ISFDB:Help desk

ISFDB Discussion Pages and Noticeboards
Before posting to this page, consider whether one of the other discussion pages or noticeboards might suit your needs better. If you're looking for help remembering a book title, check out the resources in our FAQ. Please also see our Help pages.
Help desk Questions about doing a specific task, or how to correct information when the solution is not immediately obvious. • New post • Archives	Research Assistance Help with bibliographic projects. • New post • Archives	Rules and standards Discussions about the rules and standards, as well as questions about interpretation and application of those rules. • New post • Rules changelog • Archives	Community Portal General discussion about anything not covered by the more specialized noticeboards to the left. • New post • Archives	Moderator noticeboard Get the attention of moderators regarding submission questions.   • New post • Archives • Cancel submission
Roadmap: For the original discussion of Roadmap 2017 see this archived section. For the current implementation status, see What's New#Roadmap 2017.

Help Menu

Getting Started Read This First Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Counting words in prose fiction Adding titles: Novel • Publication • Translations Verifying a publication Multiple authors with the same name Bibliographic Projects in Progress General Help Policies and guidelines Privacy • Definitions / Glossary • Rules of Acquisition • Inclusion/Exclusion Find a book title Language (Screen) Unicode / accents • Translations • Terms & Abbreviations (Japanese)

Editing ISFDB How to edit ISFDB (Full list of help pages) Field-by-field guide to creating and updating publication records Currency symbols Images: Linking permissions • Uploading • Licensing Using templates and HTML in Note fields • List of ISFDB Wiki Templates List of help pages for each edit screen Editing the ISFDB Wiki ISFDB Wiki Conventions and Customs Purpose of the ISFDB Wiki How to edit the ISFDB Wiki Other Wiki Help

---

If none of the pages linked here have the information you need, the best place to ask is at the Help Desk. If you don't get a response there, feel free to post on the Moderator noticeboard.

Archive Quick Links
Archives of old discussions from the Help desk.

---

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37

---

Expanded archive listing

Bound editions of magazines

I was verifying these bound editions of a series of magazines/fanzine and noticed they were typed as NON-FICTION. They are that, but they are also OMNIBUSes in the sense that they are just a set of separately published issues. The Help entry does not permit OMNIBUS to include non-fiction. So each NON-FICTION book must repeat the contents of the issues. Is this an exception? Would the earliest publication dates of the contents be when the corresponding book was published and should the TITLE record for each be modified to the book edition rather than the magazine? Would bound editions of magazines with fiction be handled the same way? ../Doug H (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2024 (EDT)

Ennio Ciscato

I'm going to submit a few NewPub in the pub series Fantalibro, published by Ennio Ciscato. I noticed that presently in the db there are two publishers: one normal and one disambiguated. Actually there was only one, so no disambiguation is needed. Furthermore, all the 5 titles (total of the two publishers) belong to the same pub series. Just 5, so no big editing task, but what is the smartest way to join them all together and delete the disambiguated publisher? thanks! --Fantagufo (talk) 11:32, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

I merged the two publishers. This is a moderator only function. You still need to add the publication series to the publication records individually. John Scifibones 11:57, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

Thanks a lot John, I can work from here; but before I need guidance for another tricky issue. This pub series is the redistribution of a series with the same name of publisher De Carlo. Actually, only the first two and the last two books were reprinted or added by Ciscato; all the others are the De Carlo books with a replaced hardcover, or just a replaced jacket. As a result, the publisher is Ciscato on the cover/jacket, but still De Carlo in the copyright page and title page; Ciscato was distributing and selling them. Is it compliant to ISFDB standards assign them to Ciscato, leaving to De Carlo those for which he provided cover and marketing? Or should the series be somehow shared between the two publishers (and thus have two #3, two #4 ,etc)? This is almost the way many of them are already in ISFDB (Here is an example) assigned to De Carlo with both covers and no explanation. --Fantagufo (talk) 13:28, 1 August 2024 (EDT) PS: This does not seem to me the scenario "series continues with new owner" described in the Help:Screen:PublicationSeries page. --Fantagufo (talk) 13:33, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

Sharing the pub series between the two publishers is not an issue - just add a note in the series notes explaining why there are two publishers (or someone will decide to help and disambiguate). However, this is where the intent becomes important - if they are considered separate series, with one of them just reprinting/republishing all of the others, you may want 2 separate series for them (just add the publisher name in () after the name of the series for one of them). It really comes down to expectations in this case - if I am looking for books from this series, do I care who the publisher was or is that considered one series. That will tell you if you they need to stay together. Based on what you had posted, I'd say to keep them in one series but... you know better and have better access to Italian sources :)

At the end of the day, it will be easy enough to separate them IF we decide later that it makes more sense. Annie (talk) 15:09, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

Thanks a lot, Annie. I have always considered them as two separate series, but I have to admit that this approach is not shared by Italian sources, including SBN, which seem to consider only De Carlo as publisher except for the 4 books that Ciscato really reprinted, and the series as just one, common to both publishers, so I will start submitting with the same approach, but separating the publications, as they actually are different objects, at least because the cover is different. I would also change the series name to "Gamma. Il fantalibro" because that is more similar to what is inside the books for both publishers (sometimes only Gamma, sometimes only Il fantalibro, sometimes both) while "I capolavori della fantascienza" only appears on Ciscato covers, and I see it more as a blurb. I thik I can submit this change myself. What I can't do - so I would ask a moderator to kindly help - is to un-disambiguate the publisher "De Carlo Editore (Italy)" to "De Carlo Editore": again, there is only one publisher with this name (also in the db). thank you again! - --Fantagufo (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

Anytime. We try to be reasonable for things like that when possible so 90% of the cases, as long as you are not bumping into a software limitation or a standing rule, it comes down to editor's discretion based on available data. If someone disagrees, we discuss and if needed, rules get changed or codified. John already got the publisher fixed so that is done. Let us know if you need anything else -- and don't forget to add some notes to the pub series record to explain the decision on the 1/2 series. :) Annie (talk) 17:13, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

very good. I already submitted the change to the series name with a note explaining the situation. It would be helpful to have it approved before submitting the books. and thanks again. I'll ask you to checkpoint after submiting the Ciscato books, probably next week. thanks again --Fantagufo (talk) 18:13, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

Approved. John Scifibones 19:23, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

thanks John! --Fantagufo (talk) 19:32, 1 August 2024 (EDT)

British pubs priced in pennies alone

The Price Help for bullet "Even older British paperback books, and magazines [...]" doesn't quite cover a price such as 1½d (one and a half old pence) - how should this be entered, and could the Help be updated to cater for this contingency? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2024 (EDT)

It is recorded as -/1.5, see examples. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2024 (EDT)

Template:PublicationFields:Price already covers this under the fourth bullet point under "Special note on British currency", though it doesn't mention using decimal instead of fractional notation. Perhaps we could change one of the examples to include that? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:44, 5 August 2024 (EDT)

Exactly my point. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2024 (EDT)

I'm on the fence about just making the change. I think it's likely a small enough change to not need to be logged, but I've asked Ahaseurus to come comment on that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:05, 5 August 2024 (EDT)

Scanning the data in the database, I see that the vast majority of these cases are entered using ".5". However, a number of pubs use prices like "-/4½", e.g. New Worlds, April 1939 or The Satellite, May 1939 or Trail of the Vampire. I think it would be safer to post these findings on the R&S page, confirm that decimals are the way to go, then update Help and change the affected pubs. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:56, 5 August 2024 (EDT)

I agree. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 15:05, 5 August 2024 (EDT)

Collection in an Omnibus

Is it still considered best practice to include the individual content titles of a collection as content titles in an omnibus that includes the collection title? Phil (talk) 13:48, 8 August 2024 (EDT)

That's right. If you don't include individual titles in the Content section, there will be no database link between them and the Omnibus publication, which means that the Omnibus pub won't appear on their Title pages. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:56, 8 August 2024 (EDT)

Makes sense. I missed seeing it in the Help but on looking again, it's there. Phil (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2024 (EDT)

RJ Barker

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?133764

https://civilianreader.com/2017/06/01/interview-with-rj-barker/

This author's novels are all published without any full stops after the initials and in the interview they say that there shouldn't be any. Should the name be changed from "R. J." to "RJ" - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:07, 11 August 2024 (EDT)

overlapping submissions

I have a doubt: I just submitted a Content Import for an anthology, and then a PubUpdate to add the cover. Will cover approval delete the Imported titles? Should I have waited to have the first approved, before submitting the other? thanks! --Fantagufo (talk) 15:05, 11 August 2024 (EDT)

There is no conflict between these two submissions. John Scifibones 15:42, 11 August 2024 (EDT)

so much better. I asked because the 2nd submission generated a yellow warning for the existence of the 1st. thank you!! --Fantagufo (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2024 (EDT)

Image upload specifications do not work

There is a persistent problem with image uploads. There is confusion as to how to reliably size our images. In one place (not hear the useful Choose File button) it says "Cover images should be no more than 600 pixels along the largest dimension." Next to the Choose File button it says "Maximum file size: 200 KB". Well, it doesn't work. I have an image, 600 pixels, and it is 235 KB at 300 dpi, and it is 234 at 72 dpi. What am I supposed to do? It really doesn't do for ISFDB to have requirements that can't be relied on. I do not use Windows; I use the macOS and have since 1986. I am a publisher. I make interior and book covers. I use reasonable professional software to do this. What I am not getting is an answer to the question, which is about ISFDB's requirements. I tried to make something less than 200K but it was too large in pixel size. I tried to make something 600 pixels and but it was too large in kilobytes. I am not unskilled, but the parameters given to me by ISFDB do not yield an acceptable result. Evertype (talk) 17:52, 12 August 2024 (EDT)

It is entirely possible to make something both under 600px on the largest dimension and under 200k in file size. Worst case, you can always increase the JPEG compression (reducing the JPEG quality factor below the default 90 often works with little detriment to the image quality). ISFDB covers are used under fair use. They are not supposed to be the best quality we can make them. As per the template, "This resolution is significantly reduced, and could not plausibly be used to make publishable copies of the original." -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:36, 12 August 2024 (EDT)

I don't meed them to be "the best quality we can make them". I need to have a specification that I can rely on without having to guess and reduce by 1% here or 2% there until it gets to 199KB. As I say, 600 pixels yielded a file with too many bytes, and for some other book I uploaded 199K produced a file with too many pixels. The specification is not accurate enough to help us not waste time. Evertype (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

Which book is this for? I'm happy to help you get the image to be the necessary size both with pixels and Kb. It can be done one both macOS and in Windows. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:51, 12 August 2024 (EDT)

I have a rather big and growing Ursula K. Le Guin collection and have many items for which I can upload files. I need a recipe that works, and as I have said the current specification of 600 pixels or 200K is not reliable. Evertype (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

Also, which software are you using? Photoshop? Graphic Converter? Something else? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:02, 12 August 2024 (EDT)

I have Graphic Converter, Pixelmaker, Pixelmaker Pro, Affinity… I don't use Photoshop. I would be happy to use Graphic Converter. But see below. Evertype (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

[1] & [2] need resizing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2024 (EDT)

Fixed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:11, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

This is an example of the problem I am raising. Following the instructions that said "Maximum file size: 200 KB" I produced a file for Playboy that complied with that instruction but was 1560 pixels on its longest size. But I did as instructed. Similarly for the City of Illusions image, which really needs to be a photo of the spine since the cover has no features... again my 187K file is 943 pixels on its longest side. I would like instructions that work. Evertype (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

It seems to me that the pixel requirement is stricter than the file size requirement, so I would suggest to apply that first. When I have to upload a cover, I generally scan it at 200 dpi, which provides an image typically 1500-1600 pixels on longest edge; before saving the file I shrink it, e.g. down to 25% or 40%; the risulting image is 400-500 pixels, and the file size 40-50 KB. I find it much faster and simpler than trying to extrapolate the file size, and the image quality is satisfactory. --Fantagufo (talk) 12:51, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

@Evertype: Here are the steps I'd suggest to get your images to be the right size, both in dimensions and file size, in GraphicConverter:

1. Resize the image so that the longest dimension is 600px or less.
2. Save the file as a jpg and adjust the quality of the jpg until the estimated file size is below the 200k (I'd recommend below 190k as different systems calculate the file size slightly differently, and this will make sure it's definitely below the 200k upper limit). This can be done in GraphicConverter by choosing to save the file as a jpg and clicking on the Options... button to access the additional settings (see page 20 in the manual).

I have Affinity, but I haven't used it much yet, so I can't tell you off the top of my head how to do that in that app. I've never used any Pixelmaker app. However, every image editing app I've ever used (except for a few on mobile devices) allows you to change both the image size and the quality of jpg output to achieve the desired length and width and quality/file size. You may have to poke around a little to find out how to do that in these last two apps. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:11, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

bung it in "paint", change longest side to 590 pixels, save as a jpeg and bobs your uncle. never more than 150kb. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

I right-click an image, choose "Edit", "Resize", "Pixels", lower horizontal/vertical (whichever is bigger) to 600, and then use this free online tool, https://tinyjpg.com/, to shrink the image and get rid of the useless bloat. Sometimes nothing is removed, sometimes it can be 50% or more. --Username (talk) 19:19, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

(unindent)

Upload file

I want to thank everyone for their patience. I have worked out with help how to do this with GraphicConverter on a Mac. I do still recommend that the length dimension be given right next to the Choose File button, just as the file size is. Evertype (talk) 08:59, 16 September 2024 (EDT)

Glad you figured it out. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:04, 16 September 2024 (EDT)

I support Evertype's request to state the maximum dimension (pixels) of an image in the "Source file" box of the Upload file page. I know it states "Cover images should be no more than 600 pixels along the largest dimension." three lines above the box but I agree that for editors new to the upload process, it is clearer and more sensible to state all the restrictions in the same place. The dimension statement should be moved, not copied. This facilitates future maintenance if the maximum number of pixels changes. It means you do not have to remember to change the "600" in two places. Teallach (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2024 (EDT)

Spaces adjacent to ellipses in titles

Hi! I was looking though some records and I've found what may or may not be a duplicate title record that I can't figure out. I read the rules at Help:Screen:NewPub on what can distinguish titles from one another and how to regularise titles, specifically with regards to spaces and ellipses, but I am still confused. The help page says, "An ellipsis should be entered as the sequence "period", "period", "period" with no spaces in between the periods. If the ellipsis is in the middle of the title, it should be entered with a space after it as well, prior to the start of the following word. [...] Hyphens and spaces make different titles: "Hell Fire", "Hellfire", and "Hell-Fire" are three different titles, and should be entered as such."

(a) Does that mean "There's No Fool..." and "There's No Fool ..." should be considered the same title or two different variant titles? If they are considered the same title, which one would be correctly regularised, as the help page doesn't specify whether to add a space before an ellipsis or not? (b) Similarly, in a title like "The Highest ... Treason" or "The Highest... Treason", would they be distinguished, and if not, which one is correctly regularised? ((c) Also, just to confirm, the rules as stated mean that something like "The Highest ...Treason" compared to "The Highest ... Treason" would not be distinguished, right?)

Thanks! IndigoPari (talk) 18:49, 13 August 2024 (EDT)

Regarding (a), yes, and if you find the latter ("There's No Fool ...") it should be regularized as "There's No Fool...". For (b), if it's in the middle of the title ("The Highest... Treason"), it should have the space following the ellipses, but none preceding the ellipses. If you find one like "The Highest ... Treason", it should be regularized to "The Highest... Treason". Regarding (c), yes, and the title should be regularized as already noted. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:18, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Great, thank you for the help! IndigoPari (talk) 13:51, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Wise eyes?

In this conversation we'd both appreciate wise eyes looking at the section starting "This Foreword is titled correctly" to make sure all's well with the varianting date. Please respond in-line there, for future reference. Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Don't know if they're wise eyes, but I posted anyway. John Scifibones 16:24, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Awww... thanks for your help. (note there's no space before the ellipsis) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 16:33, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Should parent collection title records list real authors or credited authors?

There is a record of a publication of a collection which contains two short fiction works, one by Milton Lessor, and one by Milton Lesser & Paul Fairman. The publication itself only lists "Adam Chase", a alternate name of Milton Lessor, as the author. For the collection title record, I've listed the author as Adam Chase, but I'm also marking it as a variant title of a canonical title record.

Should the canonical collection title record list just Milton Lesser for the author or both Milton Lesser and Paul Fairman? (The content title record is already marked as a variant of a parent title record listing both authors.) IndigoPari (talk) 15:56, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Please provide a link to the publication in question. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:36, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Canonical chapbook title record confusion

I'm editing the records of a chapbook that has been published under two different titles. The short fiction work it contains is better known by Title1, and it was first published serially in magazines as Title1 (Part 1/3), Title1 (Part 2/3), Title1 (Part 3/3); then a few times in chapbooks titled as Title2; then later a few times in chapbooks titled as Title1.

I'm marking the titles of these chapbooks as variants of a parent chapbook title record. All the publications listed the authors' alternate names, so I have to make another new title record with the canonical names to be the parent. (a) Should that canonical chapbook title record list Title1 or Title2? (b) And to confirm, the date for the parent title record should be the date of the first chapbook publication regardless of which variant title it was, right? ((c) All the publications' content title records are variants of a parent title record with Title1. Does that make a difference?) IndigoPari (talk) 16:06, 14 August 2024 (EDT)

Dead Silience

● I know I got a number of things wrong with my listing of Síri csend, which is the Hungarian translation of S. A. Barnes’ Dead Silence. If somebody knows Hungarian, could they check out my listing, and see what I did wrong? MLB (talk) 05:04, 15 August 2024 (EDT)

The Transliterated field is for transliteration, not translation so it is "Siri csend" and not "Grave Silence". Other from that, it looks good. I will chase down the date a bit more - i think you are a few days off. Annie (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2024 (EDT)

PS: The Russian one needed more help. Fixed now :) Annie (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2024 (EDT)

And I fixed the currencies for bith the Hungarian one (we use Ft) and for the Czech one (they do not use Euro) :) Annie (talk) 14:53, 20 August 2024 (EDT)

DarkLit Press & Truborn Designs

Sigh! It seems that another publisher has bit the big one. DarkLit Press seems to be gone. Check out the Publisher’s Weeky article. Through all of this, I found that Truborn Design is probably graphic designer Kristina Osborn. Check out the Truborn Press site. Should one or the other be listed as the primary of the other? It might be too soon to tell. MLB (talk) 22:36, 19 August 2024 (EDT)

旅の仲間 Fellowship of the ring

This edition of The Fellowship of the Ring does not have a cover art record, and I should variant to it a cover of mine. The artwork is a painting by Alan Lee titled Frodo's Meeting with Gildor from chapter 3 of the 1991 illustrated edition [source: arthur.io/art]. I'm afraid that it would not be correct to edit a Japanese pub record and enter "Alan Lee" in the coverart field... how can I do? thanks! --Fantagufo (talk) 06:25, 21 August 2024 (EDT)

If the publication credits the cover artist, we use the publication credit. But when sourcing from a secondary source, we use the canonical name of the artist. So, yes, we'd use Alan Lee as the credit when using a prior publication as the source. Since it's a secondary source, please be sure to include the source in the publication notes. If the pub is later primary verified & the pub does credit the artist, the verifier would recredit the cover art to the credited form and remove the publication note. -- JLaTondre (talk) 07:07, 21 August 2024 (EDT)

My publication credits the author name 'Alan Lee' so I have it in the Artist1 field. From the web I just take the painting subject, which I am writing in the notes. If I understand correctly, you're saying to variant my CoverArt to the InteriorArt of the first edition in ISFDB that lists it, which is the HarperCollins. Is that right? But what about the Japanese edition with same coverart (and no PV): just forget it, or enter 'Alan Lee' in its coverart field and variant it to the HarperCollins too? --Fantagufo (talk) 08:33, 21 August 2024 (EDT)

No, you should not variant your cover to that interior art record. As is stated on the interior art record, "This record is for fifty full color illustrations ...". The interior art record is for all 50 images, your cover art is a single image so they are not the same thing. My answer was to your question about the Japanese pub. The Japanese pub cover should be credited to "Alan Lee" with a pub note stating the secondary source. The Japanese cover art record should then be varianted to the cover art record for your cover (assuming those are the only 2 records with that cover). -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:50, 21 August 2024 (EDT)

ok, sorry for the misunderstanding; what you say was my first idea, but I was not sure. And since the Japanese book is from 1992 and mine is 2007, the 1992 will be the master and mine will be the variant, right? I will indicate my book as secondary source for the artist identification. And yes, I had looked at all the covers credited to Lee and did not see any other with the same image. Submitted both the author addition and the new pub. Once more, thank you! --Fantagufo (talk) 10:13, 21 August 2024 (EDT)

How to add Author Tags?

