User talk:Malcolmf

Welcome!

Hello, Malcolmf, 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
• Help:Getting Started
• What the ISFDB Wiki is for
• ISFDB 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 17:32, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Linking uploaded cover images to the publication records

Thanks for uploading cover images to the ISFDB wiki. The next step is to link those images to the records of the books for which these are the covers. As the instructions (step 6) explain:

Once the file has been uploaded, the image's wiki page will appear. In order to get the URL (address) for the image you just uploaded, left click anywhere on the image and copy the URL from your browser's address window. (Or right click on the image and choose "Copy Image Location".) If you're adding a cover image to a pub record, this is the URL which you would enter into the pub record's "Image URL" field.

So once you have the image's URL, go back to the pub record (it's linked on the image's wiki page) and then click the "Edit This Pub" link under the Editing Tools menu. This opens up an edit page. Under the Publication Metadata section, there's a field labeled "Image URL:" Enter the URL of the image you uploaded into this field, and then click on the "Submit Data" button at the bottom of the page. Once the submission has been moderated the cover image will be linked to the publication record. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 17:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Machen's Holy Terrors

Thanks for adding a record for this title. I've made a few changes to conform to ISFDB standards:

• The binding was changed from "paperback" to "pb".
• The note of "Penguin book #526" was moved to the ISBN/Catalog # field as just "#526". (We give all non-ISBN numbers in this field the symbol "#" to differentiate them from ISBNs.)
• I added the price as given in Tuck's encyclopedia. He gives the page count as 140 instead of 144. Can you recheck your source?

If you have a copy of the book, please do a primary verification (linked in the Welcome section above). If you don't have a copy, please update the record to give the source for the data in the record's note field. Thanks again and welcome to the ISFDB. Mhhutchins 17:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thrills, Crimes and Mysteries

I accepted this submission to add the contents to this book with an assumption that the majority of the stories are speculative and not just mystery stories. If this is not the case, you should remove and delete the non-spec-fic stories, and note that the record is incomplete and only indexes the spec-fic stories. A few problems: you didn't give the entire URL of the cover image. You should have entered http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/images/4/49/THRLLSCRMS1935.jpg into the field, not just the file name. Also, there is an author with an initialed name in which the initials were not separated by spaces: "L.A.G. Strong" should be "L. A. G. Strong". There is one story in which you reversed the title and the author: "Dorothy L. Sayers • shortstory by A Shot at Goal". Also I think this story may have the author's name misspelled: "Gold Like Glass • shortstory by Fraderick Carter". (I saw a "Frederick Carter" earlier in the anthology.) All of these can be corrected with one submission to update the record. This was a big submission so you did pretty good considering all the contents. Personally, I usually try to break up adding so many content records into several submissions to avoid losing data by hitting the wrong key, which I've done on more than a few occasions! Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Linking images

As I pointed out above, you should enter the entire URL of the cover image. Be sure not to enter the URL of the image's Wiki page, but the URL of the image file itself.

Astounding (UK)

I have your submission on hold, not because there's anything wrong with it, but if accepted as-is will require at least 30 merges of contents. I've asked another Moderator, who is much more familiar with magazines, to have a look [their entry, especially to get a new one into an existing [grid] is a little trickier than a new printing of a book]. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

My two cents (if I may interject): Because magazines can't be cloned, if the majority of the contents are from a single issue already in the database, you can use the import function, but you must first create a contentless record. The existing record for Astounding Nov. 1953 fills the bill. You will then have to remove or add contents in order for the new record to match your issue. Mhhutchins 22:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to try to recover your Astounding entry as it's only lacking a tag to link it to the magazine page (hopefully I don't make things worse). If you have more Astounding UK to enter, let me know the dates and I'll try to generate the blank records on the mag page.--Rkihara 01:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Notes in editor records

It really doesn't pay to add notes to editor records (like the one you added to this record.) This record will eventually be merged with all the editor records for the same magazine title and year. The note in the pub record was sufficient. Just a heads up. Mhhutchins 19:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Cover image tied to the wrong record

You uploaded the image for the August 1954 UK issue of Astounding, but it's tagged to the March 1954 US issue. You should have uploaded it from this record which would have automatically tagged it with the correct issue. It is best to wait until the record is in the system and then use the "Upload cover scan" function from the record whose cover you're uploading. Or perhaps you accidentally uploaded the image from the wrong record? Mhhutchins 19:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The best time to upload a cover image

