPub submissions with the words "First printing" in Notes. We will now have to review and, if necessary, correct all of them. I will be creating a cleanup script which will identify all affected publication records, both PV'd and unverified. The number of affected publications will be lower than 9263, but the cleanup process will still be very time consuming.
This is a major issue. Given this problem with understanding core data entry rules and the previously discussed repeated issues with adhering to the terms of the self-moderation agreement, I am suspending your moderator flag until this issue has been sorted out and software support for "self-moderation only" editors has been added. We will review and discuss where we stand once these issues have been addressed. Ahasuerus 10:31, 7 March 2021 (EST)
Sorry to disagree: when we know an entry for any possible printing (including the first) of a given edition would look the same as the one we have in the database, it is meaningful to denominate 'ours' as the first: this way we have the first printing in the db, and any further printing of that year will be listed after it, we have it clear that a possible further printing of that year will have to be added, and we have the general information visible that we go as deep as the level of printing in ISFDB. And if you refer to the possibility that the cover image might differ for a different printing: well, without a primary verifier or a dependable source for it, we don't even know if the image we display does represent the edition (or the specific printing). Stonecreek 12:46, 7 March 2021 (EST)
This specific book is sourced from OCLC and LTF. You do not invent data that is not on the record unless you can explain it. Stating First Printing with no qualifiers means that we are stating that this specific book in these sources is the first printing definitely (if we know that but we cannot verify that the sources point to our book, the IDs should not be added to it (or if added, the note should explain that they do not state first printing) and the note on the sources should explain that they are possibly for a different version of the book ). There is nothing in any source to support such unqualified claim. So “Assumed First Printing” is the best that can be used. Anything else is a fabrication and essentially creating information that then can be used by someone else and considered definitive. If we fabricate information, we cannot be trusted as a dB. If you cannot understand that, I am not sure how exactly to explain it better. Annie 13:19, 7 March 2021 (EST)
Those sources only would possibly index a first printing if it's stated in a publication (though not necessarily so). We do have a different policy: we state a publication as apparent first printing. So it'd be okay to state a first printing until we know if it's an apparent or a stated one (most likely supplied by a PV). Stonecreek 13:34, 7 March 2021 (EST)
Can you please point to me where this policy is specified? Because Ahasuerus already posted above our rules and they contradict it. And any other rule I had seen had been clear: each fact added should have a source - the book preferably, a secondary source if not possible. We do not invent data. If we have a documentation mismatch that actually allows us to invent data we should fix it so we do not confuse our editors. Annie 13:56, 7 March 2021 (EST)
I'm pretty sure you propagated it in one of the many arguments with Wolfram, I just haven't found it by now. Christian Stonecreek 23:24, 7 March 2021 (EST)
I had said that it is ok to add "First Printing" with no qualifications and no support of any source (other books or online sources) or the book? Very unlikely but sure, find it, I will be interested to see that and we can see what exactly was said there and in what context. Annie 00:21, 8 March 2021 (EST)
If my memory is correct, you stated that it'd be okay to state 'Apparent first printing.' (and we'd accordingly have to wait what is there in a yet unverified publication). Christian Stonecreek 01:34, 8 March 2021 (EST)
You realize the difference between “Apparent/Assumed First Printing” and a non qualified “First Printing”, right? Had you used the first here, we do not have a problem. You used the latter and then went on explaining how that is ok. A person browsing the site and seeing the statement with no qualifiers won’t think “oh, this says First printing but does not say stated so this may not be one”, they will think “first printing means first printing”. That is the crux of the problem here. Reread again everything I said so far and the excerpt from the rules above - adding a statement is not the issue, adding an unqualified one is. And then when you updated the note you changed the edition line leaving the unqualified printing one in place. (I cleaned it up when I fixed the sources issue). Annie 09:04, 8 March 2021 (EST)
Well, okay! I see the benefit of stating the more cautious version for people not aware of the difference between PVed and non-PVed pub.s (or PVed but not thoroughly reviewed). I guess that's a case of deep-in-blindness. Christian Stonecreek 09:15, 8 March 2021 (EST)
Most people won't realize what the PV table means when the find the page online (we had had enough new editors that did not and they were here to edit). And implying that it is ok to just add whatever to non-PVd publications is a bit offensive to all the editors who had done a lot of work through the years piecing things together from secondary sources and being very careful to chase any sources (with different levels of sloppiness sometimes but we are all human) - I am aware that this is not you meant but I hope you understand what I am saying here. That's why listing sources and qualifications are important (and listing what from the sources does not match our record and why when we have sources disagreeing) - if we made a mistake because a source was mistaken, it is not so good but we had a source and we did not create a piece of information that is untrue; if we just added a statement which was mistaken/misleading, we become the source now - and before long all other sites will use our data even from unPVd pubs and uprooting these errors later is hard (just look at the Larry Correia birthday problem - we did not originate it but someone did). Annie 09:53, 8 March 2021 (EST)

