User talk:MartyD

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feb 2009 - Jul 2009
Aug 2009 - Jan 2010
Feb 2010 - Jul 2010
Aug 2010 - Jan 2012
Feb 2012 - Jan 2016

Harper Hall of Pern

Question about [this] record. I have to assume your copy has one of the two "Q" gutter codes? I have one with a previous code "P05" but the number SFBC # does not have the leading '0', just 3678. I think there should be two records, one for copies with just the four-digit code [which Locus somehow adds a '0' to the end] and one for the five-digit, which can be dated to Feb or Apr '86 [likely both have the leading '0']. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Mine has "03678" in a small white box at the bottom right of the back cover (which is solid green otherwise). The gutter code on p. 499 looks like "O29" to me. There's no mistaking the "29". I suppose it's possible it's Q29 instead of O29 -- the printing is not the crispest in the world -- but I can't tell, even under a magnifying glass. FWIW, there's a faint ring around the gutter code, I presume from the stamping. --MartyD 00:28, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
There is a possibility that the jacket was not original to the book, I've found that a couple of times buying SFBC editions second-hand. A seller may have two and just combines the best book with the best jacket ... otherwise it's probably a 'Q' as the SFBC never went back to a four-digit code once they used a five-digit one. Odd, too, my copy's jacket is blue on the back. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I got this copy from the SFBC, not second-hand. But I would not have gotten it before mid-1985, and it's certainly possible I got it in 1986. I know I don't have those records anymore, unfortunately. Anyway, I'm not opposed to two records or to treating what I have as "Q29" and adjusting notes accordingly. I defer data entry/organization decisions to the SFBC organizers. :-) --MartyD 20:27, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I used to have all my stuff from the club but tossed it when I quit in about 1991. Who'd have known .... Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:26, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Requiem for a Ruler of Worlds

I've made a small change to the note.[1] DK is visible before the cutoff.--Auric 16:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Daughter of the Blood

I've removed the date from this publication record. A book with an ISBN-13 can not have been published in 1998. Based on the ISBN range, it probably was published circa 2007-2008. Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 05:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Regarding this pub, is it really "Hitchiker" as entered or "Hitchhiker"? If that edition used "Hitchiker", then its title record needs to be unmerged from the others and a variant established. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

No, just a typo I never noticed. Thanks for catching it. Fixed. --MartyD 17:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Tom's Midnight Garden variant author name only

Hi. Today I completed verification of HarperTrophy edition 1st printings, after preliminary change from author "Philippa" to "A. Philippa" which you approved. Is there any alternative to the three-stage submission

  1. import the other Title records (in this case, only the fiction Title as by "A. Philippa")
  2. remove the other Title records (here the novel by "Philippa")
  3. edit the publication record otherwise as appropriate

--Pwendt|talk 23:59, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

There is no way to do it with fewer steps, unless the title is not used by any other publication. If it is not used elsewhere, you can edit the publication directly and change the author credits for both it and the title. Then you only need a second step, to merge the new title record with the existing one (that you otherwise would have imported). Once you have a title that is used by more than one publication, the additional removal step is always required. And you can either add while editing and merge or import and edit, as you did -- each requiring two more steps. I slightly prefer add-and-merge because it avoids leaving a publication that does not match its title, making it a little safer. I'm sorry, I should have done those other steps for you to save you some time. --MartyD 01:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Variable Star

Can you check the cover image for Variable Star. My copy has a short comment from The New York Times at the bottom right of the Front Cover. In fact it is the same as the Fourth edition Variable Star. It's probably due to the cover coming from Amazon. --AndyjMo 13:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

My wife has been reorganizing the books, and I don't immediately find it. I will have to look for it this weekend, when I will have time to dig through the boxes. --MartyD 02:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Have you managed to find time to have a look through your boxes for this book? --AndyjMo 13:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I hadn't meant for it to be quite such a long weekend.... I did find it. Mine has "I'd nominate Spider Robinson as the new Robert Heinlein." -- The New York Times" at the bottom right. --MartyD 14:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I uploaded the appropriate cover image. --MartyD 15:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that matches my cover. Thanks. --AndyjMo 14:20, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

"Small Favor" - Jim Butcher

I modified your verified pub by replacing the Amazon image with a scan, and added the Author's Note as an additional title, just as a small favor. Doug H 20:45, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

