User talk:GlennMcG

From ISFDB

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Survival: new section)
(Survival)
Line 207: Line 207:
For {{P|687731|Survival}}, I accepted the edit, but changed the date to match the publication statement. Per the current rules ([[:Template:PublicationFields:Year]], last bullet), we use the date listed in the publication as the official date. If a secondary source provides a more precise date, it is acceptable to refine the precision (ex. add a day to a year & month only). If a secondary source contradicts the publication, we still use the publication's date and the secondary source information can go into the pub notes. Thanks. -- [[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 11:17, 2 August 2020 (EDT)
For {{P|687731|Survival}}, I accepted the edit, but changed the date to match the publication statement. Per the current rules ([[:Template:PublicationFields:Year]], last bullet), we use the date listed in the publication as the official date. If a secondary source provides a more precise date, it is acceptable to refine the precision (ex. add a day to a year & month only). If a secondary source contradicts the publication, we still use the publication's date and the secondary source information can go into the pub notes. Thanks. -- [[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 11:17, 2 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Got it. I think I was intuiting a more numeric approach to approximations, but understand the rationale. --[[User:GlennMcG|GlennMcG]] 15:56, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:56, 2 August 2020

Contents

Welcome!

Hello, GlennMcG, 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! Annie 04:36, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Novel Ideas—Science Fiction

We go by the title page of books, not the cover or copyright page. So even if books in a series look differently because of that, we do not normalize the title to match.

As it sounds like you may have the book, can you look at this one and check what is on the title page? If the two authors are there, I can approve (and we need to update the book as well); if it is not - then you can add notes but we will need to leave the book as is.

Thanks for the update and welcome again! Annie 04:39, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Both books have just Thomsen on the title page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .
Then I will need to reject the edit. Do you have a handy link to the other book so I can look at it and fix it? Also - if you have the book, had you thought of verifying it?
One small operational thing - the plus sign opens a new topic in the Discussion page, if you are responding to an existing one, there is a small "edit" next to the title of the item you are responding to:) Annie 04:59, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Here's the link: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?82007

Not sure what your verification operation consists of. I'll have to do some more reading on how the site works. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .

When you do a primary verification, you are saying "I have the book. All the details listed on this record are as in my book (or I noted the differences in the notes". If you have the book from a library for example, you can do Transient Primary (aka - I checked a real book and the details match - but I do not have the book anymore". When you do a PV (Primary Verification - Transient or Permanent), you will get notified on changes in the record (there is a Changed Primary menu on your page; for big changes people will post here) and if someone wants to change something and you are around, you may be asked if you can check the book again to verify something someone else claims. More details here and here.
About the book - the look inside into the Kindle book shows both names on the title page. So looks like we have a difference between the paperback and the ebook? Won't be the first... We can easily change that - would you like to try? I think I may have this book somewhere as well so will see if I can find it. Annie 17:04, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

It's not clear to me what you're suggesting I try. (Although I'm willing to give it a whirl). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .

To submit an update of the authors for the book (as based on what you see on the title page of yours, our record is a bit faulty). Or I can submit it if you prefer? :) Annie 19:08, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Legends

What is on the title page on this one? Thanks! Annie 04:59, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Legends - Edited by Margaret Weis with Janet Pack and Robin Crew
Earth, Air, Fire, Water - Edited by Margaret Weis with Robyn McGrew and Janet Pack
Seems likely to be a typo, but I understand you need rules to prioritize conflicting information.
In support of it probably being a typo, the acknowledgment page credits Weise, Pack, and Robin McGrew as the copyright owners of the prologue. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .
If the title page says Robin Crew, our record remains like that. But as it is indeed obviously a typo (based on how OCLC had added both books for example and the copyright notes), we variant to the correct author and add a note on the discrepancy. I've done the needed variants and added notes. Thanks for finding this one. Annie 06:00, 11 June 2020 (EDT)

Terribly Twisted Tales

To add the contents to Terribly Twisted Tales, there are two options:

  1. You can go to the publication page and click "Edit This Pub" in the left menu. In the edit screen, scroll down to the "Regular Titles" section and click the "Add Title" button. This will add a row where you can add the page number, title, author, etc. Repeat for each story. If there are reviews or interviews, enter under their respective sections. When done submit.
  2. If the stories are already in the database, they can be imported. This is the preferred method (as the above would create duplicates that would then need to be merged), but is more complex. To do this, also go to the publication page, but click "Import Content" in the left menu. In a separate window, find the title record for a story to import. Copy the URL and past into the "Title 1" box under the "Option 2" portion of the import screen. For additional titles, click the plus sign and repeat in Title 2, etc. When done, click the "Import Titles", add the page numbers on the following screen, and submit.

