User talk:Thync


Jump to: navigation, search

This editor is no longer actively participating and is unlikely to respond to messages left here.

If this user is the sole verifier of a publication record, please:

  • post only notices on the user's talk page concerning the addition of images and notes
  • post inquiries regarding any other changes to the verified record at the Moderator noticeboard

Otherwise, please post notices and inquiries only on the talk pages of the other primary verifiers.



Hello, Thync, 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! Ahasuerus 22:12, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The Bromius Phenomenon

Thanks for submitting The Bromius Phenomenon! Comparing it to the other editions that we have on file, it would appear that it may be the same as this record. The only difference that I can see is that the existing record has "#08145" as the catalog ID while your submission lists "0441081452" as the ISBN. Did you derive the ISBN from what's printed on the spine, by chance? And does it say "08145" on the cover of your copy? If so, then we can just update the current record, explaining what is printed where in the Note field. Ahasuerus 22:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ahasuerus, thanks for the welcome and for your query. The ISBN10 was derived from the spine of the book and verified against the following records:
It does say "08145" on the cover, but when I looked the record up on ISFDB, there was no corresponding record for John Rankine relating to a August 1973 edition, which is why I added the record. But you are absolutely correct - it should be annotated to the record that you cited. I have no idea why it didn't turn up in my search originally. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thync (talkcontribs) .
Makes sense! I will reject the submission and wait for you to create a new one to update the current record. When you do, could you please update the Note field to indicate exactly what's stated on the spine and on the cover? Sometimes publishers printed a partial ISBN in conjunction with the book's price, so the result doesn't always look like an ISBN. TIA! Ahasuerus 20:35, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent submissions

You recently submitted a collection of publication updates, primarily to add links to the WorldCat (OCLC) link, which I'm about to approve. However, these publications have been Primary Verified. When you add or change data on a verified pub, it is the custom here to notify the original verifier. In a couple of these cases, the primary verifier is no longer active, so the custom is to notify the Primary2 verifier. For the books you updated, you should notify the following people: (1) For The Strange World of Planet X, add a note to User talk:Prof beard; (2) For Code Three and for Trapped, notify User talk:Hauck; (3) For Floating Worlds, contact User talk:Willem H., who lists a special link for editors that are adding notes to his verified books. Nobody needs to be notified for Redbeard, because the primary verifier is no longer active, and you have just become the primary verifier! (Although you're still listed as Primary2.) (If you go to that user's page, you'll see that the directions there ask you to post notices about changes to notes, but this is a small enough change that I don't think it's necessary.) In addition, you should also notify User talk:Marc Kupper that you are replacing his Amazon cover image with a better image that you, presumably, scanned.

One more thing I'll mention: You posted the WorldCat links using links like "". It's simpler, and just as correct, to delete everything between ".org" and "oclc", so that this link would be named "". There's a slight advantage to this for the database storage costs, but more importantly is that this can often make it easier for someone else who's reading/editing your notes to work their way through things. Also, please be aware that our standard for listing OCLC links includes a colon after OCLC, e.g. so it reads "OCLC: 18827393" (with the link, of course).

Thank you for your contributions. - Chavey 16:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

  @Chavey, thanks for the guidance - I have notified the relevant people, and will be sure to continue to do so in future. Also, noted, re. the Worldcat links ;) - --Thync 17:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks much for taking the time to do that, I saw your notifications, and appreciate your quickly catching on to things like linking to the publications. Glad to have you join us! Chavey 21:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The Shattered Stars

What is the source for the month of publication which you wish to add to this publication record? If it is not stated in the actual publication, you should give the secondary source in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

@Mhhutchins, thanks for pointing that out. Resubmitted my edit to reflect the pub date as per Locus1--Thync 21:46, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
You should not link to a listing in the Locus database because they have "floating" anchors, which means they shift when new data is added. So in a year, the listing may be pushed forward to the next page. I'll remove the link. In the future, it's sufficient to state "Month of publication from Locus1". Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:12, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Pardon my ignorance, but how does one know whether it's a floating anchor?--Thync 22:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm not even sure if "floating" is the correct term. Let's call them "non-stable". You really wouldn't know they weren't stable unless you copied the URL and then came back a few months later to discover that it no longer linked to the section of the database you first intended. That's how I discovered that the links to Locus1 aren't stable. So how would one know whether a website's anchors are stable? I have no idea, other than learning from those who have made mistakes and discovered how to avoid them. Mhhutchins 01:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
So, to summarize: Locus1 verification is unreliable? I ask because I want to learn! --Thync 20:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
No one said the Locus1 is unreliable. Its data is unimpeachable, and it is one of the best sources on the internet. I only said "You should not link to a listing in the Locus database". And that's only because the link isn't stable. That's nothing to do with the data itself. I said you should give Locus1 as the source. You can even click on the ISFDB verification slot for Locus1. Why would the ISFDB give it so prominently as a source? Reliability of data has nothing to do with how one should cite a source. Mhhutchins 20:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
I was asking for clarification as I am a new user on the site and I would like to learn from the more experienced users. Thank you for encouraging that.--Thync 19:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

t and p

Thank you for your note at User talk:Marc Kupper#User talk:Marc Kupper. You had used {{T|2587113|name=The Gentle Giants of Ganymede}} to link to the publication. {{T}} is used to link to title records and {{P}} is for publication records. The record number you used, 2587113, was the submission record ( and in this case we wanted the publication record # which is 264598. {{p|264598|The Gentle Giants of Ganymede}} will generate The Gentle Giants of Ganymede. --Marc Kupper|talk 06:26, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification - I thought that was what I had done (but evidently didn't!) --Thync 19:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Imprint and publisher designation