:-) --MartyD 00:07, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Science Fiction Chronicle - 1993

You recently okayed a submission from Vornoff of a title merge for Science Fiction Chronicle - 1993. while the merge was fine (I am entering issues for that year), there are multiple variant titles that appear for that year on the author's summary page. I would like to enlist your help on how I should handle this. Should I merge the variants together for that year separately, or with the titles already merged, is one question I have, and any other help you can give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Syzygy 15:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

It looks like there are two for 1993 using Andrew Porter, and then a whole bunch for 1993 using Andrew I. Porter, with each Andrew Porter one having some of the Andrew I. Porter ones. The Andrew Porter ones will need to be merged with each other, and the Andrew I. Porter ones will need to be merged with each other. The end result will be one Andrew Porter as the parent and one Andrew I. Porter as the variant (and "only as by", the way it looks). The safest approach is to do one of those merges, then do the other once the first is accepted, although you can do them in parallel, as long as you keep in mind that the lowest ID is always the survivor in a merge (so when merging the variants, you'd need to keep the parent ID that is lowest). It doesn't really matter what order you do them in. If you do Andrew Porter first, all of the variants will then have the same parent. If you do the variants first, one of the Andrew Porter ones will no longer have any publications or variants, but that will be resolved when you merge those. Does that help? Please ask if it's not clear. If you'd rather I did it, let me know. --MartyD 00:49, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to give a great explanation. I've submitted the merges per your instructions. Syzygy 03:06, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry if I caused any confusion, but your explanation was quite helpful for the future. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 05:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Rebel Fey

Somebody added the cover artist to the hardcover, and I added Stone's name to the ebook version, I hesitated to touch your verification. I suspect that Stone is responsible for many of these covers, if he really did them, as the same models turn up in them. What do you think? MLB 02:11, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Locus1 credits the artwork on the hardcover to Stone. A little Google work suggests the credit is given there on one of the dust wrapper's flaps. Since the paperback is the same artwork, there's no reason not to carry the credit along. I will add it and adjust the notes on that and the hardcover. Thanks. --MartyD 14:36, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Okay, looking at the acknowledgements page in Traitor to the Blood the authors thank both Koveck (who was given credit) and Steve Stone. I guess that settles that question. Now if only somebody would credit the mapmaker. MLB 02:17, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Corrected page count to Traitor to the Blood and added a note about the map in the note section. Hope this was okay. MLB 02:25, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, fine, thank you. --MartyD 14:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Subtitles (Bilbo's Last Song)

Hi, MartyD. We exchanged a few months ago regarding the very long subtitles of Robert Nye's Falstaff and Faust books. Recalling that, and because I see you are hard at work as I must depart, I consult you.

This is one PV record that I will rearrange or reformat. The crucial points transcribed before returning the book to the library today:

-- Bilbo's Last Song (At the Grey Havens) :: title page of book
-- Bilbo's Last Song (at the Grey Havens) :: heading of poem p27

Regarding the title of the book, I understand that we insert a colon optionally to designate a line break that we choose to interpret as title and subtitle. But that fashioning is inconsistent with the use of parentheses, so we would never use both, as one WorldCat record does: Bilbo's Last Song: (...)

For us, too, I think the colon implies uppercase 'A' and the parentheses imply lowercase 'a'

Do you agree with both interpretations of our standards?

I chose to retain the parentheses, as LCCN does not, and downcase 'at'. This happens to match the title of the poem as fashioned on p27 of the book and has the big advantage that it matches one PV by Nihonjoe P402468. (Another PV simply Notes the title page subtitle.)

For the first edition Farmer Giles of Ham P269840, LC reports a very long subtitle that appears on the title page as I understand LCCN 86-155324. I chose to Note it in the same fashion.

