User talk:BLongley/Archives/Archive07

"Uncharted Territory"

Locus helpfully provided the month of publication for your verified NEL edition of Connie Willis's "Uncharted Territory". Ahasuerus 00:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

That'll do me for now, unpacking the "W"s still looks months away. :-( And NEL have varied between lots of information about all other printings to good month info about prior printings only - so there may be no further info when I find it. BLongley 00:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Perry Rhodan #5

This pub popped up on the data inconsistency list because it's an anthology with serials. It looks like someone merged your title records with other title records, keeping them as serials. If your book doesn't have all the magazine contents of the other volumes (this looks a lot like an Ace Double), perhaps the content records should be changed to novels (or novellas, I suppose, depending upon the length). Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That's now so far different from what I entered I'm just going to remove my verification and leave it to people that can compare. It looks like Harry's worked on it, he can keep it. BLongley 18:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Ace Perry Rhodans are a big can of worms, in part because we originally entered them as Magazines and then realized that many issues had more than one printing. Also, the Ackermans translated PR stories out of order, so the US publication order is nothing like the original publication order. Of course, at some point we will also need to set up VTs for the original German titles as well... Ahasuerus 19:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Not I. I do not have an Orbit PR#5. Someone saw that I cloned the notes between the three Ace PR#5 and trimmed my notation to fit the Orbit. I do have one Orbit PR#13, which I got for comparison and I found that the British PR series did not exactly copy the Ace contents, etc. When I was active in PR the Orbit PR's were still shown with the Ace. I did not break their series link, though I wrote to someone about the differences and the series only went for 39 issues. Apparently the Orbit PR's are no longer in any series. Harry can not keep it, he does not have one. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I will create a British PR series. That should make for greater ease in finding them. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but some are there and some are not and I think I will lose them if I try to get them separated. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, on the understanding that I'm not verifying anything, just recalling what I think I did originally: it looked like a novel, but when I found out that it contains two stories I made it an Omnibus or an Anthology. There's no way I'd credit Wendayne Ackerman as an Editor, as that name wasn't on the title page. I wouldn't have cared about the content lengths, so might have left them as novels or made them Shortfiction. The price is probably right, the cover looks as I remembered it, but if and when I find it again I want to absolve myself of all responsibility. I'll send the book (for free) to anyone that wants to tackle Perry Rhodan properly, but I don't. (Actually, I think I have another Orbit PR, and that's available for free too - just let me escape this little bibliographical nightmare!) :-( BLongley 00:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Bill, from my limited viewpoint the magazine classification does not fit the British editions, as almost all of the extra material was not printed. To me, just that would separate them out. Bob Hall and I discussed the story length and he went with the DB rulings that the stories themselves do not meet the novel length. To me, they would meet the 60's and before short novel standard. As for editor, much of the 'editor' attribution is suspect as Ackerman was the main man and the rest is simply casting. He was never good at editing, he was good at titles. As you say, if you do not have the material of a magazine you do not need editors. Wendayne was the translator and her interest stirred her husband. I personally do not have the Orbits and it looks like it would cost too much to get them in the U.S. Actually, I would rather have numerous other British printed books as extras with the great art. Nutshell, If I had the bulk of them I could do it right, otherwise the only thing that could/should be done is to separate them into their own series and let the trickle effect of verification have at it. No thanks on the freebees. I will continue to try to respond to questions on the Ace/Ackermans, but do not have the material for much more. As for entering the German series, that is quite huge and really needs someone native to do it right. Also there is definitely a French and Japanese series reprints and maybe others? Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 21:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

date of "The Tsantsa" in The Eighth Pan Book of Horror Stories

A submission of a 1950 collection of Sandoz stories led me to merge The Tsantsa, which also appears in your verified The Eighth Pan Book of Horror Stories, changing the date from 1967 to 1950. --MartyD 12:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Tactics of Mistake

I added the publication month (1972-06-00) to this verified pub. It is stated in my 3rd printing. Thanks, Willem H. 15:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Abyss

Found the artist's signature on the cover of [this] so redid the note and added a few more just because I was there! Spent a few fruitless minutes looking for the elusive Mercury Press edition but that name now belongs to a Canadian small press whose catalogue goes back not nearly far enough; also came across an interesting Feminist SF site that I may check out again later. Ms Wilhelm barely rated her name in their index so I guess she wasn't enough of a woman for them. Think Mercury must have something to do with magazines but then the mention wouldn't have said "Mercury Press edition". I'm a bit stumped as to where to look. Any ideas? Also see you've just celebrated {??¿¿??] your second anniversary on the site. Bet it seems longer.... ;-) Hope your health continues to improve so you can better impersonate a Canadian and get shoveling!! :-) :-) ~Bill, --Bluesman 15:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

No idea on the 1967 Mercury edition, even her own web-page doesn't go earlier than 1971 for "Plastic Abyss". (Although it omits the other story from her bibliography entirely, so that may not be the best place to check.) BLongley 19:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I think the note must be about F&SF Feb 1968 and confuses copyright date of 1967 with magazine publication of "Stranger in the House" (published by Mercury Press) in 1968? BLongley 19:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me of the anniversary, but I'm not really sure how one celebrates such. Not by shovelling snow, I'm sure. Fortunately the thaw has started and should have finished before I'm allowed heavy-duty stuff. BLongley 19:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

B5: To Dream in the City of Sorrows

Just did an entry for the US edition of [this] and there is an introduction by Straczynski. The OCLC record for the British edition doesn't show the Roman numerated pages, does for the US edition. Unlikely you would have missed it, but..... ~Bill, --Bluesman 19:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Sphere edition of If the Stars are God

Before I make it into a variant, can you re-check to make sure that this edition credits "Rick Sternback" while the US edition credits "Rick Sternbach"? Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, confirmed both. It is the same picture and the credits are different that way. BLongley 18:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. I've made it into a variant of the "Sternbach" record. Mhhutchins 19:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

