ISFDB:Moderator noticeboard/Archive 30

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page for the Moderator noticeboard. Please do not edit the contents. To start a new discussion, please click here.
This archive includes discussions from July - December 2021.

Archive Quick Links
Archives of old discussions from the Moderator noticeboard.

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

Expanded archive listing

Get Lost, Lady; this 1 was entered here in Spring 2006 per edit history and hasn't been touched since. Problem is it's not a novel, it's a nonfiction book about a female serial killer, and says "True Story" on the cover. So probably doesn't belong here. --Username 00:30, 1 July 2021 (EDT)

Zapped -- thanks! Ahasuerus 10:04, 1 July 2021 (EDT)

Dream; I remembered from back in the day that Love Object by Jere Cunningham was published by Scream/Press offshoot Dream/Press, and Fantlab photos verify that, but it says Scream/Press here. I'm going to fix that, but I noticed that books under Dream/Press on ISFDB don't have the / between the words Dream and Press. I checked online photos of spines and title pages, and all of those books have the /. --Username 22:12, 1 July 2021 (EDT)

Twilight;; The E. Stevenson is PV'd but the Edward P. is the correct one. It's part of a series. --Username 11:53, 3 July 2021 (EDT)

Creature by John Saul - 1989 Bantam Book

I came across this book at Goodreads ( Also found a nice screen shot of the front and back of the book on eBay ( It has ISBN 0553176803 (ISBN13: 9780553176803) that is in the database, same page count and same €3.50 price, but it has a Terry Oakes cover ( Is this a different variant or does the entry in the data base have the wrong cover?? aardvark7 20:09, 3 July 2021 (EDT)


I added some info to, but stupid Wikipedia gave an ISBN for a much later reprint, and stupid me added it to my edit without checking first. Since this was a 1971 U.S. book I don't think it had an ISBN. So when you get around to approving that edit do not include the ISBN. Also, photo I mentioned in the notes confirms this has "...Andrew Carmichael" just like the original British edition of Hound of Death which I mentioned somewhere on the boards a while back. --Username 09:55, 4 July 2021 (EDT)

Nobody responded in time and edit was approved with wrong ISBN, so I just made another edit deleting it and explaining why. --Username 11:45, 6 July 2021 (EDT)

Moderator pages in the middle of being updated

I am in the middle of making changes to all moderator-only pages, which may take a day or two to finish. If you comes across anything unexpected, please post your findings here. I will update this post once the project has been completed. Ahasuerus 10:12, 4 July 2021 (EDT)

Done. Hopefully nothing got broken. Ahasuerus 18:27, 5 July 2021 (EDT)

Request to merge author listings

Dear Moderator,

A humble request to merge my author listings:

1. Robert B. Finegold, M.D. --[Author Record # 222716] --

  Used These Alternate Names: -- Robert B. Finegold [Author Record # 260237] --

and: 2. Bob Finegold -- [Author Record # 319487] --

My alternate historical fiction is appearing under "Bob Finegold" with one, possibly two additional tales forthcoming later this year and/or 2022.

Respectfully, Bob

Robert B. Finegold, M.D (aka Robert B. Finegold, aka Bob Finegold)

One of the core principles of the ISFDB database is that we always enter author/editor names as they appear in the publication. We then determine which form of the author's name is best known within the genre and make it the "canonical name". As Help:Screen:MakeAlternateName explains:
  • An author who is widely known within the genre by an alternate name, e.g. Mark Twain or Cordwainer Smith, will have a canonical ISFDB name which is technically a pseudonym. This can create odd situations where a person's legal name is listed as an alternate name.
We then create "alternate names" for pseudonyms and for all other forms of the author's name. If and when an alternate name becomes better known within the genre than the current canonical name, e.g. Robin Hobb eclipsed Megan Lindholm some years ago, we flip the relationship.
In this case it looks like there are 3 different forms of the name with the following breakdown:
  • 4 stories and 1 essay have appeared only as by "Robert B. Finegold, M.D."
  • 1 anthology and 1 essay have appeared only as by "Robert B. Finegold"
  • 1 story has appeared only as by "Bob Finegold"
  • 1 story has appeared both as by "Robert B. Finegold" and as by "Robert B. Finegold, M.D."
At the moment it looks like "Robert B. Finegold, M.D." is the best known name within the genre, but it hasn't been used since 2016 and "Robert B. Finegold" is gaining on it. If and when it overcomes the other form of the name, we will flip the relationship.
Hopefully this clarifies things. And thanks for confirming that "Bob Finegold" is another form of your name! Ahasuerus 10:24, 6 July 2021 (EDT)

Nic Perumov

This name needs to be merged with Nick Perumov and his alternative Ник Перумов.aardvark7 12:46, 7 July 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for the tip! As mentioned above, we always enter author/editor names as they appear in the publication. We then determine which form of the author's name is best known within the genre and make it the "canonical name". In this case I have corrected the spelling of the Polish form of his name and linked it to the canonical Russian name. Ahasuerus 13:14, 7 July 2021 (EDT)

Two records for the same pub.

Wicked Women and Wicked Women: An Anthology of the New England Horror Writers created within a day of each other, are the same publication. They need to be merged or just move the primary verification to "Wicked Women, and delete the other title record, pub record and the one content title record. Looks like they were both sitting in the submission queue so neither editor knew of the other. John Scifibones 08:12, 8 July 2021 (EDT) P.S. There are two edits in the submission queue to correct one of the editor's name for the first publication, "Wicked Women"09:16, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

Nope. Considering that one of them is PV'd, it actually will need to work the other way around - move the contents into the PV'd record and delete the non-PV'd one. :) Moving a PV requires the editor to be here, moving the contents can be done by anyone - when that happens, we usually try to work without needing the PV to do anything (who knows when they will be back online). And I will drop a note to the moderator that approved the second one to keep an eye for that kind of issues. Do you want to do the moving of the contents or do you want me to? Annie 10:01, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
Or we can convert the duplicate into its ebook version :) Let me do that :) Annie 10:06, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
A few things:
  • When the introduction is named specifically and not just Introduction, we use the name as used in the book. I fixed that (both the paper and the ebook show it as "Introduction to Wicked Women").
  • Contents moved over and the second record is now the ebook
  • The subtitle is on the title page so it is editors' discretion if it is included (in this case I think it is important so I added it to the copy that did not have it).
Let me know if you have any questions and/or concerns. Annie 10:15, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
I used the title "Wicked Women" as that is how it is on the copyright page. I have no problem with adding it. Good idea to change it to the ebook. John Scifibones 10:26, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
The copyright page is irrelevant for the DB - we go by the title page. If the cover, copyright page and the title page disagree, we use the title page and we note the other two in the notes (if the editor wants to) :) Annie 10:36, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

Removing cover art that isn't there

I tried to delete the cover art credit for Fangoria, June 1980 (, but apparently it didn't take. Could someone delete the record? Thank you, Rosa --Rosab618 15:15, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

Once the record is created, you need to remove it from the publication (the same way you will remove a story that was added by mistake for example) - you cannot just delete the values during an EditPub - you can change them if there was a typo or something (and it will update the record) but removing the record requires the record to be actually pulled out. Done now :) Annie 16:07, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
Thanks, Annie. But how do you do that?--Rosab618 17:07, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
Go to the book - for example. Look at the left menu and find "Remove Titles From This Pub". For our book, it opens this. Select what you want to remove (the coverart shows up if there is one on the book). Press Submit :) Once ejected, if noone else uses it, the cover will need to be deleted (we have a report to catch these overnight of they remain around). The help page is here. Let me know if you have any more questions :) Annie 17:11, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
Thank you very much! I've been editing for about two years, I think, but I still feel like a newbie. There are a lot of things I don't know.--Rosab618 17:32, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

Same ISBN totally different publications

ISBN for this is 0-02-615170-7 which is exactly the smame ISBN as for this which should be 0-02-615160-X --Mavmaramis 14:14, 9 July 2021 (EDT)

Where is 0-02-615160-X coming from? At the moment the duplicate ISBN is based on OCLC. If we are fixing it, we need a source (as mentioned "Bad ISBN on the back cover: 0-02-615160-3"). Annie 15:09, 9 July 2021 (EDT)
Sorry should have mentioned the source. Dealer listing on ABE here and ISBN search --Mavmaramis 23:50, 9 July 2021 (EDT)

Wasting contributor's time (again!)

I've submitted on 2021-07-09 03:00:47 the following MakeVariant. On 2021-07-09 06:42:05, that is 3 hours LATER Dirk P. Broer submitted and approved this similar varianting operation. Then, he/she rejected my earlier submission with the now famous comment Already Done. This is frankly infuriating as it's not the first time that my work has been thrown down the drain by DPB just because he/she adores to "jump" on the cleanup reports BEFORE having a look at the queue and without noticing who is the submitter and connecting this with the fact that this contributor usually "finish" its chain of edits. All this is a waste of everybody's time (DPB and mine) and such lack of respect for the lowlife's contributions makes me want to quit immediately. Apart from the fact that I probably do suffer fools gladly, note that I'm not alone in voicing such complaints against DPB.
On a related subject, this update set the date for the Author/Work Herbert George Wells/La machine à explorer le temps couple to 1927 based on noosfere. A keener eye than DPB's should have noticed the term "Réédition" (reprint) near the 1927 book (a bit more research might have let DPB stumble on this) and the fact that the name on the cover is given as H. G. Wells. So the fact that the combination "Herbert George Wells/La machine à explorer le temps" first appears in 1927 is pure speculation by DPB (unless he has this precise edition), That's why, after some reflexion, I've initially left the date of the variant set to 2001 (the first documented occurence of this combination). Such bibliographic guesswork by a well-meaning moderator who knows zilch about french publishing does not have its place on a serious (or pretending-to-be-serious) site.AlainLeBris 04:08, 11 July 2021 (EDT)

Re: the change of the title date from 2001-09-10 to 1927, I see what you mean. I have asked Dirk to stop by and respond.
Re: the issue of valid submissions getting rejected because another editor/moderator has already made the same change, I am afraid this is frustratingly inevitable as long as our workflows require multi-step submissions. It's happened to all of us at one point or another, sometimes multiple times per day depending on what we are working on. Even moderators are not immune -- again, depending on what we are working on -- so it's not just something that happens to new contributors. It can be confusing and frustrating, but there isn't much that we can do about it short of rewriting the software to make all submissions single-step. And that would require a great deal of development work, so it's not likely to happen any time soon :-( Ahasuerus 15:25, 12 July 2021 (EDT)
P.S. While we are waiting for Dirk to comment on the first issue, here is a thought for moderators who work on both the submission queue and the cleanup reports. It may be more efficient as well as less collision-prone to work on newly added submissions first and on the cleanup reports second. Ahasuerus 16:18, 12 July 2021 (EDT)
Why does AlainLeBris never frequent my page to discuss things and always goes straight hollering to the moderator notice board? Here's my change submission.--Dirk P Broer 21:49, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

Publisher name change

This publisher's name should be changed to "Bifrost/Étoiles vives" with an accent and without spaces as it's not an imprint/publisher case but a kind of co-publishing case. AlainLeBris 09:28, 11 July 2021 (EDT)

Updated; notes added. Ahasuerus 12:46, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

Autor's name change

This author's name should be changed to "Étienne Le Roux" (accentuated capital). AlainLeBris 06:31, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

Updated, thanks! Ahasuerus 12:01, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

Gerber; I fixed the title for Sharon Webb's The Half Life to The Halflife, and noticed the husband-and-wife Gerber team of artists did covers for both Tor HC and PB, but ISFDB editor spelled wife's name as Stefanie for the PB when it says Stephanie on copyright page. ISFDB has nearly 20 Stephanie credits but also nearly 10 Stefanie credits, so this wasn't a singular mistake. Which spelling is correct and whether her name is spelled Stefanie in any books is unknown. --Username 11:22, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

That's an interesting question. It looks like some of these credits come from Grady Hendrix's Paperbacks from Hell: The Twisted History of '70s and '80s Horror Fiction (2017). Checking Google Books, I see that sometimes they spell her first name "Stefanie" ("Hobgoblin", p. 240) and other times they spell it "Stephanie" ("Seed of Evil", p. 239). It's possible that the name was misspelled in the original paperbacks and copy-pasted by the researchers, but it's also possible that at least some of the misspellings were theirs. Either way, we should probably create an "alternate name" relationship, variant the art records and add a note to the affected unverified pubs about the uncertain nature of the attribution. For now, I have asked the only active verifier who has copies of pubs with the "Stefanie" version of the name to check the spelling. Ahasuerus 12:39, 12 July 2021 (EDT); copy says "Stefanie" on copyright page, so apparently publishers spelled it differently sometimes for some reason. --Username 12:06, 13 July 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for checking! I have set up an alternate name and VTs. If and when we determine that some of our records misspell her first name, we can correct the spelling. Ahasuerus 13:58, 14 July 2021 (EDT)

Hodgson; I added info to the "abridged" record of The Night Land and then noticed there was another record for the same book; "Pwendt" has major research on his board so he obviously worked on Hodgson's books extensively a few years ago, while the other record has no edit history or notes; now that I've improved "abridged" record the other one probably isn't needed anymore. --Username 18:28, 12 July 2021 (EDT)

1996 E-Book?; an e-book in 1996 seems unlikely, especially since it has a higher price than the original hardcover. --Username 10:17, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

Baen has some ebooks from back then, so it's not unheard of. I don't know how to check the price for back then, however. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:16, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

1989 Book About Computer Viruses?; this book is on ISFDB, but as a 1998 Griffin trade edition; original 1989 St. Martin's Press edition is on, but does a book about computer viruses belong on ISFDB? Probably only reason it's here is because of the review in a SF magazine linked in the record. --Username 10:31, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

I moved the review to the notes and deleted the entry. Thanks for catching that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:14, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

Author name change

This author's name should be changed to "Stéphanie Hans" (she's french).AlainLeBris 10:41, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

Since we go by how she's credited, not necessarily the correct spelling, we'd have to check the credits she has. Her official website doesn't use the accent at all (as far as I can see). Neither does her Twitter account. Some of the works she has are verified, so you could contact those editors to have them check for the accented e. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:01, 13 July 2021 (EDT)
I imagine all of the French titles credit her with the accented e. The ones to check would be the English publications. The hardcover of Nomad (529407) has the accented e. I couldn't see a credit inside any of the others. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:28, 13 July 2021 (EDT)

Mondo; I fixed titles and added covers, and I think all ISFDB editions are correct now, although there's a Spanish edition with the Titan cover and another cover online that says it's Titan but has a white cover with a woman on it, so there's more out there; but someone entered a variant title here that doesn't seem to exist on any cover, and I tried to break it twice but had no luck, so after my last 2 edits are approved someone should remove the variant title (unless they know of some earlier edition that actually had that subtitle). --Username 18:53, 15 July 2021 (EDT)

ISBN Question

I found 2 Thomas Tessier stories on his old blog, and 1 of them was in a charity horror anthology not on ISFDB. I entered an edit,, but ISBN is a problem. This is a 2008 book, so is right on the cusp of the switch to 13-digit ISBN, and it's possible it got its ISBN just before the change occurred. However, the 13-digit ISBN on Worldcat brings up only 2 pages on Google from a site called, which is in some foreign language and looks like a fake site. So when my edit is approved, I don't know which ISBN should be used, or maybe none. --Username 15:19, 17 July 2021 (EDT)

Fake Blake; I think the 2012 Blake is actually the guy on this page, --Username 19:27, 17 July 2021 (EDT)

Duric; I added a lot of missing cover artists to old Prime Books stuff a few days ago, and the first one I did actually had the wrong cover artist entered, Garry Nurrish. There's 1 blurry, upside-down photo of the back flap on eBay which showed Nurrish was cover designer while Simon Duric was cover artist. I submitted an edit with a note explaining that, but after more than 2 days went by with exactly 1 of my edits being approved, this morning someone finally approved a few, but they entered Duric as an alternate name used by Nurrish, which is not right. He's a different guy, so if some other mod can fix that when they get a chance... --Username 10:12, 18 July 2021 (EDT)

Fixed. MagicUnk 11:54, 20 July 2021 (EDT)

1958?; editor's note goofed and wrote 1958 twice, and I made an edit based on the fact that there's a reference to 1968 online, but to be sure someone who has Tuck's book can check before verifying. --Username 21:11, 18 July 2021 (EDT)

Tuck made a mistake in Volume 1 of his Encyclopedia. He then corrected it in Volume 3.
Approved and updated. Thanks! Ahasuerus 16:15, 19 July 2021 (EDT)

Database Error

I uploaded some cover art then the site went dead and now the two covers I uploaded before that happened don't show and I get "Database error. A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was: (SQL query hidden) from within function "LocalFile::loadFromDB". MySQL returned error "1030: Got error 134 from storage engine (localhost)" Could someone investigate please. --Mavmaramis 16:56, 20 July 2021 (EDT)

Looking into it... Ahasuerus 17:13, 20 July 2021 (EDT)
I will be taking the Wiki and the main database down for maintenance at 5:45pm EDT. Hopefully it will resolve this and related issues caused by the database crash. Ahasuerus 17:37, 20 July 2021 (EDT)


I mentioned this a while back, but here,, is an example of merging problems. "Comet" is a 1997 story that was reprinted online in 2003, but as a poem on ISFDB. I checked archived online zine, verified it was a story, edit was approved, but merging didn't work. It drops the 1997 date and "short story" which is the opposite of what it's supposed to do. So I don't know what's up with this. Could be a cookie thing, could be ISFDB's problem, who knows. Anyway, mod can merge if it works for them. --Username 10:18, 22 July 2021 (EDT)

I approved this submission a few seconds ago and the result appears to be as intended. Could you please check to see if everything is OK? Ahasuerus 13:43, 22 July 2021 (EDT)
It's OK, so in the future if I merge I'll just wait until edit's approved and then see; maybe it just highlights the wrong boxes when edit is added but enters them correctly anyway (or maybe I'm just reading the display wrong). I did many merges when I first started but rarely do them anymore, but I have noticed this problem crop up several times before. --Username 09:42, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Jim Craig/James C. Pilon/John C. Pilon art

I am rather swamped right now, what with the database issues, the ongoing minor browse nodes download, Fixer prioritization, etc. Would anyone be in a position to take over something that the artist Jim Craig aka James C. Pilon (currently listed as John C. Pilon) has communicated to the SFE3 team re: his illustrations in the Rat Tales books? It's kind of convoluted and will require working with the primary verifier of 2 of the affected publications to sort out how different versions of the same art will need to be credited.

If anyone wants to volunteer, please let me know and I will post the details on your Talk page. TIA! Ahasuerus 13:40, 22 July 2021 (EDT)

Tag; last tag is misspelled, and seems redundant. --Username 09:30, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Removed, thanks. Ahasuerus 10:16, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Accidental rejections

I accidently rejected this submission. Is it possible to restore or process it? Thanks, John Scifibones 12:25, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Moderators can "unreject" submissions. I have unrejected and approved it. Ahasuerus 13:22, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Blade...?; Title seems obviously wrong, Bladerunner instead of Blade Runner, and I found this, [1], which seems to agree. Also, cover is the same for both but only 1 artist is entered, there's no month for the PB, and there are 3 PV's, 2 for 1 edition and an inactive PV for the other, none of whom seemed to notice the title error, so anyone else think this needs fixing? Maybe I'm wrong and title is just fine. --Username 14:34, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

We no longer include series names in publication titles. I will remove them. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:44, 24 July 2021 (EDT)

Quick approval

Are any moderators available to approve this submission. John Scifibones 15:58, 26 July 2021 (EDT)

Done. Ahasuerus 16:26, 26 July 2021 (EDT)
Thanks, I wanted to submit the edits, transliteration and variants while I had the notes on my desk.John Scifibones 16:38, 26 July 2021 (EDT)

Numbers Only; found a photo of Aldine edition's contents page, and page # match those of Midnight Tales; is there a way to only export page #? --Username 13:20, 27 July 2021 (EDT)

I am afraid not :( Ahasuerus 15:01, 27 July 2021 (EDT)
The way I do that is in two steps for things that have too many stories/entries to copy one by one: RemoveTitles first to pull all the titles I will want to add pages to and then Import Titles with number of pages attached. Annie 16:40, 27 July 2021 (EDT)

Email confirmation

I just created an account here. While it works, obviously, I have yet to receive an email confirmation. I would expect that within a minute, but it's been a few hours. Does this need manual approval? I use -- and no, it's not in the spam folder. AlanHK 23:52, 29 July 2021 (EDT)

You won’t get one - even if it tells you that we do, we don’t have verification mails. Your account is all set and ready to go. Keep in mind that the site is actually two separate sites - the wiki and the DB - same credentials work on both but you need to login in both separately. Welcome to Isfdb. :) Annie 01:26, 30 July 2021 (EDT)

Tags set to "Private" in error?