Thanks. --Pwendt|talk 01:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I was done for the evening. For punctuation, what matters is what's actually in the publication. If it is presented with punctuation (parentheses, colon, dash, etc.), we preserve that. If it is presented as title over subtitle or title in one location and subtitle in another, we would insert a colon between the two in our record. Other than that, use of parentheses that we add is only for disambiguation. With different poems having the same title, we would use some or all of the first line in parentheses for that purpose. So it sounds like the book is using parentheses, and preserving them is correct.
For capitalization, we normalize the capitalization according to our rules, unless we believe the choice of capitalization is deliberate and/or to carry special meaning. Here, that is clearly not the case. The rules are not explicit about subtitles, and practice is inconsistent from editor to editor. I treat the subtitle as if it were a standalone title and capitalize it that way. Others treat it as a continuation of the main title and capitalize it that way. So here, I would use "At", but some others would use "at", and neither is considered wrong. You should not, however, add another title with the opposite capitalization if there's already a record -- in that case, just follow the precedent for that title. --MartyD 11:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


I've replaced the Amazon cover art with a scan of my copy. I've also added a few extra notes. --AndyjMo 21:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Star Trek 9

Was able to add the month to [this] from a later printing [with note]. --~ Bill, Bluesman 19:09, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

City Psychonaut

Hi, CITY PSYCHONAUT is out on Amazon; I'm not sure how to best grab the cover.

Best wishes, Robin

If you would like to try it yourself:
  1. Visit the above link, right-click on the image, and Copy (or Copy Link or Copy URL--MartyD 23:33, 5 November 2016 (UTC) or something like that, depending on your browser).
  2. Then go to the pub and pick Edit This Pub from the menu at the left.
  3. Paste the link into the Image URL field. You should see something like:,204,203,200_.jpg
  4. Edit that to remove everything between the last two periods, and remove one of the periods as well. You should end up with something like:
  5. Submit!
That's how to use Amazon links. (All of the stuff you deleted is embedded sizing information that Amazon's server interprets and will lead to white boxes and other undesirable things if left in there).
Give it a try if you'd like. If not, I am happy to do it for you. --MartyD 23:33, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Wraiths of Time

Regarding Wraiths of Time: Your note states this is a first printing per the number line. This seems like it is a duplicate of 55510. Unless I'm missing something (in which case the notes should be updated), your verification should be moved over to the later pub and 277310 deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you are probably right. I will dig up my copy and double-check. --MartyD 02:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Apparent 6th printing

Hi. Last hour you approved my entry of the "apparent 6th printing" of Dying to Meet You (Sandpiper, 2010), which I verified P596751. The crucial third list item transcribes the last three lines of the copyright page:

C.p. concludes below "Manufactured in the [USA]":
-- "DOC 10 9 8 7 6" (6th printing?)
-- "4500302178"

Do you agree that this indicates I have 6th printing of the Sandpiper edition? Do you know the meaning of "DOC" or the last line (not ISBN-10)?

Mhhutchins urged me to reproduce numberlines, for someday analysis, but I rarely do so. (Without "DOC" I would be confident that its a printing-number line.)

Good night. --Pwendt|talk 03:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I like preserving unusual number lines in the notes. But it's up to you. I read "DOC 10 9 8 7 6" as indicating a 6th printing. If you Google that, you'll find examples of a full line "DOC 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1". I don't know what DOC might mean. Perhaps it's something as simple as "document". I believe the other number is some sort of serial/catalogue number. If you look at the numberline search hits that are on Google Books, you'll see those also have a similar number below the number line. --MartyD 03:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Changes to story titles

I have twice submitted changes to the titles of "The Messenger" (currently spelled "The Messehger") and "The Strega's Last Dance" (currently spelled "Stega"); both times they were not changed. Why is that? Is it because the previous spellings were verified by someone else? Mine are based on a book in my possession. I have left a message for the verifier, Don Erikson, but since Don has not answered any messages in a month, I'm not going to wait for an answer before submitting the correction. --Vasha 03:52, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, Stonecreek took care of it. --Vasha 04:40, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Because it affected a verified copy, and you didn't mention anything about it in the submission's note to the moderator, I needed to go check whether you had notified the verifier of the change. When there are a lot of submissions in the queue, I usually skip ones where I have to do work in the Wiki and go back to them. Last night I ran out of time and did not get to go do that. Sorry. Some moderators may also avoid submissions that cannot obviously be accepted without additional work. Another thing that happens sometimes (did not apply to this submission, but if I recall correctly, you had one or two others I also skipped) is that most moderators will skip submissions that make any sort of significant change to a publication having other moderators among the primary verifiers; there the submission is often left for one of those moderators to look at. You don't need to worry -- anything not processed remains there for everyone to see, and someone will get to it. Does that make sense? --MartyD 11:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's fine, thanks! --Vasha 16:48, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