Hope that helps. Let us us know if you have more questions. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:17, 15 June 2020 (EDT)

I guess I should have waited longer, but as I couldn't seem to add a question to the 'help' page, I tried re-adding the book as new entry with interior title info.
Think I'll wait for more instructions before digging the hole even deeper.
See http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?4682913 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .
No problem. Sometimes we get a little backed up. You can always post at ISFDB:Help desk which usually gets a faster response. To avoid you having to redo work, I have accepted the new version and deleted the old one. When we have generic titles like Introduction or Foreword, we add the publication title in parenthesis after the title. This is to avoid an author's page being filled with a series of "Introduction" and no easy way to tell them apart. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2020 (EDT)

I had tried to ask the question on the help page, but got a write permission error.

Also, this move lost the cover art linkage from the old record.

Please sign your name

Please sign your name on talk pages and discussion boards using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:41, 19 June 2020 (EDT)

There is also a button in the toolbar above the edit window (the second to last that looks like a signature) which will insert the syntax so you don't have to type it. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2020 (EDT)

GlennMcG 18:00, 19 June 2020 (EDT) Ok

Although it does seem odd that the site software doesn't sign things auto-magically, as you need to be signed in to play the game. GlennMcG 18:03, 19 June 2020 (EDT)

The Edge of Running Water

I accepted The Edge of Running Water, but made a couple of changes:

  • Standardized the publisher to Editions for the Armed Services
  • Removed Armed Services Editions from the pub series. It is redundant with the publisher and not really a pub series since every book published by this publisher was marked as that.
  • Changed the page count to 352. When there is a single unnumbered page after the numbered page, we just include it in the numbered pages. If there were multiple unnumbered pages (say 5, for example), then it would be entered as 352+5.
  • Changed the price to $0.00 and moved the text to the pub notes. Prices should be currency symbol and number only. Any explanations go in the notes.
  • I added the date based on the catalog id as sourced to Wikipedia.

Thanks for adding this. Regarding your note on adding the cover image: Now that the pub is entered, there is a "Upload cover scan" link below he pub notes. You would use that to upload the scan and then edit the publication to add the resultant link to the scan. There is a link to the help page in the welcome message above. If you have any questions, please let us know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:57, 26 June 2020 (EDT)

Grantville Gazette VII

I accepted the changes to Grantville Gazette VII, but kept the original "By Hook or by Crook". It was easier to edit the title of the existing record to make the capitalization change. Actually, it would have been easier to edit all three titles instead, but as they appear in other verified pubs, we will have to run that by those verifiers. So I accepted for this pub and will have the other verifiers check their pubs. Once confirmed, I will merge or variant as necessary. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2020 (EDT)

Did you see the response I made in my talk pages? I believe the usual practice is to respond to the question where it is asked. Thanks for spotting the problems. Jack Sjmathis 08:58, 29 June 2020 (EDT)
The cover of the paperback version is slightly different that the covers of the HC and TP versions of this book. I had scanned my cover and added it to the ISFDB, but it disappeared when the incorrect book was deleted. If you copy has a clean cover, can you scan it and replace the cover of the PB version? Sjmathis 10:02, 29 June 2020 (EDT)

Just noticed the "Best Selling" medallion is in a different location. I'll upload a scan. --GlennMcG 16:29, 29 June 2020 (EDT)

Thanks! Much better than my old cover. Jack Sjmathis 12:26, 4 July 2020 (EDT)

The E.S.P. Worm

When changing data in a publication with active primary verifiers, please check with another verifier first. Beyond a courtesy, we have found that this occasionally reveals the existence of a different version (99% of the time it's a database error, but sometimes it's not). I checked with Rtrace and he confirmed your change so I accepted it. I have also unmerged it from the other versions using Robert E. Margroff and created a variant title. Thanks for finding this. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:41, 4 July 2020 (EDT)

Castle Fantastic

For Castle Fantastic, I have had to reject your edit. Instead of creating a new title, simply edit publication and change the existing title. This avoids having to remove and delete the old one. When a title is only in a single publication, it can be edited from that publication (it will not be grayed out). Please resubmit with just correcting the existing record. After that is approved, it will show up under Linda Dunn and need to be varianted to Linda J. Dunn (as described with Carolyn Gilman's title on my talk page). From you moderator note, it sounds like you have this pub. Please consider primary verifying it. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2020 (EDT)

Quest for the Spear

I accepted Quest for the Spear.