You're lucky I filed it under Benford rather than Eklund. :-) I've still not got the all-clear to restart unpacking :-( - but the doctor might clear me on Thursday and I'll get beyond "C". BLongley 19:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Doctor's Orders

Yes, that cover is the same on as on the second printing. WeAreGray

proposed changes to By Any Other Name

Hi Bill. See this submission of mine, affecting your verified By Any Other Name. If figured you could review and approve or reject all at the same time. I will 2-verify once you look it over. Thanks. --MartyD 17:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll take your word for it for now, I'm not going to get to "R" for some time yet. (Just started unpacking Heinlein tonight. I hope they let me renew the lease here, or I'll only just have finished unpacking by the time I have to pack again.) BLongley 18:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Out of the Dead City

Have 'reasoned' out a publication date for [this] and noted it in the record. Have also asked the 100,000 mile... er... submission man to check Locus for confirmation. The year is solid, the month not so much. If Mike comes up empty then I'll clear the month but leave the year. The other two thirds are confirmed and the fit seems correct [for now]. Managing to tackle any boxes yet? ~Bill, --Bluesman 17:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Sort of - I acquired two more last weekend, and have tackled one of those. (I know that doesn't really help....) BLongley 18:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Hutchins has confirmed the date from Locus #201 as April '77. Have adjusted the record and the note. Just lift the light boxes!! ~Bill, --Bluesman 19:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The problem is not the boxes, it's the book-cases. I need to position and adjust the next batch. And they're in the coldest rooms at the moment, so I'll just stay in front of a nice warm computer with a select few books for now. BLongley 19:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Federation

I added the publication month to this verified pub from the copyright page. Thanks, Willem H. 21:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

British Fantasy Society

[This] discussion asks about the magazine. I have no idea what to answer. I will ask what's in it but even reviews would count. Do you know of this mag?? Thanks. ~Bill, --Bluesman 16:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Only from this page. Seems to be clearly in. BLongley 19:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Here be Demons

Changed the page count for Here be Demons, you missed the Epilogue. Dana Carson 09:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Depression or Bust / Dawnman Planet

I added the cover artist (Chris Foss) from the signature, and notes from Locus #166 to this verified pub. Thanks, Willem H. 17:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Expiration Date by Tim Powers

If this publication is not the March 1995 first edition from HarperCollins, perhaps the dating is incorrect? Maybe the Voyager imprint is a later printing of the title but kept the same ISBN and price? Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

A 2007 verification of mine is of course open to a lot of questions - I've improved a lot since then I hope. Unfortunately I haven't got that far with my unpacking yet (still got to move a few more bookcases before I get past the H's) - maybe this weekend. BLongley 21:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Still, it's not necessarily wrong - one of the things I dislike about our dating is that it's perfectly possibly to create a (maybe in this instance) definite year-only reprint that will appear before the year-and-month-specific first edition. I see I left a lot more notes than usual for me in 1997, so this might be the case here. I'll look out for it and see if I messed up or we need to push for better "partly unknown, but can't be earlier than X or later than Y" support. There are a lot of publishers that only put year on publications, and when we can adjust the first printing according to Locus or suchlike, it makes all reprints that year look like a newbie mistake. (Which this might have been.) Ah well, another reason to unpack a bit more.... BLongley 21:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I had been wondering about this when I verified the pub, but the notes are exactly as stated on the copyright page ("This paperback edition 1995" over a full numberline over "Previously published as a paperback original by HarperCollins Science Fiction and Fantasy 1995"). They do share the ISBN (not uncommon) and the March 1995 edition has a cover art credit, not found in my copy (no credit, no signature). Willem H. 21:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Vision of Tomorrow editor

Ashley also credits Philip Harbottle as the editor. Do you think we can take a wild leap of faith and actually give the credit to him? Magazine issues published out of order! A bibliographer could go mad!--swfritter 15:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I've no objection, it's just the first two sites I used for contents didn't credit an Editor so I entered then non-genre style. As to out of order - well, those sites put the stated 2 as number 2 and the unstated earlier issue as 3 so I can live with them being in non-chronological order here too, if people prefer. I only entered them at all as I kept seeing "first published in Vision of Tomorrow" notes and finally gave in - hopefully we've got the fiction now at least. (Those Walter Gillings essays may be of interest to someone too, though not me.) BLongley 18:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. You would think that the first priority of the rest of the world would be to facilitate the work of bibliographers.--swfritter 15:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Cold Commands/Dark Commands

There's a submission in the queue that has me baffled. Wants to change the title of an existing record (which seems to be vaporware) to a title that the only reference I can find doesn't come out until 2011 but the new editor wants to put a date of July 2010! I'm not even sure what to ask. New editor is [KelleyCook]. I might need a seeing eye dog on this one!! ;-) ~Bill, --Bluesman 22:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks baffling to me too. "A Land Fit for Heroes" number 19785? That's not a series edit I'd approve. Just hold it and talk to the editor. He/She may know why we have vapourware, and knowledge of future publications. Sometimes the editors DO know more than we Mods do. BLongley 23:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion underway and the series # is still in question, but the justification for the title change is valid. But I'd be remiss in not trying to hold onto what little almightyness the MOD-image creates!! ;-) Thanks for looking! ~Bill, --Bluesman 23:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Obscure Life and Hard Times of Kilgore Trout

Hi Bill, could you check the Granada edition of The Book of Philip José Farmer (unpacked yet?) for the "story" The Obscure Life and Hard Times of Kilgore Trout. All 5 pubs I own with the piece have a subtitle on the story's titlepage (A Skirmish in Biography). If yours has it too, I think I can safely change the title. By the way, I have some doubts about this being a short story. It's one of Farmers fictional author biographies, just like this one, which I entered as an essay. Any thoughts? Thanks, Willem H. 20:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The "F" novels and collections should all be unpacked, I'll go look. BLongley 20:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Subtitle is present. As to category - well, if it's fictional, I tend to leave it as SHORTFICTION, and reserve ESSAY for facts, or at least real-life opinions. There's a Rules and Standards discussion somewhere but I can't recall the outcome and am not really that bothered. BLongley 20:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, submitted the title change, and SHORTFICTION in stead of SHORTSTORY. Willem H. 21:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Bradley's Star of Danger