Hi, I want to add author tags to help identify female and/or LGBTQ+ authors. Could you show me how I can do it? I already searched in the frequently asked questions, in help, in the search engine and on the author page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GisseJo (talk • contribs) .

Sorry, but right now, to add tags to authors is not provided (and personally, I do think there's some justification for that). Stonecreek (talk) 01:47, 23 August 2024 (EDT)

They bubble up from the books. As we are a fiction DB and not an author DB, all our features start with the books and the texts - we do not classify authors (that is why we do not have nationality and gender there for example - just a working language). So the authors who have tags have them because their books have tags. Annie (talk) 09:22, 23 August 2024 (EDT)

Right. It's only possible to tag titles (for example for themes they deal with), but I do think tagging authors would lead to put them in a box. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 11:01, 23 August 2024 (EDT)

Identifying authors behind Clee Garson house name

Is there any way of telling who has identified the real author behind a house name and/or what information that identification was based on?

Specifically, the recent David Wright O'Brien volume from Armchair Fiction reprinted three "Clee Garson" stories because they were listed on the ISFDb as being by O'Brien. However, as all three were first published several years after O'Brien died it is unlikely (though by no means impossible) that these stories were by O'Brien. If anything it seems more likely they were by Paul Fairman. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Philsp (talk • contribs) .

It would be great if editors added sources in these cases, but they often don't. Information can come from a variety of sources including the SFE3, copyright registrations, conversations with the author, etc. Of the three stories in question, they were all varianted prior to when edit history was implemented - so we don't know which editor to ask. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:40, 24 August 2024 (EDT)

I updated the one Garson story we had as by unknown (Scavengers of Space) to William P. McGivern based on the SFE3 entry for Clee Garson. Unfortunately, that entry does not help with the three stories (Let's Give Away Mars!, The Spoilers of Lern, & The Martian Cross) you are asking about. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2024 (EDT)

Thanks for your quick response. I think the McGivern attribution for "Scavengers of Space" came from Howard Browne via Mike Ashley, although that was apparently based on Howard's memory rather than any hard facts. Mike thinks the other three might be by McGivern as well. I strongly suspect that the ISFDb's identification of these as being by O'Brien is wrong, or at the very least unfounded. Is there any way of indicating that in the records? Phil S-P (talk)

I think it is likely they are misattributed as well. However, lets give it some time to see if anyone else adds to the conversation. If not, I would recommend changing the parents of the three stories to "unknown" as the author and add title notes regarding the prior naming as well as Mike Ashley's comment. I tweaked the title of this discussion to add the house name so it might better draw someone's attention that has relevant info. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:03, 24 August 2024 (EDT)

(unindent) I have restored the full backup on the development server and looked for submissions that mentioned "Clee Garson". The one that stood out was number 984192. The Note field says:

• It is speculated in some sources that David Wright O'Brien is responsible for all Clee Garson stories but one. The source used by the editor who originally made the attribution of the story in this issue is not known and the attribution could not be verified.

Below are the 25 matching submissions:

+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?404141            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?660165            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?734953            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?902266            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?921054            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?921059            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?984192            |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?1470996           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2552549           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2553042           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2553043           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2799549           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2900395           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?3278130           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?3278148           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?3623218           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?3627094           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?3627137           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?4472918           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?4554736           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5285842           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5969301           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6041402           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6041405           |
| https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6041406           |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+

Ahasuerus (talk) 15:56, 24 August 2024 (EDT)

Thanks. I don't know how to intrepret the list of submissions, but I think the telling phrase is "It is speculated in some sources" as unsourced speculation of that kind is rather too flimsy to use as a firm basis for identification, particularly when we know that the "all but one" is incorrect given that two Clee Garson stories have been identified as being by other hands. I endorse JLaTondre's suggestion of changing the parent author to "unknown" unless some compelling evidence turns up. Phil S-P (talk)

If there are no objections, I will change the parent titles to "unknown" and add notes tomorrow. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:41, 29 August 2024 (EDT)

All done. I have updated the house name record -- see Clee Garson -- changed the authorship of the 3 parent title records to "unknown" and added Notes. Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention! Ahasuerus (talk) 13:16, 30 August 2024 (EDT)

delete upload

Could somebody delete this for me? [[3]] Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2024 (EDT)

Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 07:11, 27 August 2024 (EDT)

Hebrew Magazines

I attempted to create the annual record for the magazine edited by this author (רמי שלהבת). I am finding it impossible to properly construct the title in the format "<magazine title> - <year>". As soon as I add the hyphen to the right of the magazine title, the hyphen and the subsequent text jumps to the left of the title. I assume this is because Hebrew is written right to left. I've attempted editing this phrase to our standards using various text editors and the editing behaves the same as within the browser. I have noticed magazines in other languages (Chinese) where the annual records (e.g. 中文科幻学术速递 (2022). Does Chinese writing go right to left, and is this perhaps a work-around for the issue I'm seeing with Hebrew? Is there a proper way to force the editor to recognize mixed alphabets and allow us to order them as we wish? If not, is the format of "<magazine name> (<year>)" for the annual magazine EDITOR record something we want to standardize for languages that read right to left? Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 10:08, 27 August 2024 (EDT)

Yes, this is an issue with "right-to-left" languages. This discussion talks about various ways to address the issue, but I don't know enough about it to tell how easy it would be to implement a software solution without messing up anything else. At one point I tried to add better support for right-to-left languages, but it caused other problems, so I had to reverse my changes.

Chinese is apparently a special case. Originally it was written "top-to-bottom and right-to-left", but currently it's mostly written horizontally and left-to-right. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:53, 27 August 2024 (EDT)

Deletion of PII in my personal author profile

Hi,

I want to delete PII from my personal author profile that was added to isfdb.org without my permission. Can you help me remove this data? I already filed a deletion request on specific data on my profile #369619. All help would be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Glen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Glen Sedi (talk • contribs) .

Welcome to the ISFDB project! The ISFDB:Policy#Data_Deletion_Policy says the following about deleting authors' biographical data:

• If a living author (or their authorized representative) requests that the ISFDB remove the author's detailed biographical information, the ISFDB will comply after confirming the requester's identity.

For verification purposes, please send an email request to my email address at ahasuerus@email.com. Please make sure to use an email account associated with the author's public Web site or public Web page. TIA! Ahasuerus (talk) 18:23, 30 August 2024 (EDT)

The year of birth and birthplace are both found on the author's official website, so they are not difficult to find. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:09, 30 August 2024 (EDT)

I have received an email sent from the author's Web site and removed biographical data from the record. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:40, 31 August 2024 (EDT)

Warts & entry for Dennis Schmidt

Greets– I seem to be incountering a number of warts. When I first created an account then tried to login it claimed the password had been changed 5 days ago! Something is flaky. It also, after logging in, it seems the site wants me to login again when I go to another page. Also, although my user page is accessible to read I don't seem to have permission to post to it.

I originally was trying to update an entry for Dennis Schmidt (Dennis A. Schmidt). It has only one entry for him while he has 3 series @ 4 books each, a total of 12.

Just sayin'.

Thnx 4 Ur time & attention.

               _rich_ holtzschue • alias Quisizyx • quisizyx@gmail.com

About the logins - ISFDB is essentially two separate sites using the same login (the wiki and the DB share the credentials but not the cookies/sessions). So if you are logged into one of them (the DB side where you edit the records for example), you still need to login into the other one (the wiki) as well separately. Annie (talk) 12:58, 9 September 2024 (EDT)

Baen Publishing Enterprises versus Baen Books

I have an early Baen Free Library ebook from November 2000 that specifically uses "Baen Publishing Enterprises" as it's publisher on both the copyright page and on the "eBook Info" page at the end of the ebook. Given the consolidated use of "Baen Books", should I enter the publisher as "Baen Books" and add a note about "Baen Publishing Enterprises", or do I enter "Baen Publishing Enterprises" as the publisher? I should note that the copyright page also shows "A Baen Books Original Omnibus". Phil (talk) 16:16, 11 September 2024 (EDT)

I'd keep it simple - go with Baen Books, add any other details in the notes. Annie (talk) 18:22, 11 September 2024 (EDT)

Thanks. Will do. Phil (talk) 22:40, 11 September 2024 (EDT)

SBN / ISBN checker and converter

Can someone point me to a reliable site to check validity and convert SBNs to ISBNs. I've tried three and got conflicting results. Thanks in advance. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 09:04, 13 September 2024 (EDT)

Help:Screen:NewPub says:

• SBNs: Some English language books published during the late 1960s and 1970s used nine digit "SBN"s without a leading zero. When entering these publications, add the leading zero.

Have you come across cases where adding a leading zero doesn't work, e.g. generates "invalid checksum" errors? Ahasuerus (talk) 15:08, 13 September 2024 (EDT)

This one is the official one (for the US), though "This ISBN Converter Tool only supports ISBNs allocated inside the USA and Australia". ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:07, 13 September 2024 (EDT)

The problem I've got is with this pub. On the copyright page is "SBN 234 77277 X" add the leading zero for a 10-digit ISBN = "0 234 77277 X". On the back dust jacket flap is "SBN 234 77277 8" = 10-digit ISBN = "0 234 77277 8".

This website, isbn-checker.netlify, tells me the former ISBN is invalid.

This website, journal-index.org converts both 10-digit ISBNs to 13-digit "978-0-23-477277-1" which differs from the one in our record: "978-0-234-77277-5". Kev --BanjoKev (talk) 18:42, 13 September 2024 (EDT)

I see.

The first thing to note is that the formula that determines the last, i.e. checksum, digit in an ISBN is publicly known. Wikipedia has an article that describes it in depth. Our publication pages use this formula to automatically check ISBN validity and display a warning for invalid checksums. Since the pub in question, New Writings in S-F 15, doesn't display a warning, the currently displayed ISBN, "0-234-77277-8", has a valid checkum digit. The ISBN converter that Nihonjoe linked above confirms its validity.

Based on the above and on your description, it looks like this pub has two SBNs: a valid one (234 77277 8) on the back dust jacket flag and an invalid one (0 234 77277 X) -- presumably a typo -- on the copyright page. I would keep the current ISBN value (0-234-77277-8) and add a note explaining what the book states and that "0 234 77277 X" is apparently a typo. Ahasuerus (talk) 21:23, 13 September 2024 (EDT)

The converter at journal-index.org also provides a wrong hyphenation, I would simply forget it. As an alternative, the Library of Congress should be reliable enough, although it seems unable to hyphenate non-USA ISBNs (but it can convert them and check validity). Could this be the reason for the warning at the isbn site? "only supports ISBNs allocated inside the USA and Australia"... But I tried it with a couple of "88-" ISBNs and it seems to work! And as far as I know, ISBN rules are the same all over the world. --Fantagufo (talk) 09:07, 14 September 2024 (EDT)

The formula that determines how checkum digits are calculated is the same everywhere. Hyphenation rules are more complex because they are based on ISBNs ranges -- see this International ISBN Agency Web page for details. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2024 (EDT)

Thanks to you all for the responses. The two checker sites are exactly what I needed. Problem solved! Kev, --BanjoKev (talk) 20:01, 15 September 2024 (EDT)

Humungous Subtitle - soddit I can't be arsed

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?174651

https://archive.org/details/florasegunda00ysab/page/n7/mode/2up

"Being the Magickal Mishaps of a Girl of Spirit, Her Glass-Gazing Sidekick, Two Ominous Butlers (One Blue), a House with Eleven Thousand Rooms, and a Red Dog"

should this be in the names? its on the title pages as seen on internet archive. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2024 (EDT)

It does seem to be a subtitle, and therefore subject to the "Subtitles" bullet point at Help:Screen:NewPub#Title. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:08, 16 September 2024 (EDT)

i've changed the title and the first 2 pubs. i dunno what to do about the other 3 editions which dont have the title page on internet archive (or amazon) - none of them have an active pv. Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:26, 17 September 2024 (EDT)

We leave them as-is for now. If someone can later verify the contents and title, we can update then as needed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:55, 17 September 2024 (EDT)

in the meantime do they not have to be varianted? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:34, 19 September 2024 (EDT)

Yes, they should be varianted. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:34, 19 September 2024 (EDT)

thought so. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 17:41, 19 September 2024 (EDT)

Clarification on canonical name for author with multiple publication names

Hello, I have a question about canonical author names because I am confused by an author published under multiple names. This author has the legal/copyright name of "Cynthia Bailey Pratt." In 1999-2000 she published paranormal romance novels under the author name "Lynn Bailey." In 2010-2012 those paranormal romances were republished as ebooks under the author name "Cynthia Bailey Pratt." In 2014 this author began publishing new fantasy novels under the author name "C. B. Pratt." For clarification, which name should be listed as this author's canonical ISFDB name, and which names should be made variant names? "Lynn Bailey" was the first-used SFF name; Cynthia Bailey Pratt is the legal name and the republishing name; C. B. Pratt is the "active" author name currently used to publish new SFF material. Morebooks (talk) 22:44, 16 September 2024 (EDT)

This question is addresses in the ISFDB FAQ:

• Once it has been confirmed that two or more author names refer to the same person and that the connections are publicly known, one name is selected as the author's "canonical" name and the rest are designated "alternate names". The name chosen to be the canonical name is the most recognized name for the author within the SF genre.

• Note that the canonical name need not be the same as any of the author's legal names or socially used names. For example, Alice Bradley Sheldon's most recognized in-genre name is James Tiptree, Jr. and Paul Myron Anthony Linebarger's most recognized in-genre name is Cordwainer Smith -- see Template:AuthorFields:CanonicalName for details. All of the author's names are then linked within the ISFDB software to display the author's bibliography on the canonical name page -- see Help:How to record an alternate name for details. If the most recognized in-genre name changes, the software connection is changed to use the new name as the canonical name.

The question then is "What is the most recognized name for the author within the SF genre"? Ahasuerus (talk) 07:23, 17 September 2024 (EDT)

I unfortunately don't know enough about the author's recent fantasy works to know whether she'd be more recognizable in SFF as Lynn Bailey or C. B. Pratt. In romance, before writing para romance as Lynn Bailey, she was writing historical romance as Lydia Browne, Cynthia Bailey-Pratt, and Cynthia Pratt, if not more. Morebooks (talk) 16:49, 17 September 2024 (EDT)

When in doubt, I usually go with the name with the most credits. I see 5 speculative fiction novels published as by "C. B. Pratt", 3 SF novels published as by Lynn Bailey and 21 books (both SF and non-genre) published as by "Cynthia Bailey Pratt". With a bit more digging we should be able to figure out a more exact distribution of titles. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2024 (EDT)

"The Lost Boy in the Maze" Joseph Coelho

This book is a novel length poem and nothing else. Should I enter it as a novel and say its a poem in the notes? - cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:24, 28 September 2024 (EDT)

That's right. We don't have a separate title type for epic poems, so we use the closest existing title type -- usually NOVEL or SHORTFICTION/CHAPBOOK -- and document anything unusual in the Notes field. For example, The New World: An Epic Poem is in the 180-200 page range, so it's entered as a NOVEL. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2024 (EDT)

Adding new Dying Earth omnibus

Hi, I want to add this Spatterlight Press edition of the Dying Earth omnibus. But when I click "Add Publication to This Title", it doesn't let me change the title. It's just called "The Dying Earth", unlike the two other titles in the entry I linked. How should I go about doing that? (Alternatively, you can add it yourself if you wish.) Thanks! --Salty-horse (talk) 10:28, 30 September 2024 (EDT)

The option "Add Publication to This Title" lets you create another edition of an existing book (or "title" in ISFDB terms.) In this case the title of the omnibus that you want is "The Dying Earth" while the title of the existing ISFDB omnibus record is "The Compleat Dying Earth". The ISFDB database considers them two different titles, so the new omnibus should be entered using "Add New Omnibus". If it contains the same texts as "The Compleat Dying Earth" (give or take introductions, afterwords, interior art, cover art, etc), then, once the submission is approved, we can turn it into a variant of "The Compleat Dying Earth". Help:How to record a variant title has more information re: what is considered the same title, what is considered variant titles and what is considered separate titles. HTH! Ahasuerus (talk) 16:10, 30 September 2024 (EDT)

what does this number line mean?

The book is the hunger games prequel and states that "This edition published in the UK by Scholastic, 2021". The only number line is "21 23 25 27 29 30 28 26 24 22". surely not that many printings in 3 years even for this book so is it the year? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:09, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

That is likely the 21st printing, based on the number line. Depending on how well it sells, and how big each printing is, that's entirely plausible in three years. I've seen a first printing of a book completely sell out based on preorders alone, and the first one actually on the shelves was the 2nd or 3rd printing. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:00, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

That said, I'd have to see what else was around it as some publishers also put the year into a number line (usually right next to the printing number line, which can be confusing on occasion). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:02, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

cheers mate its got to go back to the library so i'll enter it with all the info in thenotes and say its intrepeted as 21st printing and give it the date 0000-00-00 - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:38, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

Considering the book in question, I will not be surprised if they went through 21 printings in 3 years. So I'd note it as 21st printing, with a note with the exact line. If we ever find out that the number line is actually a year line, we have the exact text anyway so we can adjust the note. Annie (talk) 14:40, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

the other thing i noticed was the price £8.99 is the same as the 1st printing and given the high inflation over the last 3 years...(the recent chunky paperbacks are often £9.99 or £10.99) - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:55, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

Amazon UK still shows RRP as 8.99. Reprints are often repriced but not always... Annie (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

cheers Annie i think youre right - Gaz Faustus (talk) 16:57, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

while we're on number lines the next book i'll be doing like a lot of recent ones at least in the uk just has a single number on a line (10 in this case). Am I right to give that as the printing number? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 16:57, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

Probably. Can you take a picture of the full copyright page and upload it here? That will let us see it and better judge what it is. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:17, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

heres the scan of the copyright page

https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/File:How_to_Steal_a_Dragon%27s_Sword_.jpg

Gaz Faustus (talk) 22:15, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

bollocksed up the book name (Bitterblue - Kirstin Cashore) Faustus (talk) 22:21, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

10th printing indeed. :) Annie (talk) 23:06, 7 October 2024 (EDT)

cheers, there was always a teeny bit of doubt every time i did one like that. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 07:51, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

[unindent] Why don't we have a help page with examples on it? ../Doug H (talk) 08:30, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

Help:Screen:NewPub and Help:Screen:EditPub include Template:PublicationFields:PubNote, which says:

• For more information on number lines/printer's keys, see:
  • Wikipedia
  • Editions and Printings, How to Tell the Difference: a Guide for Book Collectors
  • First Edition Identification on Raptis Rare Books, which discusses different conversions used by different publishers

Are you thinking that it would be beneficial to replace these external links with a Help page of our own? I can see the appeal: we could explain the most common scenarios on the new Help page and then link to external sources for other permutations. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:47, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

I can whip up a help page for that. Are there specific things you'd like it to include? A few examples of number lines, edition and printing information. Maybe a section on gutter codes? Would that be making it too broad? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:03, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

Since we already have a Wiki page that discusses Gutter codes, we could simply link the proposed Help page to it. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:47, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

that "10" i gave as an example was the worst one possible cos it could just be the last man standing from a full line. I should have used one that said "23" or "008". None of those websites have an example like those. i've googled for it loads of times and never got an answer - cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:41, 8 October 2024 (EDT)

I've created a base page at Help:Determining the printing and edition information. That should get us started. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:42, 13 November 2024 (EST)

I have created a Rules and Standards page section to discuss the new Help page. I have also moved User:Fantagufo's suggestion to that section. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:29, 14 November 2024 (EST)

Cover artist is a droid

i was just about to enter a recent mag which has a SF cover and apparently the cover picture was done by an AI. that comes from a review and no other info is given. Nothing on the publishers site or the amazon preview. Any idea what if anything to put as the name? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:52, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

We'd need more specific information. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:02, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

so leave the cover art blank and mention it in the notes? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:12, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

Links to the magazine in question? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:27, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

As a general observation, if the information about a work of art having been done by an AI comes from a random internet review, I wouldn't add it to Notes. There are a lot of shades of gray with AI-generated and AI-assisted content; a reviewer thinking that s/he recognizes a cover as the work of an AI art generator is not enough to be anywhere close to sure. If the reviewer has a verifiable source, then it's a different story. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

Regardless, we record what is shown in the work itself, usually on the copyright page, masthead information (for a magazine), or on the cover. If it turns out the work was done using an AI, a note can be added at some later point to the cover art title record. I don't think we should be making any other judgements about it. Just recording the information as presented, with possible corrections obtained through a reliable source. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:36, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

Pulp Adventure #44 (Winter 2024)

https://www.boldventurepress.com/pulp-adventures/

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pulp-Adventures-44-Inevitable-Conflict/dp/B0CW6FMGW4

Review https://thepulp.net/pulpsuperfan/2024/09/11/pulp-adventures-44/ - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:21, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

Do you own a copy? If not, I'd not worry about mentioning it. If you do have a copy, see if you can figure out where the reviewer got the information from (their wording makes it sound like it was somewhere in the magazine itself). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:34, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

no mate I dont have a copy, could be in the second half of the editorial not in the amazon preview. I'l just leave it blank for now. - cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2024 (EDT)

Author with same name

Apparently, there is a published poet with the same name as me and our works are all showing up on the same author page. Is there any way to separate our works into two separate author pages? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spychocyco (talk • contribs) .