"Story of Umetsu Chubei"

You are evidently wondering why I changed the date of this story - that's because it's a variant title, I'm going to variant it to one with the original date. --Vasha 01:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. A note to the moderator would have avoided the hold -- I was going to have to go do some research. --MartyD 01:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Los asesinos del tiempo

I am canceling this one - the language needs to go in the other direction (looks like you are looking at it now - sorry for not catching it earlier - I was reviewing the ones I did and realized I got it wrong) Annie 01:49, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it looked backwards to me. I hadn't yet had a chance to research/write you a note. Many submissions! :-) --MartyD 01:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Cancelled and submitted in the other way (fixing the text entry instead). I had been careful today on clearing these but one slipped apparently - which is why I was reviewing a second time - you just got it before my review got to it. Sorry :) Annie 01:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Not a problem. It's always good to be able to demonstrate that I actually review the submissions.... --MartyD 02:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Steve Dillon

I would like to undo the edit that I did creating "Steve Dillon (comics)". I don't know who was interviewed in the Irish Science Fiction Association's magazine FTL. I am pretty darn certain that it wasn't the Australian guy who created the Refuge Collection, but otherwise, who...? I will put up a verification request, unlikely as it is to find an answer, but meanwhile, please change that to something neutral like "Steve Dillon (I)". --Vasha 04:03, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how I missed this. Done now. --MartyD 00:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Birthstone Gothics

Answered your question about this series here. MLB 04:23, 28 December 2016 (UTC)


My copy of Darkenheight has a printing line [10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1] at the bottom of the Copyright page. Maybe it should be mentioned that some copies do have a printing line? --AndyjMo 16:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

If yours has a numberline, we likely have different editions. I will see if I can dig up my copy and get more details from it for you so we can compare. --MartyD 00:55, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


There is simply no way a two-letter preposition should be capitalized... not your fault, you're just following the list, but I'm going to take this to R&S because that list is all wrong. --Vasha 14:27, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

The Farthest Shore

Updated The Farthest Shore to add cover scan, add note on interior art credit, and update page numbers to reflect the last page is unnumbered. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2017 (UTC)


Happy New Year. At User talk:Cary you remarked aside that there we have one publication of the book Doctor Dolittle's Puddleby Adventures --true, the other records for that title are for contents in editions of the Treasury book. In that circumstance is a single "toggle" of the Title1354275 Type field from NOVEL to COLLECTION sufficient to amend the database on that point? Is that what you did after reading my Title Note, or my exchange with Cary?

Yes, it's pretty much that simple: Change the title type and change the pub type. If the title had not been included in other publications, it could have been done in a single Edit Pub, but when a title appears in more than one publication it must be edited separately. There is only one title record, and all places it appears point to it, so once you've changed the type, that new type appears everywhere. If there were variants, separate edits would be required to change their types to match, though.
One thing that should be done with the collection is to add the contents and then import the contents into the other publications that include the collection. --MartyD 00:53, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

At the end of 2016, i hustled to rid the Doctor Dolittle series of "Dr." titles. I was able to complete that by good fortune for all the cover and interior titles, and by hard work for the Green Canary, whose final submission you approved [2]. I guess you went ahead by analogy, or another editor did so NYEve/Day. --Pwendt|talk 15:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. I think I did edit something where I accepted a submission changing the pub or title and there was no submission changing the other. But as long as you're happy, I'm happy. :-) --MartyD 00:53, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

The Painter Knight

For The Painter Knight I've added the source of the Cover Artist, included the Canadian Price and added the Maps. --AndyjMo 15:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Missão Impossível

Hi, please check the following discussion in my page.

Green Knowe series Of/of At/at

Hi, Marty. Having entered much data on the Green Knowe series this weekend, today I noticed that some of the titles are spelled with inappropriate capital prepositions 'Of' and 'At'. Evidently there is no automated clean-up, as all were verified from Tuck by Mhhutchins in 2008. Is there any shortcut to fix these?

