User talk:Hitspacebar

Welcome!

Hello, Hitspacebar, 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! Mhhutchins 00:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Minor items in Feldeváye submission

Hi, and welcome. I accepted your Feldeváye but made two very minor changes I wanted you to be aware of:

• We separate titles and subtitles using a colon (":"), not a dash, so I changed the title to Feldeváye: Roman der letzten Künste
• We include fractions in prices (using a period as the decimal separator), even when there are no cents. So €20 -> €20.00.

As I said, both of these are very minor and are just something for you to keep in mind when you make future submissions. Thanks, and thank you for contributing. --MartyD 10:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Ok, thanks for the hints :) Hitspacebar 11:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Page number

Hello! I accepeted this two Pubs: [1] and [2]. Could you please also add the first page number of the novels. Thanks! Rudam 21:24, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for accepting. I just added the page numbers. Hitspacebar 21:48, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Die Zeitmaschine

Sorry, but I have to reject your submission. We don't merge translated publications even if they have the same title, when they have different translators. Your pub is translated by Annie Reney and Alexandra Auer. This pub [3]and this pub [4] were translated by Felix Paul Greve. Different translations were considered as respective variants of the original title. You have to "Add New Novel" for your pub of Die Zeitmaschine. Thanks! Rudam 21:51, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

ok. Thanks for the information. Hitspacebar 21:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Multiple pricing

Re this record: You should only enter one printed price in the Price field. If there are secondary prices, then you can give them in the Note field. If a price isn't printed on the publication, please enter the source in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Will do next time. Thanks :) Hitspacebar 18:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

G.A.S.

Please check the ISBN given in this record. If the letter "X" is given as the final (checksum) digit of an ISBN, it should be capitalized. Otherwise the system thinks it's a catalog number. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:28, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. I wasn't aware of that difference. Hitspacebar 14:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguating generic titles

Generically titled works should be disambiguated by adding parenthetically the title of publication in which they appear. This introduction, Einleitung should be titled "Einleitung (Rückblick aus dem Jahre 2000)". Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:35, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

This introduction should also be disambiguated. Mhhutchins 22:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the info about that Hitspacebar 14:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Suhrkamp edition of Kallocain

Hello, I have added the cover artist and some notes to your verified publication. Also, I would propose to change the # of the publication series to 303. Phantastische Bibliothek is a publication series in its own right, and is the one we do catalogue, but #2260 refers to the parent publication series Suhrkamp Taschenbuch as stated on p. 1 of the book. The #303 can't be found in it, alas, but on the ad pages in the back of some later publications. Stonecreek 04:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

In addition, as there is no page no. on the last page of the novel, we would notate the pages as 159+[1], see this help text on pages. I also have changed the year of the title to 1947 as this seems to be the year of the first publication of this translation. Thanks, Stonecreek 04:53, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Sounds all reasonable. I changed the pub series # (fictionfantasy.de lists this number as well) and the page information. Hitspacebar 08:57, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

And while I entered other german publications of this extraordinary novel, I found that Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (linked to on the left tool bar, if there is a corresponding ISBN) does list it also. Thanks very much, Stonecreek 13:25, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

NORMA

Re this record: NORMA is an art agency which handles the work of Segrelles, and should not be credited in the Artist field. You have the option to give in the Note field the cover art credit as stated in the publication. Mhhutchins 15:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I will remove it from the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

ok, thanks. The record for NORMA still lists three other publications with NORMA as cover artist. Maybe this record should be deleted completely...? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hitspacebar (talk • contribs) .

It's likely, in those cases, no other artist was credited. Yes, I believe the credit should be moved to the Note field from the Artist field, but I'll let the primary verifiers deal with it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

" Die Kantine der Raumfahrer"

Do you know the original Russian title of this work? I created a new parent record for the original Russian work but was forced to use the same name as the German translation. If you know it please update the title. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:47, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's in printed the appendix of the book. I'll update the title Hitspacebar 21:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI, after approving the submission I changed "БуФет межпланетников" (note the capital "Ф" in the middle of the first word) to "Буфет межпланетников". Ahasuerus 23:46, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I didn't spot that. Hitspacebar 07:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Author order

I am afraid the ISFDB software doesn't support co-author ordering at this time. You can flip-flop authors in data entry forms, but there is no way to assure that they will appear in any kind of order :( Ahasuerus 23:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I see. Thanks for the info Hitspacebar 23:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Cover image for Das Böse kommt auf leisen Sohlen

Hi, I do have some doubts that the image for this 1981 edition is the correct one. Can you verify it? To my knowledge, Diogenes used a pure white background only much later than 1981 (a rough guess by me would be ten years later). The typical design at this time was a black spine with a black frame and yellow background for the cover art (just as in the 1984 edition by Diogenes) if there is a cover art, which was somewhat unusual at that time. Stonecreek 09:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I guess you're right. I have a copy of the edition with that cover and probably fell for the copyright notice stating it's from 1981. However, there's another number printed below which I didn't notice before: "30/08/36/10". So far I found out in the net this might mean 10th printing from 2008. Do you think that's right? If so, I will enter a new publication for that printing and move the cover to it. Hitspacebar 11:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Sounds much better! You can use the 'Clone Pub.' function: that way the cover image needn't to be moved, only the notes and the appropriate fields have to be changed (different ISBN?, year, price), though it then has to be removed along with the cover artist from the 1981 edition. It may be also part of Diogenes' detebe pub. series. Thanks anyway for adding this! Stonecreek 14:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Le Guin novel collection

The publication type of this record was changed from COLLECTION to OMNIBUS. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:42, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok. I thought a COLLECTION was the correct pub type according to the new publication help page, but re-reading it again now I realize that chapter is talking about "stories", not novels. So, COLLECTION is not used if a book contains more than 1 novel and only novels, right? Hitspacebar 22:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

COLLECTION should be used for the publication of stories by a single-author (or authors working in collaboration), and it may include novels, but only if the novel had never been published as a stand-alone publication. This last instance is very rare (an example.) An OMNIBUS is a publication which contains at least one novel which had been previously published as a stand-alone publication. For 99% of the cases, a COLLECTION contains SHORTFICTION works, and an OMNIBUS contains NOVEL works. There are going to be odd publications every now and then that could qualify as either, and the types of those have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Mhhutchins 00:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks a lot. Hitspacebar 09:16, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Translated by ...

Please place "Translated by ..." notes in the notes field; not the synopsis field. I have approved your pending edits in order to capture the information, but then moved them to the correct field. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I usually use the notes field but must have messed up in this case. Hitspacebar 16:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Series data...

...should only go in the parent title record, and not the variant title record. I've moved the series from a couple of variant titles in the "Notes on the Strugatsky’s own work" series to the parent record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the correction. Hitspacebar 17:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Titling interior art

Re this publication: Illustrations (interior art) should be titled for the works they illustrate. This is usually the title of the story or novel. The only time to disambiguate titles is if the illustration is specialized, i.e. a map or frontispiece. So the interior art record for this publication should be changed from "Illustrationen (Mutant 59: Der Plastikfresser)" to "Mutant 59: Der Plastikfresser", unless it's for a map or other specialized art and it would be "Mutant 59: Der Plastikfresser (map)". Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I see. It's not a map, therefore I'll change it. Hitspacebar 18:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

And this art still has the year 1989 clinging to it (I think the year was misjudged when initially entering the book), but it should be 1986, shouldn't it? Stonecreek 09:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

That's correct. I just changed it. Thanks for letting me know. Hitspacebar 12:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting the year of the cover art! I also meant the interior art by John Stewart, but I will change the date of publication since I have found a source for the exact month of publication and will adapt the date for the art as well. Christian Stonecreek 13:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. Hitspacebar 13:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

New developments: both the novel title and the cover art were dated to March of 1974. The 1986 edition reprints the translation from the first german edition and also uses the cover art from then (cover art can be found at sf-hefte.de). We do use the date of the first publication for a title if it essentially the same text that is published under a different title, for example for John Brunner's The Whole Man / Telepathist, see here (wheras we differentiate the years when the title is the same, but different translations/texts are published, see here for an example). Christian Stonecreek 13:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link and the changes, I didn't know sf-hefte.de. Seems to be a good place to go and double-check. Hitspacebar 14:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Format for entering other database's record numbers

Re this publication: When sourcing an outside database, it should be given in the form: "DATABASE: 123456". So a record from OCLC would be "OCLC: 123456". Or the Library of Congress "LCCN: 123456". This will help us when/if we ever dedicate a separate field for such records and the changes can be made universally instead of manually. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, good to know. I haven't added numbers like these before (the OCLC number in that record already existed before I edited the record). Thanks for the info, I'll change the record. Hitspacebar 19:11, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Die Reise zum Arcturus

Hi, I'll add the month of publication and my share of notes to your verified publication. If you'll allow, I'll add the cover image of my copy which in this case seems a bit better in shape. Keep up the good work. Christian Stonecreek 19:34, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, sure, please do. My copy is pretty worn out, therefore the bad cover image. Hitspacebar 20:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I also added the month of publication to Der Daleth-Effekt. Christian Stonecreek 14:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Die Maxim-Kammerer-Trilogie essay

A little digging suggests that this is an excerpt from Boris Strugatsky's "Комментарии к пройденному" (serialized in 1998-1999, book publication 2002, German translation as "Kommentar" by E. Simon), e.g. see Gesammelte Werke 5, Gesammelte Werke 6, etc. According to fantab.ru, excerpts from Strugatsky's text have been frequently re-used as forewords and afterwords.

I think it would be best to add the German title to "Notes on the Strugatsky's own work" instead of creating a VT. Ahasuerus 16:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for digging. I didn't know that site. Your suggestion sounds good. Hitspacebar 16:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. Also, I have changed "the Strugatsky's" to "the Strugatskys'". Ahasuerus 17:25, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Strugatsky German translations/variants

I get to practice my German and my Russian at the same time. How excellent! --MartyD 15:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

As for the Russian titles, I do too! They are just copypasted from the sources and I have no clue about that language. But the letters look interesing. :) Hitspacebar 15:35, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Die letzten ihrer Art

Shouldn't this be typed as NONFICTION? Mhhutchins 21:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Right! Sorry about that. That's my first NONFICTION and didn't think about that. Hitspacebar 21:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Changing a field in the title record doesn't change anything in the publication record. They have to be updated in two separate submissions. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I see you just did that. Mhhutchins 21:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Variant type mismatch

This record is typed as a POEM in its original language. Could the translation be one? Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 12:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

The German translation is definitely not a POEM, neither its structure nor its style is even close to that. I just double-checked the biography of the German edition and it definitely states that it's a translation of Flight Is for Those Who Have Not Yet Crossed Over, but it also states that the original has first been released in The Third Alternative #17 in 1998.

Some digging shows that there seem to be two different works by Jeff VanderMeer with the same title "Flight Is for Those Who Have Not Yet Crossed Over": the short story mentioned above, and one that seems to be a one-page poem which was fist released in The Silver Web #9 a few years earlier in 1993 (and which got a Rhysling Award).

According to the page counts available here, all publications listed on the title record of the story up to 1996 and the on in "The Alchemy of Stars: Rhysling Award Winners Showcase" are a poem. The German edition definitely is a short story, and like mentioned above the one in "The Third Alternative #17, 1998" is as well. As for the other publications it's not that obvious.

Should "Flight Is for Those Who Have Not Yet Crossed Over " be split into two titles (POEM and SHORTFICTION)? Hitspacebar 17:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Concrete evidence that confirms your supposition that there are two pieces with the same name. I'll split them into two records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

"Vignettus"

I changed the parent title of this story earlier to English, but am now thinking that if it has never been published in English, then there should not be a false parent record at all. What do you think? Mhhutchins 20:08, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Same situation with the other original stories first published in this collection. You noted three, but there are actually four: "The Secret Life of Lynn Minneman" which was probably later reprinted in English in Secret Lives. (It's not been verified so I can't be certain.) I'm thinking we shouldn't create parent English titles until we're certain that the story has actually appeared in English. Mhhutchins 20:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I first thought that one advantage of the parent record would be that it makes clear that the author didn't write the story in German himself and that it's a translation instead. But then, on the other hand, there's the publication date "2007" for the English parent record, coming from the German edtiion, which is misleading, because it hasn't been relased that year in English. Deleting the parent record only has a disadvantage for bilingual authors who write in more than one language. In a case like "Vignettus", you would not be able then to tell in what language the title was written originally. But these are rare cases I guess. So, yes, deleting the false parent record seems like a good idea.

As for Vignette vs. Vignettus: according to bibliography in the German edition the original title is "Vignettus" ("Vignette" was a typo by me).

As for The Secret Life of Lynn Minneman: the German editon states the it's first been printed in Secret Lives in 2007. Either the German edition is wrong here or there's another, older publication of Secret Lives not yet added to the ISFDB. Hitspacebar 20:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I found this Amazon listing for a 2007 publication which appears to be the trade paperback edition of what was published in hardcover (with a different name) the following year by an imprint of the same company. Now I'll do some further research to see whether the book actually exists, since "Currently Unavailable" in Amazon-speak usually means it was announced but never published. Mhhutchins 21:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Strange: I had searched amazon.com as well and just did again after your post, but the title you linked above still doesn't show up in my search results. Seems like Amazon is delivering different search results in different countries, or something like that. But your link works. Maybe the release processes of the German edition and "Secret Lives" overlapped in 2007 and the English title was changed to "Strange Tales Of Secret Lives" on short notice, not making it into the bibliography of the German edition. Hitspacebar 21:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Further research has found no evidence that there was ever a trade paperback release of Secret Lives regardless of the title or publisher. So we're back to square one. As you suggest, maybe it was scheduled for publication and cancelled, but the 2007 copyright shows up on the German edition's acknowledgements. Mhhutchins 21:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Strugatzki omnibus

Just to be clear before accepting the submission: there is no title to the collection other than the names of the contents? An OCLC record titles it "Werkausgabe - 5". Do only the contents' titles appear on the title page? Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

The book itself says "Werkausgabe" on its title page, next to another title page listing the contents, but not on the cover. However, the titles of the series this book belongs to are used in a pretty messed up way across different places: sometimes they are called "Werkausgabe", sometimes "Gesammelte Werke". Background: there are two editions, a major release by Heyne - the one I entered - and a very limited special edition by another publisher Golkonda with the same content. The publications themselves, the publishers and online catalogues all use the titles inconsistently. Here's a title overview:

- Printed in all books of this series of the major release, but not on the cover: "Werkausgabe".