According to Locus #233 (May 1980), this printing was published in April 1980. Mhhutchins 06:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Same month from the same source for this printing of The Winds of Darkover. Mhhutchins 06:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

We're on a roll here. Same for this printing of The World Wreckers. (Ace reprinted six Darkover novels in April 1980.) Mhhutchins 06:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, all changed. You can do that automatically in future and note the source, I mostly trust Locus. BLongley 18:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The duelling machine

I changed the price for your verified here, there's a price of 55p on my copy (middle of back cover), what about yours ? Hervé Hauck 18:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

On mine the price is scratched out. BLongley 18:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Quag Keep

Dated [this ] from Locus1. ~Bill, --Bluesman 00:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The Number of the Beast - Your version versus the 1981 paperback

Afternoon! This. [1]. I cloned of your version and read your notes. Mine differentiates your edition by stating yours as "NEL Open Market Edition January 1980" while it calls itself "First NEL Paperback Edition April 1981". Your price is higher, so yours is special, the 'open market editions' having more quality(?) comparatively. My ISBN is after yours. I believe it is an early form of the "International" edition, which precedes some printings, but is never the first paperback printing. I think it must be a publication treaty between nations that allows one first worldwide available printing. The higher pricing may be because of an extra tax or treaty fee. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 21:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Lord Kalvan

Replaced a broken link image with what I think is the right one (number matches) for [this] Just to the left of the lounging gent's left heel is what looks like a Roman numeral III with a bar on top and bottom. Image isn't quite sharp enough to be certain but I think that's one of Michael Whelan's signatures. The M/W combined in several forms over the years. ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Replaced again with the one I uploaded to Amazon. ;-) Haven't unpacked the physical copy yet, but doubt I'd recognise Whelan from that description. BLongley 19:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Lee's Volkhavaar

According to Locus #234 (June 1980), this printing was published in May 1980. Mhhutchins 17:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Good enough for me, hope it is for Harry too. BLongley 19:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Midas World

There are times when I think [yo_] are q_ite certifiable...... lololol!!!! ~Bill, --Bluesman 01:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Fort_nately, I've kept one step ahead of the men in white coats. :-) BLongley 19:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

King of Argent

Just added the interior art to my Canadian edition of [this]. I assume the US edition has the same piece? ~Bill, --Bluesman 19:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I added the art and copied the note from Bill's edition. --Willem 21:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, a Primary2 is as good as a Primary1. And saves me rushing my unpacking. I should be concentrating on car-buying rather than ISFDB at present. BLongley 21:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Month for Engineman

I added a month to your 2-verified Engineman from Locus and added a note as to the source. --MartyD 11:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Month for The Martian Race

I added a month to your verified The Martian Race from Locus1 and updated the notes to reflect the source. --MartyD 12:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Book reviews and serials

What I finally figured out with reviewing serials is that the review should be of a variant title master. I generally use a master of type "SERIAL" mostly to document the fact that the serial was never published as a book. Many others use a variant title of "NOVEL". Harry has a long way to go, and should stay very busy, so hopefully we can get him up to speed so he can get most of the work done on his own. You probably have a more authoritative source for Scoops than Contento. He lists the editor as F. H. Dimmock.--swfritter 13:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Galactic Central have Dimmock as Editor-in-Chief, Buley as Editor. Bear Alley describes Buley as Sub-Editor though. I've no preference either way, just thought I'd get the raw data in. BLongley 14:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Bleiler lists Dimmock as series editor and Buley as "equivalent" of managing editor which probably makes Dimmock the best choice. The issue by issue contents are also in the Bleiler book. I have placed the mags in a series but have not created a wiki since the user-generated wiki pages are supposed to be deprecated - sometime.--swfritter 14:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Greatest thanks. I can enter the Bleiler errata as it comes. Also thanks to whoever merged my notes. Thanks very greatly, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:21, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Paperback Parlour Review

Morning Bill! This. [2]. I was looking at "Kurt Mahr" and found "Beware the Microbots" (Ace PR#55)which was published by Ace in 1978 and the Orbit editions were generally 4 years behind and the review should have been for an Ace, since Orbit, according to a multitude of sources stopped Perry Rhodans at 39. Yet here is a review leading to an Orbit edition that ABE does not have any by ISBN or searching (Orbit/Perry Rhodan/1974-1979). My problem is that the referred book has all these details in Amazon.com and .uk. Did the review provide the details for an Orbit edition or is this a created book with wrong details. One source uses the Orbit data, but states the book as the Ace edition. Sorry as this probably brings out that old PR dilemma, but I can not get a handle in U.S. Could it be an advance edition? would send notes to vendors, but have never found a way through Amazon. (of course in the U.S. I usually get the old saw that 'We have too many books to check the data for you). Other question, How is the Paperback Parlour Review? Sounds neat but looks like a lot of books, per page. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 11:41, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The review is indeed of an Orbit edition. That's number 35 by British numbering, and number 34 is reviewed on the same page. PP reviews don't give date of the reviewed edition, but of first: and says both were 1973. The reviewed editions are normally from the two months before the PP date, being a bi-monthly publication that tried to review all British paperbacks - so reviews are sometimes barely more than an acknowledgement of a publication. BLongley 11:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Greatly. I became confused. It is correct then, just unavailable. I do think it is neat though (Paperback Parlour) as it gives one a chance to keep up with British editions. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 13:11, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's been very useful, as has Paperback Inferno, the follow-on. They're just so much work to enter! BLongley 14:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Always, Always! I for one though am thankful, as my interest is always stimulated, especially by the British connections. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 15:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Just added one more issue - and look how long it's taken me! --> BLongley 16:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

"It's Great to Be Back!"