I see that a number of apparently legitimate tags have been recently set to "Private", e.g.:

It would appear that at least one moderator doesn't fully understand what happens when you change a tag's status to "private". When it happens, it affects ALL titles associated with the tag. If you need to have an invalid tag removed from a particular title instead, please post a request on the Moderator Noticeboard as per the notice that appears on the "Tag Breakdown by User" page like this one:

  • Note that ISFDB bureaucrats can remove invalid tags. Requests should be posted on the Moderator Noticeboard.

TIA. Ahasuerus 17:22, 30 July 2021 (EDT)

Another request

Are any moderators available to approve [2],[3],[4] and [5] ? TIA John Scifibones 17:41, 30 July 2021 (EDT)

I have approved 3 of them and will post follow-up questions on your Talk page. Ahasuerus 18:10, 30 July 2021 (EDT)


[6]; [7]; 1st link has just the title, 2nd link has title and name, but name is below the rest and so is not really part of the title, but rather the illustrator's credit. This seemed like a pretty obvious fix to me when I made 6 edits to delete the "By Satty" part of the title wherever it appears on ISFDB, but all were rejected with a note to ask the PV. 1 edition's PV is no longer active; the other I left a message for months ago telling him I made an edit fixing/adding a few things to 1 of his edits, and he responded with extreme rudeness, so much so that I left him another message calling him out on it, so I don't really feel like talking to him again. So now that I've provided photos, whichever moderator wants to fix this can do so, or not. I'm not making another 6 edits. --Username 16:28, 31 July 2021 (EDT)

?-1984; I was surprised to see no cover for this, since most of these modern fantasy novels are largely covered here, so I added it. However, there's still a problem; some editor left note about reference work saying July 1984, which is the month for the artwork here, but the date for the book is October here, while the title record has no month. I see 2 editors worked on this, 1 still active, so maybe they know why it's that way. --Username 15:20, 2 August 2021 (EDT)

I updated these to reflect October 1984 per the Locus source and date credit. I split the two coverart titles, since the artwork on the Avon Books edition is different; that one's dated 1986-12-00, matching the pub. --MartyD 14:52, 4 August 2021 (EDT)


A mod left me an unnecessary message on my board that said, "I approved you submission for Dangerous Red, but you need to clone the pub under that title and enter the 2003 edition in edition to the new edition." There are many, many records here with an earlier date in title record because editor didn't own a copy of that edition/didn't want to enter the info, but entering the date at least lets people know that the original is earlier than the edition(s) on ISFDB. In my case the book has at least 2 much earlier editions with different covers by the same publisher but no actual copies on, so I just added date in case anyone comes across a copy somewhere so they know it needs entering; small-press books like this one are often riddled with wrong info online so an actual copy is necessary. More importantly, 2 of my edits were rejected unnecessarily.; as can be seen here,, there's a dozen books with that publisher name. Also,, where I obviously added cover artist with a note. I'm not entering either of these again, so 1 of you can un-reject them if you want to. --Username 15:54, 3 August 2021 (EDT)

Rejected edits without communication

My message to Biomassbob will explain why I'll stop correcting badly linked reviews. AlainLeBris 01:58, 4 August 2021 (EDT)

It can definitely be frustrating to have an edit rejected (I've certainly had many rejected in the past). However, rejected edits can be unrejected, so no information or work is lost. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:57, 4 August 2021 (EDT)
Yes I know this but what annoys me is the unfortunate trend manifested by some moderators (Dirk P. Broer, Biomassbob) that bows down to "Reject First - Talk Later" instead of a more civil "Talk First - Reject Later". AlainLeBris 12:40, 5 August 2021 (EDT)
It is far easier for moderators to have one page -their own talk page- where all their moderating issues are mentioned, than to have to scrape that info at each and every editor's talk pages, don't you agree?--Dirk P Broer 06:45, 7 August 2021 (EDT)

Action requested on rejected edits list

Will a moderator please process these four submissions from my rejected edits list? [8], [9], [10], [11]I stored them there so they would not cause a "forced" rejection of several other edits. Thank you John Scifibones 11:13, 5 August 2021 (EDT)

I went to do these, but looks like you already resubmitted them and the new versions have been processed. If there is any remaining, let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:37, 7 August 2021 (EDT)

Help! Way out of my knowledge base

Found a French variant of the Tales of the Cthulhu Mythos Editor: August Derleth. Title Record # 34377

Book Title: Légendes du mythe de Cthulhu 1 by August Derleth, H.P. Lovecraft Publisher: Pocker (France) Nov 2007 256 pages. €5.80 Translation Claude Gilbert with cover by Marc Simonetti All of this from all of this is easy but at Goodreads It lists all of the stuff in the book and I have zero clue on how to do this. aardvark7 15:14, 5 August 2021 (EDT)

Same way you do it for English - you add the stories with their French titles, then after it is approved, you add a note with the translators and variant them to their parents. When the reference title is set to French, all other titles will automatically be set to French as well. :) Do you want to try? Or do you want someone to do it? Annie 16:12, 5 August 2021 (EDT)
It will probably quicker to clone this pub that looks quite similar.AlainLeBris 02:03, 6 August 2021 (EDT)

I'll give it a try. Where my problem comes from is adding all of the story titles. Goodreads gives that info but not page numbers, plus I've never done this before. I'll try to Clone but please forgive if I royally screw up aardvark7 11:30, 6 August 2021 (EDT)

Links to GCD

So I've been adding the text stories from "Heavy Metal" and referencing the Grand Comics Database for supporting information. I just read their "Data Distribution: How should I credit the GCD? What rights does the GCD retain? What rights do I have?" on giving credit, and I realized that I may not be doing this properly. Before I go any further, I thought I'd check to see what the policy is here. Should I be linking/using their data at all? Should we reach out to their board for permission? TAWeiss 11:28, 7 August 2021 (EDT)

Facts are not copyrightable (at least under US copyright law which governs the ISFDB, but I believe also international copyright). Analysis or presentation of those facts can be, but not the basic facts. So if you are talking about basic bibliographic information, there is no copyright issue. That page seems to be more about their database as whole. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:10, 8 August 2021 (EDT)
That makes sense. Thanks TAWeiss 10:32, 8 August 2021 (EDT)

Need Help with Getting a Story Included

Hello: I am a retired astronomer and listed as an author on your database.

I don't know how to add a story to my listing and am hoping someone can help me.

I have had a science fiction story published in Flash Fiction (which is a web magazine not limited to science fiction). How can I get this listed under my author page: "Andrew Fraknoi"?

The story is called "I Swallowed a Martian" and appeared on July 23, 2021:

Thanks so much for any help you could give me.

Andrew Fraknoi

We do not have a record for Flash Fiction Magazine in the DB and we have somewhat restrictive rules about when an online-only publication is eligible:
  • Speculative fiction webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues (note: online periodicals without distinct issues are not considered webzines)
  • Special speculative fiction issues of non-genre webzines
  • One time speculative fiction anthologies published on the Web
  • Online publications available exclusively as a Web page, but only if:
  • published by a market which makes the author eligible for SFWA membership (listed here), OR
  • shortlisted for a major award
The only way we may be able to fit this publication would be under the second rule, with the date defining issues - which will be a bit of working around the spirit of the rules as written. If we cannot fit it there, it will not be eligible for addition under the current rules - at least at the moment. The reason for the restrictions is pure time and effort related - we do open up for additional categories occasionally (a few years ago, web-only publications could only be included under the last bullet). Thia kinds of webzines had been in my mind lately - thinking on a way to change the rules so we can add them cleanly. Let me do some more digging on this one. Annie 12:56, 9 August 2021 (EDT)

Emile Denis => Émile Denis

The name of this artist should be changed to "Émile Denis" as he's credited.AlainLeBris 05:26, 8 August 2021 (EDT)

Fixed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:27, 9 August 2021 (EDT)

Secrets of Our Spaceship Moon

Hello mods. In regards to this publication. I can see no evidence in the publication that it is a variant title of Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon/ In fact the cover ahas the text "The Astounding sequel to / Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon" although the copyright page does say "published by arrangement with Dell" so where's the evidence that this is a variant title as opposed to a "sequel" as stated on the cover ? --Mavmaramis 16:20, 8 August 2021 (EDT)

Well, let's ask the editor who made the variant back in 2015. :) If that was a mistake (and it happens) and you now think it is not a variant, go ahead and fix it. :) Annie 12:24, 9 August 2021 (EDT)
Hauck is no longer active. I'm am not entirely confident I can unmerge the two titles. --Mavmaramis 03:20, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
Hi! There's no need to unmerge the titles, they have to be unvarianted (but that's what you propably meant). Just use the usual 'Make variant' button and enter '0' (zero) as parent: that'll do the job. Christian Stonecreek 12:44, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

Phil(l)ippe; I added a cover to 1 edition of his co-written books, and added another today, and now they're all covered. Then I noticed that all covers show his first name with 1 L. Is that a mistake here? --Username 22:11, 8 August 2021 (EDT)

Wrong Cover

I thought Parlour Papers' cover couldn't be found online, so I got it from a multi-page spread of small press magazine covers on Vault of Evil, only to learn it was on along with other issues of the same magazine; the cover I uploaded turned out to be from an earlier issue not on ISFDB, so I uploaded the right one. I need a mod to delete the earlier cover. --Username 07:13, 9 August 2021 (EDT)

Control Panel moved

The link to the "Control Panel" page has been moved from the Moderator section of the navigation bar to the Bureaucrat menu. It's not used during day to day operations and at least one of the fields is meaningless unless you are a developer. Ahasuerus 17:29, 9 August 2021 (EDT)

Double Gorman; I tried twice to delete that extra Gorman in the Carroll edition, but had no luck. Not sure why, so maybe it's a mod-only thing. --Username 02:16, 10 August 2021 (EDT)

Took care of it. To fix it, have to change one of the duplicate names to something else, have that approved, and then remove the changed one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2021 (EDT)

Pending submissions

Sorry to be insistent, but the bottleneck at submission level is starting to be quite serious (presently more than 1000 edits are in the queue). As I'm entering a certain number of new publications that are in the process of 1st approval (waiting for me to "finish" the record) or 2nd (or 3rd) approval (which will allow me to definitively shelve the book after verification), this leads to accute storge problems for me. All the free surfaces in my study are cluttered by books waiting to be fully entered and so shelved. I don't have any miracle cure but it seems to me that the pool of active moderators is sufficient but that the burden of approving simple contributors' submissions fall only on too few shoulders.AlainLeBris 04:31, 11 August 2021 (EDT)

Summers can be complicated that way - people are away for various reasons and when we have a few very active editors, it can get a bit complicated. Let me see what I can do today - I had been mostly working on a project and away from the queue for the last weeks. Annie 10:46, 11 August 2021 (EDT)
I just went through a bunch, so that should help. I'll try to do more later. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:14, 11 August 2021 (EDT)

Tag system enhancements

The tag system has been enhanced based on my 2021-07-30 post. When viewing tag pages like this one, moderators can now see a "Log of Tag Status Changes" for the displayed tag.

In addition, two new reports have been added to the "Moderator Links" section of the navigation bar: "Tag Status Changes" and "Private Tags". The first one lets you view all recent tag status changes. The second one lets you view a list of all tags that are currently set to "Private".

As the "Private Tags" report says, if you notice a misspelled or otherwise malformed tag, please post on the Moderator Noticeboard and a bureaucrat will remove it. Ahasuerus 10:19, 12 August 2021 (EDT)

Next up: merging tags and preventing some tags from being marked private. (^_^) ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:59, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
From a purely technical perspective, it wouldn't be hard to do. However, we'd need to consider the functional implications. Some editors may be upset when their carefully crafted tags are merged with other -- similar but subtly different -- tags. Ahasuerus 14:56, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
Merging can be tricky - subtle differences in usage are important for some people. Unless we can have separate views (one for the combined tag and then for each of the components). Annie 17:16, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
I can understand people wanting to not have too many changes made, but merging "action adventure" (1), "action/adventure" (1), and "action-adventure" (115) could only be beneficial, especially for the two that have only one. There are currently 12,426 tags, and I suspect a significant number of the tags needing merging are like these three examples. Then there are probable misspelling like "zombes" (1), which could be likely merged with "zombie" (1) and "zombies" (2343), again benefiting the two with only one. Any that are super specific (like "ofearna-1998" (361)) can be made private (if they aren't already). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:06, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
That's why I said tricky, not impossible. Some are clear cut. Some are not. Who is going to decide when we cross between the two? We need some type of voting system (or we will open the door for a lot of editing war). And there are some tags I would not touch with a ten-foot pole even if they look the same to me - race-based ones for example - different culture look at these differently so what sounds the same to an American eye is different from a French one or a Bulgarian one. And any moderator can make a tag private if they want to already. :) Annie 19:11, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
We could always have a discussion for any non-obvious ones. And any that could be potentially a problem (like those you mentioned), they could be marked private. I assume it's just as easy to change it back to public if we decide it's fine. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:30, 12 August 2021 (EDT)

(unindent) OK, I think have cleaned up the most obvious offenders. Some were obvious typos and have been deleted with the correctly spelled version of the tag name added to the affected title(s). Others were apparently misunderstood by the moderator who made them private, e.g. "worn out" was a reference to the plot of the story and not to the condition of the book. Finally, it's important to remember that making a tag private makes it private for ALL titles, both current and future, that may be tagged with it. Ahasuerus 15:00, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

Canonical name change

Perhaps "Trisha J. Wooldridge should be the canonical name instead of Trisha Wooldridge. John Scifibones 18:24, 12 August 2021 (EDT)

Looks like you're correct. Feel free to switch things around. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:32, 12 August 2021 (EDT)
I don't see a "Remove" button next to the current alternate names on the canonical record. Is this a moderator only function? John Scifibones 07:15, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
Nope - anyone can do it. It is on the alternative name, not on the canonical :) You attach the alternative to the canonical so when you are breaking it, you unattach from there as well. Same way as with the variants - you start from the child (bringing that up as once the canonical is changed, the variants will also needs to be fixed) Annie 11:13, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
Thanks. I understand now. Here is an excerpt from the relevant help page.
Removing existing alternate names
If the currently displayed author name is already set up as an alternate name of one or more authors, these alternate name associations will be listed at the top of the page with a "Remove" button next to each alternate name. If one of the alternate name associations is in error, click on the Remove button next to the erroneous alternate name. The resulting "Remove Alternate Name" submission will need to be approved by a moderator before the incorrect alternate name is deleted.
A touch misleading? John Scifibones 11:20, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
A bit, yes... it makes sense once you know how it works but I can see why it got you confused. Let me think on the wording. Annie 11:44, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
You're right, it's clear after you do it. I think I have everything submitted correctly. The only thing I couldn't submit was the reversal of any parent child relationship. Won't let me submit till the break is processed. Let me know how I did. John Scifibones 12:18, 13 August 2021 (EDT)


I don't know what's wrong but after changing several story dates in Hugh Lamb's 1977 anthology Victorian Nightmares that were wrongly dated as original (I guess editor didn't notice the word Victorian in the title) I can't get Fenn's "Haunted by Spirits" to be as by "Manville Fenn". I tried breaking the variant "Mandeville Fenn" but now it has Manville with the story but no books and Mandeville with all 3 editions of Lamb's book. He didn't write as Mandeville, it was somebody's error, so could somebody get rid of that variant name and put that story under Manville? --Username 21:53, 12 August 2021 (EDT)

I will fix it. FYI, you'd need to edit the title and change the credit on it. When the bogus name has no titles associated with it, it will get deleted. Judging by this no variant should be needed -- it's credited to the full George Manville Fenn we have as canonical. --MartyD 09:58, 13 August 2021 (EDT)
Fixed and merged. --MartyD 10:26, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

How to separate

In creating new books, how do I classify an ebook vs a Kindle? Many times the book is available as a hardcopy, ebook and Kindle . Hardcopies are hc, tp to pb. Ebooks are ebook but what is a Kindle? Kindles' seem to have ASIN but hardcopies and ebooks look to have ISBN aardvark7 13:10, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

It is more complicated than that. :) What you think of ebooks are often also Kindle books and a lot of Kindle books have ISBNs as well (even if Amazon hides them these days - publishers often publish a single book in multiple formats (epub and mobi for example - mobi is Kindle, epub is for other readers such as Kobo for example - and look Inside in Amazon or the publisher site will have an ISBN for the book even if Amazon pretends that it does not exist anymore) and that book will have both ASIN and ISBN). The change happened sometime in 2020, before that Kindle books which had ISBNs showed it on the page; then Amazon dropped that information both from the API and the UI. But the ISBNs still exist. :)
Unless you are sure that the two versions are different, we keep the Kindle and non-kindle ebooks as a single entry, with the ISBN and the ASIN added to it (and the BN number if it has one and you want to find it). For the publishers who publish separate versions, add them both as ebooks (one will have ASIN, one won't; they may have different ISBNs or the Kindle one may have none) and add notes to differentiate them. Annie 13:29, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

Where's The

Don't know if anyone will care about this, but I entered an edit and Modified Regular Titles said, "Title date after the publication date" while New Cover Art said, "Title date after publication date". One has "the", the other doesn't. Minor, but I thought I'd mention it so mods that fix that sort of thing know about it. --Username 19:16, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

Fixed - thanks for reporting the problem! Ahasuerus 20:02, 13 August 2021 (EDT)

Michael Gilbert?; fixed several "short fiction" entries that are clearly art credits. I don't think the artist is the same as the guy who wrote "Stay of Execution", that story probably being by mystery writer Michael Gilbert, since it's in 1 of Joan Kahn's mystery anthologies. Which one wrote the chapbook, "The General's Bane", or the poem, I don't know. --Username 01:57, 14 August 2021 (EDT)

Bound to the Dark Prince

"Bound to the Dark Prince" by Aria Lovely is a new book that I recently added to the data base. Title Record # 2898585 This is her first book in her "The Fae Wars" series. Unfortunately it has been tied to another Fae Wars series, "The Fae Wars: Onslaught" by J. F. Holmes and Lucas Marcum. Title Record # 2851786 "Bound to the Dark Prince" by Aria Lovely is book 1 of her The Fae Wars through Kindle (Goodreads 57399557) "The Fae Wars: Onslaught" by J. F. Holmes and Lucas Marcum is also a Vol One (Goodreads 57399557)(Kindle) Date base shows Cannon Publishing. Amazon shows this as a Kindle & Paperback and is the first of 2 books with the 2nd as "The Fae Wars: The Fall". These are 2 different series by 2 different authors with the same name and should be separated. aardvark7 17:10, 14 August 2021 (EDT)

Both series call themselves "The Fae Wars". The software links titles to series by name, so in a situation where we have multiple series with the same name, we have to add disambiguation to the those names. Where the titles in a series are all credited to the same author(s), we use their names. I've done that. Now we have The Fae Wars (Lovely) and The Fae Wars (Holmes, Marcum). If you visit either of those, you'll notice the software also automatically includes a prominent pointer to the other series with a similar name. I hope that makes sense. Please ask if that's not clear or if you have any questions. --MartyD 08:36, 15 August 2021 (EDT)
p.s. I also added The Fall. --MartyD 08:36, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

I get where you are coming from. I knew they were two different series but also knew it was way beyond my knowledge on how to fix it. So I tried to get enough information so that someone with that knowledge could get it corrected. aardvark7 13:08, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

Editing secondary Verification Sources

"ISFDB Bibliographic Reference Table Editor", which used to be linked in the Moderator Tools toolbar, has been removed. It used to let moderators edit the labels, names and URLs of secondary Verification Sources. However, the functionality was poorly implemented and could mess up the database, so editing was disabled many years ago.