- Printed in all books of this series of the limited edition release and also on the cover: "Gesammelte Werke".

- Publisher's homepages (both!): "Gesammelte Werke".

- Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (printed edition of major release): "Werkausgabe".

- Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (e-book edition of major release): "Gesammelte Werke".

See the discussion I had with Stonecreek on his talk page. We came to the conclusion to use the titles the way they are now and created a series for "Werkausgabe". Though I must admit that the one I just entered has become scarily long. Do you think it'd be better to use "Werkausgabe" instead like printed in the book, despite all the title confusion? Hitspacebar 20:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Per ISFDB standards, the title page should be used for the publication record's title field. Cover titles should only be used if there is no title page. That being said, this appears to have two title pages, unless the second title page is actually a contents page. (Is there a separate contents page?) I'll accept the submission and let you and Christian figure out how to handle the publication and the series. Mhhutchins 20:49, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there's a separate contents page. So altogether there's: just "Werkausgabe" and editor's name on the left page and the list of the contained titles on the right page. Then on the next two pages there's the copyright etc. on the left one, and the contents (titles and page numbers) on the right one. Hitspacebar 21:05, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Another page count scenario

Re this record: Even though the novel ends on page 800, there are 7 additional pages that should be recorded in the page count field, even if you don't create a content record for what you've determined is not significant content. The note is sufficient to explain this, but the record's page count field should show the actual number of pages in the book. I hope this is consistent with the help page's "last numbered page" rule and our discussion about page counts on the Rules Discussion page. I don't think there has been much discussion about all the different scenarios when it comes to the page count field (and you can see by the lack of other editors' comments that there isn't much interest either!) It seems to have come down to each editor doing their own thing until another verifier comes along who has a different interpretation of the rules. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter if you use the Note field to document the way the book is paginated. And you've done that sufficiently in this record that another user would clearly understand what's happening. Mhhutchins 00:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

You're right about that record. I had changed its page count based on the first half of your answer to example 1.1 in our discussion, but since you corrected your answer after that I'll change the page count back to 807. I think that's still consistent with the help. Hitspacebar 17:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

G.A.S.

Please check the publication date of this record. Is it possible that it was published before the English version? Mhhutchins 17:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

That was a typo, sorry. I just corrected it. Hitspacebar 17:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Year Zero

Re this record: Per the third bullet point here, if you don't feel the acknowledgements is substantial enough for a content record, then you shouldn't count the pages it appears on in the page count field. Mhhutchins 18:55, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Oops, yes, you're right. I simply forgot to enter the acknowledgements (which are pretty extensive) and will do now. Seems like I need a break... Hitspacebar 19:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

The Handmaid's Tale

This record is for the first Viking printing in 1996. Unless you're certain that your 16th printing was also published in 1996, it's best to create a new record for your copy. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

As a rule, unless it is noted, all records should be assumed to be for the first printing, especially for Locus1 verified records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Right, thanks. I canceled my submission and cloned the pub. Hitspacebar 20:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Drohnenland

For what it's worth I added the Pub. Series to your verified book, since it was already established.

I saw that you came to ISFDB the same way I did: via correcting an error. In my case it was a german COLLECTION that was marked as NOVEL. Stonecreek 08:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the pub series and letting me know.

We should probably add a few obvious errors here and there to attract new editors ;) Hitspacebar 14:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Download script

I have received the following comment about the recently added download script via e-mail:

• It connects to sourceforge as an anonymous user, but you still get prompted for the CVS password. [...] I guess you either need to give cvs the null password in the script itself, or your instruction should say just to hit return when prompted for it.

Could you please take a look? TIA! Ahasuerus 19:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually the script does already say to just hit RETURN at the login prompt when the checkout is done for the first time. I'm gonna make that info a bit more prominent. Subsequent cvs updates should show no login prompt. Hitspacebar 22:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Ahasuerus 22:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I also just added a "support" note which directs people with questions to this talk page so they can ask me directly. Hitspacebar 23:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Better yet :-) Ahasuerus 23:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

2nd printing of Ocean

I blanked the publication date of this record, which was cloned from the original first printing and mistakenly retained its publication date. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "2013-00-00" then (see the printing numbers/years mentioned in the pub note)? Hitspacebar 19:14, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

You're right. I've corrected it. Unfortunately, because of software limitations, year-only-dated records will appear before month- or day-dated records. Mhhutchins 20:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

How to identify the printing of Heyne publications?

You verified Elric von Melniboné: Die Sage vom Ende der Zeit, which in the notes states that it is a 4th printing. I happen to own a copy of that book myself, but nowhere do I see an indication what printing this is (specifically: no numberline). Now I wonder: How do you identify the printing of a Heyne publication? I will need to know this as soon as I get around to entering the data for my German books. Thanks, Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 23:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

It has "4. Auflage" printed on the copyright page. I just made a submission for the pub which adds this information. Hint: newer Heyne publications (maybe as of the late 1990s) often have the printing number stated on the back of the book next to the ISBN number as a two digit field above its own small barcode (example: Der unmögliche Planet). Hitspacebar 16:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

It seems like Heyne always omits the "1. Auflage" statement for the first printings and only starts stating it on the copyright page from "2. Auflage" onwards. I'm not sure if one can take this as a general rule, but at least the Heyne books I own seem to follow this pattern. Hitspacebar 17:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. I took the liberty to create a new publisher Wiki page (Publisher:Heyne) with this information, lest the information be buried in the history of your talk page. Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 15:43, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Good idea. I just came across one case where there's a "02" on the back but the copyright page doesn't contain "2. Auflage". Therefore one should always double-check copyright page and back to be sure about the printing. I'll add that to the Heyne page Hitspacebar 16:08, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

"Set This House in Order", by Matt Ruff

You submitted a PubUpdate for this book, which included listing the cover artist as "Roberto de Vicq de Cumptich". Where did you get that credit from? This is the same cover art as used for the tp editions, which are credited to Richard Bradley & Todd Robertson (in our records, and on the back cover of those books). Chavey 09:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting this, seems like I mixed up two informations on the book's jacket: "Roberto de Vicq de Cumptich" is credited for jacket design, but the photograph is credited to "Richard Bradley" actually (but "Todd Robertson" is not mentioned anywhere). Can you correct the submission or shall I cancel and resubmit? Hitspacebar 09:37, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm wondering why the tp edition credits the cover design to Todd Robertson, but the hardcover edition credits the design to Roberto de Vicq de Cumptich. Both designs look more or less equal to my eye. Probably a printing error in one of them? Hitspacebar 10:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

The logical conclusion we would have to reach is that the earliest claim for the designer was in error, and had to be corrected on the later publication. It seems that it's annoyingly common for publishers to start with a previous document and then change it for a later book -- often forgetting to update all of the data. That seems to be born out by the number of dust jackets that have incorrect ISBN numbers on them -- someone updated everything, but forgot something on the back cover. Mostly, we see that with dust jackets, although there are other cases where a book gets a new cover, and they forget to update the cover artist listed on the copyright page. I've found contact information for both designers, and I will email Todd (who I suspect is the designer) to ask about it. I accepted your submission, and then corrected that one attribution. (I also changed the formatting of the Canadian price to the way we usually state it.) Chavey 17:59, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks a lot. Hitspacebar 18:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Der unmögliche Planet

Hi, there seem some possible typos in your 5th printing of Dick's collection (at least the titles in question would differ from my 4th ptg.): Menschlich ist vs. Menschlich ist..., Die Zeit der Perky Pat vs. Zur Zeit der Perky Pat, Ich hoffe, ich komme bald vs. Ich hoffe, ich komme bald an and Ach, als Blobbel hat man's schwer vs. Ach, als Blobbel hat man's schwer!. Can you please check again? Christian Stonecreek 21:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Gosh, so many errors, how embarassing :) Your versions of the titles are all the correct ones. Hitspacebar 21:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

All corrected. Don't fret, I just lost count of my errors and typos, I still stumble over them from time to time. Christian Stonecreek 07:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Elric von Melniboné: Die Sage vom Ende der Zeit

This pub that you verified is the 4th printing. Thanks to your previous work it was easy for me to create a clone to add this first printing pub. I did not stop there, though, but added detailed INTERIORART titles to the pub's content. I am telling you this because you might be interested to add those detailed INTERIORART titles also to your 4th printing pub. Of course it's alright if you want to stick with the single INTERIORART title record that you already have (link), but in that case you should probably fix it to use the author "J. Cawthorne" instead of "James Cawthorne" (because "J. Cawthorne" is what is credited on the copyright page, and "James Cawthorne" does not appear anywhere in the book, at least not in my first printing). Cheers, Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 22:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks a lot. I'm gonna add the INTERIORART to the 4th edition as well. And thanks for pointing out the error about Cawthorne. No idea why I didn't use "J. Cawthorne" because, like the pub note already states correctly, that's the way he's credited in my edition as well. Jens Hitspacebar 16:45, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

German ed. of Walton's Farthing

I accepted the submission adding this publication but removed the "publication series" data. The series "Inspector Carmichael" appears to be a title series, and since it's the German translation of a book already in another series ("Small Change") it can't have a different series name. Mhhutchins 19:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, it's a title series indeed. I wanted to record the German version of it and then fell for the pub series field. I'll record it in the note instead. Having variants (translations) of title series might be a nice feature in the future (especially for a case like this where it's not simply a translation but the publishers renamed the title series). Hitspacebar 21:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Author's Note (A Scanner Darkly)

Hi! You may want to check if Dick's 'Nachbemerkung des Verfassers'/'Nachbemerkung des Autors' is also printed in your publication. Christian Stonecreek 14:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

It is! Thanks for the hint. Jens Hitspacebar 15:19, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Different kinds of subtitles

Hi, sorry, but I removed the subtitle Gesammelte Erzählungen in zwei Bänden in this volume and its companion. We try to don't document subtitles of that type, else we would have tons of titles with 'XXXX: A Novel' or 'YYYY: Fantastic Stories'. We do document subtitles that give additional information that's not inherent in the data. In this case the subtitle is somewhat misleading as it is printed in specific volumes but refers to two different volumes (that's because it is really the title of a series, I guess). Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 09:30, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hm, but then the second paragraph for Subtitles in the help for titles is wrong and should be rephrased. It says for subtitles that denote a series name "it is left to the editor's discretion as to whether this should be part of the title". Seeing that, and that the OCLC record uses the subtitle, and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (kind of) does as well I thought it's correct to use the subtitle when I entered the record. Jens Hitspacebar 09:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, in the end you decide! It's a title of a series for the two volumes that we can't document as a category, because it would affect the original. On the other hand the original title of 'Collected Stories' shows up with the respective german titles, which makes it a bit redundant. If you like to reinstall the subtitle, I'll do it for you. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 10:08, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

That's not necessary, it's okay that way. Either or the other way, the title is correct. But I'll add a note about the subtitle. Still, the help section I mentioned above should definitely be more precise for cases like this. Otherwise you'll have editor ping-pong: one adds a subtitle, the next one deletes it later on, a few months later someone adds it again etc etc. => superfluous work and edits => not good. ;) Jens Hitspacebar 18:07, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I also removed the subtitles from the INTERIORART and ESSAY records ("Einleitung" etc) to make it more consistent. Jens Hitspacebar 18:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Mensch+ and Der Schockwellenreiter

I added months of publication and accompanying notes to this book and that one. Christian Stonecreek 10:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Jens Hitspacebar 17:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Le Guin's Die linke Hand der Dunkelheit

Hello, Jens. It should be possible to determine the month of publication for this book as March of 2000. There are many examples - especially from 1998 to 2004 - where both the month of printing and the month of publication are stated for Heyne books and there's always a difference of two months (see here for an example). I use to note it as with this publication. Please spend a thought on this.