Hi, thanks for the welcome. I'm afraid that I won't be doing much, just adding in a little stuff as it occurs to me. I'm *slowly* rereading my way through the Condon canon -- I think that a lot of his stuff can qualify, marginally. Eventually I'll work out the interface, etc....

Wildside is putting together new editions of my works, primarily for ebooks, although also, I guess, for trade paperbacks. Here's the Kindle edition: http://www.amazon.com/Dinosaur-Park-ebook/dp/B003CYLDW0?tag=amazonselle00-20 for the first of them. Does that go into the ISFBD?

All the best, Hayford Peirce 22:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes. It goes in. With various discounts I got it for about $4.00 from Fictionwise.--swfritter 23:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll see if I can remember all this when the new editions of the next books come out. Hayford Peirce 18:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Peacock Books

Several different publishers were all in the db as "Peacock", including the Penguin imprint, a Chicago publisher (one book in 1972), and Peacock Press (publisher of artbooks, distributed by Bantam). In separating the pubs of these publishers I changed the records for two of your verified pubs, adding the Penguin parent: The Owl Service and The Crystal Gryphon. There are three pubs that remain as simply "Peacock", published in 1968. I didn't add the Penguin parent name to them because there wasn't enough info to indicate whether Peacock was an imprint of Penguin at that time. Please feel free to make any further changes in any of these pubs. The publications from all publishers have been separated now, so it may be easy if you wish to revert all of the "Peacock Books / Penguin" pubs back to simply "Peacock". Your call. Thanks. Mhhutchins 12:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I think the ones you left share the expected logo, so I just changed it back, rather than redo the wiki page to match. BLongley 17:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

SFBC UK

Saw your notes in [this] and thought maybe [this] site would be of interest? Ran across the link in one of Ahasuerus' notes. Cheers! ~Bill, --Bluesman 22:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of the site but am not especially interested in book club editions. BLongley 18:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

World's Fair 1992

Added the artist to [this], his signature is on the cover [6.5 cm up and 2 cm in from bottom right]. I have the first printing and the "Introduction" is titled just that. You have it as "Author's Introduction". Did ACE really change it for the second printing? ~Bill, --Bluesman 16:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe. I'll have to put checking that on the "To-Do" list though - I'm sort of employed again. BLongley 18:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Catastrophes, Chaos & Convolutions

Regarding this collection, IMHO this and your verified and my copy are the same book and the first and only printing as per copyright page of our copies (the first sub is visibly a Locus-based supposition). What do you think ? Hervé Hauck 12:05, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I proceded with the changes for the first printing to match my copy. Hervé Hauck 12:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Time is the Simplest Thing

The printing statement in [this] record seems to be belied by [this] earlier [?] printing. The ISBNs seem to go the wrong way but the price difference puts the '77 as an earlier printing. Both have the Magnum logo on the cover. ~Bill, --Bluesman 22:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to add that to my to-do list, Simak is not handy. BLongley 16:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Moorcock's My Experiences in the Third World War

Not sure what's going on with this title, but the two pubs appear to be the same edition. You've verified one and Unapersson verified the other. Only diff is how the stories are credited. I noticed this because I was going to add a note that it was exported to the US for $4.75, according to Locus #239 (November 1980). Mhhutchins 03:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I suspect that James Colvin isn't mentioned, but I don't have it handy to recheck. BLongley 16:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Miss Wildthyme and Friends Investigate

Re the cover image - I emailed the publishers and they are happy for ISFDB to deep-link to them. They have two earlier books in the series which were published without ISBNs; both as sci-fi, is it ok to add them? Whofan 18:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

That's fine - I answered on your talk page, as we find it's easier to keep conversations in one place. BLongley 21:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Cavalier covers

It looks like the "non-worksafe gallery of relevant covers" that you linked over on Author:Editors of Cavalier last year is now kaput :( Ahasuerus 15:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I find an awful lot of dead links now. :-/ Not just the Geocities and AOL Hometown ones either - a lot of minor authors seem to have moved from their own domains to blogs. BLongley 16:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Analogue men

Regarding your verified here, I have an earlier Sphere printing (priced at 3/6) so yours is perhaps not the first printing. I let you decide if you want to update your note. Hervé Hauck 12:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Klingon by Dean Wesley Smith

I have a copy of this book and the title should be Star Trek: Klingon. If you look at the listing on the very first two pages of all the books published up to that point, you will see it listed that way. I also looked at some other Star Trek books with listings in them (either the very first couple of pages or the last couple of pages) and they all list Klingon as Star Trek: Klingon. Just thought you should know. --Astromath 13:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

ARC

Hello ! As you seem to be on duty now, I'd like to know if ARCs are to entered in the database. Hervé Hauck 16:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Good question! However, we don't seem to have an absolute answer: see the last discussion. I think we're generally against them, but there may be special reasons for some titles - e.g. when they're given their own ISBN or the first publicly available copies state that they're later editions. I don't enter them myself, but that's partly because I don't have many. BLongley 16:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Hit or Myth by Robert Asprin

Re: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?HTRMTHMBWB1985 Found the correct cover here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hit-Myth-Robert-Asprin/dp/044133850X/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1275666465&sr=1-5. I did not edit. Thought I'd let you do it because I'm still foggy on how to link to an amazon site. --Astromath 15:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviews

Could you have a look at [this] discussion? I'm afraid it's quite outside my knowledge level. Thanks! ~Bill, --Bluesman 00:50, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Venus

As you're "on duty", I was wondering if the rank #16 of this novel in Bova's Grand Tour wasn't perhaps a mistake (#6 ?) see here. Hervé Hauck 14:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

It certainly looks wrong, but I've no idea what's right. BLongley

In the Drift

I corrected the number of pages and added Terry Carr's introduction, the maps and a note about this to your verified In the Drift. Thanks, --Willem H. 18:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Dates of early printings of The Mouse on the Moon