I see that you uploaded this image before you completed the header information for the record to which it was tagged. Looking at the image's wiki page you see that there is no publisher or artist credit, data that would have automatically transferred to the image data if you'd first updated the pub record. It's better to wait until you've completely updated the record with everything you're going to, before uploading the cover image. Keep this in mind for any future image uploads. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:43, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I was hoping to catch you before you continued, but I see you've added four more cover images with incomplete data. Once you've finished updating the pub records, I'll go back and add the data manually to all of the image's wiki pages. Hope you read this before you do much more of them. Mhhutchins 19:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Astounding, August 1954 UK

The submission updating this record was accepted, but the URL linked to the cover image was incomplete. Mhhutchins 20:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Astounding (UK) April 1954

The changes you've submitted for the dates on two contents are confusing. In the notes you've added, there is no mention of additional interior art or a new review yet you dated one of each to April '54. If they were in the Nov. '53 US edition then they should get that date. I'll approve the submission to keep the notes and it's easy to change those two contents' dates. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Not quite what I meant, but that's okay. :-) No content should have a date of 0000-00-00 unless the date of the publication itself is unknown. Clearly not the case here. If the interior art piece is new [and the [Nov '53] edition is verified, so you could ask either of the verifiers if it might just have been missed] and the review as well, then they should get the 1954-04-00 date. Again, I'll accept the submission as the notes are very good. Sometimes it's easier, and leads to less work, to answer a question first on this talk page and then re-submit once. Part of the learning curve, and we're here to help. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, about the conflict, Bill. I didn't know you were working on this issue. Mhhutchins 20:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

That's okay, just trying to help out after kind of dumping that first issue in Ron's lap. --~ Bill, Bluesman 20:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

[after edit conflict with the above message] After having to merge all of the records in this pub with the records for November 1953, I can see what you were trying to do. My question is: Is there actually a review of Flight Into Space or just a "books received" listing. The same title was reviewed in a subsequent issue, so I'm not sure why Miller would have reviewed the same book within six months. We usually don't list "books received" as reviews. About the additional interior art record by Freas for "The Happiness Effect", I'm going to ask someone who verified the US issue to look again. Also, do you know if the "Brass Tacks" in this issue corresponds with any US issue? Mhhutchins 19:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, as a "Book received", it's about the same length as the review of "Against the Fall of Night" in the same issue. Remarks such as "the author gives a vivid and carefully drawn picture" and "although this book has a strong foundation of fact and its whole outlook is one of logic, it is nevertheless essentially readable and the author skilfully manages to avoid over-technical details" certainly sounds like a review. The book is a UK edition, and I suspect the review got added to the UK edition at the time of the book's publication, and Miller did a review of the book in the US July edition which got reprinted in the usual fashion in December. Comparing them side by side, the reviews are quite different, the first is quite stiff in style, the second much chattier. I'd bet the one reprinted in Dec 1954 is actually by Miller, and the one in this edition was by someone in London at Atlas Publishing. Time to add notes about this to the April and December issues?
The illustration looks like a Kelly Freas, though it doesn't have his usual little kf logo in the corner.
Brass Tacks is another difficulty--without the letters being indexed, or someone having both editions to hand, there's no way to tell.
Who'd have thought there'd be such complications to something as simple as a listing of contents? Malcolmf 20:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Line 'breaks' in notes

I see from your note just above that you know how to install a line break. Also noticed that in the publication notes they aren't there, though when opened in an editing window the lines are separate. Without the <br> the software doesn't recognize a carriage/keyboard return and displays the notes as one continuous 'sentence'. Just an FYI. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

"Anon." versus "uncredited"

We only use "Anon." if that's the way the work's authorship is credited in the publication. Work that has no author credit should be credited to "uncredited". The author of this review will have to be changed to "uncredited" if the publication doesn't credit an author. Mhhutchins 18:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Merge vs. variant

I'm holding two submissions that want to variant two reviews by Miller. We only use the variant function if there is a change in 1) the title of the work or 2) the credited author. We merge the two records if it is substantially the same work and has the same title and credited author. In the case of these two reviews, they should be merged. Here's a help page on how to merge titles. I'm going to reject the submissions. Mhhutchins 18:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments on help pages

I removed the comment you left on the help page for merging titles. Comments, messages, and discussions should me made on community forum pages (such as the Community Portal, the Help Desk, the Moderator Noticeboard) or on user talk pages. For discussions specific to one of the help pages there is a link "Discuss this page" which leads you to a page to add messages or contribute to discussions on this specific topic. Any changes to help pages should be discussed before the changes are made. It's not a big deal. I just thought you'd like to know. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:59, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Oops. Wrong page. And I found the edit conflict before I could delete my comment. I think I've spent a bit too long at my computer this dull grey day. Time to stop for today. Malcolmf 20:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)