  • Title: I debated about this. These days, if a publication title is of the format of "Series Name: Book Name" (or vice versa), we only record the book name and leave the series for the series field. However, this was a one off. There were other films, though. I went with it as a series name. If you feel different, let me know and I will reverse it.
  • Prologue: Does this stand on its own? Like it would be reprinted elsewhere? If not, we would include it as part of the novel and not list it separately.
  • Introduction: Yes, we would normally include essay introductions. If it was a fictional introduction, then it would fall into the same category as the prologue, but an essay gets indexed. As for page number, the preferred method would be to count the unnumbered pages and enter the "page number" in brackets [] to indicate unnumbered. The other choice is to use "bp" to indicate unnumbered pages that precede pagination (this is what I typically do).

Let me know what you think about the title and whether we should remove the prologue. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:57, 6 July 2020 (EDT)

It's fine as a series. I'll remove the prologue, as it's not standalone. (Just late 4th century A.D. setup for modern times). 'bp' seems easier, but what would I use for the first of five pages before page one? [i]? [-4]? [-5]? [1]? --GlennMcG 22:01, 6 July 2020 (EDT)
I would probably go with [i] as that implies front pages, but you could also go with [1]. The key is to explain the situation in the notes (ex. "Introduction starts on the first of five unnumbered pages before the novel" or something similar). -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2020 (EDT)

I tweaked it per your suggestions, but was wondering if there was a way to have the introduction show up before the main novel in the title list. --GlennMcG 02:31, 8 July 2020 (EDT)

Use pipe in the page number. [1]|5 will sort as 5 for example. If the page number contains | (pipe), the number after it is used for sorting while the one before it is shown. If there is no pipe, the number is used for both - think of 3 being a short way to write 3|3 for example. Annie 09:21, 8 July 2020 (EDT)

Steal the Galaxy!

A few small things:

  • You do not need <br> on every line -- we used to but the software changed 10 years or so ago. We just never cleaned up all the old ones (and some editors keep adding them). The first one (on the first line) is the only one that makes sense and any difference (as it will put you under the line that starts with Notes on the pub page)
  • The issue of Locus where the book was listed is interesting information and I hate losing it when editors edit. So I restored it here.

See the changes here. Thanks! Annie 19:24, 8 July 2020 (EDT)

Enemies of Fortune

Putting "Delete" as the page number will not automatically delete a title - we use that when there are multiple changes in the book so we do not lose track (and if the handling moderator decides to, they can do the Remove) but a change that only changes this is unneeded. What you need to do is to submit a "Remove Titles From This Pub" request instead -- go to the left menu and locate the link for that. For this book, it will open this. Select the title you want to remove and submit the removal. I rejected this. I can do the Remove or you can try (so you know how to do it next time) :) Let me know if you have any questions. Annie 13:28, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

I can do that, but when I changed the title the first time following instructions that worked previously it failed this way. (Add replacement title, marking the original to substitute). Am I in this boat because that edit failed to work, and this is the appropriate fixup? Or should I have done it differently in the first place? --GlennMcG 15:37, 9 July 2020 (EDT)
No, it worked exactly as it was supposed to. You just did not have an invisible helper this time. :) If you want a title out from a publication, someone needs to send a Remove submission - you or the moderator who approved that first edit. When you mark the title as you did initially (with *** or deleted in the page number), you have a 50/50 chance of a moderator simply making the Remove for you silently post approval.
Last time it appeared to work because the approving moderator made the Remove Titles submissions after they approved your edit and probably never came to tell you that there is one more step to be done in such cases (which they had done). With new editors, we all try to shield them a bit from the more complicated and annoying parts of the DB so we will do a lot of additional submissions and fixes post approval. I usually would still stop by and explain what I had to do in addition to the already done but... Some moderators will, some won't - depends on how busy one is and sometimes depends on how concentrated one is. Hope that makes sense.
PS: Do not submit Remove in parallel to Pub Edit -- if the Remove is approved first, the Pub Edit will fail. As it is a 2 step process, I tend to assist and make the Remove when I approve such edits - you did the work of marking it, I can as well make the other submission when I do not get distracted. But different moderators work differently. Annie 16:12, 9 July 2020 (EDT)
So, basically double check all my approved edits, and finish up what doesn't happen auto-magically by editor. :) --GlennMcG 16:16, 9 July 2020 (EDT)
Yep. Plus this also allows you to spot other things you missed the first time. Annie 16:19, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