Hey Bill, I'm wondering if your verified 9th printing of The Mouse on the Moon can shed any light on this question, if you have it somewhere it is easy to find. Thanks, --MartyD 00:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I've not unpacked the "W"s yet. It's still at least one box down. BLongley 18:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Century mod

topmods.ggi shows BLongley 100,892! Congratulations. --Marc Kupper|talk 04:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations. Does it help with the pool game? LOL Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 12:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks muchly. No, it doesn't help with the pool playing - I should practice that more. (3 losses out of 3 so far in the singles - but I have had a doubles win and as Captain can claim credit for the winning team-selection this week.) I doubt I'll catch Mike Hutchins on top mods, but do still aim for 100,000 contributions - sometime. The sort of submissions I'm doing don't count a lot really - unless I add a magazine one review at a time, it's just one contribution for the whole thing. The Magazine Mods are probably way ahead of me in terms of actual data-changes. BLongley 00:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Numbers reflect effort, but anyone doing an anthology or having to re-edit gets numbers, but someone has to look at it and that is much appreciated by me. LOL Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 13:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

2nd printing of The Shape Changer

Ace's first printing of this title was in May 1981. Did your verified copy of the second printing fail to remove the date slug of the first printing? Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to get back to you, that's not unpacked. BLongley 19:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, found it. An early verification error from me, moved to 0000-00-00 for now. Not sure how the 3rd printing gets its date. BLongley 22:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Book of Ptath

Should [this] have the date as 1969? I have a later printing which notes "Published in 1969 by Panther", but does give a 1967 date for the S&J Van Vogt Omnibus. Thanks! --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

That's even less unpacked than the above. :-( BLongley 20:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Pawns of Null-A

Does [this pub] indicate in any way it might be a reprint? Have come across this:

The Pawns of Null-A 1956 88,700 words

— Ace 1956 ? $0.35 D-187
— Digit 1960 August 2/6 UK R377
— Sphere 1970 ? ? ? ? ? — some Sphere printings include an introduction by van Vogt; this is largely based on the introduction he wrote for the 1970 Berkley edition of The World of Null-A
— Sphere 1972 February £0.30 UK 0-7221-8766-1
— Sphere 1972 July £0.30 UK 0-7221-8771-8
— Sphere 1974 November £0.45 UK 0-7221-8772-6
— Sphere 1976 August £0.65 UK 0-7221-8747-5
— Sphere 1985 ? £1.95 UK 0-7221-8773-4
— Sphere 1985 ? £1.95 UK 0-7221-9773-4

on ICSHI. Note the two Sphere printings in 1972, fortunately with different ISBNs. BLIC lists the first as does OCLC and Amazon.Uk agrees with the February printing date. The second printing, which matches the catalogue # on the above record, doesn't search on BLIC or OCLC. --~ Bill, Bluesman 22:40, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Still not anywhere near unpacking the "V"s I'm afraid. Icshi is probably more accurate than me though, if you can't wait. IIRC, he had noted every van Vogt I owned at the time I checked, although he didn't always have covers for such. BLongley 23:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Created a record for the earlier ISBN. Didn't touch yours. This note will still be there when you get to the V's. By then your 'secondary' verified record additions page will be book length!! ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The Twenty-Second Century Lancer vs Panther

Afternoon! This [3]. I have the Lancer version and have a couple of problems. Instead of "Occupational Risk" I have "Balance" starts "Luigi said: 'Signor!'". Can find no "Balance" short story either. I have "Break-Point" not "Break Point". I "The Rather Improbable History of Hilary Kiffer" not "The Rather Improbable History of Hiliary Kiffer" (lacking second i). Tuck has "Occupational Risk" and "Hiliary" and no hyphen in Break Point. Changes changes! Get a couple rounds of ale and pool in before anything else! LOL Take your time, it can que forever. I hate collections/anthologies. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 22:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Harrison's Starworld

Based on the price of this printing (and your own cribsheet) I'd guess this was probably published in the late 1980s. Mhhutchins 04:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Niven & Barnes' The Descent of Anansi

There are two records for verified copies of the first printing of this title: yours and Kraang's. Mhhutchins 17:08, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Fantasy Review #92

I did a second primary verification for this issue, making these changes:

Added the interior art for the contents page. (Not particularly important, but I'd done the same for the other issues that I'd verified.)
Added missing review for Asimov presents the Great SF Stories 14 (1952) ( page 16)
Corrected the miscredited author for In the Face of My Enemy (page 18) and noted the miscredit on the review's title record.
Added missing review for The Sword and the Tower (page 23)
Corrected spelling of reviewer on page 24 and 25 from "Micheel A. Morrison" to "Michael A. Morrison"
Changed the name of the book reviewed on page 25 from The Revenge of the Senior Citizens to The Revenge of the Senior Citizens ** Plus
Changed the review of The Magazine of Speculative Poetry on page 29 into an essay record

I also created two new series for "The Editor's Notebook" and "Touchstones", into which I'll add the previous essays from earlier issues. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Fantasy Review #96

Did a second primary verification on this issue and made the following changes:

Corrected author of review to Lynn F. Williams (page 24)
Changed reviewer of Windmaster's Bane to Ed Burns (top right column of page 27)
Placed Somtow's essay (page 21) into the series, removing the series name from the title of the essay.

Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

SF&F Book Review (May 1979)

If it's unpacked and you have easy access to this issue can you check the credits for author of the reviews on pages 38? His canonical name is "Roger C. Schlobin" (as the review on page 44 is credited). Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

You're right - fixed. BLongley 14:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Ken Kelly cover art

I enjoy the cover art in science fiction. Recently, while browsing through titles, I came across a listing for Kull, by Robert E. Howard. The book in question is by Baen books. The cover is credited to C. W. Kelly. I love Ken Kelly's art and it looked very familiar. So I clicked on the C. W. Kelly link and found 16 entries. There is no bio listed. All the covers looked like Ken's work also. I then went to Ken Kelly's web site, www.kenkellyfantasyart.com and found the Kull cover listed there. It seems that Ken Kelly and C.W. Kelly are one and the same. The error seems to come from Ken Kelly's signature. The "K" in both the first and last names looks like a C with a line through it. I am "assuming" W is his middle initial. I have no clue how to link these two together, like an alias, so I am turning to you. Thanks for your time in listening. Sfbooks52 12:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we have him under 4 different variations. I've set Ken W. Kelly as the canonical name, at some point we'll need to create variants for all the individual titles. BLongley 14:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

What are the other variations? I might find some of his cover art listed under those names. Thanks. Sfbooks52 21:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Disregard. I found them. Sfbooks52 21:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I found "Ken Kelly", "K. W. Kelly" and the "C. W. Kelly" you pointed out, but if there are any others feel free to tell us. We mostly work on Authors rather than Artists, but I can understand appreciation for particular artists. The Signature/Credit difference you noticed has led to a lot of disparity. Have you seen Our Sig Library?? It's not an obvious page to find here. :-/ BLongley 23:28, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The Weapon Shops of Isher

My april 1974 NEL edition looks like this as there are differences with yours (the lettering of NEL on top), can you have a look at yours ? Hervé Hauck 07:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Bluesman added the image, not me: mine is [4]. I'll switch to yours, it's cleaner. BLongley 13:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't think to look up who uploaded it. Thanks. Hauck 13:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I should obviously check my verifications page a bit more often, that was a VERY subtle difference. BLongley 22:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The Best of Galaxy IV - changed author content credit

Morning! This. [5]. I matched my copy to your ver. I submitted a change to the essay "Life Among the Asteroids" to show J. E. Pournelle, Ph.D instead of Jerry Pournelle. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 12:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Chrysalis 6 - submitted change to author story content name Richard Wilber/notation

Afternoon! This. [6]. I submitted a Change to the Rick Wilber story to Richard Wilber as shown in my copy. Also changed page count and added note on Tom Barber art as it is such a good signature. Also, the "Locus 1" hotlink does not work. The Address seems to be Contento though and I used [7] to double check contents. They have Rick as you know. This is a 'copy' of a message to Mhhutchins. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Miller vt

I see that you rejected my sub, before trying this approach, I tried to merge the titles but they aren't available to merge. Guess that I'm not technically proficient enough for this type of manipulation. Hauck 17:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

It's probably because you used "Check for Duplicate Titles"? That doesn't work with variant titles. You either have to use "Show All Titles" and find them next to each other, or advanced search for the title - basic search doesn't give you merge options on the results. BLongley 18:11, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

The Stars Around Us - No Charles Satterfield

Afternoon! This. [8]. I submitted a delete of the Charles Satterfield content entry and added a Frederik Pohl one as my copy match of your ver, shows only Pohl. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 21:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Odd and the Frost Giants

I bought a copy of this today, and I think it should be a chapterbook. Locus #586 (november 2009) has the US edition of the story as a novelette (rough word count comes to 16 - 17000 words). Any problem with me changing it? Thanks, --Willem H. 19:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem - would probably have done it myself if we had had Chapterbook support at the time. "World Book Day" specials might also be a nice Publication Series? BLongley 19:40, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Publication Series seems logical if there are more titles, but this is the first of these I've ever seen. --Willem H. 19:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The Sinners Of Erspia - Artist credit

Is Hieronymus Bosch really credited as Hieronymous Bosch in this pub, or can I merge the two? Thanks, --Willem H. 20:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You can merge them. BLongley 12:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Done. --Willem H. 14:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Vector 135

If you have this issue, can you check out the letter credited to "Brian W. Aldiss Iain U. Andersson"? Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Should be two separate letters. Fixed now. I don't think I have that issue myself. BLongley 14:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Year of the Cloud

You verified the Playboy Press version of this book, by Kate Wilhelm & Ted Thomas. The book has a 1970 copyright, but no statement of print date. As you noted, the book has a "reprinted with permission of Doubleday" notation, which means that it comes after the Doubleday 1st edition of Oct. 1970. It would seem that this means that it would also come after the Doubleday BOMC edition of Jan. 1971. If so, I would suggest changing the listed publication date from 1970 to 1971. This would have a benefit of not having it appear first in the ISFDB listing, i.e. so that the true 1st edition appears first. (But then again, I don't know if there's policy on this sort of thing.) Chavey 04:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Catastrophe Planet

It looks like per your header banner that generally you would not need notification but in this case I removed a note from Catastrophe Planet though suspect you are not the one that had added it.

I removed "No statement of printing" from the notes as "Berkley Medallion Edition, August 1966" is the statement of printing.
Added "Printed in the United States of America"
Added - The publisher is stated on the title page as "(Berkley Medallion logo)" over "A Berkley Medallion Book" over "published by" over "Berkley Publishing Corporation".
Added - The stated August 1966 printing date is confirmed by my copy which is date-stamped "Aug 2, 1966" by a previous owner. ~Marc Kupper

--Marc Kupper|talk 17:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, mine does indeed have that statement of printing. BLongley 17:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Shackleton[-]Hill

Hi Bill. I see you verified Focus, May/June 1998 but mere weeks ago.... Would you double-check whether the author credit on Milford 1997 hyphenates Shackleton Hill? Thanks. --MartyD 01:08, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

No hyphen on essay or in ToC. BLongley 14:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --MartyD 22:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Review in Vector 154

A review in your verified Vector 154 listed the author of Alligator Alley as "Dr Adder" and not "Dr. Adder. I presume this was merely a data entry error, and have corrected it. However if the published review committed the period, we might want to note this, so you may wish to check the pub when you have a chance. -DES ^Talk 22:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

No, the review has no period after "Dr". But that's not worth a variant, so I've just noted it on the review and left it with "Dr.". BLongley 00:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, thank you. If it was an entry error not even worth a note obviously. -DES ^Talk 02:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Ghosts, Spooks, and Spectres

Can you make sure that the story by Richard Middleton is hyphenated? Yours is one of only two verified books that gives the title as "The Ghost-Ship". Looking at the original publication it also appears that the variant should be reversed. Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 06:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to get back to you on that. Despite another day of unpacking, we're only up to Bob Shaw and probably won't shelve the Anthologies tomorrow. But their boxes should be accessible at least. BLongley 21:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Hervé for moderator?

