User talk:Dodavehu

Welcome!

Hello, Dodavehu, 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:

• Help pages
• Field-by-field guide to entering new publications into the database
• Help:Getting Started
• What the ISFDB Wiki is for
• FAQ
• Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.
• Wiki Conventions - How things are usually done on this wiki.
• Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki

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! -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:48, 23 October 2017 (EDT)

The Rise of the Terran Federation

I accepted your update to The Rise of the Terran Federation. I removed the "Data from Amazon.com as of 2017-06-08." since you have verified it (which indicates the information has been compared to the publication). If there is any information on the record that is not actually in the pub (often publication date or price), than a note should be added stating that specific information is from a secondary source (ex. "Publication date from Amazon as of 2017-10-23"). I also disambiguated the David Johnson name as we have multiple authors with that name and this one seems to be a new one. Also, you give the story on page 307 as "Grandfather Encounter". I noticed the Amazon Look Inside shows "The Grandfather Encounter" for the TOC. We do credit per the title page and not the TOC, but please double check that.

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). Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:48, 23 October 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for the welcome! I have changed or confirmed the items you mentioned. Dodavehu 23:20, 23 October 2017 (EDT)

Thanks. For Carr's essay, how significantly was it revised? If minor, we'll keep it merged and just add a note to the title record. If major, we would consider them separate works. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:13, 24 October 2017 (EDT)

The 2017 version is substantially different. The chronology only goes to the year 269, versus 2936 in the 1981 version, and there are substantially more entries in the time period 1 (or 0) to 269 than there are in the earlier version. It seems like Carr is trying to match the chronology to the period of the (new) anthology, which addresses the "rise" of Piper's Terran Federation. The early, "Empire" edition spanned Piper's entire Future History, through the "Empire" which succeeded the Federation. Dodavehu 21:27, 24 October 2017 (EDT)

I split them back out and added notes to the anthology version. Feel free to tweak the notes if you so desire. Thanks! -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2017 (EDT)

The Mighty Manslayer

I have your submission of The Mighty Manslayer on hold. You have it marked as non-genre. Is this correct? Lamb's Khlit the Cossack stories have been previously entered as genre (including ones also present in this book). -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2017 (EDT)

I'm new so I may not understand "genre" correctly but Lamb's Khlit stories are historical or "adventure" fiction; there are no fantastical elements. See this bit by a recent editor of several collections of his fiction, including the Khlit stories (http://www.howardandrewjones.com/writing/harold-lambs-adventure-fiction). -- Dodavehu 22:26, 24 October 2017 (EDT)

I accepted the edit. We normally don't catalog non-genre stories unless the author is a significant genre author. However, these seem to be close enough to the border and early predecessors to the latter swords and sorcery tales that they should be included. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:25, 25 October 2017 (EDT)

Also, the binding field for this pub needs to be filled in. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

I've added the binding. -- Dodavehu 21:27, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

The Science-Fictional Sherlock Holmes

I accepted your edit to The Science-Fictional Sherlock Holmes, but have a question. The pub note states "Both Contento and Reginald credit the editor as Peterson, but Currey [in an ad for a copy on AbeBooks] states it was Norm Metcalf". This implies the editor is not credited within the publication, but Peterson is given within the record. Is Peterson's name listed as the editor in the pub itself? -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

Peterson's role is unclear. I've added some information in the Note to Moderator section. -- Dodavehu 21:21, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

Murder in the Gunroom

re Murder in the Gunroom: The pub note attributing "First Edition" being on the copyright page to Currey needs to be updated since you have verified the pub. If that statement is actually in the pub, than the "[Currey]" can be removed. If it is not, then it needs to be rewritten to state Currey said it was, but it really isn't. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

I've removed the copyright attribution to Currey. -- Dodavehu 21:24, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

A Catalogue fo Early Pennsylvania...

For A Catalogue fo Early Pennsylvania... should that actually be "A Catalogue of Early Pennsylvania..."? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:55, 2 November 2017 (EDT)

Corrected. Dodavehu 22:14, 2 November 2017 (EDT)

Price of The Leopard of Poitain and sources of data

Hi, and a belated welcome. I accepted your updates to The Leopard of Poitain, but I made one small change. When we have information in a record that cannot be obtained from the publication itself (publication dates and artist credits are the most common examples), we document in the notes the secondary source from which they were obtained. Here, based on your note to the moderator, the price falls into that category. If we were making a new entry, we'd include a note saying something like: "Price not listed in the book or on the dust jacket. Price from XYZ." Working with an existing, improperly documented entry is a little different. We err on the side of caution and assume that the information came from some reasonable secondary source, so we don't just delete it. Instead, we add a note that the source of the information is not known. So I did that, incorporating your note to the moderator, plus a statement that the source is unknown, into the notes.

I see that we have this publication linked to a couple of reviews appearing in other, verified publications. I am going to check with those verifiers and see if one of the reviews provided the price, in which case we can adjust that note accordingly. Reviews are often a reasonable source of prices and dates. --MartyD 07:26, 8 November 2017 (EST)