The Forge of Virtue

Another little tip: When a submission is approved, the "old" data is lost. So when adding notes in the cases when there is a PV already such as here instead of stating the obvious "Notes update pre-PVing" which is as good as not adding a note at all, list the changes you are making ("copyright, number line, first printing added" for example). This way someone looking at the history can see what data was verified when. Thanks! Annie 19:34, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

Sure. I thought I read somewhere that the note to the moderator wasn't retained, and therefore wouldn't show up in history. --GlennMcG 19:39, 9 July 2020 (EDT)
It is not retained as part of the title/publication record itself but if you go to the submission itself (via History (this feature is very new), "My Changed Primary" (a few years old - and which is how now we do not require you to post on every PV page every time you touch a PV-ed publication - which used to be the rule before) or via the Recent Edits), it is there on the submission. :) So you should not put important information there but stuff like "what changed" belongs there. Annie 19:50, 9 July 2020 (EDT)
Will do. --GlennMcG 19:52, 9 July 2020 (EDT)

Patricia Mathews

You started off correctly editing the parent entries and then veered into editing the variant entries (which is incorrect). I accepted the couple correct ones, but will be rejecting all of the incorrect ones. I will explain the difference in a minute, but want to post this message now as you are continuing to make edits that will need to be rejected. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:14, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

I know where I went off the rails. I'll start up again when you give the word. --GlennMcG 18:17, 10 July 2020 (EDT)
I typed the following before seeing your response so am going to go ahead and post it just in case: Titles should be credited as per the publication. If the publication uses a non-canonical name for an author, we variant the title to the canonical name. The variant will have the credit used in the publication and the parent will have the canonical author name. To fix these stories, the parent needs to be edited so that the variant keeps the form used in the publication and the parent shows up under the canonical author's page. Most of your submission have been changing the variant which means you are changing the form used in the publication and still leaving it under the Patricia Matthews author's page. I will leave the edits on hold for now. If you click on "My Pending Edits", you will see what you were changing. From there you can go to the parent record and edit it instead. That may make it easier so you don't have re-research each one. When you are done, you can either cancel your held edits or I will reject them. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2020 (EDT)
I'm cancelling now, and will edit the parents. It turns out I can't find any entries that make sense for 'Patricia Matthews'. --GlennMcG 18:31, 10 July 2020 (EDT)
I've edited a parent. When approved, I'll follow suit for the others. Sorry about the extra work for you. --GlennMcG 18:36, 10 July 2020 (EDT)
Approved. It's part of the learning process of how things work here, so no problems. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:40, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

"There Is Always an Alternative" is an interesting case as there is publication under the parent title as well. The data for publication that comes from secondary sources. I will check into it and see if that credit is correct or not. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

It should have been one "t" as well. Fixed. Thanks for finding these. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:18, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

Blood Song

I approved your edit to Blood Song. However, you left the prior "Data from Amazon (date) and Locus Magazine #608 as of 2012-09-08" statement, but you primary verified it. When a publication is primary verified, the expectation is that the data is from the publication iteself. If any information in a primary verified publication comes from secondary sources, than it should explicitly state which information (ex. "Cover artist not credited. Cover artist from artist's website."). The statement should either be removed or edited. If the date is Amazon than it should say "Date from Amazon as of ...", but the way it is written says the date is from Amazon and the rest of the information from Locus. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:45, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

Same with To Dance with the Devil. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:46, 10 July 2020 (EDT)
Hmmm. I read "Data from Amazon (date) and Locus Magazine #608 as of 2012-09-08." as the entry was created with data from both Amazon(the date), and the rest from Locus, on 2012-09-08. The date in the entry (from Amazon) is more specific than the year/month on the copyright page. Perhaps something like:
  • Exact publication date from Amazon
  • Listed in Locus #608
  • my stuff
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by GlennMcG (talkcontribs) .
Looks good. Approved. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2020 (EDT)