Also, shouldn't the prices change places, i.e. DM 17.80 become the 'regular' price, since the Euro wasn't introduced in 2000? Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 16:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Christian. I wasn't aware of that and will add that information to the Heyne page. And yes, the prices should indeed be changed. Jens Hitspacebar 17:33, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Birthplaces of authors

Hello, Jens! I added 'Baden-Württemberg' and 'West' (Germany) to your edit of Tobias O. Meißner, as per ISFDB standard: Use the "City, Administrative division, Country" format. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 10:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Right, thanks. I actually know that standard, but it must have slipped my memory :) Jens Hitspacebar 11:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it happens from time to time, for me, too. Stonecreek 11:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Omnibus

Hello! You've just submitted this book Weltensturm and noted that it contains two novels. The pub type for a book with two individual novels is classified as 'omnibus'. I'll corrected it. Thanks! Rudolf Rudam 15:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 15:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

OCLC

Hello Jens! The OCLC link of this pub Diagnose negativ is inoperative. Rudolf Rudam 17:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Uhm, I never did any submission for that pub. Did you probably mean another editor? According the the recent submissions probably User:JLochhas? Jens Hitspacebar 18:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Oops! I'm sorry. You're right! It seems that I was a little bit confused. Rudolf Rudam 19:33, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Weltensturm

Re this publication record: the creation of an OMNIBUS record requires the entry of the content titles which qualify it as an omnibus. Do you know the German titles of the two novels by Westerfeld? Mhhutchins 07:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

No, I didn't find any information about the German titles, except for the fact that they were never released seperately in German before this publication. Should it be a NOVEL then instead (which I submitted initially but was changed to OMNIBUS by a moderator)? Jens Hitspacebar 09:36, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, it depends. If the two works appear as a single work in translation, that is, without any separation in the publication, then it should be changed back to a NOVEL. (Such things happen when stories are "fixed-up" as novels without any indication of their titles or any clear separation of the original works.) I'll try to do a little research to determine if this is the case. If you can go back to your original source to see if any further data is available it would also help. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:21, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

It appears that the British edition was also published as a single work. Research has shown that the American publisher thought it was too long and split it into two volumes. As for now, the single volume editions should not be considered as an OMNIBUS but as NOVEL. I'll have to do some manipulating of title records to get this into a presentable shape, and it may involve a few verifying editors. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mhhutchins 16:35, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I just found an extract of a newer ebook version of that publication on the publisher's site, which doesn't contain a page of contents but the title page and copyright page. The title page just states "Weltensturm: Roman" ("a novel") on the title page, but not something like "Two novels in one book". The copyright page states the two original English titles already mentioned in the publication record. Moreover, the "Look inside" at Amazon.de for that ebook edition has a page of contents with 7 main chapters and a lot of sub chapters, but no indication that the two novels were separated. I'd say it's rather a NOVEL. Jens Hitspacebar 16:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Sourcing data in primary verified publication records

If the data entered into any of the fields of a publication record is not stated in the actual publication, you should be specific about which data comes from a secondary source. If all data appears in the actual publication, then it's not necessary to give a source (such as "Data from publisher's website" in this record.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Right. I forgot to change the sentence when I primary verified and added notes yesterday. I'll change it now. Jens Hitspacebar 06:16, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Ein Fischer des Binnenmeeres

I changed the ISBN-13 to an ISBN-10 in this record, since the ISBN-13 didn't exist in 1998. Keep this in mind when creating records from secondary sources. Thanks. Mhhutchins 07:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks Hitspacebar 08:47, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Look at the Birdie / Ein dreifach Hoch auf die Milchstrasse!

Based on my reading of Vonnegut's Look at the Birdie, last month I changed 10 of the collection's titles to NON-GENRE, as it's a 'non-genre'-heavy pub. Please accept my apologies for my oversight in not discussing it with you first, as these titles also appear as translations in your verified edition Ein dreifach Hoch auf die Milchstrasse!, and variants of non-genre titles also need to be marked NON-GENRE (which I have done in this case). Please let me know if these changes are OK with you or if there are any you would question. Thanks. PeteYoung 05:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

That's ok. Thanks for the changes. Jens Hitspacebar

The Silmarillion

You have verified a publication of this title so this discussion should be of interest. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:37, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Pandora

A magazine record should give the date or numerical designation of the issue in its title field in order to disambiguate it from other issues. Perhaps this publication should be titled "Pandora, Spring 2007". Also, the ISBN comes up as an invalid number. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 17:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, I'll change the title. I've already made a submission to correct the ISBN. Hitspacebar 17:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

You'll also have to correct the titles of two other records which are automatically generated: editor title record and cover art record. Mhhutchins 17:56, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes yes, I'm not that quick :) Thanks. Hitspacebar 17:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Gothic Literature

I had to reject your submission to add a single record for this title. It appears that this was published in three volumes (one for topics, and two for authors), each volume having its own ISBN. (In 2006, they would have been ISBN-10s, not the ISBN-13 you got from Amazon.) I advise when adding a record for a book from secondary sources, especially for older books, that you use a more reliable source than Amazon. OCLC is a good start. It gives data for each of the three volumes in this search. Also prices on Amazon from academic publishers change because there is no stated list price. A price in 2006 would not be the same as today. The listing on Amazon for $575.50 may be for the three-volume set, and in 2015 dollars. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I didn't see that. I'll try to split it up into the three volumes. Jens Hitspacebar 21:28, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Cover art credit

I'm unsure why there is a cover art credit for this book when there is no cover art at all. Mhhutchins 16:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Same here. Mhhutchins 16:52, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

These are titles which belong to a series of about a dozen PKD releases by the same publisher which all have a similar design (more examples are this and this one). It's hard to see in the images, but the covers are not simply one-colored but contain something one could consider "abstract art" (vertical lines, this image shows it best). I think I recorded the "cover artist" because I didn't distinguish between art and design back then. Though this special cover design could be considered an abstract form of art... but that's probably far-fetched. You think I should remove the artist? Hitspacebar 17:57, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually the definition of "art" in the help (e.g. here and here) is pretty vague and could be more precise to avoid further confusion for new editors. Hitspacebar 18:04, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I suppose we all have our individual concept of what is art, but it seems to me that for ISFDB purposes it must be illustrative. After all, we're a fiction database, and the only reason we credit cover art is because it illustrates the work. If you want to start a larger discussion of clarifying the field, please bring it to the group on a community page. BTW, you always have the option to credit cover designers in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Legal name field

Names in this field should be entered in the format FAMILYNAME, GIVENNAME. I've corrected the update you made to this author. Mhhutchins 01:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. Hitspacebar 08:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Alien Contact yearbook

Re this publication: That's a lot of editors. Are you certain that all 8 persons are credited as editor? Also, I'm not sure that it should be in the same series as the periodical. Perhaps it may be best to create a separate series, and then make them subseries of a newly created superseries? Also, if this is published in 2004, how can it collect work from the online version of 2014? Mhhutchins 23:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

It indeed lists all 8 persons on the copyright page. That might come from the fact that it's a printed compilation of 6 online issues (which are not online anymore), with each online issue probably having had a subset of these 8 editors, and they wanted to credit all editors in the printed version (even though some probably didn't work on the printed version). But that's just guessing. As for a subseries: nice idea, I'll try that. And as for the "2014": that's a typo and should be "2004" of course. Hitspacebar 08:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

As for the "subseries": I'm new to editing subseries, and I'm not sure right now what you meant by "create a separate series, and then make them subseries of a newly created superseries". My idea would be to simply create a series "Alien Contact yearbooks" for the yearbooks and make that a subseries of the existing "Alien Contact" series. Wouldn't that suffice? Hitspacebar 08:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

No. I suggest making both series into subseries of a single series (that being a "superseries" since it contains more than one series.) So there would be two subseries: e.g. "Alien Contact (yearbook)" and "Alien Contact (x)" [you supply the name for the regular periodical] and then make them subseries of "Alien Contact". Look at this series to see how it is displayed. Or you can proceed with the method you suggested, and look how it is displayed. If it doesn't look right (in both series display and issue grid display), you can always change it to the method I suggest. Mhhutchins 18:16, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok, now I see what you meant. Thanks. Hitspacebar 19:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Alexander Martin = Ian Alexander Martin?

Hello, Jens! Are you sure that these two names refer to the same person? The link for the first refers to the latter in the notes for this book. Just wondering, Christian Stonecreek 19:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Oops, that's definitely wrong. I have no idea anymore why I created that link. I had probably entered "Alexander Martin" in the search box, got one author as a result and didn't notice the additional and unexpected "Ian" in the name. Thanks for finding this. Hitspacebar 20:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sackratten-Blues

Re this publication: your source gives the publisher as just "Richter". What is your source to change the publisher name to "Verlag Robert Richter", a publisher name which isn't in the database? Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I forgot to add the information in the note: the source is the the publisher's website, double-checked with the amazon.de record. Hitspacebar 21:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Quarber Merkur 97/98

Re this publication: A 2003 publication would not have an ISBN-13. Please check your sources and make the necessary changes. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah, right. I fell for that trap again. Thanks for letting me know. Jens Hitspacebar 08:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Price for Das Vater-Ding

Hi. I accepted your submission of Das Vater-Ding, but I question the price information. The same price and comment is listed for the first printing, which was more than four years earlier. That makes me a little suspicious, even in an era of low inflation.... Does Deutsche Nationalbibliothek explicitly list the 1st and 2nd printings and give the same €14.90 price for each? Thanks. --MartyD 12:24, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

You're correct, I just checked again and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek only has the first printing in its database. I'll remove the price. Jens Hitspacebar 12:31, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

kirjasto.sci.fi

I see that kirjasto.sci.fi is currently unavailable, but let's wait a few weeks and see if the site may be resurrected. We have well over 500 links to their domain and re-entering 500+ links would be a pain if it turned out that it's a temporary issue. Ahasuerus 23:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok. I'll cancel my submissions. Jens Hitspacebar 07:16, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Ahasuerus 22:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Merging Vorwort (Andromedanebel)

Hello, Jens. As the second title was obsolete, it was better to delete it (which I did), as there was no publication attached and the title's date would have been out of sync with the publication's date. Christian Stonecreek 08:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. BTW: I think this Vorwort of Andromedanebel of your primary verfied copy from 1983 could be the same as this Vorwort from the 2015 edition and could be varianted to the same parent Russian title. Could you check you copy? In the Vorwort the author should describe how he had to amend the novel because of the increasing pace in space research. Hitspacebar 08:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I thought I had checked the two publications and came some conclusion (likely that they are different, either in content or in translation), but without making a note, I think I'll have to check again, sigh. Stonecreek 09:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sisters of the Revolution: A Feminist Speculative Fiction Anthology

I have approved the addition of the last 15 stories to this publication, but keep in mind that it is generally easier to use "Import Titles" when adding existing titles to a pub. That way you don't have to create follow-up submissions to merge titles. Ahasuerus 21:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear, seems like I already wasted lots of time merging titles unnecessarily because I wasn't aware that this feature exists. :-/ And I always thought how cumbersome all this merging is. Thanks for letting me know! Hitspacebar 21:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, we learn new things all the time! :-) Ahasuerus 21:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hellboy: Medusas Rache

Hello, can you please change the title of this book. It is misspelled as "Hellyboy", correct is "Hellboy". Thank you. HardyK 20:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, that was indeed a typo. Funny I've never noticed it. Thanks for finding this. Jens Hitspacebar 07:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Alador

According to both DNB and OCLC, the author of this publication is credited as Henry John Newbolt. I've changed the record. Mhhutchins 02:09, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

The Amazon cover image was better than the image file you uploaded. Why not just link to Amazon and let it be? Mhhutchins 21:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Because I think it's generally better to have the cover images in the ISFDB database in order to be independent from Amazon, especially for extremely limited releases like this one. If Amazon deleted the record one day, or changed its rules for image use or disappeared completely (though the latter might not be very likely for some time) the cover images stored in the ISFDB would still be there. Jens Hitspacebar 14:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

That's OK, until the ISFDB server runs out of space. :) Even when not taking ISFDB limitations into consideration, why didn't you upload the full size Amazon image to the ISFDB server instead of an inferior copy? Mhhutchins 19:05, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Is that allowed? I thought Amazon images are copyrigthed. But I probably mixed up German and US copyright (we don't have the "fair use" rule here in Germany). If it's ok to copy the images from Amazon I'll use these in the future (if there's no other one and I don't have my own scan). Hitspacebar 19:33, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

William Matheson

Since you primary verified the only publication by William Matheson, I'm hoping you can help me. Did you by chance enter the author's data (birthdate, deathdate, etc.)? His birthdate (1985) is later than his deathdate (1978). If you didn't, are there any dates given in your pub? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'm the one who entered the author data. The birth year has two digits transposed, it should be 1895. I just made a submission to correct it. The dates are not orinted in the pub, I got them from his record at Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Jens Hitspacebar 19:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Cover artist for Terror

Hi, Jens. You entered 'Nik Wheeler / Corbis' in the field. It should better be just the former Nik Wheeler as Corbis is some kind of vendor (or maybe two: 'Nik Wheeler' and 'Corbis' if you feel like entering two artists), but this way we have one new artist named with the combination of two names. Thanks for entering this novel, though! Christian Stonecreek 10:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok. I had seen several other author records in format "Name / Image Company" for Corbis (and also for Getty Images) and thought that's the way to do it. Jens Hitspacebar 10:32, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

It isn't always easy to decide: usually we try only to credit persons, not agencies or similar entities, but that's not as easy when it comes down to credits for cover art. In this case it does seem that Wheeler did the artwork, which was handled by Corbis prior to and for the publication. However, in many cases the agency or vendor is the only name we've got, so it's possible to list it instead of the real arist. Christian Stonecreek 13:32, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Series name vs. editor title record

You entered the series name of this issue as "Alien Contact - 1992" when it should have been "Alien Contact (magazine)". The former is the title of the editor title record which is not the same thing as a series. You will have to merge this publication's editor title record with this editor title record. That will automatically place it into the correct series. The system automatically creates an editor title record at the time of a publication record's creation which has the same title as the publication's title field.