Authors difference in publications and titles

I have two of your submissions on hold because they run contrary to the basic rules of data entry on the site (this one and this one) - we do NOT change the title authors in such cases, we leave the title author as uncredited and then variant to a parent with the known authors. Our rules are very clear about that - the exact text from the help page is: "If there is a publicly available source which identifies the uncredited title's author, it will be later turned into a variant title using the author's canonical name." (please note that this is part of the TITLE author field and there is no exception for EDITOR records).

However, before I rejected them outright, I checked the German magazines (which had been your domain for years) and this had been going for a very long time so I went digging to see if there is a reason for that. Unless I missed it, there had not been an attempt to change the rules to make an exception for the German language magazines (I already spent my Sunday chasing this so I stopped somewhere ~2013). The only time this was even remotely mentioned is this Cleanup report which had been implemented in the usual way (leave the big sets for the end so a plan can be made for them; it is regrettable that the report was never completely implemented but that does not constitute a change of rules - these records are still against the rules).

Is there a policy in some obscure place that I missed (and that needs to be added to the rules) or do we need to mount yet another cleanup effort to bring all of these records to policy? Thanks in advance! Annie 00:17, 8 March 2021 (EST)

Well, that's the way they were entered at the beginning of entering the series (and it wasn't me who began that), and I just followed the example that was already there. I don't see any major problem with the way it is for those, since 'uncredited' poses no pseudonym. But we could also work through the lot, if you're there to do a lot of unmerging, merging and/or varianting. And if you prefer it: sure, we can install a cleanup report for it. Christian Stonecreek 01:31, 8 March 2021 (EST)
I read this several times now. Are you really accusing me of starting these author mismatches? You know perfectly well that when I began with the Perry Rhodan series, I used a secondary source (Perrypedia) and tried to be as complete as possible. Any use of uncredited and starting the discrepancy between publication and title author is yours! --Willem 15:03, 11 March 2021 (EST)
We already have a cleanup report for author mismatches, Publication Authors That Are Not the Title Author. When it was modified in 2015 to add EDITOR/MAGAZINE and EDITOR/FANZINE mismatches, I mentioned that it was coded to "ignore[] German magazines because we have about 1,400 Perry Rhodan mismatches on file. Once the other 126 mismatches have been resolved, we can revisit the PR issue."
Unfortunately, the issue was never revisited, so now we have 5,375 mismatches, including 1,500 non-Perry Rhodan mismatches. Some are PR-related, including 434 Atlans, while others are not. Better late than never... Ahasuerus 09:14, 8 March 2021 (EST)
It won’t be that hard I suspect - two step process (create parent with the authors that are there now and then clean the authors of the current record (and fix both dates while at it) will clear a whole year of uncredited issues. The only unmerges needed will be when there are pubs credited differently.
Yes, mostly, but there are a few elaborate title notes that shouldn't be lost (or should be transposed). Christian Stonecreek 09:26, 8 March 2021 (EST)
So a third edit. :) Still Not so bad. Annie 09:29, 8 March 2021 (EST)
As for why we must finish the cleanup - we are a DB. Differences in data structures is a problem when one writes queries to find something - inconsistencies like that should have a very good reason. Being German and uncredited is not one of those unless we change the rules officially. :)
Can I request an update of the report or should I do it over in CS? Annie 09:21, 8 March 2021 (EST)
And is there a report for the case above: i. e. the 'First printing' affair? Christian Stonecreek 09:30, 8 March 2021 (EST)
Not yet - unlike the one here, that one is not preexisting... Annie 12:40, 8 March 2021 (EST)

