User talk:RR

Welcome!

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

• Help pages
• Field-by-field guide to entering new publications into the database
• Help:Getting Started
• What the ISFDB Wiki is for
• FAQ
• Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.
• Wiki Conventions - How things are usually done on this wiki.
• Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki

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

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

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Mhhutchins 13:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Three new novels

Hello, and thank you again for contributing. That written, it does seem you may have fallen into a trap nearly all of us couldn't avoid, namely submitting titles that don't belong to the ISFDB. From the descriptions at wikipedia it doesn't seem that either Falstaff, The French Lieutenant's Woman or Creation do fit the Rules of Acquisition. Just that the authors do have works listed here, doesn't mean that we want to list all of their works. (There are exceptions for authors 'above the treshhold' who are important enough for the field: Ursula K. Le Guin, H. G. Wells and Isaac Asimov would be three of them, but we want to have this list of authors as short as possible).

I may be in error, since I haven't read any of the three, and if so, please do explain on the speculative content: I have put the submissions on hold and it is still possible to approve of them. Thanks, Stonecreek 13:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Stonecreek. I shall explain the content of the following:

Falstaff - an alternate history of the late 1300's-early 1400's from the viewpoint of Shakespeare's John Falstaff, as a memoir that could be embellished or delusional, or could be true however improbable.

The French Lieutenant's Woman - a recursive metafiction where John Fowles the author appears in the plot, openly considers which direction his story would go, and loses control over the actions of his created characters. The movie adaptation did away with this since the novel is practically unfilmable.

Creation - an alternate history of the 500's BC from the viewpoint of the fictional grandson of Zoroaster, who lives improbably long and travels improbably wide, meets historical figures who could not have all been alive around the same time, and refutes the history written by Herodotus who was born a century after Zoroaster died.

You may consider these novels as nongenre if you like. RR 00:01, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining! I will immediately approve of your submissions. Would you like to add these descriptions to the synopses of the titles? (Just use - on the level of title, not publication - the 'Edit Title Data' button on the left tool bar, for example for Creation. (Do you have any further information - like price - for the publications?)

And to make it easier for other editors to know who is writing, please use four tildes (~) to sign with your user name. Just imagine a discussion like this without knowing who is writing what. Thank you very much for adding those books! Stonecreek 19:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes I would like to add the descriptions to the synopses. In fact, I find many obscure titles with no synopses. I'd like to ask other contributors about their submissions. RR 00:01, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Please proceed to update the title records (not the publication records) to add synopses of those titles. It is not necessary to discuss this with any editor who may have done primary verifications of the publications of these titles. The synopsis must be objective, and without spoilers. (It's best not to use the publisher blurbs which tend to puff up the quality of the work, unless you edit it to be more neutral.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I want to find out about the fantastic content of other novels, for instance, The Sicilian by Mario Puzo. RR 19:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The only reason that title is in the database is because it was nominated for an sf award. I have no idea why, since I can't imagine the title would otherwise qualify for inclusion in the database. Do you? (You'll notice that there are no publications in the database.) If you find other titles that have verified publications, feel free to contact the editor who verified them. The verifying editors are linked in the Verification Status of the publication record. (BTW, add a colon to each successive message within a topic, which indents it from the previous message and makes the discussion easier to read. Thanks.) Mhhutchins 20:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I found Puzo listed in the SFE with the novel The Fourth K, which features a fictional US President and possibly a then-future war. The Sicilian, by contrast, is based on a real person and real history, told mostly in flashback. Its framing story involves a fictional bundle of papers, the testament of Turi Guillano, which is desperately sought after and has the potential to disrupt the government of Italy and change history. My guess is this element made the novel considerable for a Prometheus Award nomination. The Sicilian is still very tentatively borderline-speculative, but The Forth K has more prominent content. RR 17:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Your explanation about The Sicilian may explain why it was nominated for the Prometheus, but I personally don't feel it would qualify as speculative fiction, and would reject any submission to add a publication to the title. If you disagree feel free to bring up the subject on the ISFDB:Community_Portal to get a broader spectrum of opinion. The case for The Fourth K is stronger, although borderline and very close to an genre which is specifically excluded in the inclusion policy: "Techno-thriller, political thriller and satire works set in a future indistinguishable from the present". I will accept the submission to add the title to the db. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The Scarlet Letter