Welcome to ISFDB! We can separate you (one of you will get a (I) or another designator as part of their name here) - but we will need to know who you are (aka which author record we are talking about and which of the titles on the pages are not yours so someone can actually help. In general, what needs to be done is that the titles and books of one of the two authors will need to be manually updated to carry the new name thus moving them into their own record. :) Annie (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2024 (EDT)

Hi Annie, the author name is Fred Phillips https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?175213. The two current entries under short fiction (Domestic Dispute and Learning to Fly) are mine. The rest belong to the other Fred Phillips. There are also missing works for me, which I will update. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spychocyco (talk • contribs) .

I have separated your stories out to a new author record - Fred Phillips (I). Thanks for letting us know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:08, 18 October 2024 (EDT)

Can't edit short story

When I try to edit this short story (adding a series) I get an error.

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1544562

LiseAndreasen (talk) 10:40, 17 October 2024 (EDT)

What error are you getting? Annie (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2024 (EDT)

Couldn't replicate the error. LiseAndreasen (talk) 14:36, 19 October 2024 (EDT)

We’ve had some performance issues due to bots in the last days so maybe it got caught into that. If you still have issues, please post back. Happy editing! Annie (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2024 (EDT)

a brace of varianting queries

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?14182

Q1 - some of the books entered under this title dont have the exclamation mark. should they be varianted?

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?19944

Q2 - one of the stories by this author (pooka's bridge in the Saha anthology) has the name as FitzGerald. should this be made an alternative name and varianted?

cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:10, 21 October 2024 (EDT)

Q1: It depends one how it was first presented. If the first appearance has the exclamation point, then entries without it should be varianted. If the first appearance did not have the exclamation point, then those with the exclamation point should be varianted. In this case, it looks like the first appearance did have an exclamation point, so the entries without should be varianted.

Q2: Right now, once an entry is made for an author, things like capitalization, accents, macrons, and other similar differences are ignored by the system. Therefore, a note should be placed on the publication that uses "FitzGerald" indicating that's how the name is given in that particular publication. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:16, 21 October 2024 (EDT)

cheers got it - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:26, 21 October 2024 (EDT)

Undo a cover replacement

I uploaded the cover for this book and it was approved today. For reasons that I can't remember (sorry...) the day after I uploaded a new scan of the same cover, which replaced the first; now I realized that the second scan is wrong (top cm missing), so I went to the file page and clicked "revert" next to the first thumbnail. A third (correct) thumbnail was created, but the main image did not change (yet its size did!), neither in the file page nor in the pub page. What am I missing? thank you!

PS: Browsing the help pages to solve this issue, I arrived to this one, where as step 2 I read "Switch to the Files tab" but my User Preferences screen does not have it (actually, it has no tab at all). Am I in the wrong place? Again, thank you! --Fantagufo (talk) 15:36, 24 October 2024 (EDT)

The revert should work but you may not realise it has worked. After reverting to the version you want, your browser will probably still display the old version because it is reading the image stored in the local cache on your device. You need to perform a hard page refresh. This forces the browser to download the image from the server. So try the revert again, go to the pub record and perform a hard page refresh. How you do that depends on your operating system and browser. For some browsers running on Windows, hold down the Ctrl key and press F5. If that doesn't work you will need to search on the internet to find how to do a hard page refresh for your configuration. Hope that works for you. Teallach (talk) 18:37, 26 October 2024 (EDT)

Thank you Teallach. (I'm using Firefox on Linux and the shortkey is also ctrl/F5). However I did not have to do that or anything else: I just opened again the pub record clicking on your link, and everything automagically was ok! maybe the cache got full and was overwritten... in anycase, thank you again! --Fantagufo (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2024 (EDT)

COVERART for boxed sets

Have we a policy regarding what side of the box we like for their entries? Evertype (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2024 (EDT)

I assume that the boxed set in question has two or more works of art displayed on the outside of the box, right? As per Help:Screen:NewPub, the default answer is:

• Artwork on the back cover of a publication is treated as interior art.

That being said, I suppose a big boxed set may have art in odd locations which can't be easily classified as "front cover" or "back cover". Some of the available options are:

• For wraparound art, you could create a single COVERART record and explains that it covers more than just the front cover in Notes.
• If the outside of the box has multiple works of art and there is no easy of distinguishing between the front cover and the back cover, you could create multiple COVERART records, one for each work of art.

Nothing else comes to mind at the moment, but perhaps other editors may have additional ideas. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2024 (EDT)

If we consider the back of the box as the spine, sometimes it has the most interesting material. Examples:

• The Czech translation of The Books of Earthsea was published in two volumes, each with its own ISBN, and as a boxed set, where the box has its own ISBN. In my pending edits I have each of the single volumes awaiting review and approval and then I was going to add the boxed set to include both of those. The wraparound art is the same as the jacket for the second volume of the pair, but the spine of the box is somewhat unique.
• There is a Puffin box with picture of a puffin on the spine and "published by Penguin Books" on the back, and the whole box is a wraparound with rather nice images that haven't appeared on any book covers that we show in ISFDB. The artist is not credited. Inside the box were WOE (Puffin first printing 1971, this copy marked as the 8th printing 1976), TOA (Puffin first printing 1974, this copy marked as the 4th printing 1976), and FSH (Puffin first printing 1974, this copy marked as the 3rd printing 1975). Not really sure what to do, though in terms of THIS thread…

Perhaps I should scan front spine and back and stitch them together for the ISFDB image? It will be very small with the longest-side-600-pixel limit. Evertype (talk) 10:46, 26 October 2024 (EDT)

I have scanned Help and couldn't find anything about art appearing on spines. Personally, I have seen the following "art on spines" scenarios:

• No art
• A very minor, typically abstract, work of art which we do not enter
• A version of the cover art scaled down to fit on the spine

We don't typically create separate art titles in any of the listed cases. Of course, with boxed sets, a spine can be much larger and may well have a separate unique work of art. We will probably need a separate Rules and Standards discussion about this issue.

For now, I would enter the wraparound art on the Czech box as a COVERART title and turn it into a variant of the COVERART title for the second and describe anything that is unique about the spine part in Notes.

For the Puffin box, I would enter the wraparound art as a single COVERART image with an explanation in Notes. I have seen "stitched together" images used for other wraparound art, so that sounds reasonable as well. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2024 (EDT)

Help with Adding Contents Chapters of Authors: Films into Books

Hi everyone. First time post. Hope this is readable to all who can help. I need help with adding the contents of a book called Films Into Books by Randall D. Larson about film novelisations. I have submitted some of the content data that I know how to categorise. However Part Two is a series of chapters simply titled using the name of the author of which the subject is about. eg. chapter titled 'Arthur C. Clarke' uses mix of references from previous article interviews with Clarke as well as correspondence (letter) to Randall. Other chapters on authors are purely using previous articles, or just direct interviews (with a date), or just direct letters to Randall. Some are a combination of the the three types of source. In essence, they are essays on each author contain different sources; letter, interview or articles.

Whilst the purely interviewed chapters could be added as interviews in the contents - I am not sure how the mixed source chapters should be listed. I also think each of the corresponding chapters should appear under the relevant authors bios so viewers can see and link to them (is this possible?). I am not sure to list them essays in the contents, Reviews, or Interviews.

Hopefully this makes sense, apologies as I am a new user and still have plenty to learn! I want to get it right before spending time entering the details.

Thanks in advance. ReadingMovies (talk) 13:16, 30 October 2024 (EDT)

Welcome to ISFDB!

For the interview section, I'd include entries for each one. If the interview is from somewhere else and you can find that interview in our system, you can import the title record for that interview into this publication. That way, people can see it was from the other source.

Outside of the interviews section, the rest sounds like normal content in a NONFICTION book. Generally, we don't add individual chapters as separate ESSAY title records unless they have been published elsewhere or there's an important reason for including them individually. I've placed this submission on hold so we can discuss this here and so any other editors can add their thoughts on the topic. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:29, 30 October 2024 (EDT)

Thanks for your reply. It seems I am best to leave the early chapters out of the contents page in my first edit. Instead I might just add the interviews at a later time. The interviews are ones carried out by the author for this publication and previously unpublished. But will look into it another day. In the meantime I will leave this on the board for others to add their thoughts. Many thanks for your comment and help. ReadingMovies (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2024 (EST)

Count Dracula Links

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2845024; I added Trash Fiction and Wikipedia links a while ago, where should they both be, short fiction record, chapbook title record, or book record? --Username (talk) 07:19, 1 November 2024 (EDT)

One opinion: I would think of them as similar to reviews (the Trash Fiction one is pretty much that, in fact). We link reviews to title records, so I'd be inclined to put them both on the short fiction record. Where the Trash Fiction one has information specific to that first Corgi edition, also putting that link on the pub record seems reasonable. --MartyD (talk) 11:33, 2 November 2024 (EDT)

I agree that this is the best approach - on the short story title record if they are talking about the story itself, on the publication record if they are talking specifically about a specific edition; potentially both if it talks about both the text and the edition details. Annie (talk) 10:59, 4 November 2024 (EST)

I made an edit moving Wiki link from chapbook to shortfiction record. --Username (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2024 (EST)

Ghostly Hands

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?88092; Should this have the 1928 date under that title and not the date of the original title? --Username (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2024 (EDT)

I'd argue that "Ghostly Hands" is the established title here despite the earlier publication as "The Neatness of Ann Rutledge" - this is exactly the case we have that specific rule for that allows a later title to be a canonical title. In this case if we ever add the 1924 publication, it will be a variant of this one and the parent always takes the earliest date in the original language so 1924 is correct. If we decide that "The Neatness of Ann Rutledge" is actually the canonical name of the story, then this record needs to be 1928 and we need to create the 1924 parent to hold the story place in the chronology and because we know it exists. Annie (talk) 10:20, 5 November 2024 (EST)

Galaktia XL edition

Each edition of [[4]] magazine also has an XL edition with additional content and a different cover. I realised today that the standard version of the magazine includes a listing of the additional content for the XL edition, so I can create that too, even though I don't have a copy. Everything else is the same, so I thought I could clone the one I'd already created, but unfortunately I can't change the title from 'Galaktika, October 2019' to 'Galaktika XL, October 2019'. Do I need to create a new entry and copy everything else over? Or is there some other way around this? Thanks! Gareth GDJ (talk) 07:24, 5 November 2024 (EST)

Clone does not allow a change in title. So you have two options:

• Clone with the wrong title and a note in the moderator's Note field that the title needs to be changed to "the new title". Then once approved, change the title, unmerge and merge the title into the series for the other magazine (unless we keep the yearly record for both under the same title).
• Create the magazine with New Magazine and no contents and then import from the older record after approval.

Both require a second step so do what feels easier/cleaner. The first approach will temporarily leave a second record which is incorrect (and if you are slow to update or the update gets boggled into the queue, it may get deleted) but anyone deleting should be looking at the history and they should see the moderator note explaining the creation before they request and/or approve the delete. Annie (talk) 10:14, 5 November 2024 (EST)

Right, I shall give one of them a go. I've not used Import before, so that sounds like it might be best, especially as I also need to add a new cover and subsequently variant the additional translations that I'll be adding. Thanks, Gareth. GDJ (talk) 10:40, 5 November 2024 (EST)

There are quite a few issues of Galaktika now, added by myself and another user, and more awaiting approval. They need to be tidied up into Years, but although I've read something about how to do that, I can't say I'm confident I understand what to do. Can someone point me to the instructions, or explain it to me? Thanks, Gareth. GDJ (talk) 08:32, 20 November 2024 (EST)

The second section of this How-To explains the process, although I would recommend swapping the order: Find the first one of the year and edit that title record to be the Galaktika - YYYY (or Galaktika XL - YYYY, whichever series you're working on) format, then once that is approved, submit a merge of the others of the same year with that one. That order is clearer for the reviewing moderator and also leaves the entries in a better state in the interim between the approvals of the two submissions. --MartyD (talk) 13:06, 20 November 2024 (EST)

Great, I shall give it a go and see what happens...GDJ (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2024 (EST)

So, I changed the editor series of the earliest existing edition of each year to Galaktika - 2019, for example, and after they were all approved today I did the title editor merges for each year. Most years look like they will be OK, once approved, but 2024 didn't. There are 2 editors during 2024, so I attempted to create 2 different editor series, but in both cases it merged the titles with the wrong issue. It looks like the issues weren't added to the DB in chronological order, so it attempts to merge them with the lowest title number, rather than with the earlies date. Here's my cancelled sub. How do I get around that? Thanks for your help, Gareth. GDJ (talk) 11:46, 7 December 2024 (EST)

Harry Connolly author photo

I would like to add a photo to the author page for Harry Connolly. His web site contains a suitable photo (at http://harryjconnolly.com/press-kitcontact-info/) with the statement "Permission granted to freely use the following photograph for promotional or press purposes so long as it is credited ©2009 MaryAnn Kuchera."

This statement doesn's seem to fit nicely into any of the license tags mentioned in the "How to upload images" wiki help page. The closest possibility seems to be "by permission", except that there's no explicit interchange with the author here, instead just a statement from his web page.

Any suggestions of how to proceed?

Glenn.Skinner (talk) 17:56, 9 November 2024 (EST)

I think it is appropriate to use "Permission received from copyright owner". In the notes, include the copyright statement as required. Also include a link to the website and call out that use for "promotional or press purposes" is granted there. If you want to cover all the bases, you could submit the Contact form on that page, letting him know you've done this. --MartyD (talk) 14:02, 11 November 2024 (EST)

I've taken a stab at it. (See submission 6094282 -- not sure how to make the submission appear as a proper link.)

Glenn.Skinner (talk) 21:13, 12 November 2024 (EST)

"Series" vs. Publication Series

This novel, Nautilus is part of the "Captain Grant and Captain Nemo Universe" and there are other (modern) books not by Jules Verne which are set in his universe. I have a pending edit for this but I could not find "Series" so I put used "Publication Series" but I am sure that is not right. How do I get this added to Series: Captain Grant and Captain Nemo Universe? Evertype (talk) 07:21, 10 November 2024 (EST)

"Series" are based on the content, and so applies to every publication. Thus it is kept at the Title level. "Publication Series" is a publisher's choice and so will only apply to particular publications and is documented at the Publication level. If you create a new entry, the Series is recorded in the Title Data and the Pub Series in the Publication Data sections. If you want to edit an existing entry, the Series would be done by editing the Title entry. By the by, I'll take this opportunity to pitch the idea that the Series Voyages extraordinaires should be a publication series as it was never used by anyone except the publisher. ../Doug H (talk) 10:20, 10 November 2024 (EST)

THank you. I have made the edit I was referring to. As to the Publication Series you mention, I agree with you; it should be shifted from Series to Publication Series. Evertype (talk) 13:20, 10 November 2024 (EST)

I approved your edit adding it to the title series, but rejected your edit adding it to the pub series. Captain Grant and Captain Nemo Universe is a title series. A publication series would be something like Ballantine Adult Fantasy. If that doesn't make sense, please let us know. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2024 (EST)

Linking an award to an existing title Record

I was going over the nominees for the Shirley Jackson Award, and I saw that one anthology, Lullabies for Suffering: Tales of Addiction Horror, was listed as not having an existing title record. However, after doing some digging, I discovered that the title record does exist, and can be found right here. Is there any way for me to link the title record to the award record? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bicufo (talk • contribs) .

As long as the award record is title-based (as opposed to an "untitled" award given to people, publishers, etc) you can link it to an existing title record -- see Help:Screen:LinkAward for details.

In this particular case the title record and its associated publication records also needed to be updated. They were all listed as "uncredited" because the name of the editor was only listed on the copyright page. I have updated all title/publication records and then linked the award record to the title record. Thanks for reporting the issue! Ahasuerus (talk) 14:00, 10 November 2024 (EST)

Transliterations

I've noticed that transliterations have been added to several of my Romanian and Hungarian entries. Both of these languages use diacritics, but are still Latin alphabets. I thought transliterations only needed to be added for non-Latin text? GDJ (talk) 11:03, 12 November 2024 (EST)

Transliteration should be added for any title that uses characters outside the very basic Latin characters, including any titles with any kind of diacritic. This improves the search results as the current ISFDB search doesn't find, for example, a title with ẹ or ñ if you do a search for e or n. At some point, that functionality will likely be added, but it will require a significant change to the database to do that (from what Ahasuerus has said). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:42, 12 November 2024 (EST)

If it uses any letter outside of a-zA-Z, you are better off with a transliteration. Technically, for Latin based languages, you can wait until the reports pick up the records that need it (as some of the accented letters are handled differently and are indistinguishable for the DB from their non-accented partner so the report won't light it up and search can find it as is) but a transliteration does not harm anything so when I am adding something, I simply add it for anything that has any diacritics (plus anything non-Latin). The ultimate fix is a switch to Unicode - which is a monumental task. So in the meantime, we make do. Annie (talk) 13:09, 12 November 2024 (EST)

OK. I feel another bunch of edits coming on...GDJ (talk) 15:18, 12 November 2024 (EST)

Perhaps the guidelines should also be updated, as this was not clear? GDJ (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2024 (EST)

(unindent) I discovered the clean up reports that helpfully list all the Hungarian and Romanian titles I entered without transliterations. I can go back and edit all of these, but I wanted to check that this isn't already being done routinely by someone, as my edits will be waiting in the queue and someone could meanwhile duplicate my edits. Gareth GDJ (talk) 10:21, 22 November 2024 (EST)

Oh my, where are these reports? Evertype (talk) 11:18, 22 November 2024 (EST)

The "Other Pages" section of the navigation bar on the left has a link to Cleanup Reports. Some are regenerated nightly while others are regenerated weekly. We also have a "monthly" report for "suspected duplicate author names", but it hasn't been regenerated in a few years due to the extreme amount of time it takes to run it.

To answer GDJ's question, please feel free to create submissions for languages that you are familiar with. There are a lot of outstanding entries and there is no way of telling when a self-approver or a moderator may be able to get to them. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2024 (EST)

Great, that will keep me occupied. :o) GDJ (talk) 13:05, 22 November 2024 (EST)

In other exciting news, I've just passed the 1000 edit mark! GDJ (talk) 03:48, 3 December 2024 (EST)

Congratulations! :-) Ahasuerus (talk) 08:04, 3 December 2024 (EST)

excerpts

so youve got 2 or more title which are excerpts from the same book. unless you can see both texts then you cant know wheteher they're the same chunk. whould you merge (or import) them anyway or only if you know its the same bit of the book? - cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2024 (EST)

Excerpts should only be merged if they are the same excerpt so they should only be merged if you can verify they are identical. That said, if it is a promotional excerpt (like the first chapter of the next book in the series) from multiple printings of the same title, I consider it safe enough to assume they are the same and merge them. If they are from different books (or non-promotional) then I would compare them before I merged. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2024 (EST)

I take this opportunity to ask a clarification about excerpts. If an anthology contains an excerpt from a longer text (maybe with a different title), is it to be varianted, and if yes, how? From what I see in the db, most of them remain as independent short story titles, but sometimes they are varianted to a new title (created on the varianting screen, I suppose) with the same title as the full text but of the same type as the excerpt. I think to remember that sometimes I also saw an excerpt varianted to the original full text, but I have no example at hand so I'm not sure. If there is a policy about this, I didn't find it... can you point me at it? thanks! --Fantagufo (talk) 18:53, 16 November 2024 (EST)

With the exception of translations & split works, variants are for the same work under a different title or author credit. An excerpt should not be varianted to the original work. If an excerpt was published under a unique title, it does not need the "(excerpt)" added to it. I personally would not see the need to variant an uniquely titled excerpt to "main title (excerpt"), but I guess that does show the relationship. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:10, 17 November 2024 (EST)

presumably if you do make a new exerpt title as its got the same name then you should stick something in the notes so if somebody pitches up with their merging boots on it doesnt get combined. maybe a bit more guidance in the help pages wouldnt go amiss either. cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2024 (EST)

Yes, if you know what the excerpt consists of, it is good practice to add that to the excerpt title notes ("Excerpt consists of chapters 2-3", "Excerpt consists of an edited selection from chapters 4, 7, & 8", or whatever). -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:10, 17 November 2024 (EST)

Galactic Central Images

Thumbnail Images from Galactic Central (like Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact, March 1980 https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?57162) don't show in my browser (Chromebook Version 129.0.6668.112 (Official Build) (64-bit), although the link to the image works when I click on it. Is this some browser security setting or something? Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 18:16, 17 November 2024 (EST)

Yes, it's a browser security issue. Galactic Central uses HTTP as opposed to HTTPS. You can see it by examining their URLs, e.g. http://www.philsp.com/visco/Magazines/ASF/ASF_0592.jpg .