In the ISFDB, when both imprint and publisher is given in a publication (especially on the title page and conflictingly provided in different places in the publication), we enter the Publication field as "Imprint / Publisher", e.g. Del Rey / Ballantine. In the case of this book, it seems to have been reversed. Regardless, all of the books from this publisher are in the database as simply Star, because of its changing parent publisher's name. (See this wiki page about the history of the publisher.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:00, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Noted, thanks--Thync 18:17, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

ISBN-13s in 1980s books

Please check the ISBNs given in this record and this one. It's not possible that they're 13-digit ISBNs. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 07:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

And yet they do. They could be reprints and the publishers have neglected to update the publishing information but I haven't found any evidence of this yet. If you could shed some light on this, I would be grateful--Thync 18:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
The OCLC records you link to the ISFDB records indicate they have the standard ISBN-10 (they first display the actual ISBN present in the book). Is the 13-digit number given on the back cover above or below the barcode? If so, then it may be the EAN, a precursor of the ISBN-13. The word "ISBN-13" would not be present, just the 13-digit number. Check to see if that's the case, and also check to see if there's an ISBN of any sort stated on the copyright page of the books. I'm pretty certain these records are correctly dated based on the prices. No book in 2007, the official beginning of the ISBN-13, would have a price of £1.50. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
And here is another record to check. Mhhutchins 03:08, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Have you had a chance to check the placement of the ISBNs in these three books as I suggested? If not, I'm inclined to change them to ISBN-10s based solely on the publication date you've provided in the records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:47, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Since you've not responded, I assume you're OK with the change. So I've gone ahead and changed them to ISBN-10. If you're certain that the ISBN-13 is present on your copies, leave a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Linking OCLC records

To avoid unnecessary links (and the effort taken to create them), I would suggest to only create ISFDB-to-OCLC links for publications which don't have ISBNs. (See the message I left on your note to a Primary Verifier concerning an OCLC link.) But that's entirely up to you. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:53, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Leiber's Swords Against Wizardry

Please enter the stated printing number in the Note field of this publication record. Based on the date, it should be among the 7th - 11th printings. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Image file limits

This file exceeded the ISFDB standard for cover image file uploads which is 150 kb. You should have received a warning before the system accepted it. Please remember this for future uploads. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Can You Speak Venusian

Re cover art for this book. It's signed bottom(ish) left with a 'TY' in a circle which is indicative of the works of Peter Tybus. I've amended the record accordingly and also replaced the Amazon cover for one scanned from my own copy and added other prices to notes. --Mavmaramis 17:33, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Harpist in the Wind

Replaced Amazon cover of this book with full wraparound version. --Mavmaramis 18:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Fool's Run

Cover art for this book is by Geoff Taylor from his website here. Record amended accordingly. --Mavmaramis 09:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

The Ringworld Engineers

What is the source for the year of publication which you added to this record? If it's stated in the publication please remove the contradictory note. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Didn't see that, thanks. Amended. Thync

Richard Blade

I removed the publication series into which you placed this publication. The title is already #4 in the Richard Blade Adventures series. No matter which publisher publishes this work it will always be in the same title series and with the same number. That's one way you can tell the difference between a title series and a publication series. Mhhutchins|talk 22:58, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Noted, thanks for the heads up. --Thync 19:55, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Incorrectly uploaded cover image

This image file wasn't uploaded correctly. You must use the link on the publication record to upload a cover image file for that publication. Please try again using the "upload cover scan" link. Once you've done that let me know here, so that I can delete the other file. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 16:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that's what I did as that's how I've uploaded all my previous covers. Regardless, thanks for pointing it out - I'll make doubly sure that my cover uploads meet these requirements in the future. Re-uploaded. --Thync 19:58, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Compare the wiki page for the image file you just uploaded with the previously uploaded image file. You can see that it was obviously uploaded differently. Now you have to update the publication record to link this new file to it. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 20:31, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Night of the Trilobites cover

I'm adding a cover image to Night of the Trilobites MOHearn 12:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Cover artist for Jewel of Tharn

Hello. I have added the cover artist (Tony Destefano) to your verified, as per the other printings of this book. Thanks, Linguist 16:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC).

In the Hall of the Dragon King

I've added the Cover Artist to In the Hall of the Dragon King and some extra notes. --AndyjMo 13:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Farthest Star

I've added the source of the Cover Artist to Farthest Star. --AndyjMo 18:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Moon Base

Updated Moon Base with the Printing History. --AndyjMo 09:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Golem 100

Updated the Printing History and added the source of the cover artist to Golem 100. Moved the OCLC. --AndyjMo 11:07, 6 September 2017 (EDT)

Heir of Sea and Fire

Cover artist of this is Mark Harrison, see Livradoch le Fou with same cover. Horzel 15:57, 29 November 2017 (EST)

Personal tools