A few months ago you brought Hervé Hauck up as a potential moderator (here). I had some doubts then, and started nudging him toward some of the more difficult corners of the database (starting with merges, container titles and wiki pages). I think he's doing very well, learns fast and meets most of the Moderator Qualifications by now. Do you think he's ready for at least self approval by now? --Willem H. 19:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I haven't seen any new problems with his submissions, and admire his publication series work. So I'm fine with self-approval encouragement, and would like to encourage him to look at submissions by people like Benario too. They've been doing a lot of good work on French editions. BLongley 00:41, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I've started the process by asking Hervé what he himself thinks. Thanks for the heads up! --Willem H. 10:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Ta!

You've also called her Sanda instead of Sandra:)

Oops!!! Her blog has Sanda instead of Sandra! I'll doublecheck what's on the book covers, I am pretty sure it was Sandra. P-Brane 00:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I also have a question,if you don't mind.

No problem, it's why I have a talk page! BLongley 01:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that there is some lack of uniformity in naming publishers. My fav Gollancz is a prime example, it goes as Gollancz/Orion, Orion/Gollancz, Gollancz, etc. Partially it reflects the historical situations but more often is just arbitrary. This makes looking at the publisher's output in a given year extremely inconvenient. Is there a way to deal with it? Thanks!P-Brane 00:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes! You just have to support my "Keep It Simple" principle suggestion for "publisher" names. I'd prefer to keep imprint only and let people add other notes to each publication if they must - the imprint's wiki-page can cover ownership of the imprint over the years. But the "title-page trumps all other credits" doesn't work for publishers. I suspect you know the Gollancz "G-in-star-logo" versus Millennium "M-in-a-star" for some Gollancz or Millenium books? I've tried to persuade people to come around to my way of thinking, by creating publisher wiki-pages like this, but we just end up with some people wanting to separate them with extra info. :-( Moderators now get a warning when someone wants to create a new "publisher" but that doesn't really help us reduce the problem. BLongley 01:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Where do I sign the petition for "Keep It Simple" principle? :) P-Brane 05:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC).

I like the "One Field, One Set of Data" principle, which would have worked in this case if we had separate fields for publisher and imprint, ISBN and Catalog number, Binding and Size, but I wasn't around when the database structure was being designed. So I'm forced to put publisher and imprint in the same field. Some cases are clearer than others and some cases are more complicated. Fortunately, most cases fall closer to the former. :) Mhhutchins 06:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure, but even putting both imprint and publisher in the same field should be regulated somehow. What about having both Gollancz/Orion, Orion/Gollancz? That's very confusing and inconvenient. P-Brane 01:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC).

I don't know if there is a stated policy but most people use "Imprint / Publisher". (Note spaces before and after the slash.) "Gollancz / Orion" would be the standard in that case. Mhhutchins 03:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

There is a policy. From Help:Screen:EditPub#Publisher:

If you are entering both the imprint and publisher name, as in "Del Rey / Ballantine", then it should be entered as Imprint / Publisher with the imprint first, spaces around the slash, followed by the publisher name. Note, it's still ok to enter things like "Imprint, an imprint of Publisher". The things we want to avoid are the Imprint/Publisher (with no space) and Publisher / Imprint (imprint / publisher flipped around) and formats.

I just happened to run into a small case of this with a submission the other day. In most cases that I've looked at, the problem with the legacy data is that there are many pubs (and many of them verified) doing it the "wrong" way, and fixing the instances would be a daunting editing task. --MartyD 11:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll work on converting Orion / Gollancz things into Gollancz / Orion or just Gollancz. Or is there a bot around to do that kind of things? P-Brane 23:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC).

No bot to do it, but Moderators do have a Weapon of Mass Updating for Publishers. The problem is checking whether you're going to affect verified pubs, as it would be rude to update those without informing the verifiers: and the other problem is that we haven't agreed on which way to convert them. For instance "Gollancz" for all of them would be simpler and means just one Publisher record and one Wiki page to keep up to date. But it seems that some people really do want to know who owned the imprint on any individual printing. BLongley 14:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I see the problems, I'll be only doing "Orion / Gollancz" -> "Gollancz / Orion" for now, then:) P-Brane 06:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC).

IAFA Newsletter question

In the summer and fall 1991 issues, is Brian Attebery really credited as "Brian Atteberry," with a double rather than a single r? Since it shows up twice I imagine he is, but thought I should check before submitting a pseudonym. BrendanMoody 03:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

No, both were my errors. Fixed now. BLongley 14:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

A review in Fantasy Review

In this verified pub, there's a review of Para that credits the author as "R. Vaughn Abrams," rather than the correct Vaughan Abrams R. Vaughan Abrams. This resulted in an empty author record, and since I know you don't like those (nor do I), I thought you might like to know so you could decide whether to correct the listing and add a note. BrendanMoody 04:28, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Review adjusted, noted and linked. BLongley 13:52, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Two comments about verified pubs

1) This review from Vector 226 lists the coauthor of the reviewed work as "Kevin J, Anderson," with a comma rather than a period after the J. BrendanMoody 01:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. (And another few "J, " authors). BLongley 12:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

2) Do you know whether the Mike Abbott who has two stories in The Drabble Project is the same person as the Michael Abbott who has one story in The Drabble Project and one in Drabble Century? BrendanMoody 01:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

It probably is but I can't be certain. Locus seems to think they're the same. BLongley 12:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Best of All Possible Worlds

I added the story introductions (and notes) to this verified pub. They're quite substantial, and (I think) important to this anthology. Thanks, --Willem H. 20:00, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Trouble with Tycho

Could you please check this submission? Yours is a transient verification, but it may have been created back when we didn't have secondary, tertiary, etc verifications.