You will also have to delete the false series that was created with your submission. (But only after you've merged the editor title records.) Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 22:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I realized it and slapped my forehead the moment I had hit "submit" a then saw the "new series" warning. Jens Hitspacebar 22:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Mariel: Das Geheimnis der Glocke or Mariel: Der Klang der Glocke

This publication appears to have been entered with the wrong title. (Here is the DNB record which was probably your source for the ISFDB record.) There's another record for the same publication under the correct title. It appears that the title was changed when it was reprinted in 2001. Please reconcile the two records, and delete one if necessary. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 16:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll have a look. Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 16:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

I either rejected or corrected the submissions which added a number in the title field. They don't seem to be present in the titles as given in the OCLC records. Mhhutchins|talk 18:56, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

They are present, depending on the record you look at: present, not present. The publisher split up the original novel into two publications, the way they've done it for other translations of the series as well, and I used the title from the pub's DNB record: "Mariel [1]. Das Geheimnis der Mäusemaid" (omitting the brackets). That was also consistent with the already existing titles of the other German translations of the series. From my experience, DNB records are more reliable than OCLC records for German titles regarding correct titles and I suggest we either remove or keep the "serialization number" for all records of German translations of the series (if you look at OCLC, German translations of other works of the series do and don't have a "serialization number" as well, but at DNB they always do). Jens Hitspacebar 19:23, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

By the standard used by most librarians, and probably DNB as well, anything in brackets indicates something that is not stated, but understood. That's not how the ISFDB works. We give the title which is stated on the title page of the publication, and until we get a primary verifier we should go by the secondary sources, both of which agree that the number is not stated in the publication. If the "serialization numbers" aren't stated on the title page, then they shouldn't be entered into the title field of an ISFDB record. That's what the title record's serial field is for. Mhhutchins|talk 04:31, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I see. I didn't know that brackets were used that way by librarians. Then we should remove the numbers from the other German titles of the series as well if applicable. I can do that. Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 08:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

"Entity references are not escaped/unescaped correctly"

If memory serves, Bug 541 "Entity references are not escaped/unescaped correctly" was created based on your feedback. The way notes/synopses are displayed by the software has changed since last year, so I wonder if you could take another look at the problem and confirm that the SourceForge description is still accurate? TIA! Ahasuerus 23:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hm, I genuinely can't remember being the source or cause for this FR. Are you sure it was me? I just had a quick look at the achives of the Help Desk and Community Portal but didn't find anything that would relate my posts with the FR. Do yo probably know the discussion's topic or other keywords the FR was based on and which could trigger my memory? Jens Hitspacebar 23:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I see that it was reported by Herzbube. Apologies! Ahasuerus 00:04, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Paging contents on unnumbered pages

In this publication, you should place a pipe "|" before the page numbers for the illustrations on unnumbered pages. The first should be numbered "|704.1", the second as "|704.2". No page number will be displayed (because they don't appear on a numbered page.) Mhhutchins|talk 22:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok, will do. Thanks! Jens Hitspacebar 22:35, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Langsame Apokalypse

Hi, Jens! Thanks for adding this anthology. I just added the month of publication to the entry. Christian Stonecreek 17:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Christian, thanks a lot. Jens Hitspacebar 17:20, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Non genre magazines

Hello, IIRC we do not enter covers or interior art for non genre magazines. I've updated this publication. Hauck 16:43, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Even if the cover and interior art of the issue all show science fiction images? Jens Hitspacebar 16:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

As I understand this set of guidelines, usually not, except if it illustrates specifically the fiction entered. For example a Foss illustration in a "general" article should not be entered (or so I understand but perhaps that I'm mistaken). Hauck 16:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 16:52, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed your question and after reading the help, it looks to me like there are two exceptions - the one that Hervé mentioned about the cover illustraing the content actually entered, but ALSO if the cover "is by a well known SF artist, enter the credit, and if an image is available, enter the URL". So in that case the cover wouldn't have to illustrate the contents entered, but you DO have to determine if the artist is well-known in the spec-fic field. Doug / Vornoff 04:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Der kleine Hobbit

Hello, I've approved your submission for this pub but the ISBN doesn't compute. Can you verify? Thanks. Hauck 14:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, yes, that was a typo. I'll correct it. Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 14:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Hauck 15:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Stated ISBN

Re this publication: The ISBN-13 wasn't implemented until January 2007, although some publishers started using it in 2006. Can you confirm which ISBN is actually stated in this publication? Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins|talk 07:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Argh, I fell for that trap again. It's an ISBN-10 of course. I'll correct it. Thanks for letting me know. Jens Hitspacebar 08:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

c't magazine

Hi, Jens! I wonder if you might have any issues of the magazine in question lying around. I would like to see them here, but do own only a few issues and in any case try to figure out the exact dates of publication: sometime earlier there seems to have been another two-weekly weekday than the now common Saturday. Christian Stonecreek 11:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Christian, I was a subscriber for a few years about 10 years ago but have dumped all copies some time ago (they ate up too much space). I'm almost sure that the weekday of the publication date was not a Saturday back then and vaguely remember reading about moving it one workday to a Saturday on heise.de a few years back. Good thing is: lots of back issues are available on the ctmagazin page on heise.de. If you click on "c't Ausgabe" on the left side you can select an issue and find the issue's articles. The "Editorial" seems to be available for free for all issues (I just tried a few sample issues) and if you click on to the editorial you'll see a date in the editorial. My samples showed a Monday date for old issues and a Saturday date for newer ones. If my memory serves me right Monday was indeed the old release weekday (subscribers received it on Saturday already, which should now be a Friday in the new release scheme), so the dates of the editorials should be the ones of the issues as well. Jens Hitspacebar 12:37, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Jens. I wasn't sure if it was Mondays or Fridays, so this helps a lot. There are indeed all story titles available back to 1990, but it seems the magazines with dates are only back to 2011 (with some sporadic issues before that). Christian Stonecreek 12:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

A couple of issues appeared on a clean-up report last night, so I had to correct them (here). Their editor records were merged with the following year, even though they were dated for the previous one. It is ISFDB standard to record a periodical's date field by the stated issue date, not by the known publication date. For example, this issue of Asimov's is dated as January 2016, but was published on November 16, 2015, and actually appeared even earlier. We have to use 2016-01 as the publication date of the ISFDB record, regardless of when it was "published" or when it actually existed. So in the case of "c't", you may need to change the publication date fields of those end-of-the-year issues so that they match the issue dates and can be merged with the correct annual editor record. Mhhutchins|talk 17:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it's self-explanatory for a monthly magazine, but this one is published every two weeks, and I'd think this should be reflected at least in the issue grid (for some years there would be four issues in January, and none in December). I do concede that it looks a bit odd, but by cover designation those December issues do belong to the January of the following year. Wouldn't an explanatory note suffice? Christian Stonecreek 17:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Not really. The fact that it's bi-weekly (or quarterly, or bi-annual) is irrelevant. The date field determines which editor record it should be merged with. If it was published in 2012, it has to be merged with the 2012 editor record. If you feel it should be merged with the 2013 editor record, the record's publication field must reflect that. The software of the clean-up report doesn't allow a moderator to remove the listing unless one or the other action is taken. Mhhutchins|talk 18:15, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that fits. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 18:29, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Source required

Unless the publication date for this book is stated in the publication, please give the source in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 21:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I had clicked "submit" too fast. Submission is on its way. Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 21:46, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

The Martian

I have updated your verified The Martian to add a note about the map credit and to merge the title record for the map with the one that credits the artist. --Marc Kupper|talk 08:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Jens Hitspacebar 14:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Chrysalis

Hello, I've put your submission on hold. What are you trying to do? (the story in german is already a variant of an english title). Thanks. Hauck 18:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Ray Bradbury wrote two different stories titled "Chrysalis": one is from 1946 and one from 2004 (the latter first published in this pub). This is not reflected in the ISFDB at the moment and I want to create the missing parent record. I got these infos from Bradbury's introduction in the German version of the pub which I'm currently reading. Jens Hitspacebar 18:15, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Very nice find. I've made the modifications (it was faster as there were multiple submissions involved), result is here. Hauck 18:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I'll add some more infos to the note. Jens Hitspacebar 18:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

"Uncommon" currencies

Please explain the currency used in this record in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 04:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It's the Mark from former East Germany. This currency has been used in almost 200 publications here so far, see the East German publishers Volk und Welt or Das Neue Berlin for example. See also my suggestion at Rules and standards discussions. Jens Hitspacebar 07:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I see you wanted me to explain it in the note field, not to you. Done! I will look through the other records using East German Mark and add notes if necessary. Jens Hitspacebar 10:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Page count inquiry

Re this record: Are the two pages indicated as unnumbered in the Page Count field part of the total of 1053, or does page 1 of the book start after those pages? Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 04:42, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

No, they are not part of the page count (as stated in the note field). If you count backwards from the first numbered page, these two pages would be page number 0 and -1. Jens Hitspacebar 07:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. If you don't plan on creating a content record for what appears on those pages, then they shouldn't be part of the page count. The standards state:

"Sometimes a publication will have unnumbered pages before page 1. If there is any material in these pages which needs to be entered as part of the contents of the book, you may record this by entering the count in squared brackets. For example, [6]+320 would be a publication with six unnumbered pages and then 320 numbered pages. There is no need to record these unnumbered pages if they contain no content that needs to be recorded."

By "recorded", it means a content record. Otherwise, a note (as you've given here) is sufficient. Mhhutchins|talk 08:05, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Right, thanks. I've overlooked that and will add a content record. Jens Hitspacebar 08:08, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Great Britain

Re the author update you made to Fletcher Sibthorp: The Kingdom of Great Britain ceased to exist as a country after 1800. Today, it's only used to indicate a geographical location (the island) and not a country. The birth place of persons born in England after 1801 should be given as "England, UK", usually preceded by the city and county (or region) if known. I've changed "Great Britain" for this author to "UK", abbreviation for "United Kingdom". Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 06:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I wasn't aware of that. Jens Hitspacebar 10:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

'Vorbemerkung des Autors (Irrgarten des Todes)'

Hello, Jens! Is Dick's essay featured here also part of your verified edition? Christian Stonecreek 07:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

It is! Thanks for spotting that. I made a submission to add it to the record. Jens Hitspacebar 18:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Future matic ISBN

Hi. I accepted your Future matic submission, but I don't know about the ISBN. I did a lot of searching, and I think the ISBN should probably be 3-8077-0209-1. Then there's this exciting WorldCat entry that lists both! I don't know what that means. --MartyD 11:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks. I've seen the WorldCat record too and made a submission adding more infos to the note. I guess that either the publisher really reused the ISBN numbers, or the German national library or one of the other libraries listed in the WorldCat record messed up something. Wihout a copy to verify it's just guesswork and I thought that Deutsche Nationalbibliothek should be considererd "most reliable" data souce. Jens Hitspacebar 11:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Das Schwert von Shannara, Der Erbe von Shannara, & Der Sohn von Shannara

I accepted your varianting of these titles before I saw the notes you added. Since the publication was divided up into three parts to be published, it is not the same work as the original and would not be varianted to the original (for example see In the Shadow of the Warlock Lord). Varianting is for the same work under a new title or translation. As such, I have unvarianted these three records. I would recommend grouping them in a German series name as a subseries to Shannara (as was done with the In the Shadow of the Warlock Lord). Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Hm, this is news to me because I've done it before a few months ago and it was accepted by Mhhutchins: see the German variants of Mariel of Redwall (see also the French variants there, which I didn't enter). I'm sure I've see other split novel titles varianted like this, e.g. the German titles for The Elfstones of Shannara. I just looked again in the help but haven't found anything that explicitly states how to (or not to) variant split novels. Is it possible that there's no clear rule or no consensus about cases like this one among moderators? Jens Hitspacebar 08:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to intrude but IIRC we decided (when?) that a translated novel splitted in parts is varianted to the "whole" original. There are thousands of records structured along theses lines (this one is quite telling). What complicates matters in this case is the fact that the original (1977) novel was later itself splitted in three parts (2003). As the german translation is dated 1978, I'd go for the varianting to the whole.Hauck 09:04, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for chiming in. If that's been decided it's missing in the help if I didn't overlook something. I wonder why the English split novel titles from 2003 you mentioned were not varianted to the original novel but put into a sub-series instead (probably done before the decision was made?) Jens Hitspacebar 10:39, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

You're probably right. Note also that the subset of moderators (or self-moderators) is usually different with submissions for english titles and for translations, this may explain some of the differences in interpretation. Hauck 10:54, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I restored the varianting. This another case of our help being out-of-date with current practice as well as the issue of how varianting is used for multiple things. For English to English, this is not the standard practice. If an English publication is split, the standard is not to variant to the original (another example). Any decision on translations would not have automatically applied to same language works. Though I would prefer we were consistent. We variant serializations to the whole work so it would make sense to me if we varianted English multi-part works to the complete work (i.e. treat them the same as multi-part translations). -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I completely agree with your last sentence. Hauck 12:53, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

"The Athron Quest"

Re: "The Athron Quest" (1983), would you happen to know more about it? Google Books shows that the word "Athron" appears 42 times in Cherry Wilder's A Princess of the Chameln (1984), volume 1 in his "Rulers of Hylor" series. I wonder if it may be a prequel story or an excerpt from what was then a work-in-progress. Ahasuerus 20:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

I got the list of contents from http://www.chpr.at/hrsg/w/wilferph.htm and double-checked it with sf-hefte.de, but apart from author and title there's no more information available. I've seen other publications on that site where it's explicitely stated that a contained title is an excerpt, but that's not the case for this one. So, it could be an excerpt, but maybe it's not. It could also be that the Goldmann Fantasy Foliant series contains several stories translated to German which had their first world-wide publication there and were probably never published in their original language. See e.g. Ursula K. Le Guin's An Eye for an Eye as well. Jens Hitspacebar 21:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Theodore Sturgeon's Seasoning record seems to confirm that the Goldmann Fantasy Foliant series contains at least some stories which were not excerpts but real stories first published as a German translation and only later in English. Which doesn't help regarding the "The Athron Quest" record though... I'll post a note on Christian's talk page because he's the PV of #2 of the series. Maybe he can help. Jens Hitspacebar 21:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks! Ahasuerus 22:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Just found the book: it's advertised on the back as an anthology of entirely orginal stories. Wilder's piece is also an original, set in the named universe. I'll adapt the publication and the respective titles. Stonecreek 14:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Great! Thanks a lot. Jens Hitspacebar 14:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! Ahasuerus 14:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Peter-Paul Zahl

I have approved the addition of this pub, but I not sure about the spelling of the author's name. His canonical name is apparently "Peter-Paul Zahl", but the cover says "Peter Paul Zahl". I wonder if there is a way to tell what's on the title page, which is our gold standard. Ahasuerus 20:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting this. I'm sure the canonical name is the one with a dash: "Peter-Paul Zahl". I just checked the covers of some of his other books at amazon and they all use this name. Which means that the author name of publication I submitted is an exception and should become a pseudonym "Peter Paul Zahl". Jens Hitspacebar 20:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good, I have set it up as a pseudonym. Thanks for checking! Ahasuerus 21:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the corrections. Jens Hitspacebar 21:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Alexanders langes Leben, Stalins früher Tod

A couple of quick questions about this pub:

• Does the version of the title which appears on the title page have a comma between "Leben" and "Stalins"?
• Does "und andere abwegige Geschichten" appear on the title page?