As far as I know, those are the only remaining Green Knowe title errors in COVERART and INTERIORART as well as NOVEL and multiple Publication titles. --Pwendt|talk 01:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. But Vasha77 has been on mission to fix capitalization inconsistencies lately. You could point him at them. :-) You could see if Ahasuerus would be willing to run a database script to fix them. I don't know how he would feel about that. --MartyD 01:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

You are too quick for me

MartyD, Ten minutes ago you approved four or my TitleUpdate submissions for "My First Aeroplane" --while I submitted with errors, and re-submitted. If it works for you to lag a few minutes, let me recommend that. Lacking any preview, I submit and proofread the display to catch markup errors at least, then go back [Alt <-] and revise, etc; visit My Pending Edits and cancel all but the latest only when the display is correct. I don't often augment submissions, or make substantial revisions this way (instead cancel immediately). Most concern database markup, such as ">, /a>, /i>, and /ul>, and I do complete most of them within a few minutes. --Pwendt|talk 19:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

It's ok, it wasn't a problem. I saw your additional submissions when I went to fix the HTML from the first one, and I realized you saw what was wrong, so I did not do any extra work. It was just as easy to approve them as to reject or cancel them. --MartyD 20:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Sons of Maeve Trilogy later edition

Marty, thanks for approving my clone submission for The Sons of Maeve Trilogy. Thanks also for letting me make the fixes you suggested. That has helped me learn things I didn't know I could do.Jolylchu 01:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

The Dragon's Hoard

Hi Marty! Thank you for looking over the Dragon's Hoard entry and approving it. I'd accidentally hit the submit button halfway through entering the data and just used the back button to return the entry screen. I didn't realize two records would be created. (Still learning my way around this place.)

I've edited the original record and cancelled the second entry this morning. Question, because I did forget Mosaic in the TOC the first time, and entered it at the bottom of the entries when I updated. Is there a problem entering TOC contents out of order? (If so, how do I make it right? You can point me to a help page if that's convenient.) Also: the poem is on an unnumbered page, and it looks as though I've forgotten the page number. Should I make a note of that? Thanks! Zinnia 13:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Responded to here. --MartyD 15:04, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Einstein's Monsters

Hello Marty, in order to avoid an editing war for this pub, I'm wondering how a 2003 book can have printed on it an ISBN-13 as it appeared only (in the 4th edition of the standards) in 2005 and was scheduled to be in use for 2007. Note also that, if you used this as a source the price on bc is £6.99 and not the £8.99 that is stated in the involved record (which so hints to a later and undated printing coherent with an ISBN-13). Either we set the ISBN to ISBN-10 and keep the 2003 or we set the date to "0000" (as I did and that you changed) and suppose that it's a post-2007 printing with an ISBN-13. Hauck 08:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ha! I didn't even realize we were having an editing war. :-) I thought I had set the date to 0000 while meaning to have set it to 2003, so I "fixed" it. It did not occur to me that someone had changed it. You're right, of course. I wasn't thinking about that. I will fix it and adjust the notes. --MartyD 11:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
p.s. ISBN-13s can go back to 2005 (still later than this 2003). See this. --MartyD 11:39, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Note that this 5th printing has a £6.99 price (see last page). Hauck 11:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
You said that, didn't you? I can only plead no coffee yet.... Fixed. --MartyD 11:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
It's after lunch here... Hauck 12:00, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Full titles for Titles and Publications

Marty, I see that you are at your station as I depart. See my last submission 3371214; no submissions on the publications or contents. We discussed the use of short titles once. So did Mhhutchins and I. Different guidelines, or leeway for editors, concerning Publication titles, or specifically art titles, or chapbook titles, etc. --Pwendt|talk 00:59, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. If you think they all use that title, then go right ahead and change the pubs, too. --MartyD 01:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Are you available to serve as moderator for a project this afternoon?

Hi Marty -- As I mentioned on the moderator noticeboard, I'm about to start changing Paul Tremblay's canonical name from "Paul G. Tremblay", and it occurs to me that, seeing as it will be a multi-stage process, it would be nice to avoid having that standing about in a half-finished situation for too long by scheduling a time with a moderator. Are you going to be around this afternoon & would be willing to watch for my Tremblay edits and approve them? --Vasha 16:44, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I had some big household chores to do this afternoon. I will be on for the next two hours or so. I'll be working on the queue, so if I see Tremblay submissions, I'll get after them. --MartyD 00:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Management of canonical name change: Bo Balder