(unindent) OK - I approved both merges so their pubs are brought into where they belong and then fixed both of these title records to follow the way we handle uncredited publications with known authors from elsewhere. Just a gentle reminder - when you are making the yearly series, the date of it should be the year itself (so 1991-00-00) and not the date of the first issue.

PS: As you are the PV on a lot of them, we know who to ask but it will be extremely useful to add some notes on the series level (here and all the others) where the editors names are coming from. Or on the individual years although adding them up on the series level may be cleaner and clearer. Or even on the parent series. Thanks in advance! Annie 12:40, 8 March 2021 (EST)

Dmitry Glukhovsky's "Text"

A quick FYI re: this title. Back in 2019 you added the following note: "Described as a crime / techno-thriller; it may be nongenre." As per the plot summary on Wikipedia, this is a non-genre thriller. I have updated the German VT and the Russian parent title. Ahasuerus 09:28, 8 March 2021 (EST)

I can confirm it is non-genre. If I can remember where my book is (because I do not see it where it is supposed to be), I will verify a Russian version and clean the note after that. Annie 09:56, 8 March 2021 (EST)
Thanks, Ahasuerus! Christian Stonecreek 09:58, 8 March 2021 (EST)

GOMINE — Walzenraumer der Hijthi (scheme)

Hi Christian,

Did you mean to make this a short story or did you forget to switch to Interior art? :) Thanks! Annie 18:32, 8 March 2021 (EST)

It's an artwork, which I just realized upon submitting. I'll correct it with adding the cover image. Christian Stonecreek 22:53, 8 March 2021 (EST)
 :) Thanks! Annie 23:11, 8 March 2021 (EST)

These variants

I rejected a few - there is no point changing the author in such cases. 30 of the 33 magazines need to stay under the title as is. 3 need to be split and varianted... Changing the author here will result in a lot more work. I think I approved a few earlier so I will clean the created mess based on that... but please look at the list of magazines before changing the authors. Thanks! 00:10, 12 March 2021 (EST)

Those issues have to be reviewed (and the credit chenged) anyway. But my idea was to first complete the (1. Auflage), and then come back to it. Christian Stonecreek 00:19, 12 March 2021 (EST)
But in the process you are moving issues from "Pub and title matches" to "they do not match" so when the report gets deployed, someone will try to fix them again and we will do the same work multiple times. If you are going to be reviewing the publications anyway, let's start with them. Fix the magazines themselves inside of a year, then fix the titles correctly. Otherwise we will be chasing these until next Christmas :) Annie 00:34, 12 March 2021 (EST)
Uhmmm, yes, your're probably right. I just have to dig these copies out of their vault. Christian Stonecreek

Wstęp (Dzienniki gwiazdowe)

About this one. Either we claim we do not know who to credit to (so unknown) (because we really have no idea it is Lem's or not) or it is Lem's... We cannot have it both ways (and even if it was rare, other people did write introductions for his books in Polish:) ) Annie 00:43, 12 March 2021 (EST)