Ahasuerus 21:04, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

As for bullet point one: : I don't have a copy and can only rely on external data sources, but both "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek" and "Bibliographie deutschsprachiger Science Fiction-Stories und Bücher" (www.chpr.at)." state there's a comma. But apart from that, omitting the comma wouldn't really make any sense in German. It's definitely necessary, otherwise the title would be nonsense.

Thinking of it, I think it wouldn't make sense in English without a comma as well. It'a enumeration of two distinct things, like "Frodo likes Trees, Pippin likes Beer". Hitspacebar 21:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Understood about the title not making sense without a comma, but, alas, authors and editors are under no obligation to make their titles make sense :-) Ahasuerus 21:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, indeed! Hitspacebar 21:49, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Bullet point two: "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek" states there is "und andere abwegige Geschichten", whereas www.chpr.at doesn't. I omitted it in my submission because it's one of these often used redudant title extensions stating the obvious ("and other stories") , like "TITLE X: A novel" for novels.

Jens Hitspacebar 21:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

I think "and other stories" is usually viewed as part of the title while ": A Novel" is typically viewed as a generic subtitle and therefore omitted. A search on "and other stories" finds 1,198 matches while a search on ": a novel" finds only 172 matches, almost all of them with qualifiers like "A Novel of Horrific Menace in Considerable Synopsis" or "A Novel of the Phantom Detective Agency: As Taken from the Case Files of Richard Curtis Van Loan, the Phantom". Ahasuerus 21:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I see. Taking also into consideration that Deutsche Nationalbibliothek is probably the more authoritative institution I'll add the subtitle :) Jens Hitspacebar 21:49, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Der Herr vom ander(e)n Stern

Hi, You verified Alien Contact #04; and there's some confusion as to whether the story "Der Herr vom..." is spelled andern or anderen in different publications. Could you look again at the magazine and confirm how it is spelled there? (Also, if you were able to check copies of Werner Illing's collection Utopolis and the anthology Seltsame Labyrinthen that would be very helpful.) Thanks --Vasha77 07:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. As for Der Herr vom anderen Stern: you're right, it's actually titled Der Herr vom andern Stern in Alien Contact Jahrbuch #4. Thanks for finding this. I'll make submission to correct it. As for the other collection and anthology you mentioned: I don't own a copy and can't help there. Jens Hitspacebar 14:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Der Halleysche Komet

FYI, I have updated the Note field in this record and changed the title date. It would appear that the author's son and the editors of the magazine "Земля и вселенная" were unaware of the 1913 publication. Ahasuerus 16:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Nice find. Thanks for the info. Jens Hitspacebar 16:42, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Perdido Street Station

As the 2014 edition / publication reprints the 2002 translation I'd think that the title year should mirror that fact, but it seems that you, Jens, see at in another way? (I've put your submission on hold while waiting for the outcome). Christian Stonecreek 17:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I always thought that's the way we enter translated titles: use the first appearance of the same translation with the same title, not of the apperance of the translation of the same translator (regardless of the title). No idea where I got that idea from - I probably deduced that from other titles which already existed in the database. A quick search brings up serveral examples which have been entered the same way, see this and this, or this and this, or this and this. I'm sure there are many others.

However, the TitleFields:Date help says: "When entering a variant title, enter the first date when the work appeared under any title and any pseudonym; typically, variant titles do not have separate dates. However, if the text was heavily revised (or translated) when it appeared as a variant, the date should be that of the first appearance of the revised version of the text."

Therefore it looks like you're right. And that we have lots of records which have not been entered the correct way... Jens Hitspacebar 16:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Publikation von Exodus als hochwertiges Magazin für die SF-Kurzgeschichte

A quick question about this award: was "has a high-quality magazine" supposed to be "as a high-quality magazine"? Ahasuerus 19:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that was a typo. Thanks for finding it. Jens Hitspacebar 19:37, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Approved, thanks. Ahasuerus 19:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Submissions on hold

Hi. I have two of your submissions on hold. They both would change the publisher from Goldmann to Blanvalet. But the OCLC entries indicate Goldmann. Is Blanvalet correct? Thanks. --MartyD 03:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, it most likely is correct (deduced from several sources). It's been a publisher since its foundation in 1932. As for why Goldmann is stated at OCLC as publisher: Goldmann and Blanvalet were both sold to Bertelsmann (now Random House) group in the 1970s and continued there as separate publishers. I assume that there was a time when they wanted to combine the reputation of these two, or maybe even merge them in the long run, or regarded Blanvalet as an imprint of Goldmann, and therefore mentioned both publishers (with the result that Blanvalet is stated as a series at OCLC). Very confusing actually. Thinking about it again it might be best if I simply contact the publisher and see if can get some official information. Can you please accept the submissions so the other changes don't get lost and then change the publisher back to Goldmann for the time being? Jens Hitspacebar

Ok, I have done that. For now, I also added a note to each saying OCLC has Goldmann as publisher and Blanvalet as series. --MartyD 10:38, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 11:20, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Elektropolis

Hi Jens, I hold your submission of this pub. Is the binding really octavo? I can not find a hint in the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Rudolf Rudam 08:09, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rudolf. Sorry, that's a submission error. I initially thought that the "Format: 8" stated at Deutsche Nationalbibliothek is octavo but couldn't find any proof for that - and then obviously forgot to change the value (I think it should be "unknown"). Jens Hitspacebar 08:17, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Update: whilst the help at Deutsche Nationalbibliothek is pretty tedious to search and didn't result in anything useful I just looked at the Wikipedia, and the German article for octavo format states that "8" is indeed a way to indicate an octavo format. See also the Buchformat article there. As a result I now think that octavo is correct. Jens Hitspacebar 11:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Jens! It seems to be correct, that "8" is "Octavo", but it labels the format and not the binding of a publication. In ISFDB octavo is only used as one of the many different formats of american sf magazines like bedsheet, digest, pulp and so on. DNB labels the binding of a publiaction only under the rubric ISBN/Einband/Preis. I'll accept the submission and will choose unknown for the binding. Rudolf 15:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the clarification. Jens Hitspacebar

Das digitale Dachau

Hello, please verify the page number of the story Eine und tausend Nächte. I think p. 310 is correct, or there are different prints? Regards Henna 17:02, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. 310 is correct. Thanks for finding this. I made a submission to correct it. Jens Hitspacebar 17:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Ewigkeit, Alastair Reynolds

Hello Jens, I want to upgrade/change the notes and synopsis of this publication as below:

• Version: paperback new edition (Taschenbuchneuausgabe)
• Other Price[s]: €10.30 (Austria)
• Publisher Code: 52440
• Editorial Staff (Redaktion): Wolfgang Jeschke
• Envelope Creation (Umschlaggestaltung): Nele Schütz
• Translator: Bernhard Kempen
• Height x Width: 186 x 118 mm
• Weight: 561 gram
• Additional Page[s]: 2 numbered page[s] #797 - #798 with “note of thanks”
• Synopsis Source: <a href="http://www.ibdof.com/book.php?book=29757">IBDOF</a>

Is this ok?--Wolfram.winkler 07:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wolfram. It's partly ok, but there are several things to consider and a few errors (regarding the translation errors I mention below see the changes I just did to Foreign_Language_Abbreviations):

"Version": Don't change or remove "Taschenbuchneuausgabe 8/2008" from the note. This is exactly how it is stated on the copyright page, and especially the month and year are important because if they are stated in a book they are the source for the "Year" field.

"Editorial Staff": this should stay "Editor" or changed to "Editing". "Editorial Staff" rather means the group of people working as editors in the editor department. "Redaktion" stated in a book means something like "who did the editing of the book", not "who belonged to the editor department".

"Envelope Creation" is not correct. It's "Cover design" in English. An "Envelope" is something you put a letter into (a "Briefumschlag"). The "Umschlag" of a book is called "cover" (or for the "Schutzumschlag" of hardcovers "jacket" or "dust jacket").

"note of thanks” is not correct: A "Danksagung" in a book is "Acknowledgments" in English. If it's called more than just "Danksagung" I'd also add the complete German title as stated in the book to the note, which is "Danksagung und Leseempfehlungen" in this case.

"Height x Width" and "Weight": I've never checked or entered these data so far. Did you weigh and measure the book yourself? If not you should state where the information comes from.

"Synopsis Source": The synopsis is not part of the publication record but of the title record. Therefore the source of the synopsis has to be stated there. Apart from that: I've never heard of ibdof.com before and don't know their rules, but if you want to copy a synopsis from an external source like this make sure the you have the right and license to copy it. Check their website. Don't copy the synopsis if you're not sure about the copyright.

Jens Hitspacebar 17:30, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Jens, thanks for your lot of tipps, I want to remark some points. I know, my English is bad, but the only sources I can use are the Google translator and dict.cc:

Version: 2008-08-00 is stated on YEAR in the publication data, the data are double, I mean the term "Taschenbuchneuausgabe" is enough. But everyone must decide for themselves.

Redaktion = editorial staff; one or several persons acting as editors ("Redakteur") so I can read on your page "Terms and Abbreviations", editor is a person (Redakteur), but on copyright page I can read "Redaktion", therefore it must be "Editorial Staff".

"Envelope Creation", at this moment I dont' know where this translation comes from? I will change it in "Cover Design".

"note of thanks": Google says Danksagung, "acknowledgement" (singular) Google says "Wissen", on dict.cc "Danksagung" appears only on position 8 of the translation list, but I will accept it.

"Height/Width/Weight" are measured by myself. By the way I measure the thickness of the pages, too.

"Synopsis": in future I will not use the synopsis.

Fazit: I will not make any changes in the notes of other verified data (except typos). Everyone has a different way to structure the notes, changes need a lot of time, only this answer lasts 2 hours, in this time I could enter three publikations. Thanks for your corrections, they are very helpful.

Last note: Your Binding is pb, but 186x118 mm is tp--Wolfram.winkler 07:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

It's probably easier for you if I answer in German. An English translation of the answer is below the German text so others can follow our conversation.

German answer:

Die Angabe "8/2008" hinter "Taschenbuchneuausgabe" mag doppelt erscheinen, macht aber deutlich, dass das Publikationsdatum tatsächlich direkt aus dem Buch stammt und nicht von einer anderen Quelle. Gerade wenn im Publikationsdatum der Tag fehlt können Benutzer der Seite, die die ISFDB-Regeln nicht kennen, mit dieser Angabe viel leichter erkennen, warum das so ist und vom Publikationsdatum bei amazon.de oder buchhandel.de abweicht.

Zum Thema "Redaktion": "editorial staff" meint die Belegschaft in einem Betrieb, z.B. die Zeitungsredaktion. Die "Redaktion" beim Buch meint dagegen die Aktivität, z.B. die des Redigierens (kann man sich klar machen über den Satz "die Redaktion des Buches wurde von XY vorgenommen", gegenüber "die Redaktion der Verlags besteht aus X Mitarbeitern"). Genauso meint die Angabe "Lektorat" im Buch nicht die Abteilung beim Verlag, sondern das Lektorieren des Buches. Daher ist "editorial staff" nicht korrekt. Wenn du nach deutschen Übersetzungen von "editorial staff" bei dict.cc suchst wird das mit den deutschen Übersetzungen, die das ergibt, vielleicht klarer. Siehe auch z.B. Lektorat in der Wikipedia.

Allgemeine Anmerkung zu Google und dict.cc, da du dich oben auf "only on position 8" der Übersetzungsergebnisse beziehst: Die Reihenfolge der Ergebnisse bei Google und dict.cc sagt nichts darüber aus, welche Übersetzung die bessere oder richtigere ist. Der Kontext des Wortes ist entscheidend, und über den wissen diese Übersetzungswerkzeuge leider nichts. Beispiel: wenn Du nach der Übersetzung von "Schloss" suchst steht "lock" bei dict.cc zuerst. Wenn es im Text, aus dem das Wort stammt, aber um die alten Gebäude der Adeligen geht, ist "castle" richtig. Verlasse dich also nicht auf die Reihenfolge.

Konkret zur "Danksagung": "note of thanks" ist eher für etwas wie eine Rede gemeint, also eine "Dankesnote" z.B. vom Preisträger bei einer Preisverleihung, oder in einem Brief. Ich habe sicherheitshalber mal meine gut zwei Dutzend englische Bücher durchgesehen und dort ist die Danksagung durchgehend mit "Acknowledgements" betitelt, nie als "note of thanks".

Wegen Binding "tp" statt "pb": du hast recht. Die Größe ist ganz knapp über dem laut PubFormat erlaubten Schwankungsbereich.