A new option, "Edit Verification Sources", has been added to the Bureaucrat menu. It means that changing secondary Verification Sources no longer requires developer intervention. Ahasuerus 15:06, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

A new option, "Add New Verification Source", has been added to the Bureaucrat menu. Developer involvement is no longer required when adding secondary Verification Sources.
Table maintenance activities which still require developer intervention:
  • Editing language codes
  • Adding/editing image credits
  • Adding/editing Notes templates
  • Adding/editing External ID types
We'll get there... Ahasuerus 16:49, 18 August 2021 (EDT)

Daniken; fixed record for 1970 Chariots of the Gods, added 1969 original, fixed some stuff for sequels. Under 1968 German is a 1981 English, but there's also a separate 1970 English. That doesn't seem right. Also, when I entered the original I made one of my rare mistakes and said the SBN was on front flap when it's actually on copyright page. By the time someone gets around to approving I'll be on to 100 other things and may forget to fix note, so if mod who approves it could fix that and save me the trouble that would be cool. --Username 21:57, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

Well, nobody answered and edit was just approved, so I fixed it myself. Also, nobody answered my question of why 1 edition of Chariots was under the original German edition's record while the other was separate, but I see it was fixed by someone anyway. You the man, Username. No, you the man. --Username 10:10, 17 August 2021 (EDT)

The Case of the Two Paul Alexanders

Just to let people know. Illustrator Paul Alexander IS NOT the same person as writer Paul Alexander Zink. They have been combined together as Paul Alexander and will have to be separated in the near future. MLB 04:25, 16 August 2021 (EDT)

The records have been disambiguated and SFE3 has been notified. Thanks! :) Ahasuerus 10:46, 16 August 2021 (EDT)

Electronic media

Help! I need some guidelines on how to classify electronic media. Many times a book, along with a hardback and/or paperback will have a Kindle version. Sometimes a Kindle version and an ebook. And other times a Kindle and Audiobook. Kindle and Audiobook are not options listed under Format. And Audiobooks have always been listed as Audiobook, not Audio CD or Audio Mp3 CD. Should Kindle and Audiobook be listed as "ebook" or "Other"? aardvark7 21:34, 16 August 2021 (EDT)

Kindle is ebook - all eBooks formats are classified as ebook. Audible and other downloadable audio-formats are “digital audio download”. :) Annie 23:48, 16 August 2021 (EDT)

THANK YOU Annie!! aardvark7 08:36, 17 August 2021 (EDT)


Was there a recent improvement where the annoying process of having to link alternate cover artist's name to the parent name was made easier by including the parent name when you start the edit? I don't remember seeing that before. I added a new edition of The Hunting Variety, there was no artist credit but a Marchetti signature on cover, and edit said it was an alternate name of Lou Marchetti. --Username 10:17, 17 August 2021 (EDT)

Well, edit was approved and now it says Lou Marchetti twice; I'm tired of trying to figure out this variant stuff, so mod can fix it, or not, if they wish. --Username 17:36, 17 August 2021 (EDT)
Fixed. As far as I can tell, a circular reference was created somehow having both Lou Marchetti and Marchetti as alternate names of each other (I think). No idea how that could have happened... MagicUnk 15:40, 18 August 2021 (EDT)
It happened again; Either I'm doing it wrong or something's wrong behind the scenes; in the future if I enter an artist that has a parent name I'm just going to leave it alone. --Username 18:17, 18 August 2021 (EDT)
Aha, I didn't think it possible, but you submitted a 'Make Alternate Name' edit while it already existed. So there are now two links between both author names. Have a look here: MagicUnk 04:54, 19 August 2021 (EDT)
That looks like something that the submission review software should be able to catch and block. Let me do more research on the development server... Ahasuerus 12:22, 19 August 2021 (EDT)
Checking the code, I see that the submission review software currently displays a "This name is currently labeled as an alternate name for the following authors" list, which is helpful, but it should also make submissions which would result in duplicate alternate names unapprovable. Bug 782 has been created. Thanks for reporting the problem! Ahasuerus 12:50, 19 August 2021 (EDT)

(unindent) OK, I think I got it. Please let me know if you come across any issues. Ahasuerus 15:03, 19 August 2021 (EDT)

Incorrect/Dup Artist

Reborn Title Record # 2895882 shows the cover artist to be Jackson Tjotan. The correct spelling is Jackson Tjota. The Reborn title is correctly shown under Jackson Tjota for Title Record # 2895724. IMHO Reborn Title Record # 2895882 should be removed. I could delete it but don't want to step on toes. aardvark7 17:00, 17 August 2021 (EDT)

Fixed. MagicUnk 15:32, 18 August 2021 (EDT)

Carl Brandon Society Awards

Beginning this year, The Carl Brandon Society will be selecting a long work and a short work winner in each category. Please make the appropriate modification in anticipation of the release announcement. Thanks, John Scifibones 16:25, 19 August 2021 (EDT)

Once we know what the exact names of the new award categories will be (have they been announced?), we can create new records for them. Ahasuerus 16:13, 21 August 2021 (EDT)
They haven't announced the winners yet, only that they will award a long and a short in each category as opposed to only one per category as in past years. Just trying to be prepared. John Scifibones 16:51, 21 August 2021 (EDT)
Sounds good, thanks! Ahasuerus 18:41, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

More stuff I don't know how to do

Recently I added a number of books to the data base. Most of these had various combos of paperback, ebook, Kindle and Audiobook. In the past when I have done this they all appeared merged under a parent title. Didn't happen this time. Tried variant and was told nope, they need to be merged. Fine but I have not been able to find this command. Titles that are bad are Song of Shadow (3 versions) and Hymn of Ascension (2 versions) All found under "Ballad of Emerald and Iron" Series Record # 64030. Canticle of Magic is also under there but the paperback has been attached to the above Series Record #64030 and the ebook version under "Ballad of Emerald and Iron Book" Series Record # 64035. Notice that extra word "Book" Is there a page showing how to merge stuff? I find "Unmerge Titles" but no "Merge Titles" aardvark7 16:13, 20 August 2021 (EDT)

On both title records and publication records, there is a "Check for Duplicate Titles" option. Click that and it will give you matches where the title, author, and type match. You can the select duplicates and submit a merge. Hope that helps. Let us know if not clear. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2021 (EDT)

OK I found that. So for Galaxy Under Siege it shows the 2020 and 2019 versions. I assume that I want to click the top two to merge the books but not the bottom two since the covers are different. Also even if the covers are the same, since each one has its own link, would I even then want to merge covers? aardvark7 09:50, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Since you are referring to top two and bottom two, I'm assuming you are talking about the "Check for Duplicate Titles" from the publication record. In other words, this page. You would submit merges for both - do the novels and then go back and do the covers. For covers, we merge them if the artwork is the same and they have the same title and artist credit. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Yes, that's the page. In this case for Galaxy Under Siege the covers are different so I will only merge titles. I merged Galaxy Under Seige (Title only as covers are different). I also did The Song of Shadow where I merged all 3 book versions (Top half) but only the 2019 covers (paperback and ebook) as they are the same but different from the 2020 audiobook. I did the top have book versions first, then went back and did the bottle covers part. I have others but I want to make sure I did these correctly first aardvark7 17:30, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

I approved your merges and you can see the results: Galaxy Under Siege and Song of Shadow. I also merged the cover art. The two Galaxy Under Siege are the same artwork (we don't care that the text is slightly different, only the artwork) and the three Song of Shadow covers are the same artwork (we treat cropped versions the same as the larger versions). -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:53, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Varianting a Robert E. Howard story

I could do the mechanics, but would rather someone used to juggling titles took a go at it instead. My copy of Marchers of Valhalla contains a story (novelette) called The Valley of the Lost. The acknowledgements state "copyright of 1967, under the title Secret of Lost Valley, by Heath Knowledge, Inc. for Startling Mystery Stories, Spring 1967". The story title has a note saying not to merge or variant with Valley of the Lost first published in a horror magazine in 1966. However, this title is not a variant of The Secret of Lost Valley which includes the Startling Mystery Stories issue as the first publication. Sounds like a simple variant request, but the base title already haa a variant of Valley of the Lost - the title not to be merged/varianted to, although it isn't in the horror magazine. I've run out of tabs, time and brain stacking space. Any takers? ../Doug H 19:47, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Could you make clear of what 'The Valley of the Lost' should be made a variant of? Judging from the Statement made in 'Marchers of Valhalla' it should be text-identical with Secret of Lost Valley. It seems there are two different texts titled (nearly identical) 'Valley of the Lost' and 'The Valley of the Lost'. Christian Stonecreek 07:13, 22 August 2021 (EDT)
I believe it should be a variant of a story called Secret of Lost Valley that is contained in the publication for the Spring 1967 issue of Startling Mystery Stories. However, that doesn't exist - the title referenced by the issue is called The Secret of Lost Valley. Either the reference in my book is wrong, or the magazine entry is wrong (one PVer last seen in 2013). The existing title has a variant title of The Valley of the Lost, which has multiple entries. I don't know on what basis they were varianted to The Secret of the Lost Valley rather than Secret of Lost Valley. {ref. on history of the story - see #13)}. I'm thinking the key is to find the magazine and check. There are copies listed in the OCLC, may be able to get a librarian somewhere to check. ../Doug H 15:14, 22 August 2021 (EDT)
Startling Mystery Stories is available at the Internet Archive. That issue is here. The title page uses "The" as per our entry. Please compare the text to see if it is the same story as in your publication. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:37, 22 August 2021 (EDT)
Same text (first few paragraphs). I'll variant to the existing title and add notes to this stories pub and title records. ../Doug H 16:44, 22 August 2021 (EDT)


Last moderator on the list, Tpi, has no space between since and the date, unlike the other missing mods. --Username 08:18, 23 August 2021 (EDT)

Fixed! Thanks for catching that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:12, 23 August 2021 (EDT)

Utah Speculative Fiction Award

This award was given out from 2002-2005, and it may be starting up again based on some information from some conversations I've had with a few people. The first two years, it was only a single award with a list of finalists. The second two years, they added a short fiction category. I have the winners and finalists for 2002-2003, but I'm still trying to find those for 2004-2005. I will fill in the information I have once the award is created. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:21, 23 August 2021 (EDT)

Here's the info needed to create it:

  • Short Name: Utah SF
  • Full Name: Utah Speculative Fiction Award
  • Awarded For: Recognize and honor the best novel-length book (and later, short fiction) for the year written by a Utah author or about Utah.
  • Poll: No
  • Covers more than just SF: No
  • Webpages: none at the moment
  • Note: Awarded from 2002-2005. From 2002-2003, awarded for a speculative fiction novel. From 2004-2005, awarded for the novel and for short fiction.

···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:26, 23 August 2021 (EDT)

Checking the Wayback Machine, I see the following line:
  • Anybody who has a membership to a current year sfcon sponsored convention is eligible to be a Judge. If you are interested, please read the Judge Voting Process and contact the Utah SF Award Contest Coordinator.
It looks like the "Awarded By" field should contain a statement like "Anonymous volunteer judges selected among members of the sfcon". A somewhat unusual process, but I don't think it should prevent us from adding this award. Ahasuerus 14:47, 23 August 2021 (EDT)
Probably "Anonymous volunteer judges selected among members of CONduit", since SFCON was the parent organization that put on CONduit and CONduit was the only con they ever ran. If the awards start up again (which I think they will), we'll have to change that since the judging process might be different. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:18, 23 August 2021 (EDT)
Sounds good. If there are no objections, I will create the new Award Type in a couple of days. Ahasuerus 17:26, 23 August 2021 (EDT)
Done! Ahasuerus 09:58, 25 August 2021 (EDT)
Thanks! All the information I have has been entered. There are apparently awards for 2004 and 2005, but I haven't been able to find anything on them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:51, 8 September 2021 (EDT)

Author Merge Request

Fanni Suto and Fanni Sütő appear to be the same person. Follow Fanni Suto's instagram link and you will see she spells her name Fanni Sütő. John Scifibones 20:38, 24 August 2021 (EDT)

My mistake. Never mind.John Scifibones 07:27, 25 August 2021 (EDT)

iUniverse; 51 books under this imprint, but shouldn't publisher's name be Writers Club Press / iUniverse for all? --Username 08:29, 25 August 2021 (EDT)

merging publisher

Could someone please meege Laissez Faire Produktion AB into Laissez faire. Cheers /Lokal_Profil 14:15, 26 August 2021 (EDT)

Done! Rudolf Rudam 07:28, 30 August 2021 (EDT)


I don't know if this is normal, but I've noticed when I correct wrong names or titles some editors make the right ones variants of the wrong ones. For example,; I checked the copy and it's Gold, so Golden was just copied from some online site without editor checking titles from actual book to make sure they were correct. My edit was approved, but instead of just using the correct title it was made a variant of the old incorrect title. Golden was never really the title, so why is it still there? Also,, where Gauitier was corrected to Gautier but it's still a variant of the wrong name. The point of correcting these countless errors is to get rid of the wrong info, and leaving them in the record gives the false impression that those wrong names and titles were actually used somewhere in the publications when in fact they're just mistakes copied from somewhere to ISFDB without verifying anything. --Username 18:49, 27 August 2021 (EDT)

In both these cases, the titles were already variants before you edited them. When you edit a variant, you only change the variant. If there needs to be a change in the parent also, that needs to be submitted separately. I made these two changes. As you make changes, you will need to pay attention as to whether you are editing a variant and, if so, whether the parent also needs a change. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:17, 29 August 2021 (EDT)

Lewis and Maniacs; I added the 1964 ed. of Two Thousand Maniacs! but trying to link it with editions already on ISFDB didn't work because I never understand exactly how varianting works, so I mentioned this on the boards; mod told me I almost got it right and fixed it so all editions were together. Now I see another mod approved an edit by someone else which separated them again. What's going on? --Username 11:00, 2 September 2021 (EDT)

With no answer within three days I played it safe and merged the titles again. If somebody thinks they should be separated, please tell so (and then maybe a moderator can add a note or do something about it). Christian Stonecreek 10:44, 5 September 2021 (EDT)

Moderator available to approve a couple submissions?

[12],[13],[14]. I appreciate it. John Scifibones 18:23, 4 September 2021 (EDT)

done. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:41, 4 September 2021 (EDT)
Just a couple more, please [15],[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21].Thanks John Scifibones 12:14, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
I have approved the New Award submissions. Just to be on the safe side, is this award not title-based or do we need to create a title record? Ahasuerus 12:28, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
The original publication of that title is in "The British Haiku Society 2020 Anthology". I haven't been able to find enough information to create a record. I submitted an entry to create a title record in the awards overview for the sake of completeness. The other three unprocessed submissions are the original source publications for the last three finalists. After those three are processed , I will submit edits to add the awards to the three titles. The awards will be announced any day now. One of the nominated poets reached out to me and asked that I complete the list. John Scifibones 13:04, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
OK, everything has been approved and minor corrections (page numbers/capitalization) have been made. A few questions:
I think ""As soon as I could walk"" in "Cough Syrup Magazine, Spring 2020" should not have been changed.
  • In Rune, 2020, is "How to Tidy the Asterids" spelled that way?
No. This will fix it.
Home Sweet Home should have no quote Fix. Yes "Sppoky Boi" is spelled that way.
Ahasuerus 17:12, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
The three finalist awards are at the end of my submission queue. Thank you for taking care of this. John Scifibones 17:43, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for submitting the corrections! I have approved everything. Re: changing "As soon as I could walk" to "As soon As I could walk", Template:PublicationFields:Title says:
  • all later words are capitalized except for "a", "an", "and", "at", "by", "for", "from", "in", "of", "on", "or", "the", "to", and "with"
which doesn't include the word "as". Also, I didn't think it was one of those titles that use all-lowercase because it includes two words with a capitalized first letter. Does this match your understanding? Ahasuerus 18:06, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
For stand alone titles, our case regularization standards are fine. For untitled poetry, particularly Haiku, Tanka, etc. I believe sentence case (capitalize the first word and proper nouns) is correct. However, most of what I see is to use all lower case. I think that's fine also. I have been thinking of bringing this up in the Rules and Standards Discussion page. The objection I have to the above mentioned title is that we are mixing both. By our present standards, would it not be "As Soon As I Could Walk"? John Scifibones 18:28, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
Oh, right, I completely missed the forest for the trees there. I'll head back to bed now :-) Ahasuerus 19:16, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
Regardless, I think it reflects well on us that you processed everything so quickly. We have posted the complete results before the SFPA has updated their website! John Scifibones 18:28, 5 September 2021 (EDT)

Dead User; he's Budwebster on his user board. --Username 10:01, 5 September 2021 (EDT)

Done; thanks for the heads-up. Ahasuerus 11:19, 5 September 2021 (EDT)

Cold Dead Hands; I did a major add/fix session a while ago for Robert Aickman's books, and today stumbled on a copy of his 2nd collection, Dark Entries, on Richard Dalby's site, which revealed the month it was published; that allowed me to fix date for the book and several stories in it. I decided to check Aickman's other books and found something odd, the 1993 reprint of Cold Hand in Mine by Lightyear Press. Cover is the same as original Scribner's edition but didn't list Edward Gorey as cover artist so I added him, thinking I added another Gorey credit here since I added a bunch recently. However, always being suspicious, I looked closer and discovered that if you enlarge the Lightyear cover you can see an "RS" at bottom of spine, so editor just added Scribner's cover without making sure it was the right cover. Problem is they uploaded it to the Wiki so simply deleting it like an Amazon link or something won't work. Checking Lightyear's entries here, most of the covers are missing, many records have notes saying OCLC doesn't mention it, etc. It seems to be tied to Buccaneer Books in some way, so is probably an instant remainder type of publisher. So mods may wish to delete Aickman's image from the Wiki and determine if those records which have cover images also have the wrong cover and delete those, too. Searching for ISBN's on Google Images either brings up nothing or editions that clearly aren't Lightyear, so where the right covers can be found is unknown. --Username 23:59, 7 September 2021 (EDT)

Canonical name edit

Jason Mccall should be Jason McCall. Thanks John Scifibones 18:13, 9 September 2021 (EDT)

Is now. Annie 18:18, 9 September 2021 (EDT)

Huan Mee; I corrected a couple of dates for stories by this author who is actually 2 guys who wrote 100+ years ago; after approval I stumbled on the fact that an editor named Toff entered another story by them for a 2021 anthology, Somebody asked him on his board about varianting stories with their original appearances but more than a week has gone by without a response. So if anyone wants to correct Huan Mee's story and variant names or dates...; also, there may be other stories in same anthology that need the same. --Username 14:32, 10 September 2021 (EDT)

Kudos to the moderators

I felt guilty, making hundreds of submissions while the queues were already piled up in the hundreds over the last couple of weeks. I see the queues are now down to double/single digits this morning. All this without a single plea for mercy, understanding or sympathy. To all the moderators grinding away at the queues, I salute you. (And feel a bit better about submitting another few dozen) ../Doug H 11:37, 11 September 2021 (EDT)

Jovanovich; publisher's page says Jovanovich was added in 1970 and this 1963 book has an ISBN which didn't exist back then, so this is likely a post-60's printing. --Username 15:37, 13 September 2021 (EDT)

Farrar; Publisher section has error wherever Giroux link appears, taking you to Young page instead. --Username 16:59, 13 September 2021 (EDT)

Whitney Award

This is a non-genre award that often awards to genre works. You can read more about it here:

Here's the info for it:

  • Short Name: Whitney
  • Full Name: Whitney Award
  • Awarded For: Novels by LDS authors
  • Awarded By: Storymakers Conference
  • Poll: No
  • Covers more than just SF: Yes
  • Webpages: see above

Nominations are from anyone. Once a work receives at least five nominations, the Whitney Awards Committee verifies eligibility and narrowing nominations to no more than five per category. An invitation-only group of authors, bookstore owners/managers, distributors, critics, and other industry professionals, collectively known as the Whitney Award Academy, then vote on the finalists.