What is unknown, I think, is if it's credited to Lem or his alter ego Professor Tarantoga. Usually the introduction should be the same as the first one here, since there the eighth and the eighteenth journey (and the ominous circumstances of their coming-to-be & inclusion) are talked about; it should also be in-universe fiction. The only somewhat irregular thing is the discussion of a 'LEM' as author of the 'Star Diaries' since the Lunar Excursion Mobile would have a far too small electronic brain for such a task - it seems somewhat pre-timed for 1966, but the 1971 should be at least a variant of the 1966 piece. Christian Stonecreek 06:51, 12 March 2021 (EST)
And your source for this please? Unless you have something better than guesses here, this stays unconnected. Annie 08:04, 12 March 2021 (EST)
According to Fantlab, there were 4 introductions to the "Ijon Tichy" collections published between 1954 and 1976. All of them were in-universe essays as by "Professor Tarantoga" (one of the characters in the series), but the text differed from edition to edition. Ahasuerus 13:41, 12 March 2021 (EST)
Beat me to it - I was planning to go digging on Russian and Polish sites today to see if I can find something. :) Feel free to makre the changes and add sources on the pub level and cleanup the notes. :) Annie 13:51, 12 March 2021 (EST)
Thank you for the research. Will do the updates. Christian Stonecreek 00:12, 13 March 2021 (EST)

Uralt, mein Feind

About this one: Rudam PVd it 4 years before you did. Are you absolutely sure that his book does not have the first edition stated? When he added it, his note read "noted stated"? I propose to wait for him to verify before we remove the stated qualifier... Annie 01:11, 12 March 2021 (EST)

Yes, I'm sure: checked it two times! Rudolf has quite often the "noted stated" misprinting (when it should read "not stated"). It's very unusual for this publisher to not state a first German edition (and at first I fell for this trap), but it's in fact what is there. As a hint see the difference between the DNB and/or OCLC entries for this one and the one for Vazkor for example (fifth line of the DNB entry). I guess the (missing) information was copied from another publication in the sub-series 'Science Fiction Classics', in which usually real classics are published (and ones that were published before in German). For the Dickson the collection's original English publication was just five years before and the single stories weren't in every case so much older. Christian Stonecreek 06:32, 12 March 2021 (EST)
You checked Rudam’s book two times? I have no concerns with your book at all (although why a day earlier you thought it says that is a bit of a mystery but mistakes happen) - my concern is not what the book you are holding says. My concern is the other PV’s copy. Would you have accepted this edit if it was not your book and you were moderating and a second editor was changing major data points in the notes (which they confirmed matching the previous day) or would you have tried to ensure first that they are holding the same edition and we do not need a clone instead? Apparently Ron read the initial status of this note as saying that the value is stated as well (that’s why he approved your changes the previous day). You are probably right that you have the same book but I’d still try to discuss that with the other PV first. :) If he is not around for awhile, then we can change that with a note explaining what the other PV had stated before (“The first PV had marked the edition as “noted stated”. It is assumed, based on the usual practices of the German publishers, that this is a misprint for “not stated” and there is only one version of this book” for example or words to that effect). That way it is clear what happened here and in case we read the weirdly phrased statement wrong, we have the paper trail for the change. What do you think?
There are 9 books with this note. I will ping him to clarify what he meant and we can easily sort them out. Annie 08:50, 12 March 2021 (EST)
Well, no, of course I didn't check Rudolf's book, just checked my copy, but mine does seem to be printed the same way as the ones catalogued at DNB and OCLC. Sure we can add the note accordingly. The examples are mostly for Goldmann & Bastei Lübbe publications in the mid-Seventies, and in these times both publishers didn't state first German editions. Christian Stonecreek 09:13, 12 March 2021 (EST)
And this should also go in the note, as it is a justification of why you read the statement the way you do. :) So let’s do that in order - leave a message to him, if he does not respond in a few days (he seems to be away just now), send another update with the note properly added. Thoughts? Meanwhile I will work with him to sort out the 9 publications with this note. Annie 09:25, 12 March 2021 (EST)

Spektrum der Wissenschaft, #3.21 cover

Where is the title and date coming from here? I do not see a note anywhere in the publication, cover record and there are no moderator notes? Thanks! Annie 16:43, 15 March 2021 (EDT)

It's from the original appearance of the piece as interior art. Will add the according note to the parent title (and correct the title type). Christian Stonecreek 00:05, 16 March 2021 (EDT)
Approved. Add this in the moderator note next time. :) Annie 00:20, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Reinhold Kammler

Could you please clarify what the proposed note -- "Was 1981 at home in Vienna, Austria" -- in this submission means? Does it mean that he lived in Vienna, Austria as of 1981? Ahasuerus 11:06, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Yes. Would it be better to phrase it as "Was 1981 living in Vienna, Austria"? Christian Stonecreek 11:08, 16 March 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for clarifying! I have changed it to "Known to have lived in Vienna, Austria as of 1981." Ahasuerus 11:20, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Perry Rhodan, #147: Amoklauf der Maschinen

When you have a chance: this one remained the only mismatched one in one of the years you cleared. I am not sure if it needs an update or to be split out so leaving that to you. Annie 12:28, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

Will do the update. Thanks for the hint! Christian Stonecreek 14:06, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

Wünsch dir was!