Sorry, but your proposed addition of a website had to be rejected, because this was a website for the author Hawthorne, which is already included on his summary page. But thanks for the addition of Hawthorne's The Blithedale Romance, which included a link to the wikipedia entry for the title. Stonecreek 09:50, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Updating primary verified records

I'm holding the submission to add a cover art credit to this record. If you look at the record, you'll see that it has been primary verified, which means that an editor has determined that the information is correct, based an actual copy of the publication. It is ISFDB etiquette to discuss changes to such records with the verifying editor before you make a submission that changes the records. Some editors have notification preferences posted at the top of their talk page. Most of them don't require prior notification for updates which add data to the "Note" field, or add links to the cover image. Moderators will usually accept such changes if they are not destructive, i.e. removing or replacing data from the record. In this case, you're adding data which is not stated in the publication, so effectively you're replacing the data. You should leave a note on the verifying editor's talk page (click on the plus [+] tab to begin a new topic), giving him the source for your data, and explaining why the record should be amended. The outcome of the discussion will determine if the submission is accepted. I will hold the submission until you've done that. (This policy is explained in the help links which are provided in the Welcome section above.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The Fourth K

Submission adding this record was accepted, but there are a couple of problems. We can't link to any image on Wikipedia. They strictly forbid it. You should only link to sites which have given us permission to deeplink to their image files. That list is here. I will remove the link before Wikipedia discovers it.

Second, you failed to give the source for your data in the record's Note field. You may have missed the Source section which is part of each submission form. There are five options: 1) I own this publication, 2) I am working from this publication but will not have it permanently, 3) Publisher's website, 4) Author's website, 5) Other website, later printing/edition or another source (please explain in Note). The first four choices automatically add the source in the Note field. The last choice (#5) is the default and leaves the Note field blank, which means you have to provide the source of your data in the Note field. Please update the record when you get a chance to add the source. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Sources for data should be given in the publication record, not the title record, because each publication should have a separate source (just because someone has one edition of a title doesn't mean they can verify the data provided in other editions or printings of the same file.) Also, feel free to add the URL of the Amazon image file to the proper field of the publication record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Still looking for a response to my above request. Thanks. Mhhutchins 14:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Aniara

I'm still holding the submission to add the cover art credit to this record. As I said above, when updating verified records, you should contact the verifying editor about the change. I will continue to hold it until you've done that, or you can choose to cancel the submission. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 21:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I have released the hold to the moderator who was the primary verifier of the record. Mhhutchins 13:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

There's not enough evidence to credit Vicente Segrelles with the cover illustration. Looks like his style, but only a small part of the signature is visible. I've rejected your submission, but added a note to the publication. Please remember to contact primary verifiers about changes to their verified pubs. Thanks for contributing. --Willem H. 19:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The Complete Novels

Hello, thanks for adding this OMNIBUS. I had to make a major change for both publication and generated title. The Help:Screen:NewPub states: If the book is a single-author collection or omnibus, but has an editor, as occasionally occurs, the editor does not appear in this field, the author does (this also encloses the case where no editor is credited as with this OMNIBUS), so I changed the editor/author field to Flann O'Brien.

Now, if you take a look at the author's summary page, you'll see that your submission has generated new titles for every item. You may merge the titles that appear as doubles by clicking on the 'Show All Titles' tool on the left tool bar of this page, then ticking the appropriate two items and submit. You may choose the right settings (language and date) for the new merged title.

However, there are titles that are really new to the ISFDB. Since they were published before the year 2008, you should also enter the year of first publication for them. (For this you have to edit the individual titles - it would have been possible to enter them with your initial submission: there is a field 'Date', which can be filled in the YYYY-MM-DD format). Thank you again for this new publication / title! Stonecreek 18:21, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