The submitter, User:Dsorgen, would like to change the Amazon cover scan to the one that he recently uploaded to ISFDB, but the latter is somewhat different. As far as I can tell, it's the cover of the 1983 reprint, which changed the top part of the cover while retaining the main picture at the bottom. If you still have the 1976 book, could you please check? Also, you are the primary verifier of the 1983 printing, so you could please check this submission, which will replace the Amazon cover scan with Dave's version as well? TIA! Ahasuerus 03:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Reject the first and approve the second - it is indeed the 1983 cover. The 1976 one differed as you say. BLongley 13:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Done and done, thanks! Ahasuerus 19:28, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

The Journal of Science Fiction

Back in February, writing about the Stableford collection, you wrote:
"...But if someone wants to add [records] and then asks me to verify them it would be a help..."
Taking you at your word, I've added records for all of the issues of The Journal of Science Fiction (all 4 of them :-). If the Stableford collection includes those fanzines, they could certainly use some verification. There is some obvious missing information (e.g. page numbers and pricing from issues 2 & 3). But I think I've got the rest of the data correct. (As I write this, those issues are "Pending Edits".) Chavey 08:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Not a zine I possess, but I've approved the edits and fixed a few minor problems (disambiguated the titles, fixed a date that came through as 0000-00-00, corrected a NONFICTION content to ESSAY). BLongley 12:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The article I listed as NONFICTION was Pros and Cons of Experiments in Rocket Societies, which was reprinted from the Sept. 1951 issue of The Journal of Space Flight (see here). So it seemed to me to qualify as "Science", i.e. as NONFICTION. On the other hand, the content of that article isn't far off from some of the editorials Asimov used to do, so I could see it as ESSAY instead. Chavey 18:12, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

NONFICTION is a "container" title like COLLECTION or ANTHOLOGY - i.e. an entire book of non-fiction. It can contain essays, artwork etc. ESSAY is a "content" title and will appear within a book or magazine. The only time NONFICTION is correctly put inside another "container" type is if it's part of an OMNIBUS. BLongley 18:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of this journal, the source that I used for most of this run included the Indexes of SF mags in issue #3 as all separate titles, but listed the same Indexes in issue #4 as a single item (written by Edward Wood), which is the way it's listed in the TOC for issue #4. Should I go back & standardize these two issues? And if so, which way? Chavey 18:12, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's too important to standardise them. BLongley 18:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Brin's "Whose Millenium?" or "...Millennium?"

Can you verify the spelling of the essay in this collection? I have a copy of this magazine and it's spelled with two "n"s. Rather than creating a variant I want to first make sure the other pubs are correctly entered. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

It should be two "n"s. Guess it was a lazy clone on my part. BLongley 10:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Great. I'll make the correction so that all records match. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

IAFA Newsletter, Winter 1991

Can you double-check the spelling of reviewer Stefan Dziemianowicz's two credits in this publication? Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Good catch, but interesting problem. The pub has the surname correct on the front cover ToC (not sure if that's a clear enough scan for people?) but the full name is "Stefan Dziemanowicz" at the end of the first review and "Stefan Dziemianowicz" at the end of the second. I've adjusted the latter - I suspect I copied and pasted it for the second entry, I will NEVER be able to recall how to spell that name from memory - and will probably go back and standardise the first with a note. But there's probably a help-entry around that needs a look, as I can't recall a rule that says we can over-ride an obvious mistake from incomplete information in ToC. I'll have a hunt around the wiki later, but right now I have a poker game to get to. BLongley 19:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I've entered so many of his reviews from Fantasy Review and Locus that it's become second nature now (although sometimes I hit the "q" in place of the "w"). I've overwritten a couple of obvious misspellings (for reviews but not fiction), but will create variants if the name is a form of the canonical name (initials or suffixes added or dropped). Not sure if there's a stated rule or standard. Mhhutchins 19:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Brunner's Interstellar Empire

According to Locus #251 (December 1981), this edition appeared in November 1981. This date, along with the price, fits in with the other printings' editions. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Verified pub: The Eagle's Nest

I've added a month of publication to your verified pub The Eagle's Nest, based on information at The Avengers Declassified web site.

Burgess in April 1979 SF&F Book Review

Hi Bill. Would you take a look at your verified SF&F Book Review, April 1979 and double check Stephan vs. Stephen Burgess? User:Robertreginald updated Stephan A. Burgess and attempted to include a note that the "a" vs. "e" is a transcription error -- I wasn't clear whose transcription error it's supposed to be. I didn't want to make a pseudonym if the pub didn't make the error. Thanks. --MartyD 13:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

It was my error, fixed now and the correct author details updated. BLongley 16:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

p.s. I've left RR's proposed edits of your primary-verified pubs to you. --MartyD 13:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Verified Pub: Kate Wilhelm's "The Abyss"

Your verified pub, The Abyss, had a note about a mysterious, "unfound" 1967 edition of the book. Based on a suggestion by Mhhutchins, I have changed this note to read: "Pub mentions a Mercury Press 1967 edition, but this almost certainly refers to the Feb. 1968 publication in "Fantasy & Science Fiction" (published by Mercury) of "Stranger in the House", one of the two novella's making up this collection." Chavey 22:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

SF & F Review March 1979

Our newest rookie editor, a Mr. Reginald, has added some data for the last [missing] page of [this] pub. Have reluctantly approved the submission. ;-) --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

There are several other edits for the same pub that you may wish to look at? --~ Bill, Bluesman 00:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've just got to FIND the pubs first. :-/ BLongley 00:46, 23 December 2010 (UTC)