Hello again :)

Can you look at this and this? If they are the same, they need a merge. If not, we need to disambiguate or at least add notes. As you have both magazines, you are in the best place to figure out what we need to do :) Thanks! Annie 12:49, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

Ah, yes! The 2018 one was published quite a while back, so that I didn't realize that the title was used again (they might be developed into a series: I'll see if there are future instalments. For now, I'll disambiguate the two: thanks for finding them! Christian Stonecreek 14:06, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
Thanks! Annie 17:09, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

Agency

Added the second ASIN in this one and cleaned the note (the note was there because the ASIN was not working on amazon.de (misspelled a bit in the note...) and the ISBN was not leading anywhere on the German Amazon when I added it). When there are different ASINs across the Amazons for the same edition, we list all the ones we source from and add a note which belongs to which Amazon. Thankfully it does not happen too often outside of certain US/UK paired publishers (but when it happens, it can be annoying). So just heads up! :) Annie

Thanks, Annie! Christian Stonecreek 00:10, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

Zweitausendvierundachtzig: Orwells Albtraum

Hello again,

Both OCLC and DNB show this one as part of AndroSF. Not sure if you left it out intentionally or not but just heads up. If it was intentional, is there something that makes it different from the rest of the series (I add books from this series occasionally so if there are some specifics, I'd love to know them). :) Thanks! Annie 01:06, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

I'll upload the image, add more contents and the series: I forgot to add the series, but I usually review my recent edits to find typos, mistakes and omissions like this one; but thanks for keeping an open eye: there may still some faults slipping through. Christian Stonecreek 05:43, 18 March 2021 (EDT)
I would have just put on my monitor list to see if there will be an update later but as it was a series I work on now and then, I wanted to make sure it was not intentional and I do not need to look out for something in the books that have the series. :) Thanks! Annie 19:06, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

Perry Rhodan, #799: Abschied von Terra

This one needs either to be split out or have its editors fixed. :) Annie 17:03, 21 March 2021 (EDT)

Okay, thanks for finding this one. Submission under way. Christian Stonecreek 00:04, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Old sites on author pages

Instead of removing them completely, see if archive.org will give you a snapshot we can use. Like I just did here. :) Annie 19:55, 21 March 2021 (EDT)

Thanks! Christian Stonecreek 00:05, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Franziska Wolff

When you have a chance, add a note either here or in the parent where the pseudonym is disclosed. I take you at your word that it is in a book so I approved but let's add the note. Thanks! Annie 21:59, 21 March 2021 (EDT)

Sources needed

Can you share a source for this change and this change. Unless we have a source telling us that an English author does not get shelved under their last name, we always assume it is the last name only. Spanish and Portuguese are different but English is very straightforward in this. Annie 03:22, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

You're right, of course. For a reason unknown I thought that the rules were different for 'classic' authors. I'll cancel and resubmit. Thanks, Stonecreek 03:44, 22 March 2021 (EDT)
We use this name for the Author Directory and for sorting in searches if you chose to order by that. So having the value as someone expects it (which for English speakers will be last name) is what makes sense. So for Romilly, a quick search finds this and if a Dictionary of Biography has him under Romilly, that's where we want him :) Galactic Central has Estay under E (here but as you know the link is not stable so we cannot link it directly) - which is not as definitive as a dictionary but I would follow their lead unless I have another source somewhere. :) Annie 03:53, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Atlan, #200: Herrscher im Mikrokosmos