Browser manufacturers have been trying to phase out HTTP because it's less secure. Preventing HTTP-based images from being displayed on HTTPS Web pages (including ISFDB Web pages) is one of the ways they do it.

Last I checked, Galactic Central had no plans to switch from HTTP to HTTPS. There isn't much we can do about this issue short of moving the affected images to out Wiki. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2024 (EST)

Or use a different browser. But for Chrome, see this for desktop Chrome and this for Android Chrome. I imagine the latter's solution -- type chrome://flags/#unsafely-treat-insecure-origin-as-secure into the URL bar and add http://www.philsp.com to the list -- would work on a Chromebook as well. --MartyD (talk) 12:59, 18 November 2024 (EST)

While that works, people should recognize there are reasons why modern browsers have restricted mixed content. One may decide the privacy and security risks are not significant enough for them to worry about in this case, but they should take those risks knowingly. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2024 (EST)

Weird Christmas Flash Fiction Contest

Hello. It has been some time since I have entered anything into the database. Please forgive me if my questions are naive.

There is an annual contest called the Weird Christmas Flash Fiction Contest. Each year since 2018, there are a dozen or more winners selected, and the winners are published online as an annual episode of the irregularly released Weird Christmas podcast. Their stories read in the podcast and printed on the associated web page for the episode. To me, it seems similar to an annual contest such as Writers of the Future, so perhaps each annual episode should be entered as an anthology. Or perhaps it is more like Escape Pod, in which case the annual episodes would be entered as magazines.

The authors are currently paid SFWA professional rates or better, although this was not always the case. To be more precise, this year's contest is the first one where all authors are paid. Prior to this year, a limited number of winners were paid pro rates, but others were not paid. This suggests that perhaps we should index the contest only beginning with the forthcoming 2024 contest podcast.

Below, I'll list the six annual episodes so far. Is it appropriate for us to enter any of these in the database? If not, should the forthcoming 2024 (pro rates) "anthology" be entered? And should I enter them as anthologies or magazines or something else? Thank you!

1. Weird Christmas Flash Fiction, 17 December 2018.

2. Weird Xmas Flash Fiction 2019, 14 December 2019.

3. Weird Xmas Fiction Flash Fiction Contest 2020, 23 December 2020.

4. Weird Christmas Flash Fiction Contest 2021, 31 December 2021.

5. 2022 Weird Christmas Flash Fiction Contest, 31 December 2022.

6. 2023 Weird Christmas Flash Fiction Contest, 31 December 2023.

As you can see, the name of the annual anthology has slight variations from year to year, but they are all in a series that I would call the Weird Christmas Podcast (all of which have a date, but not always a series number).

Thank you for your help.

--Michael Main (talk) 23:27, 21 November 2024 (EST) (Michael Main)

It looks like there are two questions here. The first one is whether these podcasts are eligible for inclusion. The second one is -- assuming that the answer to the first question is "Yes" -- what the best way to enter them into the ISFDB database would be.

As far as the first question goes, ISFDB:Policy states that the following types of audio materials are eligible for inclusion:

• audio books, which are defined to include readings and to exclude dramatizations, of the following types:
  • all physical audio formats such as audio disks, MP3 disks, audio players, cassettes and so on
  • digital audio books which are downloadable in any file format (Audible, MP3, MP4 and so on)
  • internet-based audio publications (such as podcasts, etc.) which are downloadable as electronic files in any number of formats (MP3, MP4, etc).

Based on the above, these downloadable MP3s should be eligible as long as they are readings and not dramatizations. According to some of the comments that I see on Web pages like this one, they appear to be readings, but, if you happen to know otherwise, please let us know.

If these are indeed readings and therefore eligible, then I think that they would be best entered as ANTHOLOGY publications/titles, each one with a number of SHORTFICTION titles. We could then organize them as a series which we could call Weird Christmas Podcast as per your suggestion.

P.S. Sorry about the delayed response. There is lots of stuff happening on the back end at the moment. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:45, 25 November 2024 (EST)

Many thanks, Ahasuerus, for looking at this item. Yes, the stories are downloadable as mp3 files, and they are readings (not dramatizations). So, I would say that annual flash fiction podcasts meet the eligibility rules. I will start by indexing the first annual podcase from 2018 and see how that goes. After that, I'll aim to index the other years, including 2024, which should appear sometime in December. Many thanks again! --Michael Main (talk) 23:27, 21 November 2024 (EST) (Michael Main)

number line question

I'm doing a book that has the number line: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 VB 9 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

so if the LHS means 1st printing what does the RHS mean and what does VB stand for? I know from other sources that theres only one edition from 1992. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:04, 25 November 2024 (EST)

Help:Determining the printing and edition information has a somewhat similar example at the bottom of the "Printing" section:

• The printer can sometimes be referenced in the number line. This number line shows a 1985 printing date (the numbers on the left side) for a seventh printing (the numbers on the right side), with the "JDPC" indicating the printing company:
• 85 86 87 88 89 JDPC 11 10 9 8 7

Based on the above, it looks like "VB" is the printing company. I am not sure why the second occurrence of the number line (the one to the right of "VB") starts with two "9"s. Some kind of padding, perhaps? As Help:Determining the printing and edition information says:

• the technology used by the printing industry in the 20th century and earlier made it easier to remove characters in subsequent printings than to add them.

Ahasuerus (talk) 11:24, 25 November 2024 (EST)

thanks, maybe just a good old fashioned typo. Gaz Faustus (talk) 12:41, 25 November 2024 (EST)

Date Is?

What should the date be for this pub, noting also the Pathfinder mention in the notes here? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 20:38, 27 November 2024 (EST)

One should guess it is the August of 1965: there seems to be no record of the 30th printing (or am I missing that one?). Christian Stonecreek (talk) 01:20, 28 November 2024 (EST)

30th printing is here.

One interpretation of the notes here: "Bantam Pathfinder edition published August 1965" [over] "7th printing" could be that this is the 7th printing of the April 1952 edition (and Bantam have just added the Pathfinder series to it), but then why date it December?

In the light of the previous notes entries, the "7th printing" line seems incomplete, and I would expect it to say "7th printing ... December 1965" - but it doesn't.

In this pub however, it states "5th printing ... December 1965. (Maybe that's what the line should read for the record in question).

One can also infer from this July 1972 printing that the publishing sequence is:

• 3rd printing......September 1963
• Bantam Pathfinder edition published August 1965 (being the 4th printing)
• 5th printing......December 1965
• Bantam edition published June 1967 (being the 6th printing)

That's the only justification I can find for the original December date, and that the (incomplete?) statement "7th printing" is mistaken. A look at the 1967-06-00 printing seems to support the above inferences. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2024 (EST)

Perhaps I can try to explain. this is the copyright page of my 29th printing. You can see that the printing numbers start over with the October 1954 printing. So the December 1965 5th printing is actually the 7th Bantam printing. Hope that helps. --Willem (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2024 (EST)

Sorry for the delayed response Willem! Excellent work posting the copyright page, and I think you've solved the problem. I'll edit to explain the December date and include a link to that c/r page. Many thanks. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 10:08, 30 November 2024 (EST)

Willem, I've submitted here. How does that look? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 20:33, 1 December 2024 (EST)

Not so elementary

Ive got one of many books in the Sweet Cherry "Easy Classics" series which are sherlock holmes chapbooks aimed at kiddies with one story per book. The title page just has "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" and the copyright page says "Based on the original story from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, adapted by Stephanie Baudet". Should they both go down as authors or just Baudet (with additional notes)? Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:36, 29 November 2024 (EST)

Yes, list both. Baudet basically rewrote the stories to make them simpler. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:10, 29 November 2024 (EST)

righto will do, should they be variants of the originals? Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:52, 29 November 2024 (EST)

Normally, an adaptation wouldn't be varianted to the original work. For example, see this series, which lists all known adaptations of William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:20, 29 November 2024 (EST)

got it - then make them a sub series of the Sherlock Holmes Metaverse? Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2024 (EST)

Sure, that would work. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2024 (EST)

I notice that see this series of William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream is tagged as "science fiction." ?? gzuckier (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2024 (EST)

You can only tag individual titles, not series. In this case the tagged title is Angela Carter's Overture and Incidental Music for "A Midsummer Night's Dream", a 1982 piece. Arguably, it's more of a rumination on "A Midsummer Night's Dream" than a work set in the same continuity, but I guess it could be argued either way. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2024 (EST)

Aha. Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 19:34, 10 December 2024 (EST)

2-person writing team published novel under 2 different alternate names

The writing team of Sherrie Eddington and Donna Smith published their paranormal romance novel It Takes Two under two different shared pen names, both of which are already in ISFDB: first in 2000 under name Adrienne Burns and then in 2009 under name Sheridon Smythe. See book publishing info at FictionDB; the novel is also part of a series, and the sequel was also published under the different pen names.

I have no idea where to start untangling the knot of alternate names with four separate names, so I’m not going to try. Help, please? Morebooks (talk) 23:20, 30 November 2024 (EST)

To me it looks like the Sheridon Smythe author record and the associated title record are already in good shape, only Adrienne Burns needs a bit of editing. How I would go about it:

• Make Adrienne Burns into an alternate name of both Sherrie Eddington and Donna Smith => same way as it's already done for Sheridon Smythe.
• Make the Adrienne Burns title record of "It Takes Two" into a variant title of this canonical title => same way as it's already done for the Sheridon Smythe title record of "It Takes Two".
• Optionally add a note to both of the alternate author name records Adrienne Burns and Sheridon Smythe, stating that these are shared pen names. Although this should be clear already from how ISFDB displays the publications and titles, stating the fact might be helpful to avoid confusion in the future. I'm not sure, though, whether this would be considered duplicated and therefore unnecessary information by other editors.
• Perform edits for the sequel that result in the same state as for the first novel.

Before acting maybe wait for a second editor's voice, I'm not the super expert here. Hope this helps, Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 03:55, 1 December 2024 (EST)

Your advice looks good to me. I think including the notes is fine, too. There is a difference between individuals using the same pen name (e.g, the "house name" case) and a tandem writing under a single pen name. You can't tell by looking at the alternate name page which is the case, so a note would clarify. --MartyD (talk) 07:46, 1 December 2024 (EST)

Anthologies with same title but different content

What's the best way to handle anthologies that have the same title but which have different content? I have found a number of anthologies in the Ministry of Peculiar Occurrences universe where the existing recorded publications contain different short stories than the ones currently available from the publisher and other retailers. For example, "Tales from the Archives: Volume 4". The existing publication here has 4 short stories. The listing for the same title on Amazon has 5 short stories, none of which are the same titles or even authors as the ones in the existing publication record. The covers are different and the publication dates are one day different. I suspect the ones listed on Amazon were published more recently but they only contain a copyright 2012 statement. They are so different that I have a hard time considering them to be variants. Should I disambiguate the titles with something like (reissued)? Suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Phil (talk) 10:01, 1 December 2024 (EST)

Definitely different. You can see they are reorganized. The Wayback Machine shows the change is recent. E.g., 2015-11-27 - 2023-05-29 have the ones matching our records. Then on 2024-02-29 they are all different and reflect the current ones (unfortunately, no captures between those two). I think you'd have to enter them with the same titles and then make a disambiguated series for them. And put "do not merge" warnings in both sets of titles. --MartyD (talk) 23:15, 1 December 2024 (EST)

Thanks. I've sent an email to Tee Morris to see if he can provide me with the dates so I'll hold off doing this for a while until I see if he responds. Phil (talk) 15:38, 2 December 2024 (EST)

Changing my login name

Hello helpers from iSFDB, my login name is okay logging the wiki, but it is not recognized for logging iSFDB. How can I change it ? Is there any doc page about this procedure ? I'd like to add a link to a video of Claude Ecken, french author, reading one of his novels, published a week ago or so, in his page. Thanks for your help. -- Éric38fr (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2024 (EST).

Welcome to the ISFDB project and sorry to hear about the login issues. I have checked the ISFDB software and it looks like it doesn't like user names which start with accented (or non-Latin) characters. Since "Éric38fr" starts with an "É", the software doesn't recognize it.

Please feel free to create a different user account. If the Wiki doesn't let you re-use your email address, you can use another, even a non-existent, address. As the ISFDB FAQ says:

• confirmation emails are optional as far as ISFDB is concerned. As long as you can log in, you have full access to all ISFDB features including Advanced Search, display preferences, submission creation etc.

Hope this helps! Ahasuerus (talk) 09:48, 2 December 2024 (EST)

Cuore di cane (cover)

I forgot to use the "upload cover scan" link... I think that [File:Cuoredicane-dedonato-rapporti.jpeg] should be deleted so that I can upload it again, right? sorry! --Fantagufo (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2024 (EST)

Deleted as requested. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:47, 7 December 2024 (EST)

thanks! i resubmited the cover. --Fantagufo (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2024 (EST)

Variant Titles: [My Secret Protector] and [The Immortal] by Pam Binder

Hello. I might be searching in the wrong location, but I could not find a page to submit a request to make one title be a variant of another. The two that need this are:

1. My Secret Protector, title record #1502675, by Pam Binder, first published in June 2003.
2. The Immortal, title record #2997080, by Pam Binder, first published under this title in April 2022.

We list The Immortal as the second book in Binder’s Immortal Warrior series; but Goodreads lists My Secret Protector as the second book of that series, which they call the MacAlpins series. Also, I checked the opening pages of My Secret Protector (from archive.org, through page 37) with the opening pages of The Immortal (from Amazon's Kindle sample), and they are a match with small edits. Finally, the description of the stories on the cover material of My Secret Protector is a close match to the publisher's blurb for The Immortal at Amazon.

My preference would be to use the original title My Secret Protector as the canonical title; others might prefer the current title The Immortal as the canonical.

Would someone please help me make this submission and suggest which title should be the canonical title? Thank you. Main (talk) 12:52, 7 December 2024 (EST) (Michael Main)

Using My Secret Protector as the canonical title is fine. We typically use the title which is the most common occurring version as the parent, but if there is not one that is more commonly used than another (as in this case), we use the first occurrence. To create the variant relationship, go to The Immortal title record, click "Make This Title a Variant", and under "Option 1", enter the title record URL for My Secret Protector and submit. Let's us know if you need more help on that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:28, 7 December 2024 (EST)

Many thanks, JLaTondre. I found the link that you described and have submitted the change. I appreciate your directions! Main (talk) 13:53, 7 December 2024 (EST) (Michael Main)

Your welcome. I approved the edit. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2024 (EST)

religious stuff

Looking at Christmas anthologies, which contain plenty of fantasy stories of course, sometimes however interspersed with chunks from the New Testament. How to handle these? On the one hand we seem to have lots of religious myths and legends and stories from other cultures, so it seems a bit off to treat Christianity differently; on the other hand, if we were to include even just published excerpts from the Bible here it would need to be ten times as big. Do we have a policy? gzuckier (talk) 21:36, 9 December 2024 (EST)

ISFDB:Policy defines "speculative fiction" to exclude:

• Philosophical works of speculative nature unless written as a work of fiction (with an inclusionist bias)
• Fairy tales with no known author

so book-length works are out.

Whenever genre anthologies include excerpts from religious and philosophical texts, we include them just like we include other non-genre excerpts published in genre books. Excerpts from the Bible are currently consolidated under The Holy Bible with variants and alternate names set up as needed. Whether they should be entered as SHORTFICTION or ESSAY is debatable -- as ISFDB:Policy says, "distinguishing between speculative and non-speculative fiction (or even fiction and non-fiction) when you are dealing with pre-1800 works" can be challenging. Parables, exempla, apologues, etc exist in that nebulous area between fiction and non-fiction. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:44, 9 December 2024 (EST)

And for non-genre SHORTFICTION, POEMs or ESSAYs, just list them in the publication note so people know they weren't accidentally left out. I usually have something like this:

Non-genre works:

• TITLE 1
• TITLE 2
• etc.

That makes the record complete, and lists the non-genre works in case someone is looking for them, but without filling the database with non-genre entries. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:11, 10 December 2024 (EST)

When working with magazines, keep in mind that we make a distinction between "genre" periodicals (magazines, newspapers, etc) and "non-genre" periodicals. When entering genre periodicals, we enter everything, including non-genre stories. We just make sure that they have the "non-genre" flag set. When entering non-genre periodicals, we only enter genre works -- see Help:Entering non-genre periodicals for details.

Anthologies are more of a gray area. When entering "primarily genre" anthologies, we generally treat them as genre periodicals and enter everything. For example, our record for Guns of Darkness includes "Major Pugachov's Last Battle", a non-genre story, because it is primarily an SF anthology with only one non-SF story. On the other hand, Great Short Stories of Detection, Mystery and Horror edited by Dorothy L. Sayers skips non-SF stories (as mentioned in the Notes field) because only some of the stories are genre. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:58, 10 December 2024 (EST)

Indeed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:45, 10 December 2024 (EST)

Many thanks all.gzuckier (talk) 19:33, 10 December 2024 (EST)

Publications in two series

27 publications in the Doc Savage (Bantam singles) series are also in the 'Bantam Fifty' series. It's my understanding that the software can't handle two publication series fields so, apart from recording the 'Bantam Fifty' series in the notes (with a link), is there any work-around so that they also appear in the Bantam Fifty Pub. Series Record? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 21:51, 12 December 2024 (EST)

You can add the MultiPubS template in the notes ({{MultiPubS}}), followed by a note using the PubS template (e.g. {{PubS|Ace Double}}}, which will at least link to the second publication series. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 21:59, 12 December 2024 (EST)

Thanks for your help, that solves it at pub level :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 17:17, 13 December 2024 (EST)

In Progress or Errored Out

I can't figure out why this submission has been errored out. Is there any 'errored out' help on the site? Advice please. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 10:02, 20 December 2024 (EST)

When a submission "errors out", it's due to an internal server error. I am afraid there isn't much we can do about them. The good news is that they are rare, roughly a couple of dozen out of the 300,000+ submissions that we process each year. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:42, 20 December 2024 (EST)

Thank you, I'll resubmit. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 11:34, 20 December 2024 (EST)

The Machine Stops and Other Stories - title record merges?

I notice that we have several title records for the E. M. Forster collection "The Machine Stops and Other Stories", and I'm wondering whether they can be merged. I own the 2024 Penguin Books edition, and based on that I've tried to come up with a comparison of the contents.

• 1997 Andre Deutsch edition. According to the LCCN (link) this edition has exactly the same content as my book, the only difference is that "The Machine Stops" appears in a different order.
• 2012 Collector's Library edition. I have been unable to find any information about what exactly is in this edition, except that it is a hardcover book with several hundred pages. From that fact I conclude that it does not contain only one or two stories but is a substantial collection, although with unknown content. Note that I searched the current Pan Macmillan Collector's Library website as well as the 2017 snapshot of Pan Macmillan on archive.org, and a wild assortment of other websites.
• 2024 Penguin Books edition. The book I have.