Hi, I saw that you accepted my edits changing the name on publess records from Boukje Balder to Bo Balder. Did you then variant them to the existing Bo Balder records? Actually, I was going to merge them. The reason for doing it that way is, when you start out with a new-canonical-name record varianted to a publess old-canonical-name record, there may be a different length or date between the two records, and if you just unvariant the NCN and discard the OCN, you lose that information. So, unvariant, change author on OCN record, merge. --Vasha 14:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

No, I did not touch them, other than to accept the edits. You've been working your way through them, so I didn't see the need to do anything and did not want to interfere. I usually only do variants when I see pseudonyms in new publication submissions. --MartyD 00:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Huh, I wonder who did that, then. Well, it's all fixed and done now. (There was the same thing with a few of the Robin Hobb books -- when I created the new titles, someone stepped in and varianted them instead of merging.) --Vasha 01:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Changes to The Book of Night With Moon

I have made some changes to The Book of Night with Moon. Imported contents to match verified trade-paperback and SF Book Club versions, added un-numbered pages in front because of those contents, and added more details to Notes. BungalowBarbara 03:47, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


Marty Limited from my phone ..having departed today. Re title 1144969 sintram and his companions I expected to be able to change from collection to chapbook after removing spurious contents. Title story is only fiction in all 5 publications evidently ..altho back cover blurb is confusing. But COLLECTION is not editable. --Pwendt

Ok, I will fix it. --MartyD 01:26, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I think I got everything. Some of the dates on the English variants may not be correct. --MartyD 02:04, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I am still working on the grouping and dating of Sintram and other Baron Friedrich dlMF title records, on/off, and E. Nesbit and George Macdonald records where translations are not involved. --Pwendt|talk 17:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Diacritics as well as caps

Recently you informed me that the database does not recognize names spelled with and without diacritics as distinct, User talk:Pwendt#Fouqué versus Fouque, as it does not for names spelled with upper and lower case letters. So we may fund on title pages and in reliable library records eight fashionings of "de La Motte Fouqué" alone (without hyphen, forename, title) but they must be booked as one. I suppose you are right, which means that the manual is half right. It is clear that we should attend to diacritics.


(quote) The name should be entered exactly as it is actually given on the publication's title page." ...
Case. Case should be regularized. ... Author names that vary only in capitalization are not tracked as variants.
Accented characters. If you are entering a name such as "Philip José Farmer" that is printed with an accented e, that accented character should be reproduced in your entry of the name. Two versions of an author's name that are printed with and without accents are treated as variants; you should not convert one form to another. However, if an accented form is given on a story title, but an unaccented form is given on the table of contents, use the accented form as the standard. (end quote)

Some time ago I failed to enter works, or update them, as by "Willy Pogány" --not even the joint work we have as by "Willy Pogany" and "Elaine Pogány" T1831219. Here I think I can recommend a change of our unique name for him, from Pogany to Pogány. Having 20 variants for Fouque/Fouqué, I am not ready to say that any one should gain or lose the diacritical mark, or a capital 'De' or 'La'.

Months ago concerning caps, #Green Knowe series Of/of At/at, you suggested that I direct User:Vasha77 to the series, which I did not. (Just now I submitted fixes of remaining Title records with 'Of' or 'At', leaving the publications for that someday script.) Just above I see that Vasha works on names. Do we have a process to propose and reach agreement on such choices?

(Later I will visit the Help desk re the manual, as the HelpHeader suggests, at least to ask them whether I should really use Help talk pages for that.) --Pwendt|talk 17:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I have asked Ahasuerus to take a look at this and to make sure I did not give you incorrect information. --MartyD 01:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

A few months ago the possibility was raised of changing the software to support having Latin-1 diacritics as variants of non-diacritics, but it met with no enthusiasm. Such a change would certainly greatly increase the number of variant titles. Since then, since that seems to be off the table, what I've been doing (unsystematically, whenever I have a spare moment) with some names whose canonical form lacks diacritics is to check as many of the publications as I can, make notes on each publication record as to how the name is printed there, and then request a moderator to add the diacritics to the canonical name.