"Juli 1982" and 1982-06-15 here :) I suspect a copy/paste mistake from the previous entry in the note but as these are hard to spot, heads up so you can sort it out when you add the cover. Annie 21:58, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

Will do. Thanks! Christian Stonecreek 00:00, 24 March 2021 (EDT)

Gate of Ivrel

Gate of Ivrel has the same cover art as Orbit UK PB edition Susan O'Fearna 19:50, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

Oh, yes! Many thanks! Christian Stonecreek 00:05, 26 March 2021 (EDT)

Possible Typos

Here are some possible database typos:

If you could please check and correct or add title notes, it would be appreciated. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:10, 28 March 2021 (EDT)

Will do my best, though the SF-Studies book will need some searching. Thanks for the hints, Stonecreek 10:20, 28 March 2021 (EDT)

Drachengestirn

Hi Christian,

Can you find this book and come join us here while we are trying what to do with these books. :) Thanks! Annie 19:09, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

Thanks, I have answered there. Christian Stonecreek 00:56, 13 April 2021 (EDT)
You have an answer - sounds like you need to move this translation? :) Annie 00:17, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

Self-approver testing

As I said on ISFDB:Moderator_noticeboard#Bottleneck_at_moderation_level, last week I changed the software to support "self-approval" -- see ISFDB:Community_Portal#Self-approval_support. It was a fairly significant change and you are now the first editor to test it on the live server. Self-approvers should be able to approve and reject their own submissions. Please give it a try and let me know if you run into any issues.

Also, please be extra careful when editing records which other editors have worked on. Communication is key :-) Ahasuerus 20:25, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

Thank you very much, I'll test it. And from now on I'll be very cautios with other people's work. Christian Stonecreek 05:33, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

German translations of Irma Chilton

Hi Christian, I need help with some complex editing of Irma Chilton. Right now the situation is as follows:

  • She has written two short novellas: "Take Away the Flowers" and "Fuller's World".
  • These have been published as a collection with the name "Take Away the Flower & Fuller's World".
  • There are three German language publications by her:
    • "Weltraumpilot Tom Davies in Aktion" (Boje)
    • "1. Auftrag im All" (Pelikan Tramp-Buch), indicated as a licensed publication from Boje
    • "Schmuggel im All" (Pelikan Tramp-Buch), indicated as a licensed publication from Boje

Right now "Weltraumpilot Tom Davies in Aktion" is claimed to be the translation of "Take Away the Flowers". It is right now unknown (in the database), which are the sources of the two Tramp books.

I do not own either of the books, but from what I have read in several forums (e.g. at SF-Fan) I am 100% sure that:

  • "Weltraumpilot Tom Davies in Aktion" is a translation of the entire collection "Take Away the Flower & Fuller's World".
  • "1. Auftrag im All" is "Take Away the Flowers".
  • "Schmuggel im All" is "Fuller's World".

In my opinion this would be the only explanation that makes sense, and it is in line with what I have seen in other publications in the Tramp series. The Tramp books are sub-licenses of Boje that is mentioned in the books. In that case all translations would be by Siegfried Schmitz (which is not mentioned there).

Also, I think that the cover artwork of "Schmuggel im All" could be by Edward Blair Wilkins but that should be checked separately.

Even if you think that these changes are too much of a risk as they are speculations without checking the original publications I wanted to document my findings here so that others do not need to start from the beginning.

Thanks! Naut 02:54, 26 April 2021 (EDT)

I think you're right in your assumptions, since both Tramp books are stated as licensed by Boje. Thanks for the informational update, I'll converge the titles accordingly. Christian Stonecreek 03:28, 26 April 2021 (EDT)
Good solution that you have found. Thanks! Naut 05:08, 26 April 2021 (EDT)
Thanks! Christian Stonecreek 08:37, 26 April 2021 (EDT)

Eschbach, Abschied von der Erde

Hello Christian, can you help me to add this story? Thanks Henna 11:56, 12 May 2021 (EDT)