If the award is added, I will populate it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:31, 14 September 2021 (EDT)

Wow, that's a lot of speculative fiction categories for a non-genre award! I guess it just goes to show how popular speculative fiction is these days. (No objections on my side.) Ahasuerus 18:42, 14 September 2021 (EDT)
I think they created them because specfic was overwhelming the regular categories. (^_^) ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:51, 14 September 2021 (EDT)
And done. In the future, we may want to post proposed additions to the Award Type list on the Community Portal. This one was pretty straightforward, but there may be cases where non-moderators may have additional insight into award eligibility. Ahasuerus 08:30, 16 September 2021 (EDT)
Okay, these are all entered through 2020. The 2021 awards haven't been given out yet. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:08, 4 October 2021 (EDT)

Fetching the Dead

I added cover and fixed dates for stories in this collection,, since all had the date of the collection but most were actually published in non-genre magazines years earlier. Edit was approved but only the cover is there; dates are the same. No explanation from moderator, and I'm not entering them again, so I'll just mention here that the last story, "Time and Again", was reprinted in a genre magazine, F&SF, under another name which the copyright page doesn't mention, but ISFDB says is "The Sleepwalker". It comes from Tracks (Spring 1978), so "The Sleepwalker" is actually a variant of "Time and Again", not the other way around as it says on ISFDB. So if anyone cares they can fix that. --Username 14:53, 15 September 2021 (EDT)

And you look at the note of the update, you will know why the dates were reset. We date variants based on the first time that specific title and author form showed up. In this case it is not clear if the original publication were under the canonical author name (Scott Russell Sanders) or under that form (Scott R. Sanders) - so it is unclear which of the two titles needs a new date (or both if it was published under the variant author name). If you want to try to track down the magazines to see if we can discover which form was used, we can fix the dates in the proper variants (and add the notes where they belong for first publications). As it is, I have it on my list for this afternoon to update the dates up on the canonical titles with notes on where they were first published; the dates of the variants will remain the same as the ones of the publication until we discover otherwise.
Careful when collections/anthologies are not under an author's canonical name - you need to account for that when dating stories. Annie 15:05, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
Here's something interesting; I was looking for more info about this book online and found an link; I checked Open Library earlier and found nothing, which is why I had to get info from the copy on eBay. Turns out there's a Fetching the Dead: Stories by Unknown author and Publisher unknown and no ID #'s except for Open Library and the Archive link. I added page numbers to the stories and a link to Open Library in an edit, awaiting approval. I wonder how many people have looked for this book and couldn't find it because it was hiding on that almost empty page. --Username 16:42, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
1 story in this collection, "The Fire Woman", comes from an anthology, Cross Fertilization, which is on Google Books, and he's credited as Scott Sanders. --Username 18:32, 24 September 2021 (EDT)

Author delete

This author was created by typo, please delete. John Scifibones 11:54, 17 September 2021 (EDT)

Authors get deleted automatically when nothing holds them. If it is still there, there is a title somewhere. When it looks like that, it is a review where the author is a "Reviewed author". These do not show up on the author pages - Advanced Search finds them though. I fixed the offending record.
Next time this happens, keep in mind that moderators can change the name inside of the Author record - so you can ask us to do that instead of changing each title. Annie 12:11, 17 September 2021 (EDT)
Got it. In fact, I just saw it work in another situation. Thanks John Scifibones 12:29, 17 September 2021 (EDT)

Accidental deletion

Accidently deleted This anthology. Please process whenever you have a chance. No rush. Thanks, John Scifibones 17:33, 19 September 2021 (EDT)

Deletion cannot be undone. Rejected submission is easy. :) All sorted. Annie 18:21, 19 September 2021 (EDT)


When I added Plagueborne to this site, and didn't realize that it was a collection instead of an omnibus until I imported the contents. Can this be changed by a moderator, or do I have to do it all over again? MLB 03:44, 21 September 2021 (EDT)

Done! It was also my fault. I've overlooked it when i approved the title. Regards Rudolf Rudam 07:14, 21 September 2021 (EDT)
I'm pretty sure anyone can do it. It takes multiple edits, unfortunately, and leads to a bit of transient inconsistency, so it's a little easier for a moderator to do it. In order to change the publication's type, its contents must include a title of the desired changed-to container type. So one way:
  • Edit the title record and change its type from OMNIBUS to COLLECTION (with a moderator note explaining what's going on).
  • Once that is accepted, edit the publication record, changing the publication type from OMNIBUS to COLLECTION. You cannot do this in parallel -- it needs the title's type change in place.
Another way:
  • Edit the publication record, changing the publication type from OMNIBUS to COLLECTION and also adding a new content title of type COLLECTION with the appropriate details (with a suitable note to the moderator). If you don't add the COLLECTION title, you'll get an error about changing the type.
  • Remove the old container title from the publication. This can be submitted in parallel. I forget if this will delete the title when processed or if then a follow-up deletion is also needed.
This same process applies to changing from any container type (ANTHOLOGY, CHAPBOOK, COLLECTION, OMNIBUS) to any other. --MartyD 13:53, 21 September 2021 (EDT)
You need a follow-up deletion. Whoever fixed it did your second plan - I zapped the now empty omnibus this morning. However - why overcomplicate so much when you have a single publication? A single edit fixes both (see this cancelled example and omnibus to collection one). Then all you need is to clear the omnibus contents field and move that into a note instead (because that field is only for Omnibusses). Annie 14:01, 21 September 2021 (EDT)
I could have sworn it doesn't let you edit the container title, even if only one one pub. Obviously, if it lets you do that, a single edit is the way to go.... --MartyD 13:45, 22 September 2021 (EDT)
I think that there is/was? an iteration where it is a problem - if I ever remember which one, I will post back - that's why I did the tests to make sure these were in the clear before posting :) But collection/omnibus/anthology swaps had been on my list so often lately (juvenile 96/128 pages "novels") that I knew that one works (and still decided to verify). :) Annie 14:04, 22 September 2021 (EDT)

La città della paura indicibile I fixed your Chapbook update to a novel. Needed to remove the extra title and move the note about translation.Kraang 23:20, 21 September 2021 (EDT)

Not a Variant

The title I changed it to is the correct title as shown in the photo on Fantlab which I referenced in my note; it's not a variant. Why it was changed to a variant is unknown. "Farway House" is the title; "Faraway House" shouldn't be there anymore. --Username 22:23, 23 September 2021 (EDT)

Approved your edit and fixed it to just a name variant.Kraang 22:48, 23 September 2021 (EDT)
This is the same case as above. It was a variant before you edited it. When you edited the pub, you only changed the variant. You also needed to edit the parent. Same title with different author credits is still handled as a variant. If you see "by NAME [as by OTHERNAME]" in a pub listing, the pub contains a variant based on author name. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:08, 24 September 2021 (EDT)

Publication Record # 647654

Found Légendes du mythe de Cthulhu 2 (listed in data base as La chose des ténèbres) on NooSFere ( There it lists the price as €6.00 and the original English title as Tales of the Cthulhu Mythos. The primary verifier is Hauck, who is listed as no longer active. I believe this should be attached to Tales of the Cthulhu Mythos Series Record # 28724, but A) not sure how to go about it and B) don't want to step on toes. aardvark7 16:46, 25 September 2021 (EDT)

"Fixing" My Edits

I entered a bunch of stuff for Ramsey Campbell books today, and 1 minor edit I made was adding ID # to Jove's edition of The Doll Who Ate His Mother, since some other editor added it to the other Jove Campbell book on ISFDB, Demons By Daylight. Oddly, when a moderator got to my Campbell edits, that one wasn't approved until long after the first few. Since it was just adding an ID and not something that needed to be double-checked, as some moderators bother doing, I looked over the approved edit and it didn't seem exactly right. Then I realized my note, "ID on left side of cover", had been "fixed" to "Catalog ID on the left side of the cover", with a note from moderator, "Clarifying which ID was that about and fixing the language so it reads like a proper English sentence". Besides the fact that none of the many editors and moderators who worked on Demons By Daylight ever entered a note about where the ID came from, unlike me, the fact that there's nothing on the left cover except the ID and the price means there was no reason to enter the word "Catalog", and adding a few "the"'s to my note changes nothing; the way I wrote it (as I've written it for countless other notes) is perfectly acceptable English; when you enter as many edits as I've done, you need to use shorthand where applicable. If y'all want to spell everything out in your edits, fine. Don't tamper with mine. --Username 17:13, 27 September 2021 (EDT)

Part of the job of the moderators are to make sure that the notes are readable and understandable. We have a lot of different IDs on the screen. Your note was ambiguous so needed fixing. The edits are not "yours" - this is a collaborative project and you do not own the notes -anyone can improve your notes. Had you used "Catalog ID" instead of ID, I would not have fixed the sentence; as I had to fix that anyway, I also made sure that the sentence reads smoothly. Annie 17:22, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
Moderators frequently tweak or expand submitted notes as needed. In this case, we support ISBNs (the most commonly used type of book ID these days), "Catalog IDs" and "External IDs". Some parts of our software also also refer to internal record numbers as "IDs", e.g. see . Given this variety of "IDs", it helps to clarify what kind of ID we are talking about.
Having said that, minor changes to Notes are not a reflection on the quality of the submitting editor's work. Most of the time it's just a case of "four eyes are better than two". Occasionally we get editors who have real trouble explaining what they mean, which can become a significant issue, but minor changes are just a fact of life. Ahasuerus 18:38, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
That's all true, except that the ID on the cover of a book wouldn't be related in any way to ISFDB, especially not a book like this one which was published decades before ISFDB existed. So specifying what type of ID it is in a note makes no sense since there's only 1 type of ID that could be there; other types of ID like External are an invention of this site, and if I got ISBN from the cover I would have called it ISBN and not ID. As far as tweaking or expanding notes go, I've done that probably thousands of times, but it's almost always fixing old info that was wrong or adding new info; adding a couple of "the"'s is meaningless and writing a sarcastic note in the new edit about "fixing the language so it reads like a proper English sentence" is just petty, especially since I've had to fix hundreds and hundreds of records entered or approved by the same moderators who complain about my work. This may all be moot soon, anyway, since the way things are going the internet will be shut down and we'll all be living in a "glorious" socialist "paradise". --Username 19:33, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
Collaborative projects necessarily will have various people modifying various other peoples' edits, as has been explained. While we appreciate all that you've done here (and you've added and improved a lot of information), it is helpful to not assume the worst about other editors here. We are all trying to improve things, and every single one of us has had out edits modified in various ways and modified others' edits in various ways. It's just how things work here. The only time that's a problem is if the information was changed to be incorrect somehow (or deleted outright). That's not what happened in this case.
As for your concern about the "ID" issue, we try to make sure there's no possibility for confusion. While you are correct that the book may have only the one item labeled "ID" on it, when it's entered on ISFDB, that clarification is useful to avoid someone other than you being confused by which ID is meant in the notes. That's why the clarification was made. I can guarantee you it wasn't to put you down or attack your contributions in any way. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:45, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
And IDs are added to books daily - external IDs (such as OCLC for example), catalog IDs, ISBNs, some other type of IDs we may start adding in the future. Keeping the notes as unambiguous as possible makes it possible to track down information later and reduces the chance of mistakes and misunderstandings. Almost every record in the DB can be improved in one way or another. Annie 20:00, 27 September 2021 (EDT)

Canonical name switch

Can I get an approval to switch the canonical and alternate name for Eugenia M. Triantafyllou. thanks, John Scifibones 20:33, 27 September 2021 (EDT)

Oh yes - that one needs reversal.
PS: There is a one-edit way to remove all those unneeded parents (advanced search to get the parent and the variant into a merging position, then make sure the Parent ID is left as empty and the new canonical name is used for the record). If we already talked about that, then this is just a reminder :) Annie 20:38, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
For some reason, I'm not seeing it (figuratively). I've always done it one at a time. Will you show me the search criteria? John Scifibones 20:51, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
Reading how I wrote it again, it sounds like you can do multiple titles with one edit which is obviously not the case. It is still one per title but it is faster than breaking a variant and then deleting the old parent. With someone with as little number of titles as hers, I would do a title search for both her names, ordered by title. You get this. Then just start merging the pairs and in each pair, make sure that "title_parent" is set to the empty string (the default will always be the non-empty one) and the correct author form is used. Hope that makes sense. I wish we had a "flip the canonical" one step that takes care of all titles. It had been requested but... not trivial to say the least. Annie 21:04, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
That's what I do. Only variants I break are when the title appears as both canonical and alternate ways. John Scifibones 21:08, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
As I said - if we had discussed that/you knew that, it was just a reminder. All set then. :) Annie 21:09, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for processing them so fast, I owe you one. At least! John Scifibones 21:18, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
I am working on a project so between my own edits, I am keeping the queue clear as well :) You need to redo one of those variants - I think you hit the wrong button on the screen - been there, done that. And "Is" is always capitalized so you may want to do something about a couple of titles. Also - the "first published in" notes needs to bubble up on the parent as well on the ones where you varianted. Annie 21:20, 27 September 2021 (EDT)

Publisher name change request

Since inception, Uncanny Magazine has been published by "Lynne M. Thomas & Michael Damian Thomas". Unfortunately, someone started using Uncanny Magazine as the publisher and everyone followed suit. The Our Staff page of the magazine's website is quite clear. As this is a moderator only function, I'm asking that the publisher name be changed to the quoted name above. Much more efficient than 41 publication level edit submissions. John Scifibones 10:37, 28 September 2021 (EDT)

Actually the Our Stuff page is irrelevant - what you need is to see the credit inside of one of the magazines (all of them really in case it changed) (as these are the ebooks, not the webzine records). I will pull out my kindle later and check how the publisher is credited in there. If the publisher is credited as "Uncanny Magazine" there, that's what it needs to say (and I cannot remember off the top of my head). Annie 14:59, 28 September 2021 (EDT)
Also, I think there may be terminology confusion here. On ISFDB, "Publisher" always refers to the company, not the person/job title (except in cases of self publishing without a publishing company name). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:23, 30 September 2021 (EDT)
Yeah, there is that as well.
Looking at a real magazine:
Copyright is to "Uncanny Magazine" which implies that there is such company.
No publisher credit besides "Publishers/Editors-in-Chief" heading inside of the "Editorial Staff" for Thomas&Thomas which is just naming what people are doing IMO.
I'd keep the publisher as "Uncanny Magazine" under these circumstances, maybe add a note on the magazine level (or the publisher level) explaining the attribution. Any other opinions are welcome. Annie 13:26, 30 September 2021 (EDT)
The couple also runs the Kickstarter campaigns, at least implying this is their magazine. I'm fine with leaving it, if that's the decision. John Scifibones 19:07, 30 September 2021 (EDT)
Amazon lists publisher for the Kindle editions as "Uncanny Magazine" (e.g., here). Since they're alive and well, one could contact them and explain/ask, and we could preserve their response as documentation. --MartyD 12:32, 1 October 2021 (EDT)
No one argues that they publish the magazine. The question is if there is a company they own they actually do that under. The Copyright page strongly implies that yes, there is one. Or are you saying to ignore the company names of publishers and to use the names of the people who run them for all our publishers? :) After all these people are also called publishers. Annie 12:53, 1 October 2021 (EDT)
No, I am saying ask them if it is published by the company or published by them personally. "Uncanny Magazine" seems right to me, given the copyright statement, but here we could ask instead of making our best assessment. --MartyD 15:12, 1 October 2021 (EDT)
I was responding to John's comment that it is their magazine - thus the number of : I used. I agree with you that asking them may be the cleanest way based on what I am seeing inside of the magazines. :) Annie 15:56, 1 October 2021 (EDT)
I have reached out and am awaiting a response. John Scifibones 17:53, 1 October 2021 (EDT)

Cynthia Asquith Collection; added better cover from Fantlab, then noticed contents page photo shows that 1 story, "The Follower", isn't in the book and "In a Nutshell" is on a completely different page. PV, Chavey, hasn't responded to anything in years, so I'm leaving this here in case anyone feels like investigating further. --Username 19:12, 30 September 2021 (EDT)

Web API access

Hi. I'm wondering if I could be permitted submission access to the Web API. My intention is to automate the clearing out of this cleanup report. The code I'm intending to run is here (effectively

As per the API instructions I'd run 20 records at a time then wait for these to clear moderation before doing the next 20. If desired I could add a particular moderator as holder to effectively move these submissions out of the normal queue. /Lokal_Profil 06:33, 2 October 2021 (EDT)

Sure thing. FR 1447 has been created. Ahasuerus 20:26, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Done. Please give it a try and let me know how it goes. Ahasuerus 21:00, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
BTW: The moving the submission part is not really moving - it just makes it untouchable by anyone but the moderator it is held for AND it is not counted in the few places we count how many we have pending. Additionally, the "next submission" link does not work for these so processing them can be a pain as you need to pick then one by one as opposed to going one after the other. So drop them in the real queue - just not all of them at the same time. ;) Annie 21:11, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
@Ahasuerus: Thanks. I submitted 3 edits via the API. I've used the publication title as "Subject" as per what I see when I look at the xml of edits done through the normal interface. Don't know how this field is surfaced in the moderation queue so let me know if it can fill a more suitable function.
@Anniemod: Thanks then I won't use the Holder feature. /Lokal_Profil 08:11, 5 October 2021 (EDT)
The submissions look fine, no problems that I can see.
As you said, the "Subject" field is what's displayed in the list of submissions; the pub's title is the best choice for Edit Publication submissions. Other types of submissions like New Award or Remove Alternative Name would use other types of values. Ahasuerus 11:43, 5 October 2021 (EDT)

Canonical name switch - Urlaub

Can I get an approval to switch the canonical and alternate name for Patricia Urlaub? Thanks John Scifibones 08:27, 3 October 2021 (EDT)

Yep, go ahead. Seems obvious. Annie 18:58, 3 October 2021 (EDT)
This one is done. When it is this obvious, should I go ahead and submit the changes without getting prior moderator's approval? John Scifibones 19:52, 3 October 2021 (EDT)
I’d post for a second set of eyes/objections (it was never about an approval really - it is just so people can see it before it happens. That’s why I would always add the author names in the topic name as well). Sometimes something may seem obvious until someone else takes a look at it. The only case where I would reverse with no post is if there are 2-3 works only and I am about to add a boatload into the pseudonym. Once it has more, I’d post before I switch it around and wait a day or so. Annie 20:24, 3 October 2021 (EDT)
Makes sense, John Scifibones 21:09, 3 October 2021 (EDT)

Merging publishers

Could someone please merge Kindberg and Kindbergs Förlag. The first is the name which best fits how other Swedish publishers have been named (i.e. omitting the "Publisher" part of the name). Cheers /Lokal_Profil 17:47, 4 October 2021 (EDT)

So is it "Kindberg" or "Kindbergs"? As there is only one book, editing that book is better than a merge because that will keep the change into the pub record (and if the PV ever comes back, they can figure out what happened). But I need to know which form to use :) Annie 18:22, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
sorry for being unclear, "Kindberg" (the "s" is used for the genitiv case in Swedish). I assumed that just modifying the pub would leave the publisher as some sort of ghost in the directory. / Lokal_Profil 04:27, 5 October 2021 (EDT)
Nope. Publishers, authors and pub series just disappear when the last thing attached to them is deleted (which also means to be VERY careful to move any data out of them before you submit the request to update the last record carrying them). Series and titles need to be manually deleted when the last title/publication respectively is removed from them. All set now, right? Annie 18:20, 8 October 2021 (EDT)

Kissing the Coronavirus

I just want to apologize to the moderator who has to okay the Kissing the Coronavirus series that I'm entering to the ISFDB database. I was just sipping some hot tea while browsing these books, then I blacked out, and the books were up for acceptence. I don't even remember doing them. At least, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. There are more, sadly. MLB 05:14, 10 October 2021 (EDT)

So you had a Mini-Version of the second part of 2020. No worries. Hope you are feeling well though :) Annie 16:28, 10 October 2021 (EDT)
Wow. Thought I'd seen it all, am officially weirded out. :) PeteYoung 23:28, 11 October 2021 (EDT)

Critic => Éditions Critic

This publisher's name should be changed from Critic to Éditions Critic.AlainLeBris 10:46, 10 October 2021 (EDT)

As we already had both, a rename could not work but a merge does. Done. Annie 00:23, 12 October 2021 (EDT)

Signing In

Curious why I had to sign in to upload a cover image; I resisted checking the box to keep me signed in since I joined last December until several weeks ago when I got tired of having to sign in constantly and finally checked it, but tonight I had to sign in again for the first time since then. Is something going on behind the scenes? --Username 23:40, 12 October 2021 (EDT)

There have been no recent software changes that would affect the sign-on process. Keep in mind that when you sign in, you actually sign in twice: first on the database side and then, separately, on the Wiki side. The sign-on process adds a "cookie" to your browser which contains your log-in name. It also tells the browser to keep you logged in until the cookie's expiration date. On the database side, the expiration date is set to 2037, so you won't have to worry about it for another 15+ years. On the Wiki side, it is set to a few months and then you have to sign in again. Ahasuerus 00:16, 13 October 2021 (EDT)
The Wiki kicks you out now and again - just sign in again and you are good for awhile again. It can be a cookie expiration or it can be your browser deleting the cookie because it did not like its age, while you updated or because something else happened. Permanent sessions are not really liked by modern browsers - they facilitate man in the middle attacks. So browsers can decide to be "helpful" sometimes. Annie 00:22, 13 October 2021 (EDT)

Moderator available?