The Hard Life doesn't appear to be speculative fiction. If not, change the type to NONGENRE. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The Hard Life is NG. I'm not sure about "The Poor Mouth". That novella was published under another pseudonym. How do I add a pseudonym to author data? RR 05:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, it'd be best to enter a publication of this title published under the pseudonym. After that's done the pseudonym should be made into a variant of the canonical Flann O'Brien and the title into a variant of the parent. Stonecreek 09:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Because they're not spec-fic, and Flann O'Brien isn't considered a spec-fic author, I've removed the content records for The Hard Life and "The Poor Mouth", and deleted the titles from the database. Mhhutchins 23:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Your submission to add a publication record for the non-genre title "The Poor Mouth" was rejected, because the title had already been deleted from the database because of its ineligibility (see above). If you feel this was done in error, please bring it to the attention of the moderators on the ISFDB:Moderator_noticeboard. Mhhutchins 23:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

An Béal Bocht by "Myles na gCopaleen"

I'm holding your submission to add a record to the ISFDB for this title, which doesn't appear to be speculative fiction. Because Flann O'Brian is not considered a spec-fic author, only his spec-fic works should be in the database. (We make an exception for non-genre works by spec-fic authors.) Are you certain that this is a work of speculative fiction? Mhhutchins 21:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

You also failed to give the source for your data in the record's Note field. If you don't choose one of the five choices in the "Source of the data" section of an entry form, it automatically defaults to "Other...source (explain in the Note)". In that case, you must enter your source in the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

This book was first published in Irish Gaelic under a pseudonym, then translated into English and published in 1973 as The Poor Mouth by Flann O'brien. Its style might be that of the tall tale, maybe it belongs in the absurdism category more than the speculative, but I'd agree with it being nongenre. It must be a short novel since it is barely 80 pages long in the omnubus. I don't quite have the hang of adding a pseudonym, an alternate title and new publisher. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RR (talk • contribs) .

If you believe that it's not sf, then it shouldn't be in the database. We only include non-sf publications by authors who are "above the threshold". This includes authors who are clearly defined as sf authors. So we would include a mystery by Isaac Asimov, or a historical novel by Poul Anderson, but not a mystery or historical novel by an author who only wrote a few pieces of sf, and is not widely perceived to be an sf author. Your description appears to make this work a borderline case, which we usually err on the side of inclusion. I will accept the submission, but change it to a CHAPTERBOOK instead of a NOVEL. This type is used for stand-alone publications of a work of fiction which is less than novel-length (40,000 words). I will add the content record for "The Poor Mouth" back to the omnibus, which I'd removed because you had marked it as NONGENRE. Next, I'll create variants of the English title to the Irish title, and then make "Myles na gCopaleen" into a pseudonym of Flann O'Brien. Mhhutchins 01:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I've accepted the submission. You will need to add the source of your data to the Note field. Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Pseudonym

I had to reject the submission to update the author data for Flann O'Brien, because there was no change in the data. In the Note to Moderator field (a temporary note that doesn't become part of the database), you say "Pseudonym: Myles na gCopaleen". The only way to add a pseudonym to the database is for there to be a publication in the database credited to that name. If this pseudonym wasn't used for a work of speculative fiction, there's only one way to add it to the author's data: create a wiki page for "Bibliographic Comments: Author:Flann O'Brien", which is linked on the author's summary page, and then add a note about his non-spec-fic pseudonyms. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask them here. Thanks. Mhhutchins 23:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing data

If you're not working from the primary source (the book itself), it is important that you provide the source for your data in the "Note" field of the submission. I've accepted the submission to add this publication to the database, but have had to find a source for the data, making a few additions and changes to the data. I also changed the ISBN-13 to an ISBN-10. A 1973 book would not have an ISBN-13 because they weren't created until the early 2000s, and didn't come into wide use until 2007. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:30, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

My sources are Amazon and Abebooks. Sorry I forgot to note it. RR 20:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. In the future, keep in mind that neither of those sources (or other retail websites) should be used until all other sources have been exhausted, especially for a book published before 2000. The best online sources are OCLC and the Locus Database (which we designate as "Locus1" when giving it as the source). Thanks again. Mhhutchins 20:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Three Novels by William Golding

I'm holding your submission to add a publication of this title. You did not give the source for your data in the "Note" field, as explained above. Instead you give a source (Amazon) in the "Note to Moderator" field. That field is temporary and should not be used to provide information about the publication because it disappears the moment the submission is accepted. Also, as explained above, you should not use Amazon as a sole source for data. It is very frequently wrong, especially for books which were published before the existence of Amazon. In this case, there is a very good source here: OCLC. It provides the correct publisher name, and the correct title of the book, both of which Amazon has wrong. It also gives an ISBN, and a page count. I will accept the submission, make the corrections and add the source for my data to the "Note" field. Rule of thumb for books published before 2000: Only use Amazon after you've exhausted every other resource in the world. :) Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

