User talk:Maybrick

From ISFDB

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(The Second Man)
Current revision (18:05, 12 October 2019) (edit) (undo)
(The Second Man)
 
Line 78: Line 78:
== The Second Man ==
== The Second Man ==
-
If [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1282831 The Second Man] is indeed a novel, we handle that differently - we will make it a serial (of 1 - with a special way to record that) and then connect to the novel. If it is a novella that was expanded, they do not get connected. As it looks like it is a novel indeed, I did that here. See if [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1954976 this] looks correct to you now. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 21:15, 9 October 2019 (EDT)Correct [[User:Maybrick|Maybrick]] 14:04, 12 October 2019 (EDT)
+
If [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1282831 The Second Man] is indeed a novel, we handle that differently - we will make it a serial (of 1 - with a special way to record that) and then connect to the novel. If it is a novella that was expanded, they do not get connected. As it looks like it is a novel indeed, I did that here. See if [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1954976 this] looks correct to you now. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 21:15, 9 October 2019 (EDT) Correct [[User:Maybrick|Maybrick]] 14:04, 12 October 2019 (EDT)

Current revision

Contents

Welcome!

Hello, Maybrick, and welcome to the ISFDB Wiki! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Note: Image uploading isn't entirely automated. You're uploading the files to the wiki which will then have to be linked to the database by editing the publication record.

Please be careful in editing publications that have been primary verified by other editors. See Help:How to verify data#Making changes to verified pubs. But if you have a copy of an unverified publication, verifying it can be quite helpful. See Help:How to verify data for detailed information.

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Mhhutchins 18:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Uncanny Tales

I had to reject your submission to add a publication record for this magazine title. Each issue of a periodical should be entered as a separate publication record. Feel free to do this using the data on the Fiction Mags index. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I have created a record for the first issue. Please use that record and this help page as a guideline when adding other issues. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

BTW, note that the editor field of the publication record is given as "uncredited" because he isn't actually credited in the issue. Per ISFDB standards, the record is then varianted to credit the actual editor (Melvin R. Colby). Mhhutchins 18:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The Liquid Man

Thanks for pointing out that The Liquid Man was originally published in Fantastic Adventures, September 1941 as by "Bernard C. Gilford"! Although we make an effort to connect original pulp publications with later reprints, there are still gaps in our coverage and this was one of them.

I have set up Bernard C. Gilford as a pseudonym for C. B. Gilford and turned the 1941 version into a variant of the 1969 book. There is a fair amount of complexity when dealing with magazines as described in Help:Use of the SERIAL type and Help:How to connect serials to titles, so I figured it would be easier if I did it myself rather than try to walk you through a complex multi-submission process.

As far as the issue of "rejecting" versus "redirecting" submitted edits goes, I am afraid the way the ISFDB software functions, there is no way to redirect or edit a submission. The reviewing moderator has only two choices when dealing with a submission which has valid data that was not entered in the right format:

  • approve the submission and then change what was entered, or
  • reject the submission and implement the proposed changes in a different way

There is nothing personal about either "rejecting" or "approving" a submission. It's just a question of what is easier and less time-consuming in each case. In the case of "Uncanny Tales" above the reviewing moderator decided that it was easier to reject the submission and enter the data in a different way, but the important thing is that the data was added to the database. Your contributions are appreciated -- thanks again! Ahasuerus 00:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

How to respond to Wiki messages

Re: "there was no message link at your site", you can reply to messages left on this page by clicking the "[edit]" link displayed at the top of each section. If the system asks you to sign on, please use your ISFDB user name and password.

Re: "any valid submission needs to be added to the site and some regular way of doing this MUST be made sooner or later", it is true that, as you said, "[s]ome users are not keen on learning data entry procedures while others are very familiar with it". Those who are not keen on learning the data entry procedures can leave a note on the Community Portal: click on the "+" sign at the top of that page (which will create a new section) and post the information there. A moderator will see your note and incorporate the data into the database. If he has follow-up questions, he will ask them on this page.