If a moderator is not too busy, please process these three unmerges. [22], [23], [24]. Thanks, John Scifibones 15:15, 14 October 2021 (EDT)

Done Annie 15:32, 14 October 2021 (EDT)
Thank you Annie. John Scifibones 17:19, 14 October 2021 (EDT)

Canonical name switch - Gabriel Silva de Anda

Proposing to switch the canonical name from Gabriel Silva de Anda to Gabriel S. de Anda. Note, I'm adding 6 more titles under the proposed name. Feedback is appreciated John Scifibones 14:41, 15 October 2021 (EDT)

Yep. About time. All his books seem to use it and the Author site also uses it - add it to the correct author record while you are there, please :) Annie 14:54, 15 October 2021 (EDT)
All records for the full name probably came from Locus (see this) and the 1993 one is even credited here with the S. One do wonder what the magazines actually said. Hm. But yes - for now, let's reverse, we can investigate that later. Annie 14:58, 15 October 2021 (EDT)
A little digging is always fun. I'm entering a serial for him, this will make the variant cleaner. Edits submitted. John Scifibones 15:28, 15 October 2021 (EDT)
Bewildering Stories? I knew the name rang a bell from somewhere - I saw him on the schedule there. Annie 17:06, 15 October 2021 (EDT)

Bedlam; I filled in info for Dead Cats Bouncing using, which was by Necro on ISFDB but was really by their Bedlam imprint, and I see that Bedlam has lotss of books with a note saying they're an imprint of Necro, so I think they should all be by Bedlam Press / Necro Publications, which is what I changed Dead...'s publisher to. --Username 08:42, 19 October 2021 (EDT)

Son of the Lamb; Hugh Lamb's son entered some new anthologies recently but made some mistakes; mod tried to help him, then I tried. He responded back in February, then nothing until yesterday when he entered a new anthology, I fixed format and made essay dates match book date, plus added book title after Introduction and Afterword. Also, he entered stories with their original dates, except Hodgson's The Phantom Ship for some reason, so I merged that. He still seems to have problems with how to enter things, and I can't remember what exactly I helped him with 8 months ago, so if mods want to check his previous work and see if anything else needs fixing/merging I'm sure he'd appreciate it. --Username 11:42, 19 October 2021 (EDT)

I randomly came across the new anthology again and now I see that Mr. Lamb just entered stories already on ISFDB without merging, so there's many duplicates, and at least 1, Northcote's story, has the wrong date. So this record really needs some help. --Username 08:54, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

Missing King; added cover to a mag and this guy entered another issue that needed some work so I fixed it; he hasn't been here since 2016 so should probably have one of those no-longer-active notes. --Username 09:54, 20 October 2021 (EDT)

Length mismatch warning

I entered a publication which contained The Girl from the Sea, an English translation of La niña que salió en busca del mar. After submitting this edit to add the translator template and setting the juvenile flag, I submitted [25] linking the translation. What is the best way to handle the warning regarding length mismatch? The translation is slightly more than 1900 words, a short story. No length is specified for the parent. John Scifibones 21:02, 20 October 2021 (EDT)

The length of the original determines the length of all the variants even if any of them wavers across a border. So usually you need to research the original. However at that length of a complete translation there is no way the original to be long enough to be a novelette (7500 words) so we know it is a short story so set the short story length to the parent and we are all set. Annie 21:13, 20 October 2021 (EDT)

Cover Problem?; I see 1 cover and then next row has the other 3. If it's the same for mods, is that OK or is there some formatting problem? --Username 20:41, 21 October 2021 (EDT)

I am seeing the same. My first thought was that it is because of the numbering (we have 4 and then a few in 10+) but [26] does not do that and it is even more weird numberwise. Let me ping our Developer. Annie 20:54, 21 October 2021 (EDT)
It turns out that it's due to the first pub not having mouse-over transliteration while some of the subsequent ones have them. If all pubs have them OR none of the pubs have them, then everything is displayed correctly.
The easiest way to address the issue would be not to display mouse-over transliterations for covers. Other solutions are presumably possible, but will require more digging. Ahasuerus 21:11, 21 October 2021 (EDT)
I vote for dropping the transliterations showing in cover arrays (under publications or in the +3 for pub series. They don't really add anything to the site - you can click on it and go check it if you need to. Annie 21:46, 21 October 2021 (EDT)
I agree with Annie. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:45, 22 October 2021 (EDT)
Done. Ahasuerus 12:47, 22 October 2021 (EDT)

L'Oeil du Sphinx => L'Œil du Sphinx

This Publisher's name should be changed from L'Oeil du Sphinx to L'Œil du Sphinx. AlainLeBris 11:44, 24 October 2021 (EDT)

Done. As you are the only active PV on any of the verified books that got changed with this update, no need to leave courtesy notes on editors' pages. Thanks! Annie 12:51, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

Changes to PVed publications

I really don't know how can Zapp be allowed to add data to my notes in this fashion. First he/she adds ("- No ISBN") without respecting my usual layout ("ISBN = None on book") which is just impolite, but more importantly this is done without having the book. Is it a case of divine prescience? To take the liberty of modifying data pertaining to a PVed publication without any physical evidence and without discussing the matter with the verifier is simply not acceptable. AlainLeBris 12:46, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

I've unverified the publication. Let any questions about it be directed to the person who knows best. AlainLeBris 13:04, 25 October 2021 (EDT)
Hello! I've approved this update after some hesitation.
1. There is no existing policy for the layout of the notes. Everyone can do additional notes in his own way. If they do not correspond to your personal rules, you can change them anytime.
2. It's very obvious that it wasn't a divine prescience, since you didn't enter the ISBN field yourself. It can be assumed that you did it deliberately, since you always enter your entries very accurately. Furthermore, all external IDs indicate that the book does not have an ISBN, so without question this addition is helpful as information.
3. Nevertheless I agree with you, it would have been more polite to contact you. Everyone makes mistakes, but you don't have to react so harshly. Regards Rudolf Rudam 14:05, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

Merging alternate names of Jon D. Swartz

Could the following forms of Jon D. Swartz's name be merged, please?

These are all variants used by the author in the fanzine, Tightbeam.--Explorer1000 14:25, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

Nope, they need to be pseudonymed, not merged and works varianted into whoever becomes the canonical. We record author names as used and then use the alternative names system to connect them. Do you want me to do it or do you want me to teach you how? Annie 14:28, 25 October 2021 (EDT)
I wouldn't say no to learning how. :) Is it too early to establish a canonical version given that there are still quite a lot of issues of Tightbeam to get through in which he has probably had some contribution or another?--Explorer1000 15:31, 25 October 2021 (EDT)
Jon D. Swartz seems to be the clear winner - he even published a book under that name and has a fancyclopedia entry. So I would call that the canonical - and we can always change it later.
So for each of the other two: Go to their pages -> left menu. Locate "Make/Remove Alternate Name". Using either the ID (176983) or the name (Jon D. Swartz) submit the form. That connects them. Submit also edits on the two alternative names to set the language to English.
Now that they are connected, you need to get all titles on the canonical page. For each title under one of the other names:
  • Check if the same title is on the canonical author page as well and if so, get the ID.
  • Locate "Make This Title a Variant" (on the title in the alternate name page):
  • If you found an ID in the previous step, use that in Option 1. I did not see any that match but I may have missed some.
  • If you did not, use Option 2. Leave ALL fields the same except for the author name where you replace the alternative name with the canonical name. If there are coauthors, leave them as they are.
All these edits (the pseudonyms and the edits and the variants) can be submitted in parallel. When all of them are approved, you are all set. Annie 15:54, 25 October 2021 (EDT)
OK. Done! Thanks for your instruction on that, Annie. :) --Explorer1000 16:38, 25 October 2021 (EDT)

Hayford; He died last year. --Username 19:15, 27 October 2021 (EDT)

Updated his talk page. Thanks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:59, 27 October 2021 (EDT)

Hachette; added cover to original American HC, used ISBN to get French cover with no luck, then got it by entering the title (also entered pub. series, which prior editor entered in notes but not in the series field), but got yellow warning about incorrect price entry; whoever entered it didn't do it right, but looking at Hachette's non-series books alone prices are entered many different ways; F before, F after, no F, $, £, decimal/no decimal, etc. So I'm not touching it, but I'm sure mods know what to do. --Username 11:22, 28 October 2021 (EDT)

For future reference, the price should be entered "F8.60" per the example at Help:List of currency symbols (which is linked from the Template:PublicationFields:Price page you go to when clicking on the ? icon next to that field). I've fixed the price. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:28, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
Great; however, what about all the other books' prices? --Username 16:41, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
You can submit the changes if you want to clean them up now. If you decide to do that, be careful with the era for the currencies that changed with time (French, UK ones for example) and to adjust the notes where required. The yellow warning is very new - most of those were added long before we had it.
As you had been told a few times, everyone works on their own projects in the DB - people often assist when someone asks for help but we also try to explain and teach people how to finish their own projects when it is a job that does not require a moderator edit to be completed. If you are not interested to fix these now that you know how, then this request will stay here until someone is interested in it or until it becomes irrelevant because these are fixed by other channels.
You cannot expect people to drop everything they are doing and rush to fix things you can fix on your own just because you happened to find them now but do not want to work on them. That's not how the site works. One book (or a few) - sure, we will assist. As Nihonjoe just did - fixed and explained how you can fix the rest. There are a lot of places where an editor can spend days and weeks cleaning up something and all of us have long todo lists as it is. Why would this be more important than any of the other 100+ things in one's list? :) Additionally, we have a big prices cleanup project going on at the moment so at least the ones that have the wrong format for their listed currency will be resolved while these are being cleaned up. Annie 17:10, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
I wasn't asking anyone to fix anything. Editors who occasionally stop by to add a cover image or think adding the word "the" to people's notes is something important can fix something like this at their leisure, but when you add as many edits as I've done every day for nearly a year now you have to offload some of it. I've fixed thousands of other editors' (and moderators') mistakes here, so obviously I have no problem doing that; however, this "foreign prices" issue is one of many I have no interest in or can't figure out (like varianting) because mods who've been editing here for a decade or more can't quite figure out themselves, so I was dropping it here so when someone who wants to/likes to work on that particular topic feels like doing it they'll know it needs doing. --Username 18:06, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
When you come across data quality issues or gaps in our coverage which you are not in a position to address -- perhaps due to lack of time/energy/knowledge/interest -- please feel free to raise them here or on the Community Portal. Sometimes other, better positioned, editors will be able to help right away while other times it may require a new cleanup report. In this case we have a cleanup report which looks for invalid prices. A month ago it was updated to be more comprehensive. 600 of the 1,680 problem prices identified in late September have been corrected since. Hopefully, the rest will be cleaned up in the coming months. Ahasuerus 19:10, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
And as I've said before, you don't tell me to do anything because this is a volunteer-only website; when you start paying people a salary then you can tell me what to do. You can bully others (and I've read ample evidence of that) but you ain't doing it to me. --Username 18:06, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
ISFDB moderators work with editors and explain the rules which all submissions should follow, i.e. they do tell them what to do. We try to be accommodating and professional about it, but sometimes the same points need to be made over and over again until the editor understands and internalizes them. It's the only way to ensure consistent data quality.
If you believe that a moderator has not been communicating with you in a professional way, please post a complaint here. Stating that a moderator has been "bullying" editors in passing is not the way to approach grievances. Ahasuerus 19:10, 28 October 2021 (EDT)
I don't understand, why there is no space between F and 8.60?--Wolfram.winkler 11:59, 7 November 2021 (EST)
To quote Help:List of currency symbols:
  • F: Franc (French). Used in France prior to the transition to the euro in 1999-2002. For consistency, prices should be entered as in "F6.50", though the price may be listed on the publication as "FF", "Fr", or just "F".
Note that there is no space between the "F" and the digit that follows it. This was agreed upon on the Rules and Standards page some years ago. Ahasuerus 12:44, 7 November 2021 (EST)
I can remember me, that between normal letters like DM, F, and so on we must have a space, only symbols dont't have a space like $, € and so on. Look here: When using an alphabetical (non-symbolic) form or abbreviation of the currency (e.g. DM, Lit, Ft), enter a space between it and the numeric amount--Wolfram.winkler 16:15, 7 November 2021 (EST)
It is not about normal letters vs special characters - the difference is about characters vs abbreviated currency names. F is treated as a character and not as the short version of Franc. Once the community agreed on that, it was added specifically into the rules so there is nothing to understand in that case - we have a spelled out rule. Annie 16:38, 7 November 2021 (EST)
I agree that was what as decided and what was documented in Help:List of currency symbols. The wording in Template:PublicationFields:Price could be improved though, especially for non-English first speakers. It currently states "Do not enter a space when the currency is represented by a symbol (e.g. $, £, €, ¥, ℳ). When using an alphabetical (non-symbolic) form or abbreviation of the currency (e.g. DM, Lit, Ft), enter a space between it and the numeric amount." Symbol is a bit ambiguous, especially since all the examples are non-letters. Since F is also a alphabetical and an abbreviation, that makes it more confusing if you don't realize a single letter can also be used as a symbol. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:47, 7 November 2021 (EST)
That’s true. Any proposals on how to reword it? Annie 16:50, 7 November 2021 (EST)
We should generally put a space between the abbreviation and the value. It's simple and logical.--Wolfram.winkler 17:12, 7 November 2021 (EST)
We could add a "Type" column to Help:List of currency symbols. The value in each row -- "symbol" or "abbreviation" -- would make it clear whether it needs a space. "F", "$", "¥", "ℳ", "A$", etc would be "symbols" while "DM", "Lit", "Ft", etc would be 'abbreviations". We would then update Template:PublicationFields:Price with an explanation and a link to Help:List of currency symbols. Ahasuerus 19:58, 7 November 2021 (EST)
Sounds like a good idea. Annie 22:34, 7 November 2021 (EST)
But the point is that it is not an an abbreviation anymore than ℳ is. It just happened to be a letter of the alphabet. Annie 22:34, 7 November 2021 (EST)
I don't understand, why we must have a difference between symbols and abbraviations? We can change the rules. --Wolfram.winkler 16:15, 8 November 2021 (EST)
I don't think inserting a space between the dollar/pound/etc sign and the numeric value would be advantageous, but we can certainly restart the discussion on the Rules and Standards page. Ahasuerus 16:48, 8 November 2021 (EST)

(the rest of the discussion has been moved to the Rules and Standards page) Ahasuerus 18:07, 9 November 2021 (EST)

Canonical name switch - Eric T. Marin

Proposing to switch the canonical name from Eric T. Marin to Eric Marin. Feedback is appreciated, John Scifibones 12:42, 30 October 2021 (EDT)

Writing under one form of the name and editing under the other (with a few slips on the writing side which you may want to recheck by the way) from the looks of it. And I suspect you have more poems coming from him so sounds like switching it over is not a bad idea. Annie 06:16, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
I was able to verify the Eric T. Marin outliers published in Scifaikuest: Online. Unable to verify the one title from Star*Line, however, the relevant issue is PV'ed. Submitting the switch, John Scifibones 11:06, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Editions Métal => Éditions Métal

This publisher's name should be changed to "Éditions Métal".AlainLeBris 09:58, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Done! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:07, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Mikael Bourgouin => Mikaël Bourgouin

This artist's name should be changed to Mikaël Bourgouin as credited on books.AlainLeBris 13:05, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Fixed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:32, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
One of the books that got changed here has a different verifier and the back cover is visible in Amazon France (it is Mikael Bourgouin). I think the publication note there covers the case but I'd leave a note to the PV about the change as it won't show up in their changed notifications and they may want to revise that note to point out the difference between the note and the credit and the reason for it. I've added a note on the author page about the two forms of the name needing to share the same page due to how the software works. Annie 16:25, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
I've updated that one so it shows as a variant. See here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:07, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
This took a bit of work, too. I had to change it to "Mikaal Bourgouin", variant that to "Mikaël Bourgouin", then correct the variant spelling back to "Mikael Bourgouin". This means that "Mikael Bourgouin" and "Mikaël Bourgouin" now exist simultaneously in the database. Not sure if this is significant somehow. Ahaseurus should probably look at it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:11, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
Ha, that's new - we were unable to do that before (and I had tried it with another author a few years back).
The question is which one the titles will go to when you type an author and if that won't cause issues elsewhere - because chances are that these may read as the same author in some parts of the code. Annie 19:57, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
Yes, that's very much a concern. Let me try to replicate this sequence of events on the development server. Ahasuerus 20:37, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
I have replicated the behavior on the development server. It looks like a bug in Edit Author. Investigating. Ahasuerus 20:53, 1 November 2021 (EDT)
I believe I have fixed the bug. The following author records will be affected:
  • Ed Acuna / Ed Acuña
  • Edgar Poe / Edgar Poë
  • P. J. Herault / P. J. Hérault
  • Mikael Bourgouin / Mikaël Bourgouin
Next, I will need to fix similar (but not identical) flaws in Edit Publisher, Edit Series, Edit Publication Series, Edit Award Type and Edit Award Category. Luckily, it looks like no existing records are affected by these bugs. Ahasuerus 16:49, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
Fixed by allowing us to use separate authors this way or by closing the loophole allowing them to exist? If we can use the authors that way, will also EditPub and so on honor what you type and get you the correct author? If you closed a loophole, should I go and clean up these 3 (uhm 4 - I cannot type apparently) and warn the PVs on what happened and why? Annie 17:10, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
I am afraid I wasn't clear. I meant to say that I fixed the bug in the software that allowed these author name pairs to be created. Prior to this fix, if you created a new author record, e.g. "Test", and then used Edit Author to change its canonical name to "Jules Vérne", the software would let you do that. Post-fix, the software will produce an error and explain that you can't do that because we already have "Jules Verne" on file.
Please note that, since the author name "pairs" listed above are not supported by the software, you may need to change one of the names to something different like "Ed Acuna1" first, fix everything, then change it back. Ahasuerus 17:44, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
Thanks. Suspected so - that's why I asked for clarification - I know that e/é and the rest of these pairs are indistinguishable for our software (until we get to Unicode anyway) and we rely on these names being unique in some places of the code so wanted to make sure where we are at. I was having a small hope we can now do these but oh well :)
Author merge should sort them out as well:) I will fix these, add notes explaining why they need to be together and notify all the PVs (and any other active editors who worked on the titles) involved whose record change due to this. Thanks! Annie 18:04, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
Sure thing. Ahasuerus 18:11, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
(edit conflict) How difficult would it be to change the software to allow both by switching everything to use UTF-8, and therefore allow different entries such as "Mikael Bourgouin" and "Mikaël Bourgouin"? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:07, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
Full Unicode support is certainly our ultimate goal. Unfortunately, it's one of the biggest tasks on the To Do list. Ahasuerus 18:10, 2 November 2021 (EDT)
(conflict...) I remember asking that 5 years ago - we need that so that small and capital letters in Cyrillic are treated as the same letter from search (the same way A/a a are treated as the same Latin letter) - which makes capitalization of Cyrillic titles more important than anywhere else - because otherwise you cannot find them (unless you search for the transliteration instead - you are still better off searching via google though so that's why there is that secondary google search if the local one does not find something). So I will be the first to say that we really really need that. But I also know it is not trivial :( Annie 18:16, 2 November 2021 (EDT)

(unindent) Edit Publisher, Edit Publication Series, Edit Series, Edit Award Type and Edit Award Category have been updated to prevent editors from accidentally creating duplicate records. The bugs were even worse than in Edit Author, e.g. you could change an arbitrary publisher name to "ACE Books" (note the case.) Hopefully all fixed now. Please let me know if you come across any issues. Ahasuerus 19:14, 2 November 2021 (EDT)

And unlike the author names, some of these could have been changed by anyone. Thanks or fixing the bug! Annie 21:32, 2 November 2021 (EDT)


Just a heads up that I tweeted a request on their Twitter asking if ISFDB can use their cover images (many not on Amazon) without having to save and upload to our Wiki; doubt they'll respond/agree but if they do, great. --Username 18:23, 2 November 2021 (EDT)

Cool. Let us know if they reply. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:41, 2 November 2021 (EDT)