Wenn es für Dich einfacher ist kannst du hierauf einfach auf Deutsch antworten. Ich übersetze das dann ins Englische. Dann aber bitte möglichst keine Romane schreiben ;)

The same answer in English:

Stating "8/2008" behind "Taschenbuchneuausgabe" may be redundant, but it makes clear that the publication date is taken directly from the book and not from an external source. Especially when the day is missing from the publication date this information makes it easier for users who don't know the ISFDB rules to detect why the day is missing, and why the publication date diverges from sites like amazon.de or buchhandel.de.

Regarding "Redaktion": "editorial staff" means the staff at a company, e.g. the editorial staff of a newspaper. In books the "Redaktion" means the activity of editing the book (which can be understood by the sentence "the editing of the books was done by XY" versus "the editorial staff consists of X employees"). In the same way "Lektorat" doesn't mean the department at a publisher but the activity of editing. Therefore "editorial staff" is not correct. If you search for "editorial staff" at dict.cc the search results may make this clearer.

General note about Google Translate and dict.cc, because you refer to "only on position 8" in the translation results: the order of the results doesn't say anything about which one is the better translation. The context of the word is crucial and alas these tools don't know about context. If you search for "Schloss" you'll get "lock" as the first result. But if the text the word is from is about the old buildings of the aristocracy then "castle" is the correct translation.

Regarding the "note of thanks": that's for things like speeches or letters. I checked about two dozen English books I own and they all use "Acknowledgements".

If it's easier for you just answer in German and I'll translate it to English here. But please keep it short then if possible ;)

Hitspacebar 15:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC) Jens

Hello Jens, now I've a little bit of time to answer your remarks. I'm happy and proud, that I get an own translator here on ISFDB, but I want to write in English and cannot take advantage (in Anspruch nehmen?) of your time to translate my posts. I hope, everyone understand my posts, if something is wrong, please tell it me.

I've read your notes an will correct my terms.

What is the translation of "Deutscher Serientitel"? I use "German series title". Is this ok?--Wolfram.winkler 06:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, or "German title of the series". Jens Hitspacebar 16:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

German translations

Hello Jens or other persons,

regarding the discussion above, please have a look to the translations below. I'm thankful for every tip, extension or correction.

Buchauszug: book excerpt

Danksagung: note of thanks?, acknowledgement

Inhaltsangabe: Summary

Inhaltsverzeichnis: Table of Contents

Lektor: Editor, Reader, Proofreader

Lektorat: Editorial Office

Kartenillustration: Map Illustration

Nachwort: afterword

Redaktion: Editorial Staff, Editorial Team

Textredaktion: Text Editorial Staff

Titelillustration: Title Illustration

Überarbeitete Neuauflage: revised reissue oder revised edition

Überarbeitete Neuausgabe: revised reprint

Umschlaggestaltung: Cover design

Verlagsprogramm: publisher’s list

Vorschau: preview

Vorwort: foreword, preface

Personenverzeichnis: People Directory

Don't wonder about capital letter or not, it is an internal matter. Thanks.--Wolfram.winkler 08:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Translations I'm not sure about are marked bold:

Buchauszug: excerpt, extract of a book

Danksagung: acknowledgements

Inhaltsangabe: synopsis, summary, abstract (if it's summarizing the work / wenn es eine Zusammenfassung des Werkes ist, und nicht das Inhaltsverzeichnis)

Inhaltsverzeichnis: table of contents, list of contents

Lektor: editor, proofreader

Lektorat: editing, editor, proofreader, proofreading, copy editor, copy editing

Kartenillustration: "Map Illustration" should be ok, but simply "Map" or "Maps" are ok as well

Nachwort: afterword

Redaktion: editing, editor

Textredaktion: not sure, but I think this is the same as "Redaktion", therefore "editing" or "editor", see the remark I added at the beginning of the Foreign Language Abbreviations

Titelillustration: cover art

Überarbeitete Neuauflage: revised reissue oder revised edition

Überarbeitete Neuausgabe: revised reprint (I'll ask at the community portal for this and the one above)

Umschlaggestaltung: cover design

Verlagsprogramm: publisher’s list

Vorschau: preview

Vorwort: foreword, preface

Personenverzeichnis: list of characters (If it's the list of characters of the story / wenn es die Liste der Figuren in der Geschichte ist)

Jens Hitspacebar 16:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

I've researched "Textredaktion", got some feedback for "Neuauflage/Neuausgabe" and have now added everything to Foreign_Language_Abbreviations Jens Hitspacebar 12:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Jens, thanks for your notes. I use the term "map illustration" for the person, who creates the maps, it's another meaning then "maps", better I should use "map creator"? Another term "Vorderer Einband teilweise hochglänzend, I use "front partly coated high gloss"--Wolfram.winkler 07:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

• "map", "maps" or "map illustration" are all ok. "map creator" should be ok as well, but I don't think that it is very common ("üblich") in English. I wouldn't use it.
• "Vorderer Einband teilweise hochglänzend": "Front cover partly very glossy" or "Front cover partly high-gloss" (not sure which "hochglänzend" translation is better, but it definitely starts with "Front cover partly...")

Jens Hitspacebar 16:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello Jens, I want to use the term "coated" (beschichtet), only high-gloss is in this case wrong. My whole term/template is: "Cover: front [cover] partly coated high-gloss", (soll heißen:"Vorderer Einband teilweise hochglänzend beschichtet") your suggestion with the beginning "front cover..." is double.--Wolfram.winkler 08:23, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Mars-Odyssee

Hello, Can you check your verified Mars-Odyssee and verify the cover artist name? Can Bolo be a weirdly looking spelling (due to font) of Bob or is it definitely Bolo? I have a suspicion that these 4 here are the same person but the Bolo is throwing me off. The other 3 seem solidly connected (still chasing them via google but that is where it points). I am also posting on the other PV page in case their book is handier. Thanks! Anniemod 23:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Answered on Rudolf's talk page. Hitspacebar 15:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Cover image for Niemalsland

Hi, Jens! I do have some reservation about the displayed cover image for this book. I guess amazon had done what it does often: supply the image of a later printing; for if you look at the other books published in 1998 by Heyne the "HEYNE<" logo as of today was not established. Christian Stonecreek 12:25, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Christian. Good point! Before submitting I had actually double-checked with the record at DNB, and it shows the same image. But I didn't notice the logo. You're right: the new logo wasn't introduced before 2002 (or later). I'll remove the image. Thanks for spotting it! Jens Hitspacebar 12:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I have the impression that DNB actually takes some of its displayed images from amazon: it would make that source somewhat unreliable in that regard. Stonecreek 12:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Maybe. But I just compared the cover images from Amazon and DNB, and they are slightly different, and the difference is so small that it's neither a 1:1 copy from Amazon, nor does it make sense that someone at DNB bothered to edit the copied image from amazon for a difference of only a few pixels. I think it's more likely that they simply re-used the cover from the ebook from 2011 - which doesn't make it any better :) Jens Hitspacebar

Hermann, das Hermelin

Hello Jens, I've added the translator in the notes. Regards Henna 16:32, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Henna, thanks for letting me know! But there's no need to notify verifiers if you change a TITLE record, because verifications (and change notifications) are only done for PUBLICATION records. In this case it means you only have to notify me if you'd change the Gogols Frau publication record. See Making changes to verified pubs. Nevertheless, thanks for taking the time to notify me :) Jens Hitspacebar 17:01, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Gogols Frau

Hello Jens, I've added a cover scan. Regards Henna 14:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Jens Hitspacebar 20:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Exodus, #25

Hello, in this publication there are two pieces of INTERIORART by Mario Moritz, perhaps some disambiguation is in order. There is also a page number set to "i". Hauck 17:52, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting these errors. No idea how the "i" sneaked in there. I'll submit corrections. Jens Hitspacebar 17:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Welttag des Buches

Hi, Jens! What do you think about changing the publication series for this to Welttag des Buches or something like that. I found another book (Die Vermessung der Welt by Daniel Kehlmann) which would be in the same series. The covers reproduce the respective images from previous editions, but from the spine and the overall look it seems somehow appropriate to assign the proposed series. Stonecreek 14:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Christian. Good idea. Since it's the world book day we could use the already existing publication series World Book Day Specials in order to have all world book day publications in one series. Information about the German Welttag des Buches series could be added to the note then. Or we create the new pub series Welttag des Buches and add infos and links to the World Book Day Specials in its note (and vice versa). I like the second solution better because, apart from happening on the same day and it the day's name, there doesn't seem to be a lot of international cooperation regarding the publications. Jens Hitspacebar 18:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I added the latter series to both publications. Christian Stonecreek 05:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Countdown läuft

I have a couple of questions about this publication which I hope you may be able to clarify:

• Since we know that the booklets are staple-bound, shouldn't we set the binding code to "other" rather than "unknown"?
• The Notes field mentions 7 booklets, which matches what's stated on the cover. However, the Contents section lists only 6 novellas. Is the 7th novella non-genre or did it get lost in the shuffle?

TIA! Ahasuerus

I just added the seventh title (simply forgot to enter it initially). As for the binding: not sure, my experience with boxed sets here is very low. Does the binding of the record refer to the box itself or to the items in the box? If it's the former than it is unknown. Jens Hitspacebar 16:09, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I would say that it describes the items. A typical boxed set is made of cardboard. If the books inside the box are hardcovers, we use "hc"; if they are trade paperbacks, we use "tp"; etc. Ahasuerus 16:19, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok. That makes more sense actually because the box itself is usually not bound but just a wrapper around the bound items. I changed the binding to "other". Jens Hitspacebar 16:33, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Approved, thanks! Ahasuerus 16:50, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Varianting to original

Hello Jens, this title and that one are not varianted to their originals and show on our cleanup report. Can you have a look? Thanks. Hauck 07:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I made the submissions yesterday evening but they only got approved later at night when I was at bed already. I'm gonna variant them now. Jens Hitspacebar 09:57, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

The Strugatsky's Mittag, 22. Jahrhundert

Hi, Jens! Please join the recent discussion on the community portal. Christian Stonecreek 17:40, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Christian. Will do. Jens Hitspacebar 17:44, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I added the shortfiction contents for the omnibus edition. Christian Stonecreek 04:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Im Exil

Hello Jens, I've approved your submission but can you confirm "Gary Rudell" (vs. the usual "Ruddell")? Thanks. Hauck 16:14, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, "Gary Rudell" is how it is spelt in the data source. Jens Hitspacebar 16:16, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, variant~s, links & pseudonym done. Hauck 16:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks! Jens Hitspacebar 16:21, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Der Sohn des Fischers

I have your variant of Der Sohn des Fischers on hold. The two images are similar, but not the same. Typically, we would leave a note and not actually variant in these cases. Your thoughts? -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

You're right. I didn't look close enough obviously and didn't notice that the person in front is a lot smaller in the original image. I'll cancel my submission and make a note. Jens Hitspacebar 08:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Welt der Ewigkeit

Hi Jens! I've modified the cover artist of the title Welt der Ewigkeit and have added a note. What do you say? Rudolf Rudam 18:26, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rudolf. Thanks for making the changes. Looks good. One tiny thing: it might be difficult for some users to decipher what the "KLP" abbreviation in the note means. Maybe expand it to "Kurd-Laßwitz-Preis"? Jens Hitspacebar 18:53, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Good point! I'll write it out in full. Rudolf Rudam 07:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Me too! Christian Stonecreek 08:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Vonnegut's Ein dreifach Hoch auf die Milchstrasse!

Hi, Jens! Would it be okay to change the date of publication to just 2010-07-00? (My second printing states only that month for the first printing, and amazon chooses everyime the first of a given month, if there's no specific day available. Christian Stonecreek 15:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Christian. Sure, no problem. My copy only states the year and nothing else. Over time I've come to the same conclusion than you regarding a "1" in the publication date at Amazon: don't trust it! What makes it even more untrustworthy is that Amazon doesn't always use a "1" if there's no known day for the publication date. I've seen several publications there which simply omit the day (e.g. stated as "Juli 2010"). Probably depends on who's entering the data there... Jens Hitspacebar 17:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Spektrum der Wissenschaft, #1/2017

Hello Jens, as for magazines we go by stated date, perhaps should be this issue dated "2017" (even 01-2017 if #1 means jaunary). Hauck 15:25, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I think you're right. The exact date is not stated in the magazine. I had looked up how issues have been entered for c't magazine, and there issue #1/2017 is the last issue of 2016, but that magazine always states the exact date. I'll change the date to 2017-01-00. Jens Hitspacebar

"Spektrum der Wissenschaft, #1/2017" edit

Hi. I had to hard-reject your edit to "Spektrum der Wissenschaft, #1/2017" because the title is no longer in the database. Most likely, it was merged into some other title. You will need to find that and make your edits to that, if necessary. Thanks. --MartyD 15:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, no worries, it had indeed been merged by moderation already :) Jens Hitspacebar 15:44, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Wir waren außer uns vor Glück

I accepted the edit to Wir waren außer uns vor Glück but did a few small changes:

• Removed the ASIN. For paper books that have ISBNs, the ASIN is the same as the ISBN-10 so there is no point adding it again. The easiest way to know if the book needs to have its ASIN recorder is to see if the ASIN starts with B (or even B0 at the moment) - if it does, it is a new piece of information so we record it. If it does not, compare to the ISBN-10 - it will always match so no need to record. If it does not match, then check again your ISBN :)
• Change the Translation line to use the new template Tr (all templates describer here). Using the template will allow the translators records to be found if/when we have a new system to record them.

Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Annie 18:14, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

Thanks. Jens Hitspacebar 12:48, 12 July 2017 (EDT)

Exodus, #28

Hello Jens, the Simon story in the second printing starts on p. 76, the Haubold story on p. 80. Please take a look. I would like add the title of the cover image MenschMaschine and clone this magazine later, thats OK for you? Thanks Henna 16:45, 18 September 2017 (EDT)

Hi Henna, you're correct. I made a submission which fixes the wrong pages numbers. Thanks for finding these errors. Jens Hitspacebar 10:55, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

Exodus, #30

Hello Jens, I found some errors in your verified pub. The poem Codex litteraeis on p. 82. Der Gondoliere on p. 87 is a poem. I think we should mark the comics on p. 14, 88 as Comic: …. I'm not sure it is better to remove the subtitles eine Art Steampunk-Geschichte and Now Under New Management. Please take a look. Thanks Henna 16:19, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

Hi, thanks again for spotting some errors. I made a submission which corrects wrong page number, poem title type and the missing "comic" prefix. However, I think we should keep the subtitle at least for Now Under New Management because it definitely is a real subtitle. The rule is to use what's stated on a title page including the subtitle, but with some exceptions. One exception is that a subtitle can be omitted if it is only something that states the obvious, like "a novel". My submission didn't remove the subtitles, but it's ok for me if you want to make a submission which removes "eine Art Steampunk-Geschichte". Jens Hitspacebar 17:11, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

Hello Jens, I removed the subtitle eine Art Steampunk-Geschichte and I will add the title of the cover image Strandet in the notes. Regards Henna 12:58, 23 September 2017 (EDT)

Exodus 31

Hello Jens, in your verified pub the artwork on p. 13 by Hubert Schweizer is missing and also the comic prefix on p. 22. On p. 16 is a cartoon by Jan Hillen without title. I just changed the prefix from comic to cartoon in exodus 32 and 33. Please take a look. Thanks Henna 13:44, 23 September 2017 (EDT)

Hi, thanks for spotting these. I made a submission to add/correct the titles. Jens Hitspacebar 16:11, 23 September 2017 (EDT)

H. G. Wells with Ullstein

Hi Jens! I have added notes to Von kommenden Tagen and I also changed the format to pb, as all the other publications with Ullstein of that format are also pbs (let's take pb to mean pocket book). As I'm going also to verify the other Wells editions, shall I proceed? Christian Stonecreek 02:41, 7 October 2017 (EDT)

Hi Christian. Yes, please proceed. Jens Hitspacebar 03:07, 7 October 2017 (EDT)

I have added notes & the afterword to Das Kristall-Ei. Christian Stonecreek 04:17, 8 October 2017 (EDT)

It seems that the page count for this edition (of 'Das Kristall-Ei') begins with and includes the cover. As this would be unusual for this publisher and to ensure I haven't got a 'damaged' copy, could you please check yours also? Christian Stonecreek 02:11, 8 November 2017 (EST)

It's the same in my copy. The cover would be page 1, counting backwards from the first numbered page. Maybe a production error? I had something similar with my copy of Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, where the cover's page number is not 1 but 3 (!), in which case I added this information to the note. Jens Hitspacebar 12:42, 8 November 2017 (EST)

Yes, Ullstein may had initially planned a second title page for the collection or had miscalculated the pages. Who'll ever know? Thanks for checking, I have adjusted the notes. Christian Stonecreek 00:20, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Die linke Hand der Dunkelheit

Hello Jens, I think the official price for the book in 2000 was DM 18.00 (ÖS 131.00) and there is no 01 for the first printing. Have your book a label on the back cover with the €9.00 (DM 17.80) price? Please take a look. Thanks Henna 12:40, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Hi Henna. Yes, it has a label (if you mean a "Aufkleber") on the back, put on the original ISBN field and stating €9.00, DM 17.60 (not 17.80 as I see now) and the "01" for the first printing. I haven't looked below the label so far because I considered this to be the "official" data (probably put on the book because of a production error with wrong data in the original ISBN field). Jens Hitspacebar

Hello Jens, I think the book is bought after the 1.1.2002 and so the publisher labeled the book with the new integer €-price and the new calculated DM-price. Regards Henna 14:34, 9 November 2017 (EST)

That's possible, yes, but today it's hard to tell what the real reason was. We should therefore add both prices and and an explanatory note to the record. I'll try to see if the original values below the sticker are the same as the ones you posted above and make a submission then. Jens Hitspacebar 15:20, 9 November 2017 (EST)

There's no way to remove the sticker without damaging the book, therefore I can't see what's below it. But I assume we both have the same edition and made a submission which added the information you have provided above. Jens Hitspacebar 17:16, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Notes for Spiegel

Hi, Jens! I added some information to the Cixin Liu CHAPBOOK. If it's okay I'll edit some more recent Heyne titles in a similar way. Christian Stonecreek 04:04, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Hi Christian. Sure, no problem. Jens Hitspacebar 04:09, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Time to become a moderator?

Hi, Jens! I personally think it's long overdue that you may become a moderator. But before I propose that officially, it is helpful to ask you first if you're willing. As for the ability, I do think that there should not be much doubt. But look into the moderator help screen and the moderator qualifications first before answering. Christian Stonecreek 04:20, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Thanks a lot for thinking about it, Christian. I'm willing to do that if it's accepted, and I think I'd be able to handle it responsibly. Jens Hitspacebar 07:30, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Great! I'll wait for Dirk's answer and then propose both of you in one go! Christian Stonecreek 08:44, 11 November 2017 (EST)

With Dirk seemingly not around this weekend I decided to not wait any longer and have started the nomination process. Best of luck, Christian Stonecreek 11:02, 12 November 2017 (EST)

When it last came up, Dirk had some reservations about becoming a moderator. I am not sure if they still apply. Ahasuerus 11:04, 12 November 2017 (EST)

P.S. Also, it's been my experience that it usually works out better when we consider one nomination at a time. Less of a chance of things becoming competitive :) Ahasuerus 11:23, 12 November 2017 (EST)

(unindent) Congratulations, you are now a moderator! I have added you to the Moderator Availability template -- please feel free to edit it as you see fit.

Also, when you get a chance, please take a look at Help:Screen:Moderator and post on the Moderator Noticeboard if anything is unclear/out of date. It's been a few years since the page was last rewritten, so it may be getting creaky. Ahasuerus 11:17, 17 November 2017 (EST)

Many thanks. Will do. Jens Hitspacebar 12:28, 17 November 2017 (EST)

Congratulations from me, too (and Happy Moderating)! Christian Stonecreek 12:49, 17 November 2017 (EST)

Spektrum der Wissenschaft: notation of cover dates

Hi, Jens. All the issues I saw & verified so far have Month.Last-two-digits-of-year as sole statement for their respective month of publication, so I changed the issues in the database according to that. Hope that was okay. Christian Stonecreek 14:44, 13 November 2017 (EST)

Yes, that's ok. Jens Hitspacebar 15:32, 13 November 2017 (EST)

Also, I found that the width is that of an A4 publication; alas, the height is less. Maybe quarto (8.5" × 11") would be more fitting?

Ha, it's indeed not A4, which I didn't notice when I entered the issues I own. I just measured one issue and it's pretty close to quarto. So, yes, quarto it is. Jens Hitspacebar 15:46, 28 November 2017 (EST)

And, continuing the case of Bastei Lübbe: what do you think of rename "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction" into "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy", analogous to "Heyne Science Fiction & Fantasy" and "Ullstein Science Fiction & Fantasy", to avoid any such numbering & labeling confusion? Christian Stonecreek 06:52, 28 November 2017 (EST)

Gonna answer on your talk page to keep the discussion in one place. Jens Hitspacebar 15:46, 28 November 2017 (EST)

Stories in Collections that have nearly the Same Title

Hi Jens! When merging the story titles for "Die vier Mondbrüder" by Gustav Meyrink I have one that is slightly different. In the 1916 publication there is the term "Zeit-Egeln" while in the 1984 publication it is "Zeitegeln". I double-checked my book and can confirm the difference. If I understood the direction on the Help page correctly, I should not merge them, but make it a variant. Is that correct? Is there anything special to observe when doing so? -- Kurst 12:02, 18 November 2017 (EST)

That's correct. Even when the difference is that small we create a variant because the general rule is to state the title as it is spelt in the publication, and even if there's just a small difference they must not be merged. Two things are important here:

1. When creating the variant, the title which was first published has to be the parent title, whereas the title which was later used will become the variant - even if the variant title was used more often.
2. The date of the variant title has to be the one when the variant title was first used, not the date when the work was first published. This means you have to change the date for J. H. Obereits Besuch bei den Zeitegeln to the publication date of the "Die vier Mondbrüder". This rule was changed just a year ago (see Rules_and_standards_changelog), therefore you will find variants which don't stick to this new rule because they haven't been changed (yet)

Jens Hitspacebar 12:23, 18 November 2017 (EST)

Janvier, an 2000

Hi, I found that this pub got an award "Grand Prix International du Roman de Science Fiction, Novara, Italy". Source is here: Leihbuch-Datenbank. But this award has no entry in ISFBD directory. What is to do? --Zapp 04:40, 6 January 2018 (EST)
See here "Grand prix du roman d'anticipation scientifique (1954)", too. --Zapp 04:53, 6 January 2018 (EST)

If there is no entry in the award directory then you can't create an award record for this title. In this case an option is to add the award information to the title record's note. I've never heard of the "Grand Prix International du Roman de Science Fiction" before. It seems to be almost forgotten or unknown, at least to the internet, which knows almost nothing about it. The French Wikipedia list two other awards containing "Grand Prix" in the name, but it looks like they have nothing to do with this award. I'll ask Hervé if he knows something about it. Jens Hitspacebar 08:49, 6 January 2018 (EST)

The second one (the "first" Rosny) is more documented and is a price given by a publisher (here Métal under its founder Birgé) to one of its books (this one). At about the same time, Fleuve Noir (another french publisher) tried to do the same trick with a novel by Jimmy Guieu. We decided not to list it. For the first award, I'm very dubious about the whole story. A french-sounding award given in Italy to a book that only seems to exist in german? It's (IMHO) a bit too strange to be true. Having made some research (on and off line), I even found that nobody has heard of this book in the french SF scene. It's either a mistake or a deliberate ploy to hide the real author. Hauck 09:44, 6 January 2018 (EST)

Thanks a lot for your feedback. I also found it quite strange that there seems to be close to zero information about the award and nothing about the original French title in the web. Another strange thing: according to the German site about this pub (sf-leihbuch.de), the copyright page says: "© 1962 by Grand Prix International du Roman de Science Fiction, Novara, Italy". But why would a publication be copyrighted to an award? I think it's very likely that you're right and this award and the French original title are a hoax. Or maybe they are part of the story that is told in the book. I'll add this info to the title's note. Jens Hitspacebar 10:07, 6 January 2018 (EST)

Thank You for researching. I asked because I couldn't find more than I wrote before. --Zapp 16:13, 6 January 2018 (EST)

Pandora

Hello Jens, I verified the Pandora magazines and found two mistakes:

• Pandora 3: Review p. 251, Mario Ulbrich Die Pyramiden von Tief-Ost is missing
• Pandora 4: Story p. 92, Der selbstverliebte Roboter abridged title

Please take a look. Thanks again for your help Henna 14:54, 11 January 2018 (EST)

Ah, more typos in my verifications! :) Thanks for finding these, I'll correct it and add the missing review. Jens Hitspacebar 15:00, 11 January 2018 (EST)

Als es noch Menschen gab

Hi, Jens! I inserted the stated official month of publication (2010-03-00); there still was the day of distribution indexed.

Now for something completely different: All Bastei Lübbe books that I recently saw in 2nd hand book shops enhance our assumption that the Fantasy publication series lived on for some more years than the other specialized series. Christian Stonecreek 13:24, 14 February 2018 (EST)

Hi Christian, thanks for the information. So, what do we do with the series? Combine all "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction XXX" series into one simply named "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction", keep "Bastei Lübbe Fantasy" as it is and change all titles from the "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy" series to one of the formerly mentioned, making "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy" obsolete? Jens Hitspacebar 14:30, 17 February 2018 (EST)

Sorry for the late answer, Jens. It seems still the case that nowadays there is only one series (one batch of possible numerations, encompassing 20XXX, 22XXX, 23XXX, 24XXX, and even 28XXX). My best idea would be to leave the years 2004-2006 into a somewhat greyish area, with 'free' choice, until we can obtain a clearer picture. Christian Stonecreek 12:18, 2 March 2018 (EST)

Not sure I understand what you mean with the free choice "greyish area" from 2004-2006. It's probably easier to understand if you can provide a list of the title series and their lifespans you have in mind (how you think these series should look like here eventually). Moreover, what about pubs like your PV'd Die falsche Welt which is from 2016. Shouldn't we maybe simply put all 2xxxx numbers into one title series "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy", no matter what knowledge we can obtain about it's possible lifespan, and assuming that if something like "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction" or "Bastei Lübbe Fantasy" is stated in a pub with a 2xxxx number then it's part of the "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy" series? Jens Hitspacebar 06:43, 3 March 2018 (EST)

There seems to have been a distinct separation between the publisher's Fantasy line, so that all titles were confined to the realm of '20XXX' up to (and perhaps including) 2004. After that the distinction is still unclear (to us), so that I would suggest to accept "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy", "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction" and "Bastei Lübbe Fantasy" for a few following years, until "Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy" takes over the whole range of numbers. Christian Stonecreek 13:50, 3 March 2018 (EST)

So, put into lifespans, this would be:

• Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction: all 2xxxx numbers except for 20xxxx, from the beginning until max. 2006
• Bastei Lübbe Fantasy: only numbers 20xxx, from the beginning until max. 2006
• Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy: since 2004
• In the range of years from 2004 to 2006, the series likely overlapped and can be chosen arbitrarily. Jens Hitspacebar 04:32, 4 March 2018 (EST)

Make that "In the range of years from 2004 to 2006, the different series may or may not overlap and can be chosen arbitrarily until we have a clearer picture" for the last item, and we arrive at what I intended to say. ;-) Christian Stonecreek 08:53, 4 March 2018 (EST)