Sure. Would you like to try it? Here's an analogous example (of course - or likely - we don't know much about the pages or the price). Only be sure to mark it as nongenre. I'll take a second look after the edit, if it's okay. Christian Stonecreek 12:56, 12 May 2021 (EDT)
Hello Christian, thank you for the example. Here is the result: Die Welt, Samstag, 20. April 2019. I hope everything is correct, please take a look. Thanks again Henna 09:58, 13 May 2021 (EDT)
Looks good! Maybe a note on the source of the shortfiction (author's web page) would be fine. Christian Stonecreek 13:20, 13 May 2021 (EDT)
Now with the link. Thanks again Henna 13:18, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Nova, #30

Hello Christian, in this pub is a gap from p.101 to p.160. Should I add the contents? Regards Henna 14:19, 26 May 2021 (EDT)

If you'd like to do it you're welcome. It got somehow lost in my to-do list: wanted to read & enjoy the contents in full before entering them. Christian Stonecreek 05:02, 27 May 2021 (EDT)
Hello Christian, everything is done (I hope). Please take a look Henna 15:28, 28 May 2021 (EDT)
Great work! Thank you very much! Christian Stonecreek 17:10, 28 May 2021 (EDT)

Aligning notes

Hello Christian! What is the meaning of the phrase aligning notes as a justification, when you make changes in the notes where we are both PV? Rudolf Rudam 06:46, 7 June 2021 (EDT)

It means to have the notes as in other publications of a given series. Christian Stonecreek 06:50, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Whereby your wording and your order of the individual notes are predetermined? Rudolf Rudam 07:25, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Not necessarily, but with 'Titan' it seemed somehow useful for the avid reader to have one orientation. Christian Stonecreek 07:33, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
One other thing that seems more important is the role of Wolfgang Jeschke: he is credited as co-editor but doesn't appear with the parent title (and is obviously not a pseudonym used by Aldiss): would 'Wolfgang Jeschke (in error)' possibly be more appropriate? Christian Stonecreek 07:41, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Do I understand that correctly, that the decision of what may be necessary and what is useful for an avid reader is made by you? Other PV should follow accordingly even if they are the first making a different entry in the notes? Rudam 10:55, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Well, the more there is in the notes the more there is that a user might find useful. Christian Stonecreek 23:14, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Well, but sometimes less is even more.But you still haven't answered my question. So I can assume that you keep changing some notes of mine that have the similar content as yours and feel the urge to change the sequence of my notes, even though I am the first PV. Also, I didn't catch that the notes of a given series have to be structurally identical. Could you please guide me to the corresponding rule. I appreciate your effort. Rudolf Rudam 09:48, 8 June 2021 (EDT)
If you feel the way that unstructured notes for publications where you are the first PV should prevail we can leave it at that. Sorry that you might feel I have stepped on your toes. Christian Stonecreek 13:40, 8 June 2021 (EDT)
Nice that you've got it. BTW, in case you haven't noticed, in practically all ISFDB pubs, the notes aren't structured. Rudolf Rudam 08:47, 9 June 2021 (EDT)
Yeah, but the majority of them generally have only stub notes; that shouldn't be a reason to not work on them. Christian Stonecreek 11:12, 9 June 2021 (EDT)
Wolfgang Jeschke isn't the editor of the original anthologies, but he is of course the editor of the entire Titan-series. We can't leave him out. Rudam 10:55, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
It's only that he didn't do editorial work other than for other translated works (anthologies among them), where he ain't credited. The contents for 'Titan' were selected by other editors, and Jeschke only organized the translations and the cover artworks; there seems to be no original content work he did. Christian Stonecreek 11:12, 9 June 2021 (EDT)
From that point of view you are right, but his name is associated with all 21 TITAN issues and is emphasized on the cover, spine and title page. It reminds me a bit of the alleged part, Isaac Asimov played as editor for the Greenberg/Waugh anthologies. His name was prominently featured on the cover. I would therefore recommend, just as with Asimov, that his name be kept. Rudolf Rudam 12:11, 9 June 2021 (EDT)
Okay, I'm fine with that point of view. Christian Stonecreek 23:24, 9 June 2021 (EDT)
Personal tools