Based on my research, I believe that the Andre Deutsch and the Penguin Books edition could be merged. About the Collector's Library edition I am unsure. What do other editors think? Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 09:59, 22 December 2024 (EST)

Yes, you should merge the Andre Deutsch and Penguin Books editions since they match. Since the Collector's Library edition contents are unknown, I would leave them separate. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:41, 24 December 2024 (EST)

Creating SHORTFICTION entries

I have some short stories to add to Jan Mark's page. I don't see how to add new SHORTFICTION entries_ only novels and so on. I've read the help but I must have missed something. Marnanel (talk) 12:46, 24 December 2024 (EST)

You enter them as content tiles in the publications they appear in. I posted some helpful links on your talk page to get you started. John Scifibones 12:55, 24 December 2024 (EST)

Thank you! Should I be able to edit User:Marnanel itself? Marnanel (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2024 (EST)

I believe you have to have a certain number of edits on the wiki side before you can do that. To get around it, I've created your userpage for you, so you can edit it now. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:03, 30 December 2024 (EST)

Splitting authors

It's been a long time since I was an active editor here, and I thought I should check before trying to do something this complicated. See this page, which indicates that the titles listed under this author need to be split into two authors. That is, this title should be under a new Richard Adams, and the story Poor Ash and the Introduction to that anthology also belong to the new author.

Since cloning a publication doesn't allow the author to be changed, I assume I would have to create a new publication from scratch, and then clone that for other instances. If someone who actually knows what they're doing wants to make this change, please go ahead, otherwise let me know if that's correct and I'll give it a shot. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 06:46, 25 December 2024 (EST)

I've separated these out by editing each of the relevant records (the three title records as well as the anthology publication records) and changing the author to Richard Adams (1938-). I added the biographical info for the new author's record from the tolkienandfantasy.blogspot.com article. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:59, 25 December 2024 (EST)

Thanks! Mike Christie (talk) 04:36, 26 December 2024 (EST)

A follow-up to this: I've submitted a couple of edits to clean up another title that was confused between the two Richard Adams. If a moderator could take a look at those edits and approve them that would be great. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 06:29, 27 December 2024 (EST)

Approved. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:40, 27 December 2024 (EST)

Thanks again. Mike Christie (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2024 (EST)

Contents say "aye"

Theres an anthology on here with the 1st and 3rd printings with identical contents. I want to enter the 2nd printing from a listing on a site that doesnt list the contents. Should i clone the contents? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:58, 2 January 2025 (EST)

Yes, just add a pub note stating the content source is whichever printing in addition to adding a pub note for the source of the second printing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:11, 2 January 2025 (EST)

Best procedure for updating chapbook translation

This chapbook 3395098 appears to be a German translation of Lady Cottington's Pressed Fairy Book. However, it's not marked as a variant title and its two publications (1037961,1037960) only contain the interior artwork and not the SHORTFICTION title for the German translation (which does not exist). What steps need to be taken (and in what order) to correct these records? The series of edits I was considering are: (1) Make the CHAPBOOK title a variant of 12705; (2) Create a new SHORTFICTION title record for the German translation by adding it to the contents of one of its publication records (say, 1037961) ; (3) Update this SHORTFICTION title record so that it is a variant of 1430785; (4) Add this SHORTFICTION title to the other publication record (say, 1037960). --Riselka (talk) 10:30, 4 January 2025 (EST)

This has already been resolved as I ran across it via a cleanup report before I saw this. But, yes, the steps you outline were correct. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:42, 5 January 2025 (EST)

Thanks, JLaTondre! --Riselka (talk) 08:55, 10 January 2025 (EST)

Converting Chapbook to Collection

I've come across another chapbook (3384168) that should be a collection since it contains more than one piece of short fiction. However, I can't remember the best procedure for updating the affected title and publication records. Do I need to update all 3 records independently (parent title, variant title, publication), or is there a smaller number of edits I can submit? --Riselka (talk) 10:43, 4 January 2025 (EST)

I misread your question so I removed my bad answer. I'm pretty sure you start with the parent title, then do the variant title, then do the publication title to remove the chapbook record and possibly to change the type. Phil (talk) 11:10, 4 January 2025 (EST)

In this case, since there is a single publication under the title record, it can be done by:

1. Editing the publication record and changing the Pub Type to Collection and the content title record's Title Type to Collection
2. Editing the parent title record and changing the Title Type to Collection

Those two edits can be submitted in parallel. Changing the content title record in the pub will update the variant record.

If there were multiple publications under the title record, it would need to be done by:

1. Editing the parent title record and changing the Title Type to Collection
2. Editing the variant title record and changing the Title Type to Collection
3. Editing the publication record and changing the Pub Type to Collection

The second one would need to be approved before the third one could be submitted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:56, 4 January 2025 (EST)

Thank you, JLaTondre and Phil! I've gone ahead and submitted the two edits (6135365, 6135368). --Riselka (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2025 (EST)

They have been approved. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:01, 4 January 2025 (EST)

It would be nice if those steps listed above could be added to the Help as a separate topic under "Deleting and Modifying Data". Phil (talk) 12:30, 5 January 2025 (EST)

Which help page? There are many. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:49, 7 January 2025 (EST)

A new topic named "How to convert a chapbook to a collection" under Deleting and Modifying Data, possibly just after How to convert a novel to a chapbook. Phil (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2025 (EST)

Authorship

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2316854

I will be pving and editing one of the books for this title. Adams isnt mentioned on the title page orthe copyright page. should he be down as an author? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:18, 12 January 2025 (EST)

It should be entered as per the pub record, so if Adams is not listed on title page, he should not appear on publication record. However, I would probably variant the resulting Goss only title record to an Adams and Goss one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:21, 12 January 2025 (EST)

the kindle preview on amazon title page just has Goss that makes 2 of the 3 pubs without adams so edit them both unmerge from the original, merge with each other change that title and variant to the original? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 10:23, 12 January 2025 (EST)

Yup, that works. -- JLaTondre (talk) 10:28, 12 January 2025 (EST)

cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:14, 12 January 2025 (EST)

Baen Science Fiction publications question

For a while, Baen used the symbol of a launching spaceship above "Baen" both within a circle. It was typically found on the spine, the front cover, the inside of the front cover, and the title page. The spine also typically showed "Science" [over] "Fiction" under that symbol. Should the books published in that manner be considered part of the "Baen Science Fiction Books" Publication series? Phil (talk) 14:00, 13 January 2025 (EST)

It's been over a week with no comment. I'll give it a couple days more but if I don't hear anything, I'll assume it's yes and edit accordingly. I'll also add a note to the publication series. Phil (talk) 08:14, 22 January 2025 (EST)

I feel that including a genre under a publisher does not make a series, if there is no other link between the publications. Given that Baen publishes Science Fiction, and Fantasy, it could be argued that they are simply providing bookstores and readers a basic classification. In my opinion, one should not be able to create a publication series without providing a description that explains which books are in the series and which ones are out. I do recognize that the ship has sailed on this, but since you asked the question, I'll provide my $0.029 (not inflation, conversion to US$). ../Doug H (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2025 (EST)

That's actually a very good point. I haven't made any of those entries yet and will not going forward. Phil (talk) 07:23, 5 February 2025 (EST)

FWIW, I agree with Doug. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:43, 5 February 2025 (EST)

Review articles not exactly joint authorship

The Hartford Courant has lately gotten into the habit of publishing book reviews which consist of 2 separate reviews by two different authors of two different books, concatenated into a single article article with a single title, that usually only refers to the first book. I don't know if this is behind a paywall: [5] bottom half of the page "Opposites' union hold beauty, humor" So I've been listing it as an essay with two authors, and a review with one author. Does that make sense? Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 23:27, 13 January 2025 (EST)

Do you have an example of some you've already entered from the Courant? (as an aside, I delivered papers for the Courant about 40 years ago) ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:52, 22 January 2025 (EST)

Here's one.https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?1029316 Typical of what I was saying, Two reviews individually credited to different authors presented as a single article under one title; of which only one review is SF related. Just happened to get the bill today; the Courant delivery is $60 a week now. Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2025 (EST)

T. J. MacGregor in French

Don't hide. I know you're out there. I need a couple of books in French checked out. The first is Vengeance fatale by T. J. MacGregor. There seems to be no information on either Amazon or Goodreads as to what this book is a translation of. Does anybody know.

The other is Le Septieme Sens by T. J. MacGregor. I just need this book checked out so they can see if I did anything wrong.

Thanks for any help that I can get. MLB (talk) 05:11, 16 January 2025 (EST)

According to the French Wikipedia "Vengeance fatale" is a translation of The Hanged Man. "Le Septieme Sens" looks ok to me (maybe one of our French editors knows more), except for the format. Amazon France has it (and "Vengeance fatale" too) as "Broché – Grand livre" which to my knowledge translates as Trade Paperback. The dimensions (15.5 x 2.4 x 24 cm and 15.5 x 2.7 x 23.5 cm) also point in that direction. Hope that helps. --Willem (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Thanks. MLB (talk) 06:26, 17 January 2025 (EST)

Collection Variants

if 2 collections with different titles have the same set of stories should they be varianted? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 08:07, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Are they already in the database? If so, please provide links to them. If not, are they both edited by the same person? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:11, 16 January 2025 (EST)

are there any general guidelines in the help pages? i couldnt see any.

Collected Short Stories - E. M. Forster

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1001893

The Machine Stops and Other Stories

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3226606

The notes for TMS say the same stories as for CSS and i've checked an edition on internet archive and theyre right. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Same contents, different name -> they need to be variants :) That's what a variant is after all. Annie (talk) 15:35, 16 January 2025 (EST)

nice one - no links needed after all! Next cases (hypotheitical) 1 - same titles but sl different list of stories. 2 - different titles but sl different stories maybe only 1 different . 3 - different titles, same stories but different NF contents. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:51, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Agreed. It looks like this book is the first one released. It looks like this book, this book, and this book should be varianted to it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:40, 16 January 2025 (EST)

even tho the last one hasn't got confirmed contents? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:51, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Probably, since Collector's Library only issues reprints of previously-published works. If it turns out to not be the same as the others, we can always unvariant it in the future. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:54, 16 January 2025 (EST)

as its a probably and not a definitely i'll just leave it and wait for the contents to be added - cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2025 (EST)

another question about this. The same set of 12 stories is also down as an omnibus because they were originally published in 2 seperate collections. which one needs to be binned, the collections or the omnibus? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Gaz, you asked about general guidelines in the help pages for variants. See here: Help:Screen:MakeVariant. Teallach (talk) 16:25, 17 January 2025 (EST)

cheers mate I had an inkling i'd seen it before but I cant navigate round the blummin help pages for toffee. I've taken to printing them off cos i know I might not see them again. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2025 (EST)

All (or most) of them should be found here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:54, 22 January 2025 (EST)

Cover art conundrum

I'm doing a book where the artist is "Tarajosu" on the © page and "Johnny Tarajosu" on the back cover. which should i use? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2025 (EST)

I'd use Johnny Tarajosu noting where the credit comes from and note the credit from the copyright page in the pub notes. Annie (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Annie do you say that cos the cover outranks the copyright page or cos its a more complete name? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2025 (EST)

Both I think. I prefer complete names to just last names unless the artist is just using their last name (easier to differentiate). And copyright pages, especially some parts of it, will have legal names (of authors or copyright marks) and as such they tend to be more legal than "as used". We do not have a written rule for this because it really depends on how the data is presented and what makes the more sense from that book. As long as the notes explain the situation, there is no wrong way to record the situation here IMO. Annie (talk) 10:16, 17 January 2025 (EST)

My first magazine

I have acquired a few magazines (8 to be exact), which I'm now trying to verify. Already with the first one - Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961 - I have stumbled over a few curious things, but since I'm completely new to magazine editing (I've never done this before) I am not sure whether I'm missing information about magazine editing conventions. So before I start any misguided editing I would like to ask a few questions.

• Page 123: Has an illustration showing the word "Fin", which is French and is supposed to indicate "The End" of the preceding story. See this on archive.org. This is not recorded in ISFDB, but logically (if we were to continue the numbering of the other interior art titles) it would be "Hiding Place [5]". Is there a reason why this is not recorded in ISFDB? Is it maybe too insignificant?
• Pages 124 and 127: ISFDB records titles on these pages which actually have no content: "The Reference Library (Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961)" and "Brass Tacks (Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961)". Am I correct to assume that these are merely placeholder titles, to indicate that a new section in the magazine begins? (the reviews and the letters sections, respectively)
• Page 124: "The Reference Library (Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961)": Is there a reason why this is a shortfiction title without length and not an essay? In comparison, the other placeholder "Brass Tacks (Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961)" is an essay.
• Page 124: It would be nice if "Review: Eight Keys to Eden" would be listed after "The Reference Library (Analog Science Fact -> Fiction, July 1961)". Is it possible to use "124|124.1" and "124|124.2" for the respective "Page" fields even though the two content items are in different sections of the EditPub screen?
• Pub note "Hiding Place after John Schoenherr [...]". I don't understand what this means. Can someone translate for me?

Thanks for giving me a bit of a starter helping hand into the magazine editing business, Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 13:10, 17 January 2025 (EST)

Just a partial answer (in the middle of something so will come back unless someone beats me to it)

• You can use "124|124.1" and "124|124.2" regardless of which section on the screen the contents is :) The sections on the edit screen are because these require different data; when the order is done, ALL the contents is enumerated and evaluated (so even in different sections, you really should not have the same numbers anywhere) :)
• The Reference Library type - welcome to Advanced Editing - aka "10 people look at it and simply do not see something until new eyes actually look at it". It should be an essay of course.
• The note about the cover - the credit is "after John Schoenherr" and not "John Schoenherr" - even if it looks like one of his, the magazine does not credit it to him but after him. Common practice in this era for European magazines to have cheaper/house artists repaint/redo a painting so they do not need to get the permissions from the actual artist/magazine.
• When you have sections that contain other elements (like the reference library) which we want to organize, we record an essay with the section name (disambiguated if needed) and then list the elements (usually reviews but sometimes essays) under it. The page number should be the page number of where the section starts.
• The missing art -- dealers' choice on what to record basically for smaller pieces like this one (uhm - I mean editors' choice). If you want to add it, do so (talk to the PVs and all that - ah, no PVs I see so... noone to talk with).

Hope that helps. And I may have answered the whole thing - let me know if I missed something and sorry about the order - I really stopped by to answer about the page numbers and then just kept going :) Annie (talk) 13:26, 17 January 2025 (EST)

Thanks a lot, Annie, indeed your answers helped a lot! It will be interesting to see where this journey is taking me ;) Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 08:05, 18 January 2025 (EST)

Implied spaces in titles

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2408611

Got this book in hand the titles wrong cos it has an ampersand on the title page as well as the cover. the title page also has no spaces before and after the & ie "Lead&Gold". is that how the title should be entered? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:31, 21 January 2025 (EST)

We do not have specific rule for & but I tend to consider it equal with "and" which means spaces on both sides of it which is the standard punctuation in English (which is what we follow when we have no special rule - aka "space after comma but not before" and no space before "!" (unlike French) for a few more examples). :)

And yes - "and" and & are different so the title needs fixing but I'd use standard punctuation: "Lead & Gold". Annie (talk) 17:32, 21 January 2025 (EST)

well that was an easy one to sort out - cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2025 (EST)

forgot to ask if the other pub should be unmerged and varianted? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:09, 21 January 2025 (EST)

If there is one publication that uses "and" and one that uses "&", their titles indeed need to be unmerged and varianted. If on the other hand it turns out that it is & everywhere, it just needs to be fixed. Annie (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2025 (EST)

well the other one's a fixer jobby so no editor of woman born has seen the title page of the tp (not on amazon) and its got & on the cover. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2025 (EST)

So it needs fixing - if we do not have a title page via Look inside or other means, we go by the title. :) Annie (talk) 20:15, 21 January 2025 (EST)

cheers - done it. Gaz Faustus (talk) 08:51, 22 January 2025 (EST)

The Songs of Summer

This Introduction to the collection is dated 1978-03-00, for which I can find no source. Could fresh eyes find what I've missed? Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 23:12, 21 January 2025 (EST)

With two active PVs, ask them to look into the book and see if there is a note on previous publication or something. It may be a mistaken date (I’ve seen people dating based on the date at the bottom of an essay and not based on publication - which may or may have not been the rule at one point). Annie (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2025 (EST)

Thanks Annie, will do. You might well be right about the dating, I've seen that too. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 01:06, 22 January 2025 (EST)

The Gollancz hc 1st ed can be seen and borrowed on archive.org. "March, 1978" is stated at the end of the introduction on page 10 which is the date it was written. The copyright page states "Introduction (c) Robert Silverberg 1979" which refers to its first publication. I agree with Annie: essays should be dated according to first publication, not when written.

However, the plot thickens. The above paragraph relates to Introduction (The Songs of Summer and Other Stories) which is correctly dated 1979-05-00. You have asked about Introduction (The Songs of Summer) which appears to be incorrectly dated 1978-03-00. The related Pan pb pub record is wrong. It should either have the same title as the Gollancz hc (... and Other Stories) or there should be some varianting. The cover of the Pan pb does not have this suffix but we cannot see the title page.

Of course, you need to liaise with the active PVs of the Pan pb and ask them to check it just in case that pub contains some different information regarding the publication date of the Introduction. While doing so, I suggest you ask them to also check the title of the pub as stated on the title page. We need to know this to determine how to correct the ISFDB records. Teallach (talk) 14:06, 22 January 2025 (EST)

Thanks for giving this some thought, I'll follow all the tracks. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 16:19, 22 January 2025 (EST)

one word title split in two?

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1267865

some books like this seem to have a one word title split in two on different lines. the title page is not available for this one but i've pved similar ones where the title page is the same. Everywhere says this one is one word so is that how it should be entered here like some of the pubs? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2025 (EST)

It looks like splitting and a variant is needed. Both Locus1 and BLIC have the 2006/2007 Hodder Children's editions as "Stone Heart". The title page presentation is the same as the cover, and photos of the copyright page show it makes no mention of the title. I think you would need evidence from those pubs or from other contemporaneous material (e.g., a blurb/announcement/review) having it as one word to override that 2-word treatment. --MartyD (talk) 10:27, 23 January 2025 (EST)

2050, edited by Sean Wright

Does this anthology actually exist? I can't find any information about it at all. It must have been on Amazon once, but not a trace of it is to be found there or anywhere else. How disappointing and mysterious. —Rosab618 (talk) 02:47, 25 January 2025 (EST)

It likely was available at some point. The publisher disappeared by 2008, based on the Wayback Machine archive of pages on its site (some Japanese site took over the domain in 2010). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:47, 27 January 2025 (EST)

Inserted but not bound-in maps

The Chinese translations of Annals of the Western Shore have printed folded maps inserted but not bound into the books. They are the same as the ones used in the colour end papers of the LOA edition. How do I include these in the contents? Evertype (talk) 08:58, 26 January 2025 (EST)

Don't give them a page number, and include them as INTERIORART entries, with an explanation in the notes. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:35, 27 January 2025 (EST)

OK, I'm going to input the map of The Western Shore as "西岸世界 (map)" unless I should find out how to say "map" in Chinese. Evertype (talk) 08:23, 30 January 2025 (EST)

The parenthetical part should be in English. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:44, 5 February 2025 (EST)

Misspelled author: Bill Hackenberger

Hello. The author Bill Hackeberger has a misspelling in his name (as BIll Hackenberger, with an uppercase I) at [[6]] -- It looks like it takes a moderator to fix the name. I have checked that the correct spelling is with a lowercase i (in the original source of his second publication, "Schrödinger's Hamster"). Thank you. --Michael Main 18:33, 26 January 2025 (EST)

Fixed. It was likely just a typo. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:34, 27 January 2025 (EST)

How Do I Create a Separate Cover Image File?

I am working on Charles Stross' Accelerando, Ace 1st ed hc. The existing cover image is not quite correct (blurb missing near top edge) so I want to replace it with a scan from my copy. However, the existing cover image file has been reused for two other pub records: ebook1 and ebook2. So I don't want to just upload my scan and overwrite the existing file because that will change the cover for all three pubs. I've come across this situation in the past and tried to solve it by uploading my scan to a new file name. However, when I tried to link it, that caused a yellow warning message in the submission:

• "Wiki-hosted image URL ... does not match the internal publication tag ..."

and a moderator had to sort things out. What is the correct procedure I should adopt? Teallach (talk) 18:45, 27 January 2025 (EST)

Re-upload the current image into the editions it belongs to, edit their fields to actually point to their own image and then import your image where it belongs :) That is the cleanest way and the least likely to cause more issues going forward. Alternatively, just upload it anywhere but... the next editor may not be as diligent.