It's the Pub Note where the source data goes, correct? I hope I got it right on my next addition. RR 03:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's the field labeled "Pub Note" on the entry form, and that's where you add every piece of data that doesn't fit into any of the other fields, but you believe is necessary for the record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:22, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Publishers

May I merge certain publishers? Some go by variant names, and some are imprints or subsidiaries of other publishers. RR 22:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

This should have been asked on the ISFDB:Help desk page, not on your own talk page. No one is likely to read a post that you've made to yourself. :)

As for your question, the quick answer is no. Non-moderatoring editors don't have that ability. You can bring your suggestions for merging to the group on any one of the community pages, which are linked on the Community portal page (linked from all wiki pages.) Mhhutchins 22:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The Aerodrome: A Love Story and sourcing from Amazon, again

You've submitted a series of submissions to add new publications for this title, all of which are sourced from data on Amazon. As I've pointed out several times, Amazon's data should not be used for older publications. At it's best, the data is incomplete, and there are several sources which have more complete data, all at the click of a mouse. I'll accept the submissions, but ask that you go through each pub record and add information based on a more reliable source, such as OCLC. Thanks. Mhhutchins 22:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

An example of the problems caused by using Amazon for the source: the publisher given by Amazon for his publication shows "Atlantic". There is no such publisher. The data for older books is entered by Amazon partners (book sellers) who don't feel it necessary to provide complete or even correct data. According to the OCLC record (created by librarians who are more conscientious than book dealers), the publisher is Little, Brown under their Atlantic Monthly Press imprint. A quick search for this publisher on the ISFDB shows that it is given as "Atlantic Monthly Press / Little, Brown" (the ISFDB standard of entering an imprint and its publisher.) Mhhutchins 22:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Another bad publisher given in this record. Mhhutchins 22:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

This record is a duplicate of the first one and should be deleted. One Amazon dealer entered the imprint while another entered the publisher, creating what would appear to be two different editions for what was actually one. Mhhutchins 22:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Dates and prices sourced from Amazon

This record is for a 1988 publication which has a 2013 price. 99% of the time, Amazon doesn't give the date of each printing, only the first one. Their prices will be for the printing their selling. It's not likely that a trade paperback published in 1988 would have the same price for 25 years. You'll have to blank out the date field (0000-00-00, displayed as "unknown") or find another source that gives the publication date of the printing which is priced at $14.95. Mhhutchins 22:42, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The Martian Chronicles

I've been trying to help figure out the dates of various paperback editions with the Michael Whelan cover. Then I looked in Michaeol Whelan's website for the cover. I found out the illustration is titled "Descent" and is dated 1989. This means earlier editions listed on ISFDb with cover by Whelan are erroneous. The Whelan cover was used at least until 2000, with three variations: the Bantam logo, the old Spectra logo, and the new Spectra logo. During that time, 1989-2000, the book price went from $4.95 to $7.99. The number of printings may be the only way to guess the edition's year. RR 05:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, this should have been posted on the ISFDB: Help desk page instead of on your talk page. (This page is used for other editors to contact you.) To answer you question I'll need the link to the title record for the Whelan work. Mhhutchins 13:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'm starting to get it. That sort of info has to go on the Help Desk.

If this is the work you're talking about, I don't see any earlier uses of it. The first was in 1990. We date records from the first publication, not the date of its creation. Are there other records for a use before 1989? Mhhutchins 13:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm looking for other records. The Martian Chronicles are to be continued.... RR 18:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

You said "This means earlier editions listed on ISFDb with cover by Whelan are erroneous.". I couldn't find any earlier editions. I'm asking you to point out those records so I can see if they're incorrectly dated or have the wrong artist credit. Mhhutchins 19:14, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmm...well, here's Record # 262212, which does not say Michael Whelan, but it says Ian Miller and shows a picture of Whelan's cover. Other than that, I can't find any erroneous listings either. Amazon has some for sure. RR 00:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

If you look at the bottom of the cover image, you'll see it's courtesy of Amazon. Cover images of books published before Amazon's existence are always suspect. And this record hasn't been primary verified either. Even if the image was correct when it was first linked, quite often Amazon "updates" older printings with the cover of a more current image. I'll remove the link to Amazon once you've read this response. If you find any others like this, feel free to make submissions removing the links to any nonmatching Amazon image files. There are literally hundreds of those in the db.