Odd Mods

So I noticed someone the other day entered some info for an Evergreen (division of Grove) book,, and as usual I check to see what other related books may need entering/fixing, and noticed 1 book had the wrong format,, so I changed it to TP. Then I got this,, where the top rejection --Username 09:51, 4 November 2021 (EDT) shows a list of recently rejected submission for the logged-in user. For you, it shows your recently rejected submissions, for me it shows my recently rejected submissions, etc. Only you can see that list for your rejected submissions. Please provide a direct link to the rejected submission. Ahasuerus 12:09, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

is from a mod I had problems with months ago when he threw a tantrum because I fixed some info he got wrong and then recently when I did the same again. He's rejected my edits twice recently, once to reject an updated picture of Donald Trump which showed him full-on and happy instead of sideways and sad, adding "No politics on ISFDB!", as if an image is political, --Username 09:51, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

The submission in question would have replaced our current image of Donald Trump from the back cover of a book with a 2024 campaign button pin, which is clearly political in nature. Ahasuerus 12:17, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

and then rejecting the 1 above, which is a mistake because as can be seen here,, the dimensions are clearly those of a trade paperback (and none of the other Evergreen books are PB, either). --Username 09:51, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

I have found the submission in question. The Publication Note field in this primary-verified pub says "This edition is 17.7 x 10.5 cm". Template:PublicationFields:PubFormat says:
  • pb - paperback. Typically 7" × 4.25" (18 cm × 11 cm) or smaller, though trimming errors can cause them to sometimes be slightly (less than 1/4 extra inch) taller or wider/deeper
Since 17.7 is less than 18 and 10.5 is less than 11, the format should be "pb". Ahasuerus 12:24, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

I didn't even notice it until now, but the PV for the Evergreen book is this same mod, so it's another case where he doesn't like me fixing his info that needs fixing. I like how this guy doesn't approve any of the other edits I have in the queue but only picks those he can reject, even though neither of them should have been rejected. It's almost as if he's doing it out of spite because he's still angry about our past dealings; nah, that can't be it, that would be childish and unprofessional, right?. On a related note, the first few edits in my queue relating to Shroud Magazine were "put on hold" recently by another mod until I answered a question he had for me, but since then more recent edits about Shroud have been approved while those remain; was the hold really taken off after I answered his question or are they still on hold? --Username 09:51, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

Yes, I removed the hold after you answered my questions. Ahasuerus 12:10, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
There was no Trump image at all until I added 1 a few months ago, then added the current 1 because it seemed to be a rare 1 and was bigger and easier to see; I was never happy with the sideways view and unhappy expression so decided to replace it with a full-view happy photo, and that was the first 1 that came up; no political intent was intended. Since you obviously disagree I will leave it as it is now. The Evergreen books are all TP except for a couple of supposed HC, so I find it hard to believe they switched to PB just for this one (might be a trimming issue as mentioned above); if so then all the other TP should be PB, too. As for my remaining Shroud edits, I'm just going to cancel them and do them again so they'll go to the top of my list since they seem to be lost where they are now. --Username 12:47, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
I've grabbed a PD image from Wikimedia Commons that shows him smiling, and put that in place. That should also avoid the problem of using a campaign button. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:48, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
There are two issues here. First the Trump image that is so clearly political, that only a completely blind person would not notice it. I was probably the first moderator to see it, so I was the one who had to reject it, as any moderator would have done. In my opinion there should never have been a picture of that horrible man uploaded, but opinions don't matter here.
Second is the submission to change the format of a publication that has a primary verification by an active editor. As has been explained to you again and again, for this kind of change you need to contact the verifier, so start acting like the professional you claim to be. After I rejected your edit, I added the dimensions to the notes, because the Library of Congress has them wrong. On reviewing this pub, I noticed it should have been moved to Evergreen Black Cat / Grove Press, when this form of the publisher was entered in ISFDB in 2018. I corrected this now. --Willem 15:35, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
All authors should have a photo if one is legitimately available. To not have one for Trump would be just as political as trying to use a campaign button (just in the opposite way). I'm no fan of the man, but having a picture of him here has nothing to do with anyone's opinion of him or what kind of person he is or isn't. Let's try to keep that in mind. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:43, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
Just like I said, opinions don't matter here. --Willem 15:48, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
As I mentioned on Username's Talk page the other day, political statements are not allowed here and that includes statements posted on the Wiki. There are plenty of other places where people can share their opinions of politics and politicians. Ahasuerus 16:44, 4 November 2021 (EDT)
Point taken. Sorry, won't do it again. --Willem 16:47, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

Submission Search implemented

The "Moderator Links" section in the navigation bar has been updated with a new option -- Submission Search. At this time it lets you enter a user name (case sensitive due to Wiki limitations) and then gives you a list of the most recent approved submissions created by the user. The table layout is the same as what you get on the Recent Approvals page. You can page through the displayed results 200 submissions at a time.

If everything looks OK and we don't run into performance/other issues, we can consider adding additional functionality, e.g. the ability to display rejected submissions, limit the search by date, etc. Ahasuerus 18:38, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

There is a bug with names that have a space in them: try to search for Scriptor Praesensionium or Scott Latham. And no amount of quotes seems to help. Annie 11:43, 15 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks, I'll take a look. Ahasuerus 12:39, 15 November 2021 (EST)
I believe the bug has been fixed. Here is what we get when searching on "Scott Latham". Ahasuerus 19:56, 16 November 2021 (EST)

Artist Chaffe

Author Record # 27922, Chaffe lists no other information and only one record for cover art Worlds of Tomorrow, May 1967. On Oct 4, 2021 Heritage Auctions sold the art that was used as the cover for that magazine. They give credit to Douglas Chaffee and he signed the art in the lower right. I think this record should be merged into Author Record # 26145 and record 27922 be deleted. I have submitted a request to change the artist of Worlds of Tomorrow, May 1967 from Chaffe to Douglas Chaffee aardvark7 17:09, 6 November 2021 (EDT)

We credit as per the publication. I was able to find this issue at Internet Archive and the table of contents has "Cover by Chaffe". I rejected your edit and instead made it an alternate name. Please remember that, for cover artists, we allow the use of secondary sources to add credits (using the canonical name) for uncredited cover art; however, we don't replace credited art using secondary sources. Hope that makes sense. If not, please ask questions. Thanks for finding this. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:08, 7 November 2021 (EST)email
The main thing is that Douglas Chaffee got into the record as being the artist. aardvark7 13:58, 7 November 2021 (EST)

One Against the Legion

Hello Mods. I have a copy of [27] however although the prices on the back match those of the record the copyright only has "Published in Great Britain by Sphere Books Ltd 1977" and not the "Reprinted 1979". How should I enter this publication please ? --Mavmaramis 12:57, 8 November 2021 (EST)

Captive Universe

Publication Record # 262970 shows no data of publication. For this ISBN, Goodreads has a date of June 15, 1976 ISBN Search also shows a date of 1976 but a month of January. Record show 2 primary verifications: Syzygy last action 2016 and Don Erikson last active 2020 aardvark7 15:51, 8 November 2021 (EST)

Resurrecting a rejected NewPub

As The Apollo Murders has been deemed OK for inclusion here, does anyone care to unreject my original attempt to submit it from last month? I assume the original NewPub (which adds a different UK edition) could be accepted, and then the duplicate title record merged with the existing one - as opposed to having to redo it all as a new AddPub submission? ErsatzCulture 19:14, 9 November 2021 (EST)

It is still borderline but it does get marked as SF everywhere so... let's keep it for now. Unrejected, approved and merged and I dropped a note to the original moderator so he knows what happened here and why. I have a very vague memory that Fixer actually sent that one in and I did not like it (too borderline that early on) so sent it to wait post-publication - and I had not gone back to the October titles again. Annie 20:30, 9 November 2021 (EST)
Everything about this book screams Techno Thriller, but at least his other book[28](ages 3-5) has some spec fic(advanced tech/magic gets cardboard box into space) in it, albeit for toddlers on someone knee.Kraang 21:22, 9 November 2021 (EST)
Two editors and one moderator decided that there is something borderline enough to include it. I’d rather err on the side of inclusion. We can always delete it when someone reads it and we decide it is not ours. :) Annie 01:21, 10 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks. I actually picked this up yesterday when the ebook was dirt cheap in an Amazon daily sale (which is what prompted me to check if anyone else had added it here). Unfortunately there are several hundred other books that are prioritized above it in my TBR, so it'll be a long while before I personally get round to seeing how speculative or not it might be... ErsatzCulture 05:11, 10 November 2021 (EST)
You know, there is a small part of my brain that is screaming in my head that if it is in space (and set in 1973), it must be ours - even if all they do out there is grow potatoes or kill each other. Annie 14:35, 10 November 2021 (EST)
At the risk of getting way off-topic for the moderator page, I'm reminded that the Patricia Cornwell space-set mysteries puzzled me due their lack of inclusion. I did wonder whether to submit them - NB: I haven't, and am not likely to ever, read them - but I assumed that they'd maybe been picked up by Fixer and rejected? Although perhaps Thomas & Mercer isn't an imprint that Fixer watches? ErsatzCulture 17:48, 10 November 2021 (EST)
I haven't read them, but the descriptions I've read make them sound like near-future thrillers with some science fictionish elements. So, based on that, I'd consider them on the fence for inclusion. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:33, 10 November 2021 (EST)

Lloyd; I came across a book with this editor's name and his ISFDB page has a stray comment from someone on the wrong page, in case anyone wants to move it to the right page. --Username 10:21, 13 November 2021 (EST)

Done. Thanks for the heads-up. Ahasuerus 20:05, 13 November 2021 (EST)

Dark Drabble Anthologies or Dark Drabbles Anthologies?

I'd like to index the third anthology of drabbles in a series edited by D. Kershaw for Black Hare Press. I have a contributors' copy for this volume and the title, as given on the title page, is Monsters: A Dark Drabbles Anthology (note the plural of 'drabble'). The page after this lists four other titles under the heading 'Dark Drabbles Anthologies' (again note the plural use of 'drabble').

However, two other titles in the series have been listed on the ISFDB (one of them by a contributor to the book concerned who has provided a primary verification) - Worlds and Apocalypse - with the subtitle of each volume given as 'A Dark Drabble Anthology' (note the singular of 'drabble'). They are together listed in a series called Dark Drabble Anthologies with 'drabble' in the singular again.

Looking up each title on Amazon and using the 'Look Inside' feature, both the Worlds and Apocalypse volumes are subtitled 'A Dark Drabbles Anthology' (i.e. 'drabble' in the plural) on their respective title pages (although Amazon has assigned them a variant subtitle for marketing purposes in its database). Also, the covers of the two books indicate that they are numbered 'Dark Drabbles #1' and 'Dark Drabbles #6', respectively.

My question is this: Should I submit an entry about Monsters using the subtitle as it appears on the book's title page or should I use the singular form of 'drabble' so as to make this volume conform with the existing entries in the ISFDB? Greg--Explorer1000 17:47, 13 November 2021 (EST)

Use what the title page says :) Annie 19:20, 13 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks Annie! That's what I thought should be the case. I guess the titles of the other two books in the series and the series title should also be updated before working on the entry for volume #3?--Explorer1000 19:26, 13 November 2021 (EST)
Yep. Ping the PVs. There may be a different copy floating around as well (correction on part of the print run? - these are PODs most likely so easy to do). So we check with the PV even if we can see the book on Amazon now. Annie 19:29, 13 November 2021 (EST)
OK. That's reasonable.--Explorer1000 19:43, 13 November 2021 (EST)

Gorman Book and Other Problems; Did some work on Ed Gorman's Sam McCain series since there was lots of wrong/missing info; this particular book I believe was missing the Carroll & Graf edition, although I'm not 100% sure because by the time someone got around to approving it I'd done a lot of other edits and couldn't remember anymore. However, I wondered why it was approved and yet there was still a pending edit on my list with the same title; when I looked at the record, Gorman's name is there twice. I highly doubt that I did that when I made the edit, so I figured I'd wait until someone approved the remaining edit. Someone just did, and all the info I entered is there now, I think, but Gorman's name is still there twice. I have no idea what happened, but someone might want to take a look and see where the chain broke. Also, while coming here to write this note, I had to log in again after not having to do it for a long time. I've also noticed recently that searching records is taking longer than usual; there seems to be a delay on pages that have more than a couple of entries, and when you go back to a previous page it takes a few seconds for the record link you just clicked to change colors so you know it's been clicked. I don't know if others are experiencing this, but other sites I go to don't seem to have a problem, so I don't think it's my laptop. I logged in again, so that's taken care of, anyway. --Username 12:33, 14 November 2021 (EST)

Hmm...simply removing the second one doesn't work, so there's something definitely fishy about it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:06, 15 November 2021 (EST)
It is a kinda known issue - you need to replace one of the two with a different name (I add 1 at the end usually). Approve that. Then you can remove it with a second edit. :) Annie 14:54, 15 November 2021 (EST)
Yeah, I figured that would work. I wanted to make sure the right people knew about it. :) ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:30, 15 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks for letting me know! I thought we had a cleanup report for this scenario, but maybe not. Let me take a look... Ahasuerus 16:43, 15 November 2021 (EST)
A new cleanup report has been deployed. I expect it to find 2 more pubs with duplicate authors when it runs tomorrow morning. Ahasuerus 09:12, 16 November 2021 (EST)

Serials without Standard Parenthetical Disambiguators

The following titles comply with standards and may be removed this cleanup report

  • Castles in the Sky - 6 titles
  • Creative Destruction - 48 titles
  • Echoes from Dust - 60 titles
  • Keepers of the Ageless One - 20 titles
  • Near Zero - 46 titles
  • The Cavern of Serpents - 5 titles
  • The Night Companion - 9 titles
  • The Voyage of the Princess Ark - 36 titles
  • Trigger Warnings - 9 titles

Thanks in advance, John Scifibones 09:41, 19 November 2021 (EST)

Done. Annie 12:15, 19 November 2021 (EST)
Here are a few more
  • The Witches' Bane - 21 titles
  • My Name Is Daedalus - 6 titles
  • Murder in New Eden - 22 titles
Apreciate your attention John Scifibones 14:49, 1 December 2021 (EST)
Done. I also fixed a couple capitalization issues ("With" is never capitalized in mid-title) :) Annie 13:40, 2 December 2021 (EST)
A few more which can be removed
  • From the Ashes of Our Fall - 5 titles
  • Living Standards - 32 titles
  • The Dead Bine - 41 titles
  • The Masterful Timepiece - 5 titles
  • Volatility Cycles - 19 titles
Apreciate your attention, John Scifibones 08:37, 15 December 2021 (EST)
Just a reminderr John Scifibones 19:27, 22 December 2021 (EST)
Worldcon beats pressing Ignore I am afraid :) All done - although "The Dead Bine" was really "The Dead Bin" ;) Annie 20:32, 22 December 2021 (EST)
Better to misspell here than the actual title! Thanks John Scifibones 20:42, 22 December 2021 (EST)

Condor; 70's Condor was a cheap paperback house; 40 years later Condor is not the same publisher. --Username 13:34, 19 November 2021 (EST)

I came across this publisher again today and see nobody responded to this so I'm bumping it up; some differentiator needs to be added to one or the other. --Username 12:31, 27 February 2022 (EST)

Sixth Month of the Condor; Open Library page says June, copyright page of copy,, has a 06 at the end of the page; is that what Scholastic used to denote month of publication? Also, the long-gone PV has a stray message on the wrong page of their board. --Username 16:18, 21 November 2021 (EST)

What Happened Here?; One of the edits I made today was for an ancient Boy Scouts anthology of genre stories, but my edit field has been cleared and that book isn't in my approved edits list. Checking the book's record, my note about where I got info from is there but many of the stories don't have the page #'s I entered and the edit history doesn't credit me at all. What is this? --Username 11:04, 22 November 2021 (EST)

Looks like a system's hiccup (either of our software, or - more likely - of the internet / server connection). This happens very seldom, but it does. Stonecreek 11:12, 22 November 2021 (EST)
It errored out. Happens occasionally - not much anyone can do besides redoing the submission in case it did not get through (as usually part of it goes through and part of it fails). As you can see, it happens less than once a month usually. You just ended up being this month's recipient of the glitch. Annie 11:39, 22 November 2021 (EST)
I am afraid the linked page is moderator-only, so Username can't see it. Here are the dates of the 2020/2021 errored out submissions:
  • 2021-11-22 09:17:07
  • 2021-10-31 08:50:35
  • 2021-09-03 21:40:09
  • 2021-08-10 19:21:53
  • 2021-04-09 19:03:27
  • 2021-03-19 18:41:44
  • 2021-03-13 18:45:32
  • 2020-09-24 15:28:30
  • 2020-07-02 01:38:06
  • 2020-06-08 06:48:00
  • 2020-02-25 01:03:37
  • 2020-01-16 07:34:40
Ahasuerus 14:03, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks for posting these - I totally forgot that this one is not visible. Annie 14:30, 22 November 2021 (EST)
I re-entered rest of info that got lost, so now it should be complete once approved; I also amended my note with today's date and my name so nobody working on this later (which is likely since almost every name entered on ISFDB is different in the book) doesn't think someone else entered partial page #'s and fixed some names and then I stumbled along and finished it off. --Username 17:17, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Today I clicked on my errored out edits and was surprised to see my edit that's mentioned here; does it go away by itself or can it be deleted, or does it just stay there? --Username 17:34, 19 December 2021 (EST)
My two from 2016 and 2017 are still there, so I suspect they will only go away if there's another glitch of a different sort. ../Doug H 09:50, 20 December 2021 (EST)

Author Merge Request


For F&SF September/October 2019, SFJuggler is the PV.

I noticed a title " Films: Love Death + Some Regression", which is an essay noted as by "Karen Lowachee" at I believe the author name is a typo, and the author should be "Karin Lowachee". The Amazon kindle preview notes "Karin Lowachee". "Karen Lowachee" has no other titles in ISFDB, but "Karin Lowachee" does, and they appear in F&SF also, of a similar type.

I checked with the PV and SFJuggler concurs that a correction to "Karin Lowachee" should be made. I understand that the Authors must be merged, to the "Karin Lowachee" author name. There should be no records left for "Karen Lowachee".

My understanding is that a Moderator must do an Author Merge.