Technically the yellow warning is not an issue - but it can cause data loss in situations as above if people are not careful and do not protect the image for the rest of the editions. Annie (talk) 18:48, 27 January 2025 (EST)

Thank you Annie. I have followed your "cleanest way" option. Edits submitted. Teallach (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2025 (EST)

Delay in my edit for an undiscovered Arthur Clarke short story with a duplicate title?

My edit for an unknown Arthur Clarke short story (available at the Internet Archive), which has the same title as one of his White Hart stories, has been waiting patiently for more than a week. I (modest cough) think it‘s of some importance, even though I misspelled “Benjamin Britten.” (I don’t see how to correct, rather than withdraw, a pending edit.) Discussion on Reddit. (Trivia: the pen-name Sir Arthur used for this version became a fictional character in later White Hart stories.) — FlaSheridn (talk) 13:52, 28 January 2025 (EST)

We are behind on approvals so it is nothing personal - we just have a lot to clear through the list and every edit is as important as any other so we tend to go in order (skipping when something needs more time/research than the moderator handling it has at that time) and sometimes clearing through a series of edits as it is easier on the verifications. :)

There is no way to edit a pending submission I am afraid - in such cases, I'd actually recommend to cancel the old one and resubmit - a visible error in the submission may delay its processing even more as someone needs to research and figure out what you meant. Also - this type of edits really requires a SOURCE -- either in the proper fields (if feasible) or at least in the moderator notes. If you had added the link above in the moderator note, the submission would have had a better chance to get approved. In addition, approving this edit will require quite a lot of extra edits to get the stories untangled in the DB - and that takes time and research. :) Annie (talk) 14:07, 28 January 2025 (EST)

My submission has now been rejected, on the reasonable grounds that “it should be unmerged from the White Hart title,” which is sensible, but I don’t see how to do it on the Title Editor screen.

In answer to the query “I'm not clear on which magazine version you are referring to,” it’s the first publication listed, and the only magazine publication, Science-Fantasy, Winter 1950, available at the the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/Science_Fantasy_02v01_1950-1951-Winter.

Reddit user Statisticus subsequently noted (in the discussion linked above) that Groff Conklin anthologized this version in 13 Great Stories of Science Fiction, which I’ve verified at the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/13greatstoriesof0000grof/page/68/mode/2up. — FlaSheridn (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Hi FlaSheridn -

I can help you to unmerge the title. Actually, looking more closely at the title record, it doesn't look like an umerge is necessary. That title was published using the Charles Willis pseudonym and Science-Fantasy is the only publication where it appears. In order to break this out from the other title, you simply need to break the existing variant relationship. Ordinarily, you would use the "Make This Title a Variant" tool and on the intermediate screen enter "0" in Option 1. However, since we'll also need to make the newly separated title into a variant of a new title using Clarke's name, we can build the new relationship which will replace the old relationship. You'll still want to use the "Make This Title a Variant" tool, but in this case, you'll want to use Option 2 on the intermediate screen. In the form, replace "Charles Willis" with "Arthur C. Clarke". You'll also want to add a Title Note explaining that the new title is different than this title. You'll also want to submit an edit to the old title. You'll want to change the date on the title record to "1957-01-00" and it would be a good idea to add a short note that the 1957 title differs significantly from the 1950 title. Once both those edits are approved, I believe these records will look good. Please let me know if there is anything I can explain more clearly or if you have any questions. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 19:02, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Both edits submitted, thanks: 6161876 & 6161877. I didn’t see how to note that the earlier story is not part of the White Hart series, and that the story in the Groff Conklin anthology is the non-White-Hart one. — FlaSheridn (talk) 14:32, 4 February 2025 (EST)

Ping? —FlaSheridn (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2025 (EST)

As previously noted, submission approvals can take a little while as we are all volunteers and we have lives outside the site. That said, I've sorted this out now: the White Hart story is here, and the other one is here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:49, 20 February 2025 (EST)

Thank you kindly; one detail left: I don’t see in the edit view how to correct the story in the Groff Conklin anthology to being the non-White-Hart one.

—FlaSheridn (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2025 (EST)

Two French titles for Rocannon's World?

This title entry for Le monde de Rocannon has two entries, one an omnibus; both translations are by the same translator, Jean Bailhache. This title entry for Le monde de Rocannon has three entries only one of which has been verified but with the same translator. I have a ew variant to add but something seems wrong here, and maybe the should be corrected before I add the new one. Evertype (talk) 07:59, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Different author: Ursula K. Le Guin vs Ursula Le Guin :) Annie (talk) 10:06, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Um, that seems to me to be gratuitously illogical. The author is obviously the same person, the translator is the same person, and the TITLE is the same TITLE. I'm sorry, but I really and truly cannot fathom how this benefits the database. It certainly does not help me to assign a new book to anything, and while I would record what's on the title page I would never, ever think that I was supposed to use the presence or absence of "K." to mark these as different TITLES. Please explain how this makes sense. Evertype (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2025 (EST)

A variant is a unique combination of "title, author, translator(if applicable) and language". And we do not do variants of variants (which would be helpful here).

So yes - when the same translation is published under different author names, we have two records (same happens if a different title is used). Just how the DB is designed. Pretty much the same way on how we have separate records for any other variants. The new book will go under whichever name that book uses.

Books have authors and titles. TITLE records inside need to match these - so we use variants to connect the dots when the details do not match. When adding a book you start from the book data. That will tell you where your titles need to go (or which titles to import). Annie (talk) 12:37, 30 January 2025 (EST)

The ability to create a "variant of a variant" would indeed help clarify things in this particular case, but implementing it would open a huge can of worms -- given the number of possible permutations -- and be very time-consuming besides, so it's unlikely to happen. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:05, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Prose poem

how should i enter a work with this description (don't have access to the work itself). Pretentious piffle isnt a category so should it be poem or short story? Faustus (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2025 (EST)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Faustus (talk • contribs) .

If the author/publisher calls it a poem, I call it a poem in our DB (see for example). And we have a tag which also shows mostly poems. Add a note that it is a prose one. Annie (talk) 13:51, 30 January 2025 (EST)

cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2025 (EST)

Spurious alternate name of Carlos Ochagavia?

I noticed that the "unknown" catch-all author record is marked as an alternate name of Carlos Ochagavia. Given the "meta" nature of unknown, this alternate name relationship seems spurious to me. Does it seem reasonable to remove it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Riselka (talk • contribs) . 14:56, 6 February 2025 (EST)

No, it should not be removed. It's due to this record. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:01, 6 February 2025 (EST)

This seems odd to me since unknown corresponds to an unknown rather than uncredited authorship. This is also the only author linked to the "unknown" record, while I believe I have encountered several (but can't name any offhand) titles with uncredited but known (canonical) authors/editors. Is there a document that records these rules/conventions, and how it ties in with the alternate name / pseudonym links? Thanks, -- Riselka (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2025 (EST)

Found a quick example by searching for titles with uncredited authors. This variant title 2347766 did not credit the author John W. Minor, but John W. Minor does not have unknown listed as an alternate name (i.e. the "Used These Alternate Names" field). Just to be clear, I'm not questioning that Carlos Ochagavia has an uncredited publication, but that unknown is not an alternate name / pseudonym used by Carlos Ochagavia as an alternative name / pseudonym. Apologies if I mixed up terminology in the original post regarding alternate names. -- Riselka (talk) 15:56, 6 February 2025 (EST)

The title Nihonjoe linked to was originally entered as by unknown. When we learned it was really by Carlos Ochagavia, it was first varianted to a new title as by Ochagavia. This probably popped up on a cleanup report, and unknown was changed to uncredited. Unfortunately the relation between Ochagavia and unknown was not deleted. I removed the relation. Thanks for finding this! --Willem (talk) 16:11, 6 February 2025 (EST)

Thank you, Willem, for making the change! -- Riselka (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2025 (EST)

Duplicate series

I've somehow created two records with the same name for the same series. I'm not sure how to fix this. Such_talk 21:31, 8 February 2025 (EST)

I have fixed it by changing the name of one of the series to "Skyward1", then moving all of the affected titles to "Skyward". Normally, it shouldn't be possible to create two series with the same name, but something must have gone wrong with the software. Perhaps it couldn't handle "out of order submission approvals" correctly. I am going to to create a Bug report. Thanks for reporting the issue! Ahasuerus (talk) 21:51, 8 February 2025 (EST)

The Dispossessed

I propose making The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia a variant of The Dispossessed, given the numbers involved? Help says: If the two title records have the same author name, the canonical/parent title is usually the first title for that work, but may be a later title if that title is much better known.. Also, please remind me what the dating should be. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2025 (EST)

I would have to oppose this. From the first edition to the LOA edition which Ursula contributed to towards the end of her career, the canonical title for this work is the long title. Please do not make this change. Evertype (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2025 (EST)

Notice the part in our rules that state but may be a later title if that title is much better known? At 3 titles for the former, and 43 for the latter, I'd say that qualifies as much better known. Wouldn't you? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2025 (EST)

Re: your title dating question:

• Variant titles are always dated as of their first appearance.
• Canonical titles are dated by the earlier of the original publication date or any variant title dates with the following exceptions.
  • Translations - Use the date first published in the author's working language, even if a translation was published earlier. Relevant help.
  • Serializations - Use the date first published in book form, even if serialized at an earlier date. Relevant help. John Scifibones 06:32, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Again, I vigorously oppose making this change. This is a bibliographical project. It is not the Wikipedia. Note that The Hobbit, or There and Back Again is the main title, and The Hobbit is the variant title. We should not accept BanjoKev's proposal. Evertype (talk) 08:00, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Thanks John for your dating info. Kev. BanjoKev (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Evertype. This is indeed a bibliographical project, but I’m missing how reference to it not being the Wikipedia is relevant.

As a project we have an extensive set of Rules and Standards which have been discussed, agreed upon, and codified over many years. Sometimes these Rules deviate from those followed by other sites and organisations. This is to preserve the integrity of our data and maintain consistency and internal logic within the project.

Yes, and this kind of "Oh, let's implement a rule/guideline even though there's really no problem now" attitude constantly dumbs down the Wikipedia. I mentioned it because what you are proposing feels just exactly the same as I have experienced on the Wikipedia. It's not a welcome feeling. Evertype (talk) 11:43, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Per your reference to The Hobbit: There are 123 entries of the title “The Hobbit, or There and Back Again” but only 89 entries for The Hobbit, hence the qualifier in the Rules “…but may be a later title if that title is much better known.” fails because the longer title is better known. That is why the parent/child relationship is as it is. It is a quantitative judgment rather than a qualitative one. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Maybe one can make arguments about "long-case clock" v "grandfather clock" on the Wikipedia with this kind of popularity contest, but I'm sorry, this is a bibliographical project and we have some duty to honour the artists whose work we document. Ursula's title for the most important editions, the first (1974) and the last (2017), had the long title. She did not disavow that title; she retained it. Deviations from the longer title are likely due to publisher's choices, and even there where one is counting instances I would think one would need to distinguish between editions and printings, since the latter may tend to distort the count. A large number of editions of this book have a different subtitle ("A Novel"), but those are not included in the count you provide, and if people have not been adding that subtitle, then they have not being doing a complete job—or if the rules forbid such subtitles, then the rules distort the facts, and again, the count is unureliable. The titles The Dispossessed and The Dispossessed: A Novel are variants of the original title, The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia. I remain opposed to the change you have suggested. Evertype (talk) 11:43, 10 February 2025 (EST)

I do understand your reasons for opposing my proposal; unfortunately they are not accounted for in the Rules as they stand. See menu item 1 in the Help:Screen:MakeVariant

We record titles as they appear on the title page. There are many, many instances of publishers using titles that the author’s disagree with to varying degrees. Sometimes it’s only later, when authors achieve sufficient status, that the original, intended title is published or republished in this case.

As I stated at the start, the numbers involved of the two titles warrant my proposal. As you feel so strongly on this issue, I suggest you raise a post on the Rules and standards board to see what others think and whether a change in the rules is appropriate. Kev. BanjoKev (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Re: the "much better known" exception, one way to tell how well known a title is would be to check secondary sources like encyclopedias and histories:

• The Cambridge History of Science Fiction (eds. Gerry Canavan and Eric Carl Link) uses The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia once and The Dispossessed 16 times.
• SFE:
  • The main article uses the full title, The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia when it first references the novel, but The Dispossessed the other tree times it mentions it.
  • Ansible uses The Dispossessed twice.
  • Utopias says "Ursula K Le Guin's The Dispossessed (1974) carries the subtitle "An Ambiguous Utopia".
  • Libertarian SF uses The Dispossessed.
• Encyclopedia Britannica refers to this novel as The Dispossessed.
• Encyclopedia.com uses The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia while quoting "Modern Fiction Studies contributor Keith N. Hull" and The Dispossessed the other 3 times it refers to the novel.

Based on the above, I think it's fair to say that the two titles are used interchangeably, with the full title typically given once and the shorter version used later, presumably to save space. I am not sure it warrants making The Dispossessed the canonical title. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Thanks for your research and comments, in the light of which I'll withdraw my proposal. You know better than I do what the intent was behind the exception - that it applied to sources external to this db. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 19:23, 10 February 2025 (EST)

As I recall, the original intent was to account for cases like The Stars My Destination, which was first published in the UK as Tiger! Tiger! (1956-06-14). A few months later it was serialized in Galaxy as The Stars My Destination and most subsequent reprints used the Galaxy title. It would be odd to use Tiger! Tiger! as the canonical title -- many SF readers may not even recognize it as a variant of The Stars My Destination. Luckily, there is no such difficulty in the case of The Dispossessed. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:31, 10 February 2025 (EST)

Makes perfect sense - thanks for the background! Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 11:15, 11 February 2025 (EST)

Electric Monkey Number Line

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?531285

No its not a Captain Beefheart LP - Ive got a few of these books in hand like this one, published by Electric monkey and none have a number line as such or any publishing history beyond "This edition published in ****". what they do have is a line with a number with the format "5 digits, forward slash, single digit" in this case its "53603/3". is that number a substitue for a number line in some way - not noticed it on any other publishers books. None of their other books have been pved so thats no help. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:10, 11 February 2025 (EST)

I don't recall seeing this format. The only relevant thing that I see on the internet is this listing of a book published by Electric Monkey in 2022. The "Description" field says "Numberline is a single digit '1'", which suggests that they use an unusual number line format. Ahasuerus (talk) 06:12, 12 February 2025 (EST)

a lot of uk publishers seem to use the number line with a single number nowadays, the electric monkey books that I've got don't have that - the other two have 47253/13 and 58384/1. # Gaz Faustus (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2025 (EST)

I didn't know about the "single number" printer's key/number line in recent UK books; thanks.

If we can't figure out what strings of numbers like "47253/13" and "58384/1" are used for, then I guess we'll just have to document them in Notes and add that their meaning is currently unknown. (It's possible that they are "order numbers" used by printing companies, but I have no evidence to support it.) Ahasuerus (talk) 13:42, 12 February 2025 (EST)

Male Answer Syndrome: Looks like it could be a catalogue number and printing number. A look at a few different copies of the same book might be revealing (e.g., if the number to the left of the slash stays the same but the number to the right changes). --MartyD (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2025 (EST)

the one in hand thats 53603/3 has a copy on ebay with the copyright page scanned and its 53603/5 so it looks like you could be right mate. how about in the notes - "There is no number line but there is a line with the number 53603/3 possibly indicating the third printing of this edition"? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2025 (EST)

another listing on ebay shows the copyright page for the hc edition with a different isbn and that has 53603/1 so mebbe could say in the notes "...possibly indicating the third printing of this title" for the book I'm holding? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 08:44, 13 February 2025 (EST)

Perhaps something like:

• There is no number line but there is a line with the number 53603/3. Since Ebay listings include copies with 53603/1 and 53603/5, the number after the slash may be the printing number, which would make this record the third printing.

Ahasuerus (talk) 12:13, 13 February 2025 (EST)

Thats alright for this one but what about the other titles and any future ones, do i have to go fossicking around on ebay looking for scans which show a differnet number after the slash for each of them? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:27, 13 February 2025 (EST)

I don't think it would be necessary. We could just enter a generic sentence along the lines of "There is no number line, but there is a line with the number NNNNN/N. It's currently unknown what it means, but other books by this publisher include similar numbers with the last digit changing within the same edition, possibly indicating different printings." Ahasuerus (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2025 (EST)

cheers i'll just paste in what you've written there. Gaz Faustus (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2025 (EST)

(unindent) got another electric monkey book with the "number line" 58384/1. "1" might or might not mean the first printing so what do i do - edit the existing pub (unverified) or add a new one? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2025 (EST)

Could you link the existing unverified pub, please? Ahasuerus (talk) 12:10, 16 February 2025 (EST)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?646520 Faustus (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2025 (EST)

Thanks. Looking at the unverified pub record, I see that its data comes from Amazon UK and Locus Magazine #688. If the data in your publication doesn't contradict what's in the unverified record, I would suggest updating the record with your data and documenting any additional information that is not present in your pub -- like the exact publication date -- in the Notes field. Ahasuerus (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2025 (EST)

righto mate i'll do that. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 08:13, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Mostly Ghostly

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?576436

this anthology at the mo has contents which are the original stories. philsp says that the stories are all "drastically abridged and partially rewritten" by Steven Zorn who is down as the editor (the copyright page has Gregory C. Aaron as the editor). A later printing on ebay has "Adapted by Steven Zorn" on the cover flap but the story title pages just have the original author. I was going to remove all the stories and add new ones with two authors - the original author and Zorn. I thought i'd better check before ploughing on. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2025 (EST)

After checking page counts and page numbers, I agree that these are clearly drastically abridged versions and need to have separate title records. The publication in question contains only 56 pages, which is not nearly enough space for 2 novelettes and 5 short stories.

That said, we aim to enter titles and author names the way they appear on title pages. Since the title pages in this book only list the original author, I would suggest the following sequence of submissions:

• Add new titles as by the original authors alone -- make sure to link this discussion in the Moderator Notes field to ensure that the approving moderator doesn't merge the new, abridged, titles with the already existing full versions
• Remove the existing Contents titles from the pub
• Once the first two submissions have approved:
  • Add notes to the new title records explaining that they are abridged versions and not to be confused with the full versions; this can be done in parallel with the step immediately above
  • Turn the abridged title records into variants -- the parent titles will credit both the original author and Steven Zorn

This should be good practice, but, if it sounds like too many steps, please let me know and I can do it for you. Thanks for identifying this issue! Ahasuerus (talk) 11:41, 17 February 2025 (EST)

thanks for offering mate but i'll never learn unless I have a pop at it myself. when i do the varianting adding Zorn I have to add his name in the linking brackets like you've done? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:40, 17 February 2025 (EST)

When you display one of the new title records and click "Make This Title a Variant", the "Make Variant Title" Web page will give you too options: "Option 1" at the top of the page and "Option 2" at the bottom of the page. Scroll down to "Option 2", where the current title (which is about to become a variant title) is displayed. The first three fields are "Title", "Transliterated Title 1" and "Author 1". Click the big "+" sign next to "Author 1" and a new line for "Author 2" will appear. That's where you will enter Steven Zorn's name. Hope it makes sense! Ahasuerus (talk) 14:01, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Its not that mate its just that when you said add Steven Zorn you used the linking template Steven Zorn and i didn't know if that was what you wanted putting in the second author field in the variant. # Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Oh no, you only need to use braces in ISFDB Notes fields and on Wiki pages. Values in regular ISFDB fields -- authors, titles, publishers, etc -- are linked automatically. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:18, 17 February 2025 (EST)

right I'm ready to have a stab at it! apologies to the reviewing mods in advance... Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:32, 17 February 2025 (EST)

...Ahasuerus any chance you could review them out as you know what the issues are?

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6171758

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6171761

Faustus (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2025 (EST)

The "title removal" submission was fine and I have approved it. However, the "publication update" submission will also change the publication date (1998 -> 1991) and the ISBN (076240406X -> 1561380334), something that I didn't expect.

According to Worldcat, this anthology has used 3 different ISBNs:

• 1561380334 - Amazon says that it was published on 1991-01-01
• 1561380563 - No Amazon record
• 076240406X - Amazon says that it was published on 1998-07-01

The way Amazon's database works, a YYYY-01-01 date means that Amazon knows the year of publication, but not its month or day. YYYY-MM-01 means that Amazon knows the year and the month of publication, but not the day. In this case it means that 1561380334's ISFDB publication date will be 1991-00-00 and 076240406X's ISFDB publication date will be 1998-07-00.