This is another reason why Amazon shouldn't be used as a source for older books and why I've made a point about that, one to which you have yet to respond. Also, those publication records which you added for The Aerodrome have not been updated. If you would rather not to do that, just let me know and I'll do it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Paranoid Fifties

I've accepted this publication into the database. There are a few problems:

1. An anthology or omnibus which has no credited editor should be credited to "uncredited".
2. In the ISBN / Catalog # field you entered "none". This field should remain blank if there is no ISBN or catalog number. That fact should be stated in the Note field.
3. The biggest problem: you sourced Amazon and Abebooks. I can't emphasize enough that these two websites, whose only purpose is to sell books, should not be used as the sole source for the data of older books. This has been repeatedly brought to your attention, but it hasn't changed the practice. If you had gone to OCLC (as I've also pointed out previously), you would have found this record. That record also gives the correct title of the publication. Once you've read and responded to this message, I will update the record and use the OCLC record as the source for the ISFDB record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Worldcat rather than booksellers. I bookmarked it. And the Note field is the Publisher's Note. I'll get my act together. RR 05:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Improper image upload

this file was directly uploaded to the server, which is not the correct method to upload cover image files. It has no image license attached (required for copyright purposes), an improper title (which doesn't match the tag of the publication record), and no direct link from the image to the publication record. All of this would have been done automatically if you'd used the "Upload Cover Scan" link on the publication record. In order to correct the problems, you'll need to go to the publication, click on the upload link, and follow the directions. Once that file is on the server copy its URL, and then go back to update the publication record, adding the URL of the image in the proper field. If you have any questions about how to do this, just ask. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:59, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Research has shown the same cover image on the server, which is linked to this publication. If the image, catalog number and price are the same, you can link this image to the publication record you intended for the image you uploaded. 03:05, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Same situation with this file which will have to be uploaded using the publication record link method. Mhhutchins 05:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes...well, I thought I was uploading my images the right way. I'm not sure I know how they got uploaded to the server instead of the 'upload cover scan' link. Maybe I overlooked a step. I'm supposed to copy and paste the url of a picture file, even after I uploaded the file? RR 06:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes. It isn't automatic. Once the file is uploaded (correctly) to the ISFDB server, you will copy its URL and then update the publication record, adding the address to the Image URL field. You start by clicking on the "Upload cover scan" link of the publication. It appears that you used the direct upload method which is linked on the wiki (a link labeled "Upload file" which should not be used for covers, but for other kinds of files.) Ask if you need further assistance. Mhhutchins 13:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I had to reject the submission, because you added the URL of the current file. This file will have to be deleted from the server because it was improperly uploaded. (Compare it with other cover image files and you'll see the problem.) First go to the pub record, and follow the directions from the "Upload cover scan" link. Again, if you need help, just ask. Mhhutchins 04:45, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Are there 2 ways to add a cover picture? A, post an URL, and B, upload a file and then post its URL? I might prefer the URL posting because it's easier. RR 05:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

There is one way to add a cover image to a publication record: adding the URL (web address) of the file in the proper field in an edit to that record. That file can 1) be on your computer's hard drive and you can upload it to the ISFDB server or 2) be on another website, one for which we have prior permission to deep-link to the files on that server. Websites which have given us permission are listed here. You can not link to an image file on a website which has not given us explicit permission to do so. Mhhutchins 05:34, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Capitalization

Please use standard English capitalization (explained here under "Case") when entering titles, especially if OCLC is your source. They only capitalize the first word and proper names. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Chapterbooks

When entering CHAPTERBOOK-type records (i.e. books which contain a single work of fiction of less-than-novel length), you have to create a content record for contained work. I've added one to this record for you. I also added the roman-numbered pages (according to OCLC which I linked in the Note field). BTW, what is the source that it is hardcover? Your source OCLC doesn't give the binding (it rarely does). Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I just assumed its first printing was hardcover since it was an original children's book. Haven't such books traditionally been hardcover? RR 05:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