Thanks. Dave888 13:29, 22 November 2021 (EST)

A merge is needed if there is more than one title under the wrong author name and you do not want to update all records one by one. In the case of just one title, you can simply update the record here and the mistaken name will get auto-deleted as soon as it is approved. Authors are matched based on the name, not the ID. So:
  • Check with the PV (there are two of them and both are very active) to make sure
  • If one of them checks the magazine and agrees, submit the edit :) Annie 13:33, 22 November 2021 (EST)
PS: Even if we go for a merge and not an edit, the "check with the PVs" is a mandatory step :) So... start there. Annie 13:34, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Thanks. I'll check with Rtrace also. I already checked w/SFJuggler.Dave888 14:13, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Rtrace OK obtained, and edit on author name submitted. Thanks for your help.Dave888 11:17, 23 November 2021 (EST)

Black and Blue question

Publication Record # 460949 is an ebook for Black and Blue by Gena Showalter. The record shows it has an ISBN of 978-1-4516-7162-9. The record also states from Amazon a KINDLE page count of 401. Goodreads shows both an ebook with ISBN 978-1-4516-7162-9 AND a Kindle version with an ASIN of B00BSB2AMG, the same ASIN that Amazon shows for the Kindle version. Aren't these two different books rather than what looks like one in the DB?? Audible also mentions the Kindle version and links to the Amazon page. Barnes and Noble mentions an ebook (Nook) with the ISBN. Curious in Indy aardvark7 14:44, 22 November 2021 (EST)

It is the same book available in 2 formats. We don’t separate the ebook formats as separate records unless the publisher does with a separate isbn/cover/something else. There are a few publishers that issue separate ISBNs per format. For all the rest the ISBN is for all eBooks essentially - some stores use it, some (Amazon since last year) don’t. Until last year, the ASIN record in Amazon also carried the ISBN (and until a coupe of years ago, they were also visible on the Amazon page). :) Annie 14:56, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Many Goodreads records come from the Amazon database as it existed at a certain point in time. In a way, it's similar to our database since many of our records also come from the Amazon database as it existed at a certain point in time. The result is that our data and Goodreads data can vary -- even when the original source is Amazon's core database -- because we took snapshots at different times. Throw in the fact that our data entry rules differ and it can get confusing. It's one of the reasons why it's important to include the "snapshot date" when recording where our data comes from. Ahasuerus 15:33, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Annie from what I am hearing from you, unless the cover is different, treat Kindle & ebooks as the same book, right?? aardvark7 16:31, 22 November 2021 (EST)
Or unless there is a "EPUB ISBN" and "MOBI/Kindle ISBN" and "PDF ISBN" printed in there which are different or there is an extra story in one of them or extra excerpt or something along these lines. Officially each format is supposed to have its own ISBN but that's expensive and only a few (mainly children books) publishers do that. So everyone has an eISBN instead (which in theory does not exist but in practice does) and if there is a publisher site, they contain links to Amazon (with ASIN), B&N (based on the ISBN), Apple, Kobo and so on. See this one for example (I was just working on editions of this book so I had it handy). Look at "Product details" and the link on the right. The Amazon link is transformed into an ASIN link if you click on it because this is what Amazon wants these days :) But it is the same book even if Amazon does not show the ISBN anywhere on the product page anymore. Goodreads have two records for this one though: ASIN based and ISBN based - just like for the one we started the conversation with. It is how they do things these days - not very consistent but that is a somewhat common pattern with eBooks - they keep Kindle and eBooks separate for the most part. We don't. :)
Small publishers can be trickier (no site very often) but they are similar. Not all Kindle books have ISBNs (you don't need one if you are exclusively Amazon) of course.
Take for another example this one - I looked at the three available formats from my library (epub, mobi/Kindle and the Overdrive ebook (which is not sold - it is a library format)) - looked as in "downloaded all 3 and checked to see if they are the same). It is the same book inside. Hope all this helps. Annie 17:19, 22 November 2021 (EST)

Nathalia Sullen

Nathalia Sullen artist record 264974 is the same person as Nathália Suellen artist record 177821. All books in the data base are listed under Nathália Suellen except for the 7 books listed under "The Dark Queen" series. Bio information and websites are listed under Nathália Suellen. I am trying to check "Look Inside" for any books on Amazon to see how the name is listed in the book. I would say Nathália Suellen is her legal name. I have been able to check Black and Blue, Coral and Bone there and they show Nathalia Sullen. The Gathering Dark, Last Kiss Goodbye and Splintered either do not show the cover artist or there is no Look Inside. The artwork for these 3 can be found at and I will see what I can find about the others. Dark Descendant uses Nathália Suellen aardvark7 16:28, 22 November 2021 (EST)

Part 2. All books in data base looked at on Amazon "Look Inside" Dark Descendant, Unhinged, Untamed, Ensnared, Roseblood, Odd & True show Nathália Suellen. Jinn & Juice, Illusionarium don't give cover artist. Wolf at the Door does not have database version on Amazon. All others show Nathalia Sullen aardvark7 16:59, 22 November 2021 (EST)
I would submit a request to merge these two records together but I am not sure how to go about it. As you can see from what I have found, books have used both versions of her name and some books that are under Nathália Suellen used Nathalia Sullen for her name. aardvark7 09:08, 27 November 2021 (EST)
Since the spelling is different (Sullen vs. Suellen), we would not merge these. We would pick one of the two as "canonical" -- usually the one she is better known by or has more credits as -- and make the other an alternate name/pseudonym. For any art record credited to the alternate name, we would make a variant title credited to the canonical name. Once all of that is complete, the alternate name's bibliography would appear empty and would point people to the canonical name, and the canonical name's bibliography would show the combined results, with anything credited to the alternate name tagged with a form of "as by xxx" ("only as by xxx" or "also as by xxx").
Any records we have not using the name as given in the publication should be corrected (and then variant made, if applicable).
If there is no explicit credit in the publication and credit comes from a secondary source, we generally would use whatever form of name the secondary source used (again, making a variant, if applicable), except we would NOT create another alternate name just to accommodate a variation used by the source but not any publication. In that case, we would use the canonical name and note the secondary source's form of the name. For example, suppose a secondary source called her "Nat Sullen". We would not use that as a credit, rather we would use whichever of "Nathália Suellen" or "Nathalia Sullen" we decide is canonical and record in the publication notes that the artwork is uncredited, but XYZ credits the art to "Nat Sullen".
--MartyD 11:58, 27 November 2021 (EST)
Marty, I am finding her name spelled 4 ways. I believe Nathália Suellen is her proper name. If you go to the "about" section of her website it shows Nathália Suellen
All of the books listed under the Nathalia Sullen listing, show Nathalia Sullen in the text shown in the Amazon Look Inside. However I know that this person is Nathália Suellen as the artwork for these books can be found on her website at These are the only books I have found so far with the spelling Sullen
All of the books under the Nathália Suellen listing have one of 3 configurations shown in the Look Inside: Black & Blue has Nathalia Suelle, 7 of them show Nathalia Suellen, 8 show Nathália Suellen (Stain shows nothing in the English version but Nathália Suellen in the Spanish). (NOTE a vs á) 3 others do not state the artist in the Look Inside. The books Wolf at the Door and Coral & Bone shown on Amazon are different printing. I have a list of who is who. The art for these books can be traced back to her websites and/or listed under the Nathália Suellen record.
I agree with the "canonical" vs alternate name/pseudonym solution. I guess I am putting in my 2 cents for Nathália Suellen to be canonical with Nathalia Suellen, Nathalia Sullen and Nathalia Suelle being alternates. aardvark7 17:29, 27 November 2021 (EST)
Yes, that seems fine, although I am pretty sure the software will consider Nathália Suellen and Nathalia Suellen to be the same and will not produce a second record based just on the differing diacritical. If that proves to be true, you would need to note it appears as "Nathalia". --MartyD 10:02, 3 December 2021 (EST)
I am willing to try to link all of the books to the name listed in them using Nathália Suellen as canonical. What I don't know is how to link alternate name Nathalia Sullen to Nathália Suellen. After the names are linked, would those 7 books also show under Nathália Suellen? (Are those the "also as bys?) For those books showing Nathalia Suellen as the artist, (currently are all listed under Nathália Suellen), it is easy to make a note that they state the artist as Nathalia Suellen. I assume nothing else would need to be done since you think Nathalia Suellen would not be set up as seperate from Nathália Suellen.
Actually there is a lot of work done when you create a pseudonym. The titles won't show up on the canonical author page automatically - you need to create new parents for each of them (Make Variant, Option 2, all remains the same except for the author where you put the canonical name). Annie 16:17, 3 December 2021 (EST)
Well I am missing something or not understanding. The names Nathália Suellen and Nathalia Sullen currently exist. If Nathália Suellen is canonical, how do I go about making Nathalia Sullen a pseudonym of Nathália Suellen? (This is the cover artist not the book author) Am I understanding that I would take the 7 books listed under Nathalia Sullen and reenter them using Nathália Suellen? The would I take the books under Nathalia Sullen and make them variants of the books under Nathália Suellen? And if that is the case, the book Black & Blue is already listed under Nathália Suellen. I would need to make a version where the artist is Nathalia Suelle and make this a variant of the book under Nathália Suellen? Or am I completly out in left field here?? aardvark7 22:06, 3 December 2021 (EST)
No - nothing new needs to be entered except for the parents at the end. We just need to connect the existing records. Two steps needed: make a pseudonym (starting form the to-be-pseudonym record, look in the left menu and locate “Make/remove alternate name”. Follow the prompts there. This will make the second author form an alternate/pseudonym for the first. The second step (can be submitted at the same time and is technically multiple steps) is for each title in the pseudonym page, to create a parent record (Open the title record, look in the left menu and locate Make variant, Option 2, change only the author name). let me know if you would like me to do this one so you can see the steps or if you want to try. Or I can give you a step by step with links so you can do it while following them. Annie 22:29, 3 December 2021 (EST)
I gave it a try. It seemed pretty straight forward. Once I got in I think I also saw by what you ment by Option 2. Hopefully I did right. aardvark7 16:54, 4 December 2021 (EST)
Black & Blue is the only book having Nathalia Suelle. It is currently listed under Nathália Suellen. Would one delete the current record then reenter it under Nathalia Suelle? Then Nathalia Suelle would also need to be linked under Nathália Suellen as an alternate name. Or instead of deleting the record can you just change the artist name to Nathalia Suelle? aardvark7 15:01, 3 December 2021 (EST)
No need to delete anything - just update the book (or the title record)'s author field to what it needs to be. Annie 16:17, 3 December 2021 (EST)
PS: And yes - Nathália/Nathalia will be treated as the same name due to how the DB is setup. Annie 16:20, 3 December 2021 (EST)
I will at least go into the books where Nathalia is shown as the artist in the Look Insides and make a note in the Pub Notes that the book shows Nathalia Sullen. All of these books are currently listed under Nathália Suellen. I don't want to mess with Black & Blue until I understand what is going on to get that name as a pseudonym of Nathália Suellen. aardvark7 22:06, 3 December 2021 (EST)
I didn't see a way to change the artist on Black & Blue so I made a note in the Pub field. This is the only book I can find using Nathalia Suelle and it's a note from the author thanking her for the wonderful cover. I also made notes for the books where for name was spelled Nathalia instead of Nathália aardvark7 16:54, 4 December 2021 (EST)
Annie I have to apologize, I screwed up. I did a wrong cut and paste. On the books where I state "Book text credits Natalia Suellen for cover art", it should read "Nathalia Suellen". I thought I checked and double checked, but I missed it. Fortunately I always check everything one last time after it goes through you folks. I will be fixing these and I again apologize for the extra work I put on you folks. I will now go stand in the corner. aardvark7 19:32, 6 December 2021 (EST)
The only people who do not make mistakes are the ones doing nothing. Let me know if you need me to fix something - if not, submit the changes you need, add a moderator note explaining that you are correcting a copy/paste mishap and we are all set. Annie 19:37, 6 December 2021 (EST)

Syzygy; added issues of Crank from and this PV did #4 but entered a couple of titles wrong; I fixed them and then got nervous because I anticipated the usual complaining about not checking with PV first before changing anything. I was relieved to see the PV hasn't responded since 5 years ago, but now that I think about it they should probably have 1 of those "no longer active" things on their board, right? --Username 21:22, 23 November 2021 (EST)

Francois Roca => François Roca

This author's name should be changed from "Francois Roca" to "François Roca" (see here for example).AlainLeBris 04:06, 24 November 2021 (EST)

That one is a bit more complicated because of the English editions - no argument that this is the guy's name but we need to find out how he was credited (and if it does not have "ç" on the credits somewhere, we will need notes and so on...) I'll work on that in the next days. Meanwhile I added a legal name so we at least have it there. Annie 19:44, 6 December 2021 (EST)
Notes added. Name changed. Annie 23:59, 6 December 2021 (EST)

Fake; Saw a couple of rare entries on this board, but they don't seem legit. --Username 07:36, 24 November 2021 (EST)

Thanks for your open eyes. I have deleted the two spam entries. Stonecreek 08:17, 24 November 2021 (EST)
I blocked the account, too. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:56, 24 November 2021 (EST)

Editing My Edits; Can any of you explain to me why, after I discovered there's a recently added Archive copy of Joseph Payne Brennan's rare 1963 collection Scream At Midnight and added it here, and then discovered there's another story in the book at the end that's not on the contents page for some reason and was never entered here until I added it, someone approved the edit of some other editor who entered the missing story again for some reason, removed my note about the handwritten dedication at the front with a 1963 date, and removed my note about the missing story and then slightly rewrote it and entered it as his own note? It's not like he owns a copy; he used Google Books as his source. Can someone remove the duplicated story and reinstate my note about the dedication and my note about the missing story? Didn't the mod who approved this guy's edit notice any of this? --Username 23:32, 24 November 2021 (EST)

Done. It might be that this just was a coincidence of simultaneous approaches. Stonecreek 12:52, 27 November 2021 (EST)
Was my approval and my mistake. With hundreds of edits to approve there are a few that slip through. With no PV only the edit history is there to refer to. I'll remove the extra story.Kraang 13:12, 27 November 2021 (EST)

"Omnibus" of magazine/comic issues

Looking for some moderatorial opinions on handling of a submission that is for a book collecting a three-issue Marvel Comics series of H. P. Lovecraft adaptations. Each of the issues featured one short story and two poems by Lovecraft. The issues contained a new graphical/comics-style adaptation of Lovecraft's works and also reprinted the original works.

1. It seems to me the original issues, while technically comics, should be "in", since they reprint the Lovecraft works. Would they be MAGAZINE?

2. Would we make this new publication an OMNIBUS? If the originals were ANTHOLOGY, I believe we would, but if they're MAGAZINE?

3. If we made this new publication ANTHOLOGY, would we still want to include the the titles of the three original publications?

I think there's also an issue with MAGAZINE/EDITOR and wanting to include that title record in another publication. Does anyone know?

Thanks, --MartyD 12:14, 27 November 2021 (EST)

I would guess that the original Marvel issues should be entered as MAGAZINEs. Reprints of MAGAZINE issues are typically entered as ANTHOLOGY pubs, e.g. see these Astounding reprints. Ahasuerus 20:03, 27 November 2021 (EST)
I’d add the reprints as anthologies - as the originals are magazines, we cannot import them so we cannot make an omnibus. The old comics are non-genre Magazines - just like newspapers are magazines in the dB IMO. My 2 cents. :) Annie 20:42, 27 November 2021 (EST)
Are we going to start adding comic books? I thought they were always out of scope. For an author like Gaiman, this would add quite a bit of new material. TAWeiss 08:51, 28 November 2021 (EST)
These particular comic book issues were a special case -- they contained not only comics but also reprints of the stories/poems which the comics were based on. Ahasuerus 10:09, 28 November 2021 (EST)
I was the one who submitted this. Please note this is a hardback book with ISBN. Do magazines or comics have an ISBN?? aardvark7 11:08, 28 November 2021 (EST)
Normally, magazine issues do not have unique ISBNs. Instead, the whole magazine run is assigned an ISSN. Occasionally, when a magazine issue is sold as a standalone publication, it may be assigned an ISBN.
Comic books follow the same paradigm. To quote
  • There is no single identifier standard, today, for comic books. ISBNs are used for some trade paperbacks, original graphic novels and specials. ISSNs are used to identify some series but do not identify specific issues (generally the ISSN is used in conjunction with a publication date).
(emphasis added.) Ahasuerus 12:00, 28 November 2021 (EST)
Also let me note I am not advocating entering the 3 comic books that make up this hardback, only the hardback itself. I agree with the person about comics, they don't belong in the database. This hardback kind of reminds me of record 2556723 Stan Lee Presents the Marvel Comics Illustrated Version of Blade Runner aardvark7 13:07, 28 November 2021 (EST)
I was thinking this would be a collection like this.
Yeah, like that... aardvark7 22:24, 28 November 2021 (EST)
Sorry, I have been having cable problems.... This is definitely not a normal "comics" situation. Since the three issues printed the original Lovecraft works, they would be "in". So what I was thinking when I asked about this is what happens if/when someone decides to enter those three issues? Do we care to represent that this compilation collects those published subsets (and, if so, how exactly), or do we want to ignore that and only have the compilation linked to the three issues by common content? --MartyD 15:39, 1 December 2021 (EST)
We could list the comics and publications in the title description, and links to something like GCD
I agree with Annie's comment above -- I would enter them as non-genre magazine issues. Ahasuerus 17:35, 1 December 2021 (EST)
We have a similar problem with an omnibus including a previously published omnibus - you cannot have an omnibus inside of an omnibus per the rules here - you import the contents of it only instead (boxsets are prone to that). The only way to indicate the connection is via the notes - so that's the only thing we can do here when magazine issues are collected in an anthology... Annie 13:32, 2 December 2021 (EST)
(unindent) So what are the rules for comic books? If they reprint text stories/poems from other publications, then they are in? Do we add in all of the comics written by over the threshold writers. Are these in now, or only if they are reprinted elsewhere? Should we add all of the Sandman series for example since #19 won a World Fantasy Award ? I'm just trying to clarify the exclusion rules. TAWeiss 10:16, 4 December 2021 (EST)
Think of comics as non-genre magazines. See Help:Entering_non-genre_magazines. If an issue publishes a work that is "in", then we would create a record for that issue, but we would only create content records for the "in" content. --MartyD 16:01, 5 December 2021 (EST)
We actually do have a bit of a loophole here. For above threshold authors, everything is eligible except "non-genre (...) non-fiction which was not published as a standalone book." (thus us not indexing articles in random magazines which are non-genre even from Isaac Asimov). We had always had an informal rule not to allow single issues/floppies of comics even from the above threshold authors (kinda on the same premise) but if you read the ROA, they are not explicitly forbidden - they are not considered speculative fiction (so we are in the clear for non-above the treshold authors) but they are fiction so technically speaking they are as eligible as their collected variants and GNs are(which had been allowed so far)... We can get that clarified in the ROA and close the loophole completely by changing:
  • "This includes any non-genre works published as standalone books as well as non-genre short fiction, but excludes non-fiction which was not published as a standalone book."
  • "This includes any non-genre works published as standalone books as well as non-genre short fiction, but excludes non-genre non-fiction which was not published as a standalone book or a genre publication and graphic stories in non-genre magazines".
Or something like that. That covers it all because comics floppies and the UK/Japanese magazines are non-genre magazines under our definitions so we are all set. That also closes another loophole - if you parse that sentence in ROA in a certain way, that makes even genre non-fiction ineligible if it is not in a standalone book or genre publication (NYTRB and any other newspaper magazine with interviews and reviews and articles only and no fiction for example will be completely out which is not how we want to read line - and not how we had been reading it). Time for a R&S thread so we can hash out the wording? Annie 21:50, 5 December 2021 (EST)
Sounds good. I am thinking we should further sub-divide paragraph 4, e.g.:
Works (both fiction and non-fiction) which are not related to speculative fiction, but were produced by authors who have otherwise published works either of or about speculative fiction over a certain threshold (see below). Specifically:
  • Included: non-genre fiction and non-fiction published as a standalone publication
  • Included: non-genre short fiction
  • Excluded: non-genre non-fiction which was not published as a standalone publication or in a genre publication
  • Excluded: graphic stories in non-genre publications
We can discuss the details on the R&S page once the discussion has been moved there. Ahasuerus 11:32, 6 December 2021 (EST)

Moonsinger's Friends - inactive PV

I need to make changes to Moonsinger's Friends based on the copy I own. Once I make the changes, I'll PV it. The sole current PV is Bluesman who is apparently inactive so I can't get his consent. Along with needing additional titles and notes, it also needs to have the title changed to "Moonsinger's Friends: An Anthology in Honor of Andre Norton" to match what's on my copy's title page. I believe that should also be the canonical title. I asked the PV of this pub to check her copy and she has submitted a title change to correct the title on that pub as well. Since my corrected title matches the title for the hardcover edition of the same date that doesn't have a PV, is there any objection to me making the same change to this title record as well as the pub record? Phil 22:39, 27 November 2021 (EST)

Since it has been about 5 days since I posed this question and there are no objections, can I reasonable go ahead and make the changes? Phil 17:07, 1 December 2021 (EST)

Languishing submission

Can someone approve this submission that is languishing in the queue for two days. It'll allow me to continue my work on this issue.AlainLeBris 03:11, 28 November 2021 (EST)

No problem, looks good. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, sometimes the quantity of submissions overwhelms us [poor unpaid] moderators! ;) PeteYoung 07:14, 28 November 2021 (EST)

Mars Manual;; Not sure this belongs on ISFDB, except for the reviews, since it seems like non-fiction, not a novel. --Username 00:03, 30 November 2021 (EST)

Well, it is described at Amazon as a flight manual for a fictional trip to Mars, and this would make it eligible and is correctly entried as fiction: it is written like a piece of nonfiction, but that's just a masquerade. Stonecreek 04:33, 30 November 2021 (EST)

Author Link Error; That error occurs when you click the link on this page,, so something's wrong there. They made a rare edit on Community Portal recently, which is why I noticed. --Username 21:57, 30 November 2021 (EST)

Just a bad code on the user’s page - a | at the end of the link. The author page is fine:
I’ll drop a note to the editor. Annie 22:13, 30 November 2021 (EST)
And fixed. Ahasuerus 22:18, 30 November 2021 (EST)

Links to file sharing websites

Should we have links to files on file sharing websites like here? TAWeiss 17:27, 1 December 2021 (EST)

It's a very good question. There are quite a few archival sites out there and their legal status is all over the place. Some, like Project Gutenberg, research the copyright status of each file ahead of time. Others, like, cover so much ground that they can't realistically contact every rights holder; they make things available first and take them down if the copyright owner asks them to. Then there are sites like the LibGen.* family of projects, which claim to comply with relevant copyright laws, but have been in and out of legal trouble for years -- see this Wikipedia discussion. We certainly wouldn't want to link to the last type of archival sites.
In this case all I can find is the following note by the site maintainer:
  • please direct all inquiries & legal threats to collectfruit at gmail dot com!
Ahasuerus 18:07, 1 December 2021 (EST)
Since I'm the 1 who added it, I can say that since it's just a PDF I don't see a problem; anything that required signing up or something similar I would never add. As I've written here a few times, a site like is more problematic because they add anything and everything, which is why they get complaints so often and have to take stuff down, so that's why I usually add an Open Library ID but not the actual Archive link; if people go to the OL page and decide to click the link that's their choice. A funny thing happened earlier this year where someone uploaded a 1984 issue of S.D. Schiff's Whispers Magazine (most issues of Whispers are very hard to find) to the Archive but when I went back to it a little while later it was gone with the usual notice about being taken down possibly because of complaints, etc. However, recently I saw the same issue again and pounced on it immediately, since it was not in the preview section but was 1 of those full PDF's; there are still several stories in that issue which have never been reprinted, at least not anywhere I know of, so I have several downloaded stories in my printed-out pile waiting to be read (along with countless others). It seems the only difference between the original URL for that issue and the URL there now was a single dash, which made all the difference. There's this message on Annarchive: "ABOUT ⒶNNARCHIVE: though many of the files hosted in these archives were donated or scanned by myself, many more were collected from file-sharing websites, some of which no longer exist. i don't take credit for these files nor do i in many cases know the identities of the original scanners - i'm just trying to make sure these files continue to be available." Since the last issue of Dragon came out in 2007, I doubt anyone complained about their hosting a PDF or it wouldn't still be there. The only reason I noticed this issue was because I got on a run of adding/fixing stuff for books with hologram covers and saw that Amazon's cover image actually displayed the hologram better than the other cover image, so I replaced it and then found the other stuff. --Username 18:46, 1 December 2021 (EST)

Converting NOVEL to NOVELLA / CHAPBOOK (plus more)

Les chevaux de Soulimane: one would think that it's unlikely that this publication holds a novel — looking at the page count: even at 300 words per page (which seems not very common for a text aimed at adults, and quite unlikely for a juvenile) this would well be under the threshold of 40,000 words. So it seems more likely that it's a CHAPBOOK containing a novella.