Re: "the site ought to take any data that dates before the year 2000 especially seriously", we have many editors and users with specialized interests. Some enter authors' biographical details, some work on magazines, some enter language-specific data, etc. We don't assign tasks, so people mostly work on the areas that interest them. That said, our coverage of pre-2000 SF is generally superior to our overage of more recent works. If nothing else, there was less SF published in the 19th and 20th centuries and it has been out long enough to be noticed and cataloged. Ahasuerus 19:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The Secret Kingdom

Hi. I have a question about your submission of a new publication of The Secret Kingdom in 1929. Were you only trying to inform the moderators that this entry was incorrectly dated 1926 instead of 1929, or do you have information about a printing of the story as a book in 1929? I did correct the date, but I have your submission on hold. Thanks. --MartyD 11:38, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi again. Having heard nothing, I'm going to assume you were just using the submission to notify us about the date, and I am going to reject it; as I mentioned above, I did fix the date. If there should be a 1929 book, please resubmit. Thanks. --MartyD 03:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hell's Pavement

Hello, I've rejected your submission because, contrary to what's in your message to moderators ("Since Knight did not have a story in Astounding in 1951 I did my best to make this entry less confusing."), the existing notes evoke a 1952 text which is in fact this one. The content of the note field is thus correct and there's no need to modify it. Hauck 17:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Tags

Hello, please voice your problem with tags that seem invasive to you at the Moderator Noticeboard. Commuicating with us via submissions is not the easiest and most efficient way. Thanks. Hauck 10:02, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Signing posts

In order to facilitate better communication (and provide people a link to your user and talk pages), it is recommended to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Let me know if you have any questions and I'll be happy to help you out. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:54, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

This would still be very helpful. Just type the four tildes (~~~~) to sign your posts instead of typing out "--Maybrick". It then signs your username,dates the post, and adds a link to your user page and talk page. This makes it so people don't have to go to the history of an article to find a link to your user and talk pages. Please let me know if you have any questions. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Non-Edit Edits

Please don't use the edit submissions for comments, requests, etc. It should only be used for actual edits. If you have a comment, etc. then please post them at ISFDB:Community Portal (as a new topic by using the "+" symbol at the top of the page). Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:40, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the content of the note. Please feel free to add any stories in the Fedogan & Bremern collection to a series. I haven't read the stories, so I can't speak to whether these are straight detective stories, or supernatural detective stories. The cover of that collection would suggest the latter. However, if you are certain that there are no supernatural elements to the stories, you can also add the non-genre flag. I would consider Wandrei to be above the threshold and thus the stories would be eligible regardless of their speculative content. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 23:50, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Dark Legion

Hello, I've rejected your edit on two grounds: 1) the cover shows only Crawford as given author and the record should reflect this and only this, 2) "pretty much acknowledged" is not enough evidence of joint authorship (that should be materialised at title level with a variant eventually if proof is given). Hauck 20:09, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I have rejected your edits again. As Hauck says above, even if we knew for certain that Glasby wrote this, we would not change the publication record. The publication record should show exactly what the the publication states. Instead, we would establish a pseudonym relationship and variant the title record to a new title record under Glasby's name. As far as SFE, it states that Glasby wrote a single short fiction story under the name Crawford. At 160 pages, this could be a novella, but it would be pushing it on page count. The problem with house names is that there is no guarantee that other writers weren't also writing under the Crawford name so the SFE3 statement doesn't really prove anything. I did find a Glasby's Dark Legion publication (which I will add to the database). It could be a re-print of the Crawford book under Glasby's name. But without being able to compare them, there is no way to know for certain. I will add notes to both records indicating the possibility, but the evidence is still too weak to make an actual variant. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:33, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Images of Malcolm Jameson and Milton Lesser

I've had to reject your edit to add this photo of Macolm Jameson to his author profile, as we do not have permission from the site owner to link from www.wendymaclure.net. Is there perhaps an image at Luminist you could link to? That would be fine, as we have Luminist's permission (and a complete list of sites we can link to in this way is here). Thanks. PeteYoung 02:11, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

I did the same with the proposed image for Milton Lesser, as we do not have permission to link to openmedia.com. See ISFDB:Image_linking_permissions for a full explanation. --MartyD 06:59, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

Image Links

I had to reject your addition of an image to Harry Bates. We can only use images from sites that have explicitly given us permission to do so. See ISFDB:Image linking permissions for a list of such sites. If you wish to contact the site to see about permission, the instructions to do so are below the list. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

Never mind. That picture looks to be some sculptor with same name. Maybrick 17:33, 22 September 2017 (EDT)

Incorrect publication data

Hi, please feel free to make changes to publication records, especially those with no primary verifiers, when you come across problems. It's easier for the moderators to review the information you've assembled than for them to go assemble the information and make the changes themselves. I did fix up Satans of Saturn. Thanks. --MartyD 23:08, 14 August 2019 (EDT)

The Second Man

If The Second Man is indeed a novel, we handle that differently - we will make it a serial (of 1 - with a special way to record that) and then connect to the novel. If it is a novella that was expanded, they do not get connected. As it looks like it is a novel indeed, I did that here. See if this looks correct to you now. Annie 21:15, 9 October 2019 (EDT) Correct Maybrick 14:04, 12 October 2019 (EDT)

Personal tools