User talk:Data Thief

Jump to navigation Jump to search


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

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!Kraang 01:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Data Thief thanks you for the welcome. Data Thief has many questions. Data Thief will resist posting all questions at once. Data Thief will ask one question for now. WTF is all this "XML" b***s**t? Data Thief 23:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
XML is the language of data thieves. Get used to it. :-) --Marc Kupper|talk 18:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

To Bot or Not to Bot

For someone (or something) that "is not a bot", but a "small set of PL/SQL procedures and functions", you are quite loquacious, and slang savvy as well. AFAIC, it's total BS. Take that FWIW. BTW, I'm LOL. TAFN CUL8TR MHHutchins 01:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


You mention "a web-based interface", is there a public URL for same? -DES Talk 17:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Focus, November 2000

I'm clearing up old holds and have some questions/comments about this one.

  • The date is given as 2000-November-00. This should be 2000-11-00
  • The price is given as £1.75p. I suspect the trailing p is not needed and £1.75 would do.
  • In the contents you submitted Fringe with a type of "unknown type F" (literally). I don't recognize that type and am not sure what your intent was.
  • In the contents you have three INTERIORARTs by various artist but all of them have blank titles. The title should either be of the story it's illustrating or the publication.
  • You tried to include an interview but something's missing in the XML and it came through as an entirely blank record:
    <cInterviewee>Brian A. Hopkins</cInterviewee>
    <cInterviewer>Simon Morden</cInterviewer>

I've rejected the submission. It was number 1057527 in the queue meaning a moderator can view/resurrect it at and to view the original XML at should there be additional questions. --Marc Kupper|talk 18:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Fantascienza links

I've worked the submissions on a few of these, and they are some pretty sad images. Do you think it's worth the trouble to re-link to them? Mhhutchins 07:35, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, the old links are broken and need removing: and the replacements are better than nothing. I hope Pips55 can improve on a few of them. BLongley 11:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Not so sure about 'better than nothing' .... blecch! --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Having reviewed many, I only found one pub where we had a local image now. And that's an angled photo that doesn't seem any better. Ah well, I took the opportunity to fix the titles and languages for a lot of "Complete Novel"s. Ernesto didn't die in vain, his notes were very useful. BLongley 01:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Fleuve Noir Anticipation

Sorry if I didn't get the joke but you are working on the series that I'm currently entering (Fleuve Noir Anticipation)and PVing (for those that I have). Looking at the poor quality of the result and the load of work it'll take me to correct this, I'm stopping now my contribution to this project. I'll let this bot play with the data and enter the rest of the 2002 volumes of this series, I've better thinks to do. Hauck 21:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Data Thief, you just got pwned! :) Mhhutchins 04:49, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, a bot's submissions are only as good as its sources. In this case the source that Data Thief had found was not very good, so it affected the quality of the submissions.
I am sure Data Thief can find other areas to experiment with while Hauck is working on this pub series. For example, the Library of Congress has been making its new records available online in XML format and they contain quite a few tasty morsels. Ahasuerus 05:05, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
If using that source is worse than having no data, I'll stop using it: it was just the only source I found with easily usable data. Or let me know what was so wrong and I can ignore or fix the errors in the rest of the series. Submitting each in a quarter of a second seemed more sensible than doing it totally manually. BLongley 16:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)