In addition, shouldn't the publisher be the commonly known Albin Michel? It is according to the OCLC entry I linked to (and according to the ISBN range 2-226-). Also, there's the question what the source for the note that it's not the first printing is: the copyright date is not sufficient when there's no other earlier publication to be found (or is there?) It still might be the first, and the note should reflect this.

Unfortunately the entering & veryfying editor doesn't respond to my questions, posted here. So, how shall we proceed? Stonecreek 07:37, 2 December 2021 (EST)

As I don't want to contredict such a specialist of french publishing and a specialist of "first editions", I've unverified the publication. Do as you want, I strictly don't care. If Stonecreek without the book is better placed than me to determine what is exactly its publisher, so be it, it's not the first that he meddles with data (I remember something along the lines of "first printing"). Hail to your bibliographic genius that transcends time and distance... Note that I do not dare to answer to such luminaries lest I be eclipsed. On a more positive note, even a dimwit could have found this 1987 book that is the mythic 1st printing. AlainLeBris 12:22, 2 December 2021 (EST)
A few quick notes:
  • The French "Dépôt Légal" is not the same as the Copyright date in English editions. It belongs to the book, not the text and as such can be used safely for dating of French books.
  • A lot of publishers use the same ISBN block for all their imprints. The fact that we had not seen this imprint yet can mean one of three things: either someone was standardizing (we had seen that a lot) OR it is a rare one in our books OR there is a mistake in the record. BNF has the publisher as "A. Michel, 1987" (incidentally confirming an existing 1987 printing and that 1988 is a later printing). OCLC has Albin Michel with holding libraries in Canada and France (via BNF); if you look at OCLC's other editions, the 1987 ones with the same ISBN are also there so it also confirms that this is NOT a first printing. None of these exclude the possibility of it being out from an imprint. If a verifier says that is how the publisher is credited, I'd note a difference with the sources but won't destroy their data
FYI: The OCLC entry under 1987 with a Canadian library - the Canadian library in question actually lists this as the (c)1987, 1988 printing. The French library lists theirs as 1987. ../Doug H 14:40, 2 December 2021 (EST)
Yes but being a French book, I kinda trust the French record more than the Canadian one (which probably should be up on the 1988 record and not on this one but...) :) Annie 14:53, 2 December 2021 (EST)
  • The only somewhat valid issue I can see here is the length. However - being a 1987/1988 book, I am not sure of the density of the print (we still have 90-100-pages novels at this point because of small and dense prints). Alain, can you count the words on a page? Just to see where the estimate is going? Thanks! Annie 12:46, 2 December 2021 (EST)
Alain, in your comment you totally missed out on the question that triggered the thread, and that is the length of the fictional text. Even a 'dimwit' like me is able to do a little bit of calculating, and while it's possible that there are about 350 or more words on every page, I strongly do think that this is unlikely for a juvenile at that time of publication, and that's why I asked about a word count or an estimate of it. The other questions arose while looking at the thing (and it was WorldCat that had put just Albin Michel as the publisher). So, please stay friendly in tone, and remember: it's highly ethical to answer questions when asked. Thanks in advance, Christian Stonecreek 13:35, 2 December 2021 (EST)

Kipling: Above the threshold?

Hi, I just searched for his novel "Kim", which seems to be nongenre, but I would have considered Kipling above-the-threshold. I'd estimate he'd be similar to H. G. Wells in the proportions of genre / nongenre works. Any input would be welcome. Stonecreek 11:46, 3 December 2021 (EST)

I'd consider him ATT. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:06, 3 December 2021 (EST)
Kipling was all over the place. He wrote a couple hundred pages worth of science fiction stories, another collection worth of supernatural stories, animal/children's fantasy stories like Just So Stories and The Jungle Books, some "weird fiction", horror, etc. On the other end of the spectrum, his popular novels -- Kim, Captains Courageous, The Light that Failed -- were not speculative. He also wrote a lot of realistic stories, but then again, some of them had at least borderline speculative elements, e.g. the "Boots" trilogy was narrated by a dog. Ahasuerus 12:56, 3 December 2021 (EST)
I take it from the answers that it'd be okay to add his nongenre works (?). I'll wait for the weekend to pass, and then add Kim if there's no massive contradiction. Thanks for your input so far! Christian Stonecreek 01:14, 4 December 2021 (EST)

Aberrant Dreams

"A Shogun's Weapon" entered by PV,, but "A Shogun's Welcome" here,, and here, PV doesn't respond to messages, so what's to be done? --Username 13:37, 3 December 2021 (EST)

Well, that seems to have changed. He last answered to a question in November, and is occasionally around (mostly at weekends, I think). So just try to question him about the piece. Stonecreek 13:57, 3 December 2021 (EST)
Well, I questioned him, but I see that a question I asked back in February was never answered so I'm not holding my breath for this one. However, I found this,, so I think it's clear what the real title is. --Username 14:13, 3 December 2021 (EST)
So, the best you / we can (or should) do is: wait for the weekend to pass, and then act (if there's no answer and you don't wanna do it on your own, just give me a reminder on Monday). Christian Stonecreek 01:09, 4 December 2021 (EST)
I'm just going to change it to the correct title and add that archived link. If PV ever responds and somehow the title really was Weapon in the zine I can always change it back, although I doubt that will be needed. --Username 11:36, 4 December 2021 (EST)

The Future is missing

Hi, it seems one specific magazine issue is missing, according to this thread. Christian Stonecreek 04:56, 4 December 2021 (EST)

Not missing - just hiding between other things on the board. It had been found, brought to the light and approved. Annie 05:35, 4 December 2021 (EST)

The Problem,; mod apparently needs to change publisher to preserve notes, so someone can do that if they wish. --Username 19:09, 10 December 2021 (EST)

I've done a bit more research and I can find Publisher Update submissions by non-moderators in the recent approvals. Are you certain that you are not able to update the name in the publisher record? @Ahasuerus, Is there a list of edits/fields within edits that are only available to Moderators? I know that an author merge is usually requested on this board, but am not sure what other functions require higher privileges. Are there any edits where fields are locked except for Mods? That seems to be the issue that Username may be experiencing. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:32, 12 December 2021 (EST)
As far as I know, we don't have a list of fields which are only editable by moderators. It's supposed to be covered in field-specific mouse-over and Wiki-based Help pages. In this case, the mouse-over Help reads "Only moderators can edit publisher names" and Help:Screen:EditPublisher says "Note that only moderators can edit this field once the publisher record has been created."
The other frequently used field which can only be edited by moderators is "Canonical Name" in Author Editor. Also, in Advanced Search, Author and Publisher merges can only be done by moderators. (The ability to edit Award Categories used to be restricted to moderators, but the restriction was lifted a couple of years ago.) Ahasuerus 13:08, 12 December 2021 (EST)
Thanks. That explains it. I've updated the publisher per Username's original edits. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:07, 12 December 2021 (EST)

Brazzaville; This book got confused with another William Morrow book, and the 600 pages was actually 300+; I fixed that and other stuff but screwed up replacing the old cover image with what I thought was a better one because I forgot to delete the stuff between the dots; the old image seems to be gone from Amazon, so I found what I think is the only image online that shows the entire cover, front and spine, clearly and uploaded that to the Wiki, so whoever approves the 1st edit, ignore the yellow warning because next edit fixes that. --Username 15:41, 11 December 2021 (EST)

Approved and done. --Username 09:37, 13 December 2021 (EST)

Nick Rodgers / Nicholas Rodgers

Does anyone know whether Nick Rodgers is the ssme artist as Nicholas Rodgers ? --Mavmaramis 04:53, 12 December 2021 (EST)

Judging by a gallery on his website I would say yes, and Nicholas should be a pseudonym of Nick. Do you want to do this? I added the link to his (as Nick) author page. --Willem 05:34, 12 December 2021 (EST)
Could I leave that to you please ? --Mavmaramis 12:28, 13 December 2021 (EST)
Ok, and done. No problem. --Willem 14:17, 13 December 2021 (EST)

Puffin Plus; (UK) part prevents these 2 from being part of the other Puffin Plus series books; also this, Puffin Plus wasn't the publisher, just a series. --Username 09:36, 13 December 2021 (EST)

Dragondoom by Dennis L. McKiernan Title Record # 943551

In my search for art by Richard Bober, I can across a cover by him not in the data base. The cover scan I have, came from xigallery but a small version can be found at They show this as being a mass market book printed in 1990 at 454 pages but they have no ISBN number. On the cover I can read "In US $5.50 (In Canada $6.50) A Bantam Spectra Book" and the book number 28837-6 which does not match the Publication Record # 276425 book with no cover. At a quandary as to what to do or how to proceed. Any suggestions?? aardvark7 10:25, 17 December 2021 (EST)

Well, for the years 1990 & 1991 OCLC as well as Amazon seem to have only the one ISBN that we have in the database. The variant cover might have been scheduled but never got published (or might have been published in a totally different - later - year. As Goodreads doesn't source their data, and has often found to be unreliable (even more than Amazon), my best guess is that this was in fact not published. Stonecreek 12:40, 17 December 2021 (EST)

J. Turner; James Turner at bottom should have a (I), and essay merged with other essay. EDIT: Also,; art credits probably belong to a separate James Turner. --Username 16:52, 18 December 2021 (EST)

Author email

You may have published a book by Nancy Macon, 703 how I lost a ton and gained a like. I just wished to tell her how much her book meant to me and how difficult it may have been to write it. She is a courageous successful woman.

Sincerely Edna Smith, Hamilton, Ont. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ednachristy (talkcontribs) .

The ISFDB is not a publisher. We are a bibliographic site that indexes speculative fiction (science fiction, fantasy, & horror) works. It seems likely a web query has led you astray somehow. I'm sorry, but we are unable to help you with your request. If you search the author via Google, she may have a social media site via which you can reach out to her. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:03, 19 December 2021 (EST)

Languishing submission (2)

Can someone approve this submission that is sitting in the queue since 2021-12-17 05:36:44 and will not disappear by itself? The ISBN entered is as on book.AlainLeBris 03:31, 21 December 2021 (EST)

The ISBN seems to have a bad checksum. Will you verify it's correct (see here)? I've approved the submission. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:30, 21 December 2021 (EST)

Dick Smith?

[29]; Exorcist makeup guy, not SF fan guy, added (make-up artist) to his name in an edit, PV'd by someone I don't wish to contact, it's at the top of my edit list with nearly 150 edits in front of it, so can someone approve this,, before the others? --Username 19:03, 22 December 2021 (EST)

Happy Holidays to the Moderators

As I know from past experience it is a laborious avocation. Thank you.--swfritter 19:19, 24 December 2021 (EST)


Can 1 of you un-reject this,, since it IS the same art; you can see the girl's head in the hole of the Pocket cover; it's a step-back cover, and opening it reveals exactly the same art, just like the several other foreign Andrews reprints I added edits for recently. Here's a copy: --Username 20:10, 24 December 2021 (EST)

I unrejected & approved it. Please add a moderator note in cases like that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:09, 25 December 2021 (EST)

Jumbled Covers; I remember this disarrangement happening once before, so I'm sure mods will know how to fix it again. --Username 18:07, 26 December 2021 (EST)

I'm not sure what disarrangement you are referring to. Can you be more specific? You have selected the "View covers for this year" for the books published by Record in 1972. The three images match up to the covers for those three books. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:04, 26 December 2021 (EST)
Like the previous time this happened, the 3 covers, instead of being one after the other, are 2 in one column and 1 in the other. Whoever fixed it last time discussed it between a couple of mods and discovered there was some coding or other kind of problem and fixed it, so I assume it's the same this time. ALSO, can a moderator accept the 2 edits I made nearly 2 weeks ago regarding Richard O'Brien? The Rocky Horror actor was interviewed and hosted the TV show Urban Gothic, so those 2 belong to him; the PB horror novel is by some American with the same name, and he may have written the poems or not, but the interview and intro for Urban Gothic definitely belong to the actor. I don't understand why the dozens of edits I made today and most days are rushed through and accepted with barely a glance just to make the queue smaller, especially at night, but something simple and obvious like that sits there for weeks. --Username 22:38, 26 December 2021 (EST)
For software issues, your best best is to write a note on Ahasuerus's user page. He is our developer. A mod cannot help you with software issues. For your edits, some of your edits are easy to process, but a number you make difficult because you provide no sources or notes and are impacting verified pubs. Mods don't always have the time (especially during the holidays) to handle the difficult ones and will drift to handling the easy ones. Looking into this one, on 12/14 you changed the Richard O'Brien record to be the actor's biographical information. Five hours later you submitted these two edits which conflict with that prior change. In addition, if the actor is not the author, than the interview does not belong in the database. So, no, these are not easy ones. I will work through them. -- JLaTondre (talk) 07:46, 27 December 2021 (EST)
Again, when this happened the last time where covers were misaligned, I left a note just like the one above, 1 mod discussed it with another one, they figured out what the problem was and then fixed it. I see that the 3rd cover has a little symbol after the title, and if I remember correctly that's what the problem is. I found it: The O'Brien interview probably doesn't belong here, just like the Dick Smith interview I added (makeup artist) to recently because the same editor confused him with the Dick Smith who was a SF fan guy, and that interview was also deleted. So complain to that editor who doesn't check which name they're entering before they make an edit. Why would a horror magazine like Fangoria be interviewing someone in the SF field? Also, Dick Smith's name is on the cover of that issue of Fangoria, image available online, with "Makeup lessons from the Master". I wouldn't contact that editor anyway because they hacked my home page months ago and it had to be locked by mods so they couldn't do it again, in case you weren't aware. The intro I verified in a few seconds from the Wikipedia page for Urban Gothic which mentions that Richard O'Brien, the Rocky Horror guy, was the "Storyteller" of the TV series, thus also the author of the intro for the book version; the book isn't PV'd, anyway, so there was nobody to contact about that one. So no, this isn't something that should take any significant amount of time to accept. This has nothing to do with holidays because it happens regularly, holidays or not. I did a number of extensive edits yesterday (and most days), all of which sat there all day until the 1 mod who seems to work at night just ran through all of them in a few minutes like they usually do. But the Richard O'Brien one needed 2 weeks to think about? --Username 08:21, 27 December 2021 (EST)--
Regarding the covers: As per the discussion you linked to, Ahasuerus made a software change to fix that issue. I gave you the simplest & quickest way to handle software issues.
Regarding the edits: You made conflicting edits in the space of a couple hours. You did not provide sources. Yes, all of that can be looked up, but it takes times. Most of your edits provide sources and those will get processed more quickly. When you make the moderators do extra work for information you already have, there will be less moderators with the time (or even patience given you have been told many times) to deal with it.
I have provided feedback on how to improve responsiveness to your edits. You can choose to accept it or not. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:59, 27 December 2021 (EST)
Another, Now that I look further, Plon has several pages in the 70's where covers are misaligned, so it seems to be a general problem. --Username 19:22, 9 January 2022 (EST)
The software has been changed not to use mouseover help for transliterated values on Publisher Year pages, which should solve this issue. Ahasuerus 14:24, 1 February 2022 (EST)

Minor Change to Canonical Name

Jess C Scott should be corrected to comply with standards. (Add the missing period). Faster for you to edit than for me to post three title edits and one author update to move the metadata. Thanks, John Scifibones 14:18, 27 December 2021 (EST)

The absence of the period is correct. The author does not use a period as per her website. As such the "However, when it is clearly the author's choice to omit the period, or when the author has a single letter name that is not an initial (e.g. "Harry S Truman") the period should be omitted." comes into play. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:30, 27 December 2021 (EST)
No problem, I'll edit the titles I have added after they are processed. Thanks for looking at it. John Scifibones 15:45, 27 December 2021 (EST)
We probably need a note in the author note field that the name is per the author’s preference though so it does not get “fixed” by someone without them doing research. Annie 17:26, 27 December 2021 (EST)
Done, John Scifibones 22:37, 27 December 2021 (EST)

Author merge required: Paul Ma[r]gueritte

Spotted these in today's deaths: ,

The former record (with the r) appears to be the correct one, per the links to English and French Wikipedia.

The incorrect version seems to be down to a transcription/data entry error - possibly at some other reference site? - rather than an error in the source pub(s). The author record has a single poem, from a single pub. That pub has a link to a scanned copy on, and the contents list (specifically page xiv) shows the name spelled Margueritte, so this seems to be a case for merging rather than varianting author records? IIRC author merges are only available to mods? ErsatzCulture 19:40, 28 December 2021 (EST)

The Internet Archive scan (the work is in public domain so the full scan is available without an account) shows the title page has the "r". The two records have been merged. -- JLaTondre (talk) 07:48, 29 December 2021 (EST)

Missing N; it's Payne, not Paye. I don't know if changing that would cause note to go away, so I leave it to mods to fix it in order to avoid the usual complaining. --Username 23:25, 28 December 2021 (EST)

Fixed. -- JLaTondre (talk) 07:44, 29 December 2021 (EST)

Lancer Duplicate; The only book published by Lancer in 1971 that was missing the ID was The Baby Factory; I found a cover on and used the ID to find the missing cover on Bookscans, so that's now complete. However, the Alice Brennan book has a record with no cover but a cover artist mentioned in Paperbacks From Hell according to the note, while there's another record with a cover but no cover artist and a note saying the artist is unknown. So mods may want to decide which record and what notes to keep. --Username 11:11, 31 December 2021 (EST)

Rigby; I did a lot of fixes for these magazines; the proofreading was terrible, with different titles in different parts, different names, etc. The editor who entered them here years ago made their own mistakes, too, so it was a bit of a mess. I think I got most of it, but someone may want to look at them to see if anything else needs tweaking. More importantly, the spelling of the editor's name as J.C.H. Rigby was wrong, with their name being JCH with no periods both in those old zines and their recent novels, which I also fixed. So mod will need to change the name to JCH on that page linked above. --Username 17:55, 31 December 2021 (EST)

J. C. H. Rigby and JCH Rigby merged. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2022 (EST)