If you're unable to find a source which specifies the binding, leave the field blank. It's best not to assume. Mhhutchins 14:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Zalma

Submission adding this record was accepted, but it has a couple of issues. According to your source (Amazon.co.uk) the publication date is 2011-03-17 and a page count of 460. Also, you give it an ISBN-10. All books starting in 2007 should have an ISBN-13 (with rare exceptions). Mhhutchins 18:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

La derneir homme

Submission adding this record was accepted, but I changed the ISBN-13 to an ISBN-10. The ISBN-13 didn't exist in 2003. Mhhutchins 00:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Note that I've changed the title to _Le dernier homme_.

Science Fiction: A Very Short Introduction

I had to reject the submission to change the binding of this publication. You may not have noticed that the record has been primary verified. In these cases, you need to contact the verifier to discuss any changes to the record before making a submission to change it. BTW, "tp" is only used for softcover books that are taller than 7 inches (or over 18 cm), per this standard. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Same situation with Kafka: A Very Short Introduction. According to OCLC it is 18 cm, which is "pb" per ISFDB standards. Also, this 2005 publication would not have an ISBN-13. That will have to be changed to an ISBN-10. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

And this one too. ISBN-13 is OK for a 2010 publication, but according to OCLC, there are xiv roman-numeraled pages which should be added to the page count field. Mhhutchins 00:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I had assumed trade paperbacks have sizes, shapes and features not common to mass-market paperbacks. I'll keep in mind that tp is taller, pb is shorter. I found some listings that contradict the rule: Tales of the Otori, by Lian Hearn, the first 3 novels were split-reprinted as 6 paperbacks, all 5.9"x4.1" and have French flaps and dust covers. This must be a Japanese style of binding, but here it's just pb. # 69043, # 1317209, # 1317210, # 1317217. RR 05:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You can leave the Format field blank, and use the Note field to describe the binding if none of the ISFDB standard bindings apply. Our usage of the terms "pb" and "tp" are based solely on the size.

About the Hearn books: in discussions on the wiki, it's good to link to the specific ISFDB record to which you're referring. Use standard wiki write-up (not HTML): enter the URL of the record between a single set of brackets. It took a while to find the records you're speaking of. The first number is a publication record and the last three are title records, which made it even more confusing. Based on size a book with a height of 5.9" is "pb". Checking the OCLC records, I see they were 16cm, making them "pb", so I changed the two records that were given as "tp" to "pb". Mhhutchins 14:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing OCLC

When using OCLC (Worldcat) as your source, you should give the record number in the note field in the format "OCLC: 1234567". You are not required to link it, but it would be nice. I have done so for this record. One other thing: you give the binding/pub format as "tp" and the publication series "Faber Finds", but your source doesn't give this data. Please update the record to provide the source. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I found the binding format confirmed by Amazon.co.uk, from which I gave the current price (in the Note field), the publication date, and an image link. You'll still need to give the source for the publication series. Mhhutchins 02:53, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I forgot to list Amazon as a source, but that's where I found out it's a tp. RR 03:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

But you still haven't given the source for the publication series. Mhhutchins 04:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Never mind. Found it mentioned on the cover scan that I linked to the record. Also, as I note above, when you give an OCLC record as your source put it in the format "OCLC: 1234567" (include the colon), and use the HTML break ("<br>") at the end of a line to start a new sentence in the Note field. Otherwise, all the notes run together in one single line as it does here. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Wright's Laughing Man

I'm holding a submission to make this novel into a variant, but there was no change given in either the author or title field, a requirement for a variant. Mhhutchins 15:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Since there was no change, a variant is unnecessary. So I'll reject the submission. If you had some other intention, please make a new submission. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm holding another submission to make the title into a variant of Earthmun. There is a similar title by Wright already in the database: Erthmun (record 13808). If this is the proper spelling of the title, and if Laughing Man is a variant of it, please cancel the submission and make this title into a variant of record 13808 (in the Parent # field at the top of the "Make Variant" page.) Mhhutchins 00:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia says it's a US retitling of Erthmun so I rejected the submission and created a variant. Mhhutchins 03:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Create a variant is what I meant to do. I'm rusty at this. RR 03:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)