Castaways in Time

You managed to double verify Castaways in Time. Not a big deal, but you may want to remove one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:26, 11 July 2020 (EDT)

How would one do that? --GlennMcG 15:51, 11 July 2020 (EDT)
Lol. That's a good question. You could probably unverify (which would hopefully remove both) and reverify. But now that I think about it, it shouldn't be possible to get in that state the way the GUI works these days. I will point Ahasuerus to this discussion in case there is a bug he would want to look into. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2020 (EDT)
Yeah, I don't see a way to modify/remove verifications in any way. --GlennMcG 17:43, 11 July 2020 (EDT)
To remove or change a verification, click on "Verify This Pub" this pub again. If you have already verified it, the options will now be "No verification" and "Transient verification" (assuming you permanently verified it). This allows undoing a mistaken verification or changing the status of a verification (in case you are downsizing your collection or have bought a book you previously transient verified). -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2020 (EDT)
Done. --GlennMcG 18:09, 11 July 2020 (EDT)

Nightshifted

I'm holding this edit. It looks like you cloned the second printing to create the first? We already have the first printing. Am I missing something? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:50, 13 July 2020 (EDT)

Yep, must have missed it somehow. I'll cancel the edit, and PV the 1st printing. --GlennMcG 18:02, 13 July 2020 (EDT)

The Dark Remains

For The Dark Remains & other recent additions, you added a note of "Maps by Karen Wallace". Is there a reason you just didn't add the maps as interior art? -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:16, 16 July 2020 (EDT)

Because I didn't know that was appropriate. What would you like me to do? --GlennMcG 20:06, 16 July 2020 (EDT)

We generally include them so I'd add them. They are entered as interior art. For title, 1) if the map has title "Given Title (map)"; 2) if the map is not titled, "Book Title (map)"; and if the same map is used in multiple books of the series and is not titled, you could use "Series Title (map)". If there are multiple maps, than use "maps" instead of "map" in the parenthesis. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2020 (EDT)

Replacing cover images

When replacing cover images that are already on the wiki, please don't upload at a new location. Instead, upload over the existing image. To do that, go to the image page (example Image:THRGHTHCTK1992.jpg) and use the "Upload a new version of this file" at the bottom of the page. It will warn you that are overwriting an existing image, but just go ahead. If someone else uploaded the prior image, edit the image page after uploading and change the name in the source field to your user name. You will not need to re-edit the publication entry as it will already be linked. However, due to a bug with our wiki software, your browser may not show the new image unless you force a cache refresh (typically a shift F5). This avoids unused & duplicate images on the wiki.

For Through the Ice, I moved the image you uploaded at Image:THRGHTHCTK1992-2.jpg over to Image:THRGHTHCTK1992.jpg and deleted the former. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2020 (EDT)

I was concerned that if I used the same name it would overwrite the old image, and make it impossible to refuse the edit. So this is a function that is not moderated? --GlennMcG 16:11, 17 July 2020 (EDT)
Correct. Image uploading is not moderated. But we do pay attention to it so if something goes wrong, it can be fixed. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:52, 17 July 2020 (EDT)

The Ancient One

Regarding this submission: Is this 6th printing actually listed in Locus with the specified printing date? Or when cloning this record did the date and note not get removed? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:16, 26 July 2020 (EDT)

I missed removing the Locus reference in the cloning process. --GlennMcG 15:02, 26 July 2020 (EDT)
Approved & removed. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:03, 26 July 2020 (EDT)

Kisssing Sin (excerpt)

In Tempting Evil, should be the second excerpt be "Kissing Sin" (two s's) instead of the current three s's? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:26, 30 July 2020 (EDT)

Although 3 times is a charm, 2 is the right call here. --GlennMcG 15:13, 30 July 2020 (EDT)

Changed. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:02, 30 July 2020 (EDT)

Survival

For Survival, I accepted the edit, but changed the date to match the publication statement. Per the current rules (Template:PublicationFields:Year, last bullet), we use the date listed in the publication as the official date. If a secondary source provides a more precise date, it is acceptable to refine the precision (ex. add a day to a year & month only). If a secondary source contradicts the publication, we still use the publication's date and the secondary source information can go into the pub notes. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:17, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

Got it. I think I was intuiting a more numeric approach to approximations, but understand the rationale. --GlennMcG 15:56, 2 August 2020 (EDT)
Personal tools