I think it ought to be standard practice to have the canonical form always be WITH diacritics, but I haven't actually proposed that on the boards yet. Vasha 02:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the last discussion of this issue! I was going to go look for it myself, but you beat me to it :-) I seem to be unable to find the follow-up discussion in the Community Portal archives for some reason, but, as you alluded to, there were objections, so the proposal was shelved. Ahasuerus 03:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Voyage from Yesteryear

I added an entry for the maps in Voyage from Yesteryear. They are initialed, but I can't make out the scrawl. The one for the Mayflower II seems to be SRH. The map of Chiron may have the same, but they could also be SGDN. I've added them in as uncredited, but perhaps you have a better idea of what they are.--Auric 18:54, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

The one on Mayflower II looks like "J P. H" to me. Under my big magnifying glass, the initials on the map of Chiron look the same as on the Mayflower II. --MartyD 02:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The Ghost Brigade

I had entered a duplicate pub to your verified copy of this pub. My entry includes the acknowledgements as an essay on page 345, and notes on the Canadian price and the author credit. If you and Wjmvanruth are good with these changes, I'll update this pub and delete my entry. Doug H 21:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

It's ok with me. --MartyD 02:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. Doug H 18:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Held submission

Please approve this submission so I can correct the date. I accidentally entered the wrong one. Thanks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Done. Sorry, I was off researching it to leave you a note. :-) --MartyD 01:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
No problem. I've submitted the correction. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

A batch of nongenre stories - if you disagree please comment

Currently there are numerous non-genre horror stories that are in the database because it's natural to just enter a book of horror or "tales of terror" without figuring out which stories are supernatural. I don't intend to systematically hunt for them, but when I spot one, I like to mark it nongenre. (In the case of classic stories, marking is better than removing it from the database because it'll just get re-added with some new anthology.) At the moment, I've spotted the following stories that I think need such a change, and I'm consulting people who have them in their verified pubs.

Firstly, there's Great Tales of Terror and the Supernatural (verified copies: (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7)), which contains "A Terribly Strange Bed," "The Three Strangers," "The Most Dangerous Game," "Leiningen Versus the Ants," "A Rose for Emily," "Taboo," and undoubtedly other non-supernatural ones that I'm not noticing at the moment. Here are verified publications for those and some other stories:

Are there any of those stories you think ARE genre? Vasha 15:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

ADDENDUM: Discussion moved to the Community Portal. --Vasha 01:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I will comment there. --MartyD 11:21, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I added the Canadian price to your verified

I added the Canadian price to your verified [3].Don Erikson 20:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Seventh Son

Please check the back cover of Seventh Son to see if there's a cover art credit for James C. Christensen. I have a 13th printing that credits Christensen on the back cover and Nolan on the copyright page. My copy has the Noland artwork. Your copy has a die-cut cover with the Noland artwork partially visible in the cutout. You open the cover to view the entire Nolan painting. If your copy credits Christensen on the back cover then he likely did the artwork that's on the outer cover. I suspect a fix would be to add a second cover title record sort of like a dos-a-dos. --Marc Kupper 06:44, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

Sorry to have taken so long. Finally managed to dig it up.... There are no credits of any kind on the back cover, just a blurb sandwiched between two quotes (Washington Post Book World and Chicago Sun Times) and "A Tom Doherty Associates, Inc. Book". The credits are:
  • Cover art by Dennis Noland
  • Cover design by Carol Russo
  • Maps by Alan McKnight
and that's the extent of it. I have a very similar vintage -- and style -- book, Red Prophet. On that there is also no additional credit, but the Nolan credit specifically says "Inside cover art..." (also, what looks like NOLAN is visible in the bottom right corner of the painting). If you want to add a second cover credited to Christensen based on your 13th printing, it's ok with me. --MartyD 14:23, 9 July 2017 (EDT)

The Prophet of Lamath

Replaced the Amazon cover art for The Prophet of Lamath with a scan of my copy, also added the Copyright statement. I've indicated that the LCCN is not valid. --AndyjMo 08:12, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

The Wizard in Waiting

Replaced the Amazon Cover art for The Wizard in Waiting with a scan of my copy, also added the Copyright statement. --AndyjMo 08:22, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

The Power and the Prophet

Replaced the Amazon Cover art for The Power and the Prophet with a scan of my copy, also added the Copyright statement. --AndyjMo 08:31, 6 July 2017 (EDT)