Given the above, I think the best way to proceed will be for me to approve your submission, which will effectively remove all traces of the 1998 printing and change the ISFDB record to reflect what's in the first, 1991, printing. After that you will be able to:

• Create variants for the new titles
• Use "Clone Publication" on the 1991 publication record and create two new publication records for ISBN 1561380563 (date unknown/0000-00-00, data from WorldCat) and ISBN 076240406X (1998-07-00, data from Amazon.com)

Does this make sense? Ahasuerus (talk) 18:14, 17 February 2025 (EST)

yes i think i've got it - when I was fussing over what to do with the contents I didnt notice about the date and isbn until I did the edit, sorry about that - Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2025 (EST)

No problem, the submission has been approved. One thing that I needed to adjust was the name of the ANTHOLOGY title's editor. Keep in mind that ANTHOLOGY publications have their editors' names specified twice -- once for the publication record and once for the contained ANTHOLOGY title record. Your submission changed the editor's name in the publication metadata section, but not the name of the ANTHOLOGY title.

Please proceed with the nest steps, i.e. creating variants and cloning the publication record, at your convenience.

Also, please keep in mind that the parent title's author(s) always use their canonical names. For example, the author of "Man Size in Marble" is Edith Nesbit, but when you create a parent title for it the parent authors will be E. Nesbit and Template:Steven Zorn because E.Nesbit is the parent of Edith Nesbit. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2025 (EST)

cheers for for the reminders, I would have forgottten to use the canonical names for the variants. Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:47, 17 February 2025 (EST)

variantings done - Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Everything has been approved. Thanks! Ahasuerus (talk) 21:11, 17 February 2025 (EST)

cheers i'll have a go at those other editions later on today. Gaz Faustus (talk) 07:56, 18 February 2025 (EST)

the 1998 edition and the 3rd printing of the 1991 edition are submitted. I didnt do that other one - I thought it was a bit dodgy as it only shows up on worldcat and nowehere else. Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2025 (EST)

I have approved a ClonePub submission and left a question about the AddPub submission on your Talk page. Ahasuerus (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Time in talk

I was going to post about a problem, but I think I figured it out. When you post to someone else's Talk page, regardless of your time zone/preference, the resolution of the four tildes (~~~~) uses the preference for the owner of the Talk page. This could makes it look like you are posting in the future. I don't know if this is noted anywhere. ../Doug H (talk) 12:44, 17 February 2025 (EST)

According to the Mediawiki manual, setting a time format and offset in your Preferences "[d]etermines the date format and timezone that the interface of pages such as recent changes or your watchlist display. Any dates that appear in Wikitext will not be automatically reformatted. In particular, this includes signatures, so if you set a timezone other than the wiki default times shown in the interface won't match those in signatures." ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:12, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Hebrew transliteration

I added this anthology, which is a translation from Hebrew, and would like some advice to complete the submission. The author 393479 (and thus the book) was not in ISFDB before. I guess I can variant the anthology, creating (option 2) a new Title כל הסיפורים authored by אברהם ב. יהושע and then edit the new author record to enter the Roman transliteration, with no need to alternate Abraham B. Joshua to the Hebrew name. Would that be all, or should I also variant the contents titles to the Hebrew author? (but leaving the Italian titles, I do not know the original titles of the single stories). --Fantagufo (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2025 (EST)

You will want to create variant titles for the collection title (note that it's a single-author collection as opposed to an anthology) as well as the 4 Contents titles that the book contains, i.e. 3 works of fiction and 1 essay. You will also want to create an "alternate name" relationship between "Abraham B. Yehoshua" and its parent, "אברהם ב. יהושע". Note that you can only create "alternate name" submissions once the parent name exists in the database, so you will have to wait for at least one variant title submission to be approved first. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Similar, but with an extra trick, is the situation for the artist 393480: wikipedia records him as Mordechai (Motti) Mizrachi (Hebrew: מוטי מזרחי), but the book credits Motti Mizraki. I could variant the Coverart Title record to a new Title with the Italian book title and the Hebrew author name, then edit the new author record with the "Mizrachi" transliteration and then alternate Mizraki to it (or enter "Mizraki" as a second transliteration?). Thanks! PS: Of course I cannot at all read/write Hebrew, every Hebrew word in this post is pasted from wikipedia! --Fantagufo (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2025 (EST)

You'll want to use the same steps as above: create a parent title for the Tutti i racconti COVERART record using "מוטי מזרחי" as the parent name. Once approved, you will be able to create an "alternate name" relationship between "Motti Mizraki" and "מוטי מזרחי" as well as add one or more transliterated names. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:10, 17 February 2025 (EST)

Two essay titling cases

I’m asking for advice on how to treat two scenarios regarding essay titling as follows:

• Case 1: An essay, titled only “Foreword”, appears in a publication (call it Title A, dated A) as “Foreword (Title A)” and dated A. Exactly the same essay appears in a later publication that has a different title (call it Title B, dated B). How is this essay titled in the Title B publication; should it be “Foreword (Title A)” and dated A, or should it be “Foreword (Title B)”, then varianted to “Foreword (Title A)”, and dated B?
• Case 2: Four publications, with different titles, are published simultaneously. Each contains exactly the same essay, titled only “Preface”. How should the essays be disambiguated?

Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev (talk) 12:19, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Just 2 cents here:

• Case 1: I go for variants, each carrying its own date and title. The only exception is if B is an omnibus that contains the full A inside (because then the Foreword is really for A inside of B).
• Case 2: This will be on a case per case basis. The standard will be to use one of them as a parent and variant the rest but there may be a case for other naming. To be on the safe side - everyone gets a title per the rules, all gets varianted into whichever you like the most ;)

This will be an interesting discussion though - our disambiguations can be... convoluted and complex in some cases. Annie (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Your 2 cents makes perfect sense and accords with my understanding of the varianting rules. The only surprise is "varianted into whichever you like the most". The one I like the best will be the first one published. Thanks! Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 06:36, 9 March 2025 (EDT)

Boundary Shock Quarterly issue titling

Boundary Shock Quarterly [7] is currently setup as a magazine series with yearly EDITOR tiles, each of which has MAGAZINE publication records. The current naming scheme (except for issues #1 and #2) have the magazine titles as Boundary Shock Quarterly, month yyyy. This doesn't match how the issues are actually titled on their title pages (or covers). For example, the issue currently titled Boundary Shock Quarterly, April 2019 shows "Ray Guns and Space Babes" with a subtitle of "Boundary Shock Quarterly #006" on its title page. The primary title is the issue theme name. Shouldn't these magazine publication records reflect the title page more exactly? I suggest the changed titles be setup just like books with title and subtitles as printed on the title page. This would make the title for the April 2019 issue "Ray Guns and Space Babes: Boundary Shock Quarterly #006". Comments? Phil (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2025 (EST)

This publication follows our standards for naming periodicals. If you are suggesting a change in standards, you should start a Rules & Standards discussion.

PS "Ray Guns and Space Babes: Boundary Shock Quarterly #006" would not be to standards for a book either. Series and series number are specifically excluded from the publication title. John Scifibones 15:30, 19 February 2025 (EST)

I lost sight of that. Is there any valid way to make the theme name more visible? Maybe a variant of the same date? Or does it have to hidden in the notes? Phil (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Editor titles (periodicals) are roll-up titles. All issues for the year are maintained in one record. The only variants are for author alt names. For example, here is the 2024 title record for Boundary Shock Quarterly. Before you ask: Reprints are treated as anthologies so even if there is a slight title difference, it's not a variant. It's a different pub type and series.

If your definition for buried is not shown in the title record, you're correct. However it's clearly visible in the publication record. The periodical you picked displays the issue number and title if any in the first note. There is no standard calling for this, but it's what I do in all the periodicals I maintain. Phil, here are more examples of how I record periodicals. John Scifibones 17:20, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Thanks, John. I haven't dealt with a lot of periodicals so I'm trying to come up to speed. I'll look at the other titles in the BSQ series and make sure they conform. Phil (talk) 18:35, 19 February 2025 (EST)

Download Covers

Is it possible to download all the covers of a science fiction series with one command? If so, what is the command? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heinzjakob (talk • contribs) . 10:43, 20 February 2025‎ (EST)

CreateSpace

i'm doing some new editions of an old anthology originally published in 1901. The original and the new editions are uncredited for the author/editor. One of the new ones which i'm entering from Amazon is published by "CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform". Its page says you have to use the author as the publisher so should I put uncredited in the publisher field? Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:22, 20 February 2025 (EST)

Just leave it empty in such cases. Add a publication note that it is published via "CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform" :) Annie (talk) 13:24, 20 February 2025 (EST)

cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2025 (EST)

Cloning contents

some new editions of old anthologies like the one above have a Amazon preview where you can see the contents but they are usually the most recent ones. Others don't have confirmed contents. The anthology I'm doing was published 1901, the new editions are over a hundred years later with slightly different titles (to the original and each other) and different publishers to the original. is it valid to import the contents? # Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:50, 20 February 2025 (EST)

If the titles are different even at the slightest, you add the new title as is in the book and you variant it into the original title (yes, even if the difference is in a single comma or in and/& or something like that; capitalization and spaces and so on is excluded as we standardize titles on that - this only requires notes if need be). For anything that has the same title, you can import it. Annie (talk) 14:29, 20 February 2025 (EST)

sorry Annie i think i must have garbled the question. its whether i can import the contents to a different edition when the contents are not displayed anywhere. this old anthology is out of copyright and several publishers have been releasing new editions with slightly differnet titles. two of them are on amazon and the previews show the same contents as the old one and they even seem to keep the original formatting. Ive entered those two and will do the contents when signed off. some dont have the contents page viewable and the question is can i import over the contents to those ones? Not only that but if i cant enter the contents is ther any point in adding those ones as new publications as there's no hard evidence that the genre stories (2 out of the 5 in total) are in them. I'd be gobsmacked if the contents are not the same as the original but alas that's not going to cut it. Ahasuerus has been giving me a tutorial on my page for a different related scenario and he's just given an update which i think, extrapolatin to this one gives the answer that its probably not valid to add the contents without more evidence. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2025 (EST)

"Cloning" contents was the wrong expression that was me doing my Terry Fuckwitt impression # Gaz Faustus (talk) 16:27, 20 February 2025 (EST)

Ah, I see. That really depends on how sure you are. If the new one claims to be a reprint (a lot of these do) - you can import with a "Contents imported from XXX edition;" publication note in the record you are importing into. If a book claims that the story was initially in that book, you can import it there with a note on the source again. Look at archive.org, OCLC and ebay to see if someone has the contents of the old one - most of them are somewhere. But if you do not have a strong statement that it is a reprint, I wouldn't. Feel free to also post on the Research board for a specific book - some editors have uncanny abilities to find screenshots and contents lists - this is what we have the board for.

The short rule is "I think" is not a valid source; another book saying something is until we prove it to be wrong (which we also document). Annie (talk) 16:33, 20 February 2025 (EST)

If it's out of copyright, Project Gutenberg can be a good source. OCR scans are not the same thing as images, but they're usually helpful. --MartyD (talk) 17:20, 20 February 2025 (EST)

cheers thought that was the most likely answer. just to clarify - i know the contents of the original as its on the internet archive. Gaz Faustus (talk) 18:33, 20 February 2025 (EST)

So you are asking if you can safely import into the reprints? Same answer applies - if it claims to be a reprint, you can (with a source note). If it just seems like it may be based on title alone, nope - unless you find something somewhere to prove that it does not skip/add stories. :) Annie (talk) 18:49, 20 February 2025 (EST)

"if it claims to be a reprint" does that mean it has to have that printed in or on the book itself but not if it says it in an amazon listing for instance? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2025 (EST)

Amazon’s listing can be a good enough source for that (just make sure you note the source in the notes). If we ever discover differently, it is fixable but as many problems as Amazon has, they rarely get the contents wrong (where they connect books is a different story). Also - for modern books, look inside may be useful (if it shows the correct edition that is). If you share an example, someone may be able to help - there are some publishers who literally take out of copyright books and reprint them. If it is one of those and the listing says reprint, it is a 99.99% certainty so I’d import. If you are still in doubt, leave it alone - empty is better than wrong :) Annie (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2025 (EST)

thanks i think I'm getting a feel for what you can and cant do - Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:02, 21 February 2025 (EST)

Excerpts +; questions

I'm asking for advice on the title and its two variants in this example. Are they varianted and dated correctly? Do we treat fragments the same as we do excerpts? Is the titling structure correct for the fragment(s)? There are also a lot of similar titles to be considered further down the Contents list here. For reference I'm looking at '* Title > Excerpts' and '* Date > Excerpts' at this Help page. Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2025 (EST)

If it is different enough to make a variant (so difference in language, title, author or translator but NOT contents), it carries its own date. If the text is different, it is not a variant (so two different fragments won't be varianted but the same fragment under different titles will be varianted). Nothing special about excerpts around their dating or varianting.

From the looks of this example, it is the same fragment so... if we insist on using separate titles, we use the correct date for them. However, if the fragment in the later books is not the same (has more or less material), then they are not variants even if they start at the same place. Annie (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2025 (EST)

Thanks for that help Annie, I'll see what I can do. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 01:57, 27 February 2025 (EST)

Just another piece for this. If there are multiple different excerpts with the same title but different content, please add a note to each title record indicating that it should not be merged with others of the same name unless they have exactly the same content and then note what this specific excerpt contains. Here are examples for the title "Starship's Mage (excerpt)" excerpt 1 and excerpt 2. Phil (talk) 17:56, 27 February 2025 (EST)

How to add a magazine

I have a copy of The Paris Review I need to add. I see that there are other examples for another year. My year is 2013 and I have one number of it, but I can't find instructions about what to add and in what order. Evertype (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2025 (EST)

Just enter the issue as you have before it (i. e. only genre-related content and analogous to other issues of the magazine). If you know the actual month of publication, I'd also add that (it seems to be published on a regularly quarterly basis), maybe this example may also be helpful (this magazine is also published every three months). Christian Stonecreek (talk) 11:06, 28 February 2025 (EST)

Those existing issues are titled incorrectly. They should not have both an issue number and date. The date is preferred over issue number ("The date is preferable, but the usage (be it the one of the magazine like Interzone or the one of the country of publication as in France) or an erratic or undocumented publication schedule may lead to the use of only the issue number.": See the Missing or Variant Dates bullet here). If we have the date, that is what should go in the title field. The issue number can be listed in the notes. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 11:52, 28 February 2025 (EST)

When I create New Magazine there is both Title and Publication sections to fill out, but the magazine already exists, even if the other entries have incorrect titles. I wouldn't know what to fix the others to. The example Stonecreek shows has both number and date in the title, doesn't it? Or do I go to some place and add a volume to the magazine from there? Evertype (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2025 (EST)

For a new magazine, the title section creates the title record (which is of type EDITOR for magazines and fanzines). The software uses the same title to create both the EDITOR title record and the MAGAZINE publication record. We do something unusual with EDITOR records insofar as we combine all the records for the magazine by the same editors for any given year (e.g. The Paris Review - 2018. The format for the title of these rolled up records is <Name of Magazine> - <Year>. We also adjust the date of the rolled up records to reflect the year only. For the first magazine entered for a given year, the title and probably the date need to be adjusted in a second edit. For subsequent issues, the new title record can be merged with the existing rolled up record. That is the best way to add new issues. For Christian's example, it appears that the year is part of the issue numbering i.e. the issue number is listed as "3/2021" within the magazine. Most magazines that use regular ordinal issue numbers, should not have date listed in their titles. I'll go ahead and correct the two issues of the The Paris Review, but it's simply a matter of moving the issue number from the title of the publication record, to the notes. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 18:43, 3 March 2025 (EST)

Reliability of Open Library links?

Can someone educate me about the reliability of Open Library links? I'm asking because so far I have not concerned myself with Open Library, but have now become quite confused after looking closely at an Open Library link for the first time, specifically in Domes of Fire.

• The pub record is about a paperback edition with ISBN 0-586-21313-9, has a publication date 1993-07-00 (probably taken from Locus1), a price £5.99 and a page count 584. The Open Library link on the other hand points to a page that describes a 1992 hardcover edition of the book with 448 pages and ISBN 0-246-13843-2. So pretty much everything does not match.
• According to the ISBN the hardcover edition described by the Open Library page would be this pub record. So my initial reaction was, I should shift the Open Library link to that hardcover pub record. But then I noticed that the hardcover pub record has a contradicting page count of 470, which matches Locus1. So who to believe, Locus1 or Open Library?
• To top things, the Open Library page has a preview that shows the copyright page for a "Special overseas edition" with the same characteristics as the regular paperback edition. For that special overseas edition we meanwhile have this pub record (PV'ed by me). But my point is, the Open Library page is not even consistent within itself, i.e. it describes one book and provides a preview of another book!

This leaves me with an impression of utter unreliability. Is my impression wrong? And should I shift now the Open Library link to a different pub record? Any illumination would be much appreciated, thanks! Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 09:00, 1 March 2025 (EST)

Titles with the same name

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?903657

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2065768

should these 2 stories by Lord Dunsany have the (I) and (II) in the titles? The contents pages for some of the books are on websites and theyre not in the titles as shown. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:41, 2 March 2025 (EST)

No, not if they are not on the title pages. The only time we use "(I)", etc. to disambiguate non-artwork titles is if the same work, under the same title, appears multiple times in the same publication (which is due to the software not allowing the same title record to appear multiple times in the same publication). If an author uses the same title for two different works, we use notes to indicate they are different, not disambiguation. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:41, 3 March 2025 (EST)

thought so. i'll confirm they're different stories and then sort out the titles and notes - cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:54, 3 March 2025 (EST)

Quotation marks

Refering to Help:Screen:EditTitle#Title / Symbols and punctuation / Quotes, "* Quotes can be entered either as single (') or double (") quotes. They are considered interchangeable typographical artifacts and no variant titles should be created for versions of the same story that use different types of quotes.", the correct thing to do is to merge these two titles: Fragment zum »Jäger Gracchus« and Fragment zum 'Jäger Gracchus'.

However, pedantically, the first sentence seems to exclude the use of the quotation marks used in this search - or are they covered/allowable under the next Help bullet "* Strange symbols". Please clarify. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2025 (EST)

Many of our rules / help were originally written with English only in mind and not all have been expanded for other languages. I don't know for certain, but I would suspect that this section was specifically about English quotes. I would suggest a Rules discussion about handing "»". -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2025 (EST)

I think you're probably right. I'll raise it as you suggest. Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 05:24, 8 March 2025 (EST)

Matthew John - To Walk on Worlds

Hello,

Hoping someone can help me understand where I may have gone wrong with my recent submission for this collection - https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?1046957

The contents are in the wrong order, I verified that I submitted them in the correct order.
The reprinted stories in the collection did not link to their existing ISFDB entries, but created new ones instead. I can submit Merge requests to clean these up, but wasn't sure if there was a way to link these correctly when submitted the publication?

Thanks,
MikePalumbo (talk) 05:58, 7 March 2025 (EST)

You need to order them explicitly (we use piped number when there are no page numbers - so |1, |2, |3 and so on - otherwise you will see random order (usually by Title ID). See for example here for example (as I was importing from the paper one, instead of |1, |2 and so on, I just put a pipe in front of the page number - it achieves the same thing - as long as the numbers can be ordered, the actual numbers do not matter). See the help page for more details.

When you add the title as a new title in the contents, it will always create a new record. If you want to reuse an existing one, you should not add it on the initial submission and instead you should import them later. When they are created like that, you always need to submit a merge request after the approval. Annie (talk) 10:33, 7 March 2025 (EST)

French capitalization

Hello, everyone! Or bonjour. I'm adding French collections and anthologies right now, and I don't understand NooSFere's use of capital letters. I don't quite understand the rules of French capitalization to begin with, but NooSFere seems to break them. For example, they list an H.G. Wells translation as "La Plaine des araignées", but it's already here as "La plaine des araignées." Usually NooSFere seems to use more capitals than they should, but sometimes something is listed as lowercase there that's uppercase in the book or on the ISFDB. It's rather confusing. (Also, they don't always seem to list authors as they appear in their works. For example, H.G. is always "Herbert George" Wells.) I'd appreciate advice on how to capitalize in French. Merci! —Rosab618 (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2025 (EST)

While I'm on the subject, should French stories be merged if they have different capitalizations? —Rosab618 (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2025 (EDT)

I cannot help with the rules of French capitalization, except with the advice to try to look them up somewhere on the net, or maybe ask editor Linguist who is from France for general help on the subject on his talk page.