Ok, great :) Looks like we're good to go. The first thing I'd do is change the note of the Bastei Lübbe series accordingly, if there's nothing else to discuss left, and also notify the other German editors about the change. Jens Hitspacebar 10:25, 4 March 2018 (EST)

(unindent) Final version:

• Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction: all 2xxxx numbers except for 20xxxx, from the beginning until max. 2006
• Bastei Lübbe Fantasy: only numbers 20xxx, from the beginning until max. 2006
• Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction & Fantasy: since 2004
• In the range of years from 2004 to 2006, the different series may or may not overlap and can be chosen arbitrarily until we have a clearer picture of the series' lifespans

Hello Jens, you declared all 2xxxx numbers from the beginning as Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction. What do you have in mind with from the beginning the year 1971 or 1996? If your version imply the year 1996 I agree with your proposal. Rudolf Rudam 13:40, 26 March 2018 (EDT)

"from the beginning" means: from the first occurrence of a publication in the mentioned range of numbers. I haven't found a publication in any of the Bastei Lübbe Science Fiction series earlier than 1971 in the database, so this would be 1971. Jens Hitspacebar 14:14, 26 March 2018 (EDT)

Does that mean that all previous sub-series ( Abenteuer, Action, Bestseller, Special) will disappear? Rudolf Rudam 15:11, 26 March 2018 (EDT)

Well, that was the whole point! :) See Christian's talk page where we initially discussed it. Jens Hitspacebar 15:27, 26 March 2018 (EDT)

Thanks

Henna 15:24, 17 February 2018 (EST)

You're welcome. Jens Hitspacebar 15:31, 17 February 2018 (EST)

Cover artist for "Demolition"

Hi, Jens! I have added Janny Wurts and some notes to this. Christian Stonecreek 15:44, 18 March 2018 (EDT)

Thanks, Christian! Jens Hitspacebar 11:27, 19 March 2018 (EDT)

Format issues "Zwischen zwei Sternen"

Hi Jens, you have changed this pub from "tp" to "pb". Why? The help clearly states: "For books as tall as 7.25" (19 cm) or as wide/deep as 4.5" (11.5 cm) use "tp"." source I have made clear that the book is •Size (height x width): 19.0 x 12.5 cm, so there can be no doubt that it is tp. Naut 04:15, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Yes there is! There has been a recent discussion on that term leading to a new one: what was paperback is now mass market paperback, and this publication fits the (European / German) standard. The new mmpb and tps are separable by their size and their prices, the latter usually nowadays cost somewhere between €15 and €25, this being an example for a tp by the same publisher. Christian Stonecreek 04:52, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

This is an recurring problem, which has recently been discussed and, alas, has not be fully resolved and put into the help yet. The sizes mentioned in the help were devised some time ago and probably didn't take into account that "Taschenbuch" and "Paperback" use slightly different (bigger) sizes in German publications than in the US/UK. I made the change because de-facto it is a "Taschenbuch" and therefore a "pb". Apart from the size you can usually derive the format from the price and if the publisher lists the book as "Taschenbuch" or "Paperback" on their website. Example: first there was a "tp" edition of Am Ende aller Zeiten by Fischer Tor, and it was later re-issued by Fischer Tor as "Taschenbuch". According to the current help, both should be "tp" because of their size, but this would obviously be wrong. Jens Hitspacebar 05:05, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Sure. I knew about this problem for long, but older commits of mine had been reverted to the old rules ... now it is vice versa. Anyway, I'll stick to the new rules and just ignore what others do. :) Naut 05:14, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Ok, good :) And sorry for not notifying you. Should have done that, considering the constant confusion these rule deviations raise. Jens Hitspacebar 05:29, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Nevermind, that's more my own fault. If I would follow the current discussions I would have known. Naut 05:57, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Der kleine Hobbit again

Hi, Jens! I added notes and the map to this. Christian Stonecreek 15:16, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Hi Christian, thanks for the info. Strangely, my copy has the table of contents on p. 5, not on p. 4, and the map artist Juliane Hehn-Kynast isn't credited at all. Maybe these are different printings without a printing number being stated? Jens Hitspacebar 16:24, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Oops, my fault for the ToC, I'll correct it. The credit in question should be at the top of the copyright page, right beneath the credit for the translator. Christian Stonecreek 16:33, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Nope, it's not there in my copy. There's only the translator stated. It was probably forgotten and added in later printings. Jens Hitspacebar 16:38, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Puzzling! It seems these are indeed different printings. My copy also has a reference for Farmer Giles of Ham, published in the series 'dtv zweisprachig' on the copyright page, it was set by 'IBV Lichtsatz KG, Berlin' and printed & bound by 'Ebner Ulm'. In addition p. [303] is blank and p. [304] is an ad page for publications by Georg Bitter that range from Mabel Esther Allan over books by John Christopher and Terry Nation to 'Der kleine Hobbit'. Christian Stonecreek 00:25, 12 April 2018 (EDT)

It could also be helpful if you do remember details of the purchase of your copy. Christian Stonecreek 00:33, 12 April 2018 (EDT)

The reference for Farmer Giles of Ham is there, the series however only as 'zweisprachig' (without "dtv"). "Satz: IBV Lichtsatz KG, Berlin" and "Druck und Bindung: Ebner Ulm" are stated, too.

The ad on p. 304 is different: it's by Georg Bitter Verlag as well, but only for one book: Pan Tau by Ota Hofman.

I have no memory at all about the purchase, but I'm quite sure that I bought it used and not a as new copy. And it looks quite old (pages are yellowed). Jens Hitspacebar 13:07, 12 April 2018 (EDT)

THanks for the further research. Following the publications suggested by the ads in my copy, mine has to be a later printing, so I'll remove my verification, and clone a new publication. I also dimly remember to have purchased that copy anew only after reading "Der Herr der Ringe", and my copies of that work are from 1980. Thanks again, Jens! Christian Stonecreek 23:31, 12 April 2018 (EDT)

Die Gabe

Hello Jens, A copy was bought even earlier on 2018-12-09. I think 2017-12-09 is correct. Do you have read this book? It's on my shopping list. Regards Henna 16:06, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

Hi Henna, thanks for the info. That was indeed a typo and I just corrected it. Yes, I've read the book. I think it has some flaws in writing style and plot, but it's nevertheless worthwhile reading because of the topic and the ideas. Therefore: recommended and a good choice for the shopping list. Jens Hitspacebar 16:44, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

Hello Jens, thank you for your answer and your recommendation. Henna 08:42, 22 May 2018 (EDT)

Solaris

Cover artist Antonio M. Rosario of this pub is credited in later printing. --Zapp 15:58, 14 June 2018 (EDT)

Thanks. Hitspacebar 10:56, 15 June 2018 (EDT) Jens

pb vs. tp - interim solution for German publications

User:Wolfram.winkler has proposed that we have a vote on the 4 possible approaches that you identified back in April. There was no consensus among the four editors who participated in that discussion at the time (wolfram has changed his mind since), so no decision was made.

Would you like to give it another shot? Perhaps create a separate Wiki page which would explain the nature of the problem, how German-language paperbacks have been handled so far and what the options are, both on the policy side and on the software side? It may not result in an immediate change, but it may help editors who specialize in other languages better understand the problem and perhaps prompt them to think about solutions that would apply in their areas of expertise as well. What do you think? Ahasuerus 16:21, 29 June 2018 (EDT)

Well, I don't really have much hope that another shot will lead to a result. But since Wolfram and you are asking I'll try nevertheless. Just give me some time, the weather is simply too good here right now and has to be enjoyed. I'll post something one of the next days. Jens Hitspacebar 12:21, 1 July 2018 (EDT)

Thanks for considering it! As you said, it seems unlikely that we will reach consensus during this iteration. I just hope that having a Wiki page detailing the nature and the history of the issue may help:

• explain the current data entry rules to new editors
• clarify the nature of the issue and the available options if and when the next iteration of the discussion starts
• facilitate software design discussions by providing an example of the kinds of challenges we face

It need not be formal, even a sub-page under your User page would be a step forward. Ahasuerus 15:20, 1 July 2018 (EDT)

Hello Jens, what's new on the pb/tp front?--Wolfram.winkler 05:26, 13 November 2018 (EST)

Nothing, except for the Softcover_publication_formats_on_international_markets page I created based in this request, if you haven't seen it yet. I currently have no time to push the issue. Jens Hitspacebar 14:17, 15 November 2018 (EST)

Planned Project Scope Expansion

(I am leaving this note on the Talk pages of some of the more active editors to make sure that we are not missing anything. If you have been following this Rules and Standards discussion and agree with the proposal, please ignore this note.)

As per this discussion, ISFDB:Policy#Rules_of_Acquisition is about to be expanded to include:

• Speculative fiction webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues
• Special speculative fiction issues of non-genre webzines
• One time speculative fiction anthologies published on the Web

If you believe that this scope expansion may cause unforeseen and/or undesirable consequences, please share your thoughts on the Rules and Standards page. TIA! Ahasuerus 11:24, 4 July 2018 (EDT)

Appell für die bemannte Raumfahrt

Hello Jens, I think the title should be Appell für die bemannte Weltraumfahrt. Thanks for looking it up Henna 05:22, 15 October 2018 (EDT)

Hi Henna. I've just checked it, but Appell für die bemannte Raumfahrt is correct. Has it also been published somewhere else as ...Weltraumfahrt? Jens Hitspacebar 12:08, 15 October 2018 (EDT)

Hello Jens, yes in Alien Contact 47, look here. Regards Henna 06:42, 16 October 2018 (EDT)

Ok, I see. Thanks for the infos. I created a variant Appell für die bemannte Weltraumfahrt and add some background infos to the note. Jens Hitspacebar 13:50, 16 October 2018 (EDT)

Zeitschiffe

Hello Jens, I added the preface to this publication. Regards Henna 15:03, 24 January 2019 (EST)

Hi Henna, I had left out the preface because it is not an essay, but part of the novel. Though "signed" by Baxter, it's written as if the manuscript of the novel was given to him by a bookseller. See the remark about the "Editor's Note" in this pub's note as well. I suggest to remove the preface from the pub and add a note to the novel's title record about the fictitious preface. Jens Hitspacebar 11:58, 25 January 2019 (EST)

I see. Thank you for the explanation, I will remove the preface. Thanks for looking it up Henna 13:06, 25 January 2019 (EST)

Binti: The Night Masquerade & Home

Hi Jens, wanted to let you know I'll be splitting out my non-PoD version from your PoD version - have a look here and update that pub record with the info from the (likely) PoD copy you have (remove everything that I've typed and does not correspond with what you have in your copy).
I've also submitted an edit to add an extra note to Bunti: Home to clarify where to find actual PoD printing date. Let me know if you want to discuss. Cheers! MagicUnk 16:17, 29 January 2019 (EST)

Hi, thanks for the information. I added even more infos to the note of my PV'd Binti: The Night Masquerade, because though it's been printed in Germany according to the PoD line in it, it also says "Printed in the USA" on the back (like your copy does). As for Binti: Home: my copy is one which doesn't contain any POD information, but though I can't prove it I believe it was nevertheless printed on demand in Germany as well, considering how fast I got it and the price (though it also says "Printed in the USA" on the back). Therefore I'd say that the absence of PoD information doesn't automatically make it a non-PoD copy. Considering the statement of Tor.com that they "consider traditional print publishing for a selected number of titles" I wonder if your assumption "This publication record is for the non-PoD version" in your PV'd record is correct. Jens Hitspacebar 12:46, 1 February 2019 (EST)

Hi Jens. Thanks for the feedback. Do keep the two versions as they are clearly distinct, but feel free to add notes to further clarify. MagicUnk 15:37, 1 February 2019 (EST)

By the way, I did ask Nihonjoe here to separate out his non-POD version of Binti: Home. So that's at least two without any pod info - yours and his. MagicUnk 01:52, 2 February 2019 (EST)

Frank Lewecke

Hello Jens, Frank Lewecke is stated in both publications as Frank M. Lewecke. Can you please change that? Many Thanks Henna 15:44, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Done. He's also spelt that way on the Kurd Laßwitz Preis website, where I believe I got the name from initially when I entered the data. Seems like I overlooked the "M." back then. Jens Hitspacebar 15:52, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Shambling Towards Hiroshima

Hi. Please see this and comment there. Thanks. --MartyD 12:33, 23 March 2019 (EDT)

Martian Time-Slip - PKD

Hi, you are pV here. My 2nd printing of this has "designed by sue michniewicz" curved underneath the pink circle between the price and barcode circles. Perhaps yours has too?

Also, on my 2nd print title page appears "SF MASTERWORKS" underlined and a blank circle. What do you make of that, if yours is the same?

Also, on my copyright page is "This edition reprinted by Gollancz" but with no date (your 3rd seems the same). Cheers. BanjoKev 18:44, 6 May 2019 (EDT)

Hi!

• "designed by sue michniewicz" curved underneath the pink circle: same in my edition
• "SF MASTERWORKS" underlined and a blank circle: not mentioned anywhere in my edition
• "This edition reprinted by Gollancz": not in my edition, but "This edition published in 2007 in Great Britain by Gollancz" instead.

I'll add these infos to my PV'ed record. Jens Hitspacebar 14:31, 7 May 2019 (EDT)

Thanks for your time with this Jens. I'm now clear that the "SF MASTERWORKS" underlined and a blank circle is a printer's error on my title page and your input helps me for when I put up my 2nd printing.

Your amazon cover is exactly the same as mine - shall I link my scan upload to your record when I do mine? Many thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 17:08, 7 May 2019 (EDT)

Yes, no problem if you do that. Jens Hitspacebar 12:49, 8 May 2019 (EDT)