As for "H. G. Wells" vs. "Herbert George Wells", the rule is that we record the name exactly as it is actually given in a publication, either on the title page, or on the page where the work starts (e.g. in an anthology). For instance, see here and here.

Finally, regarding merging: I would say yes, merge them and use the regularized capitalization, because the rule is that "Titles should have case regularized according to language-specific rules unless there is some specific evidence that the author intended certain letters to be in a specific case." For source of this quote, see here, specifically the bullet point "Case".

Hope this helps. And if more experienced editors spot me giving wrong advice, then please correct me. Cheers, Patrick -- Herzbube ^Talk 15:23, 9 March 2025 (EDT)

Thanks for your opinion about merging. I knew that names are recorded as they appear in the publication, but NooSFere lists H.G. as "Herbert George" (and A.E. van Vogt as "Alfred Elton", and Lovecraft as "Howard Phillips", et al.) whether or not that's how they appear in the actual text. I will ask Linguist if he can tell me how the caps should be standardized. Thank you! —Rosab618 (talk) 20:06, 9 March 2025 (EDT)

Academentia: Novel to Shortfiction/Chapbook

While getting ready to add a pub record for the audiobook of Academentia: A Future Dystopia, I noticed that the length of the ebook here is 105 pages which is normally the length of a novella. Looking at the audiobook, it is only about 3 hours long, which is also typically the length of a novella. Based on the original publication information on the copyright page of the ebook, I think this is actually a variant of the 2001 novella Academentia: A Fytte in Nine and thus not a novel.

1. Does this seem reasonable?
2. If so, I know how to change a novel to a chapbook, but in this case, it looks like it's a bit more complicated since this novella title is also included in the Wildside Double here. Are these the correct steps to take?
   1. Unmerge the novel pub that will become a chapbook.
   2. Change the existing title into a SHORTFICTION, length novella
   3. Variant the novella title with the 2001 novella Academentia: A Fytte in Nine as parent.
   4. Convert the new novel title into a chapbook using the procedure documented in the Help here.
   5. Merge the two variant SHORTFICTION titles.

Thanks! Phil (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

Your idea looks correct, change your procedure as follows.

• No need for step a
• Step b is correct
• Step c is correct
• Edit the ebook changing the pub type to chapbook and add a new title of type chapbook.

This completes the conversion. Remaining question, is this really an omnibus? John Scifibones 10:09, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

It's just like an Ace Double so I'd say yes. BTW, based on the page count of 135, I'd guess that the Bamberger title is also a novella. Should I change that as well? Phil (talk) 10:47, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

If you believe it's less than novel length, yes. I don't know either one, but they look to be the same length. John Scifibones 11:12, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

Done. Phil (talk) 12:38, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

Good job. I'm sure it's clear why unmerging was not necessary. The title is still associated with the same publications. Only it's type changed, novel to shortfiction. John Scifibones 12:47, 10 March 2025 (EDT)

Weirdpunk Books "zines"?

Hello,
I plan to submit entries for a few of the "zine" releases from Weirdpunk Books. They are saddle-stapled and measure 5" x 8" (not 5.5 x 8.5). For the format, should I select pamphlet, octavo (and note the size discrepancy), or other?
As for the type of entry, should I select chapbook for the single-story publications, and anthology for the multi-story ones?
Thanks,
MikePalumbo (talk) 19:37, 11 March 2025 (EDT)

Chapbooks/anthologies from what I can see which means that you need to use pamphlet as the format as octavo is only for magazines and fanzines. Other is really for "other" - decks of cards, posters - things that are not books at all but happen to have a story in them. It is not for "paper but I cannot determine the format" :) Annie (talk) 23:38, 11 March 2025 (EDT)

How to add a new year to a Magazine?

I need to add a volume for 1983 to Yale Review, and I looked at The Yale Review - 1941 but I don't know what to do. New Magazine gives me a page with both Title and Pub fields, but they differ from what's under just the Title or just the Pub from the 1941 page. What's the procedure? Thank you. Evertype (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2025 (EDT)

Add the magazine as any other book ("Yale Review, September 1983" for example as the title, the Magazine series as a series and so on). You will notice that you cannot add a publication title or author - it will match the one of the title record (just like with novels). Post approval, the title record gets converted to the yearly record with a second submission. It is always a two step process. Annie (talk) 23:30, 11 March 2025 (EDT)

Replica Dustjackets

Can we use them as covers? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 22:16, 13 March 2025 (EDT)

I have a 1969 Asimov hc 1st printing with its original cover and a replica cover for the same book, bought from dustjackets.com. The covers are identical (including colouration) apart from "Facsimile Dust Jackets LLC" at the top of the inside front flap. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2025 (EDT)

yeah i've seen quite a few of those facsimile ones. I recently entered an old novel and the only cover i could find for it was one of theirs so thats why I was mulling over whether i should upload it or if it would be frowned upon in polite circles.. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 01:34, 14 March 2025 (EDT)

They are faithful reproductions so I don't see why they shouldn't be used. It's about the accuracy of the image, so I'd say use it. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 04:54, 14 March 2025 (EDT)

I agree. I would add a note (both in pub notes and in the coverart title notes) that the linked image as of <today> is from an identical reproduction and is not a scan of the original. Then it's documented and a future someone with access to the original could know to replace it. --MartyD (talk) 09:44, 14 March 2025 (EDT)

its already been sent in and I mentioned it in the mod notes. if its signed off i'll add a pub note. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:53, 14 March 2025 (EDT)

The facsimile dust jackets produced by Facsimile Dust Jackets, LLC are not always accurate reproductions of the original jackets. For example, the facsimile dust jacket of the 1st ed of Siodmak's Donovan's Brain omits both the price and the cover artist's signature. After noticing this I had an email conversation with Mark Terry, the proprietor of Facsimile Dust Jackets, LLC. He confirmed the facsimiles are not perfect; they are merely intended to look nice on a jacketless book. He does allude to this on the website on page About These Facsimiles.

For this reason I strongly oppose use of these facsimiles for ISFDB cover images. However, if the consensus of the community is otherwise then they must be accompanied by a clear pub note stating that the image may not be an accurate reproduction of the original and may be missing features. Teallach (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2025 (EDT)

cheers mate its already signed off and have sent in a new edit with a note about where the cover comes from - we can always chuck it out again if enough people think its too iffy. Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:44, 16 March 2025 (EDT)

Uncredited/Unknown

just done a 19th century anthology which had no author/editor given so entered as uncredited. a new version has "unknown" on the title page. does it get a seperaate title with unknown varianted to uncredited? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2025 (EDT)

Unknown means “we do not know what the book may say - it may have a credited author or not”. Uncredited is for cases where there is literally no credit. If you share which book you are talking about, you will get better help but in general, the same book should not have both uncredited and unknown entries in the DB. Annie (talk) 00:16, 15 March 2025 (EDT)

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/218276207/antique-book-stories-by-english-authors

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stories-English-Authors-London/dp/B0CLTK3XSV/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1UIQ3MLG7UNRC&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.mBQEMp6HH6jgS7L0cvkwBg.YcPDPkY0mZQ9E-eBImLjaXsafD4EhHX6Yzp30Z4SnYs&dib_tag=se&keywords=Stories+by+English+Authors+London+zinc+read&qid=1742046302&sprefix=stories+by+english+authors+london+zinc+read%2Caps%2C66&sr=8-1

here's the listings showing the title pages. Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:50, 15 March 2025 (EDT)

Contents on the inside of the front cover of a paperback book

What do I put in the page field? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2025 (EDT)

It's fep (for front end paper) with books, like here (put the cursor on that abbreviation for a short description). Christian Stonecreek (talk) 02:08, 21 March 2025 (EDT)

cheers i think i asked this before. the guidance says that fep is for hardbacks which have endpapers, and mags. it should be changed to say inside front cover for paperbacks as well. Gaz Faustus (talk) 10:31, 21 March 2025 (EDT)

Where are you seeing hardbacks? Template:PubContentFields:Page says "book publication". The hover over text is "books". If "hardbacks" is stated somewhere else, I agree it needs to get cleaned up, but we need to know where in order to fix it. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:34, 21 March 2025 (EDT)

sorry mate phrased it the wrong way round - should be fep is for endpapers (which only hardbacks have), and inside covers of mags. It doesnt say owt about paperbacks. i've never seen a defintion of endpapers which says paperbacks have them. and even if i'm wrong I still think the help page should have "inside cover of paperbacks" added to the fep and bep category just in case any more idiots take up editing. (Going off 3.6 in Help:Screen:NewPub) Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:41, 21 March 2025 (EDT)

Cliff notes, etc

I can't find a policy for these; but what is the policy regarding Cliff Notes and the like? Do they count as titles? Thanks. gzuckier (talk) 12:53, 25 March 2025 (EDT)

Sorry, but what are cliff notes anyway? Christian Stonecreek (talk) 12:57, 25 March 2025 (EDT)

Aha. CliffNotes is a trademark which became the generic name for little chapbooks with like a 20 page summary of a famous book, intended for students assigned a book to read who didn't, for one reason or another, but want to get enough to pass the exam. Cliff is the name of the major publisher of such, I assume. gzuckier (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2025 (EDT)

We have several of these in the database. See Cliffs Notes. We also have similar publications by other publishers (e.g. Brodie's Notes). I believe they qualify as "Published non-fiction works about speculative fiction". Hope this helps. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 15:37, 25 March 2025 (EDT)

Many thanks! We do have something similar over here in Europe, but they usually are titled/ named differently and in various ways. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 02:38, 27 March 2025 (EDT)

'Pending edit', submitted more than 3 months ago

. Good day Sir, Madam,

I submitted an entry on 2025-01-27, submission # 6154317, an anthology (WEIRD WINDSOR Anthology).

Two things were flagged: on the price, I put: 'Pay what you want.' (PDF or EPUB)

And was told:

More than one space character is not allowed in the price field

All right, we can put 'Free' for the price, instead.

But the second one is about the barcode on the paperbacks (15 paperback copies were printed for the collaborators.) It said that:

ISBN-10s that starts with 2 and ISBN-13s that start with 9782 are typically in French (although exceptions exist), but the submitted language of this publication's main title is English The copies were printed in the UK, so, yes, exceptions exist. The ISBN is 2370001956766.

 I can send you a clear photo of the cover and the ISBN if needed.

But maybe the ISBN section could be left blank, since there are no more printed copies sold, and now that the anthology is available online. Here’s the link, by the way:

https://payhip.com/WeirdWindsor

So, I would appreciate help concerning these two little editing issues: changing the price for: 'Free'; and either removing the yellow notification about the ISBN (which is correct, photo proof upon request) or removing the ISBN altogether since now the anthology is available in electronic format (PDF or EPUB).

Thank you very much, and wishing you, Sir, Madam, a wonderful day!

Cordially,

-Carl Lavoie —The preceding unsigned comment added by Jahrel (talk • contribs) 17:28, April 2, 2025‎

It sat so long because it required a great deal of work. Here is the verified ebook. If you need an explanation of the changes and additions, I will post on your talk page. 18:46, 2 April 2025 (EDT)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?6214550; I made an edit that got a similar message about ISBN starting with 9782; Sarob is based in France as of a few years ago so that would explain it, right? --Username (talk) 19:52, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

The actual ebook had no ISBN. John Scifibones 20:39, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

untitled stories

I want to enter the book "Try and Stop me" by Bennett Cerf because it has a chapter called "The Trail of the Tingling Spine" which is a collection of stories that he said were told to him. most of them are ghost stories but none of them are titled. how should they be titled and disambiguated. i thought about something like "untitled [1]" etc with "The Trail of the Tingling Spine" as the series. is numbering them like that valid. Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

I tried to put a link in to the internet archive for these stories but it just showed up as ordinary text. Faustus (talk) 15:19, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Here you go. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:49, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

cheers Faustus (talk) 13:16, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

There is a recent R&S discussion on this topic that has not yet been resolved. The direction in which that was heading is to use "untitled [n] (pub title)" for this case. It's an unfortunate amount of extra work, but if that scheme is used, I would encourage you to edit the title records once created and enter something in the notes to identify each story (like first line + last line or dramatis personae or whatever seems useful). --MartyD (talk) 13:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

righto mate i'll do it like that - I dont mind sorting it out if it neds to be changed. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:30, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

Directory Entry transliteration

What, if any, effect does it have on the db if two authors with the same surname have their Directory entries transliterated differently? Some examples: Bäckström, Bergström, Engström, Myllylä, Nyström, Sjöberg, and one that's half-and-half Källström. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

The whole point of the transliterations is to make it easier to find an author (or title) because the search engine here treats accented/macroned letters (for example "ō" as opposed to "o") differently. Searching for "Engström" will not find "Engstrom" (and vice-versa). So, for accented characters, the non-accented version should be included as a transliteration, and any reasonable transliterations should be included (such as "Engstrom" and "Engstroem", in this case). I don't see any issues with any of the ones you linked. This also applies to Romanizations of non-Latin-based writing systems such as Japanese, Cyrillic, and so on. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:08, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Directory Entry is a bit of a dealer's choice because we can only pick one - either value is correct when multiple transliterations are possible. I tend to prefer the "strip all special parts and use the straight letters" option except for German names where the standard is to have "e" added replacing the umlauts. But I do not change this one if another transliteration is chosen instead. So even if the directory name for the two Nyström is different, the search by name will find it for both spellings because they carry the transliterations (which is why I do not search by Directory name and only look at it when I look at the author directory where only the first 2 letters matter anyway. The DB (and anything else on the site) really does not care - this field is only used if you do specific search for it and for that table. Annie (talk) 19:18, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Thanks for those quick answers, now I know there's nothing to see here :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Adding a new German translation of an English Anthology

Hello, I am preparing to enter a German translation of an anthology. I already searched in the frequently asked questions, in help, but still have questions left and need the community. The title: A Dragon-Lover's Treasury of the Fantastic (Editor Margaret Weis): https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?513 There are about 20 stories to enter. At the end of each story the original English title is given and also the name of the translator. The date of the German publication: 1995-05-00 1) Date for the German translations: Is it 1995-05-00 or do I check if there is a German translation of a story already on the database and use this date? 2) Translators: How can I enter the name of the translator of a story? 3) Varianting: Do I variant each story separately? Is there a way to variant all the stories in one submission? Thank you! SciFanta (talk) 18:01, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

Hello! I hope the following does help a bit.

Ad 1): Please do check if there's the same German translation (using the exact same title) already in the database: for example for Stepsons of Terra there are two different German translations (both using the same title proper). If there does exist this exact title, there are two possible ways to proceed: a) enter the title (and merge with the existing one after the publication was moderated), or b) import the existing title (s) after the publication was moderated. The second way is preferable, because we won't have doublette titles at any given point in time.

Ad 2): The translator is to be added in editing the notes of a title when this does exist, like here. Please use the Template:Tr template.

Ad 3): The individual titles have to be varianted separately: every one has to be varianted to a different title. If you can rely on already existing titles it's possible to import them in one submission step, though [see b) under Ad 1)]. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 02:48, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Thank you Christian, your information helps! As I found neither the German title "Drachen füttern verboten" nor the ISBN in the database I going to start the process Greetings! SciFanta (talk) 03:32, 10 April 2025 (EDT).

Great! Just be sure to also add the publication series. I also hope there are credits for the respective translators: this publisher sometimes (foremost in the 1980s and 1990s) was sloppy with regards to this point (and some others also). In those cases the only thing left was to add a note like to this title. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 04:18, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Collections with different contents

Theres a collection with 12 stories. A later collection (different publisher) has the same title but only has 5 stories (they are all in the earlier one). Seperate titles or varianting? cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:28, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

Gaz, I've come across this before and asked the same question. My post received one reply expressing an opinion but no definitive answer.

The thread is here: Collections with Abridged or Expanded Contents.

As you can see from my examples, there does not appear to be a consistent policy for this situation.

This ought to be resolved. Teallach (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

cheers mate do you know if they can be varianted if they have the same title and author? I think I'll do the 5er as a seperate title with notes and see what the reviewer says. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 15:07, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

No, don't variant them. Variants are for same work with different title or author. I suggest you wait a bit to see if a moderator contributes to this thread. If not, go with your own proposal: "seperate title with notes". Teallach (talk) 18:29, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

In general terms, we treat collections like any other content type. If the differences are minor, we consider it the same work. If the differences are large, we consider it a new work. Same as with a story that has been edited, it becomes a judgement call when enough changes are enough to call it a new work. If it is just a single work difference, you will likely find the editions have been combined with a title note stating differences. If it is a larger difference, you will likely find the editions are separate with title notes on both stating the differences and not to merge. In this case, I would treat as different since it's such a large difference. They would be treated as separate works so not varianted to each other. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:05, 13 April 2025 (EDT)

cheers i'll do that - Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:29, 13 April 2025 (EDT)

JLaTondre: Thanks for the clarification. Now that I know it's a judgement call, all is fine. I can work with that. Teallach (talk) 18:31, 13 April 2025 (EDT)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?36238

this one sprang to mind that i pved a bit back. the Sphere edition is missing 4 stories, 4 poems and the afterword that are in the american books so not a minor difference but it wouldnt seem right to unvariant them. (anthology not a collection but similar problem) Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2025 (EDT)

For that one, I would definitely split it into its own title, after verifying that the contents really aren't there in the American release. That's too much of a difference. They basically left out around 50 or so pages of content. That's too much of a difference to be a variant. Notes should be placed on both titles, though, pointing to the other and saying they shouldn't be merged. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:16, 14 April 2025 (EDT)

well i owned both books when i wrote that note, its the american one thats got the extra stuff which is why i bought it and then offloaded the uk version to the British Heart Foundation. Willem H and stonecreek are pvs for the 2 versions so you should give them a shout for extra confirmation. I'll let you sort it out as i'm happy the way it is. - Gaz Faustus (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2025 (EDT)

They've been split now: Best SF: 1973 and The Year's Best Science Fiction No. 7. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:48, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

still needs to be varianted to the canonical author and put it in the series (No.7) - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:52, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

Done. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:01, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

they show up nicely together when theyre in a numbered series like this one but if they're not in a series and have different names they could end up at opposite ends of a list of anthologies or collections and you wouldnt know theyre related just from the list. is threr any way of grouping them other than varianting or series so they show up together? - Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:22, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

Not really. They each have links to the other, so that should be good enough. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:00, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

Bulgakov's name

In all the editions of Cuore di cane published by De Donato (one already in the db, one just submitted) the author name is spelled Michaíl (accented "í"), but when I submitted the new book, or tried to correct the one already present, the system replaced it with a normal "i". Can somebody fix it? thanks! --Fantagufo (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2025 (EDT)

Fixed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:51, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

thanks Joe! --Fantagufo (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

Tonelli's name

The artist Etonelli (Elio Tonelli) is not actually credited with this name in the two publications he has in the DB. He is identified only by his signature, which is sometimes clearly "E.Tonelli", sometimes "ETonelli". I think that the canonical name should be changed to "E. Tonelli" or "Elio Tonelli". What do you think? --Fantagufo (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

When there is no explicit credit, we generally credit using their canonical name since signatures can vary wildly (initials, abbreviated, symbols, etc.). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:49, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

I know and agree. What I'm saying is that there is no reason to have a misleading "Etonelli" as canonical name, just because it was never explicitly credited. --Fantagufo (talk) 22:08, 16 April 2025 (EDT)

Updated. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:58, 17 April 2025 (EDT)

Author: Kate Moretti

Kate Moretti is the author of the short story "Blink" in the first Brave New Girls anthology. However, in Kate's author page, her surname is misspelled as Maretti. I have an e-book copy of the anthology, and the correct spelling their is MORETTI. Her biographical note their also confirms she is the same Kate Moretti that is listed at Amazon.

I don't have permission to change the spelling of her name on her author page. Would someone please help. Thanks! Michael Main 14:50, 22 April 2025 (EDT)

The way you can fix this is to go to the "Blink" title page and edit the title there, changing the author to "Kate Moretti". That will create a new author page for that name, and the old one will be deleted (automatically, I think, although perhaps we'll have to go do that manually -- I forget). This specific case is simple because it is used in only two versions of one publication, and we can easily confirm that the correct spelling is present in the sources for each. And the author page itself does not have any info we want to preserve, so making a new page and deleting the old one is fine. --MartyD (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2025 (EDT)

That's right, "orphaned" author records are deleted automatically. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:30, 22 April 2025 (EDT)

Many thanks for the instructions. I have submitted the change from Maretti to Moretti in the story's title page. Thanks again. --Michael Main 20:27, 22 April 2025 (EDT)