Full Moon Tonight

Hi Marty. You approved my submittal of Moonbroth #11 and you made the title "Full Moon Tonight" by Amos Salmonson into a variant of "Amos"'s parent author Jessica Amanda Salmonson - all well and good. However that title appears a second time here with a note saying that this is a "radically altered version" which first appeared in Moonbroth 11. My question is if it is "radically altered" should the title remain in the db twice as it exists now, with perhaps a note added to the one that appears in Moonbroth. Or should the Hag's Tapestry version be varianted to the Moonbroth version? Or something else? Thanks for any help. Doug / Vornoff 00:17, 9 August 2017 (EDT)

If the texts are not "the same", then we consider them different works. I use "the same" in quotes because in practice we ignore situations where there are small differences. Without reading both pieces, I take the "radically altered" at face value and assume these are substantially different enough that they should not be merged. Also, with the exception of translations, we do not use variants to indicate derivation relationships. So no variant here. Adding a complementary note to the Moonbroth version about the Hag's Tapestry version is a good idea. --MartyD 06:32, 9 August 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for the clarification - very helpful. Doug / Vornoff 11:55, 9 August 2017 (EDT)

four past midnight

fairly trivial; page # for introductory note for is xi,not xii; will fix if no objection. thanks. gzuckier 21:55, 14 August 2017 (EDT)

No objection! --MartyD 07:27, 15 August 2017 (EDT)

Castle Roogna

Castle Roogna: I've updated the Printing History - the copyright statement does say First Edition not First Printing. The LCCN is as listed on the copyright statement but the web site says it is invalid. --AndyjMo 14:09, 17 August 2017 (EDT)

Can you help with canonical name change

Hi, I'm about to change the canonical name of Jaspre Bark to Jasper Bark, as I posted on the moderator notice board yesterday. Would you be able to stand by and approve the first steps in the process so I can go on to the next steps? I will first unvariant all variants, then I will go through the remaining titles on Jaspre Bark's page and either make a new variant for it or change the name on it and merge it. (Please don't delete anything before I've dealt with it.) Thanks! --Vasha 10:24, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Sure. Go nuts. :-) --MartyD 10:25, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
All done; thank you very much! --Vasha 10:51, 26 August 2017 (EDT)


Replaced the Amazon Cover Art of Mathemagics with a scan of my copy. I’ve added the LCCN although the LoC record states that is a hardcopy edition. --AndyjMo 07:56, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

Master of Many Treasures

Updated the Printing History and added the source of the cover artist to Master of Many Treasures. Added the LCCN. Replaced the Amazon Cover art with a scan of my copy. --AndyjMo 12:51, 11 September 2017 (EDT)

Drgonne's Eg

Updated the Printing History and added the source of the cover artist to Dragonne’s Eg. Added the LCCN. Replaced the Amazon Cover art with a scan of my copy. --AndyjMo 12:57, 11 September 2017 (EDT)

The Braintree Mission

Hi, In your verified copy of The Braintree Mission you credit the cover art to a Jack O'Hara Cosgrave, II. has it as by John O'Hara Cosgrave, II. Could you pleease check?--Dirk P Broer 17:04, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

John, not Jack, it is. Corrected. Thanks for catching it. --MartyD 21:04, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

Star Wars

I was looking at verifying this pub and saw that you had already added it. However, it appears that it should have From the the Adventure of Luke Skywalker as a subtitle and be moved in with these pubs.

Pohl's "Essay" or "Story"

If you want, I'll scan the item and send you a copy, just tell me where. Bob 10:13, 6 December 2017 (EST)

Thanks for the offer. It's fine. Aside from double-checking that the ESSAY typing was intentional vs. an oversight, I wasn't trying to debate the absolute correctness of how it is typed. I was only trying to figure out if the translation (which I don't have access to) is of the entire piece or a subset. I tried, but I can't tell, so I've defaulted to assuming it is (or it matches other non-Galaxy appearances). The only consequence of my punt is that I changed the variant's type to ESSAY so that it matches the parent. Not much harm there if in the future we decide the type should be different or that there's two forms of it -- one the full "essay" and another just the story with no commentary -- that should have different types assigned. --MartyD 18:19, 6 December 2017 (EST)

SQL bug in Advanced Search

It turns out that we have a somewhat obscure bug in the Advanced Search logic: Bug 690. I have experimented with the code, but I can't find a way to fix the bug without redoing the query generator. Since you are much better at SQL, I wonder if you may find some time to take a look and see if a straightforward solution may be possible. TIA! Ahasuerus 14:31, 3 January 2018 (EST)

Sure thing. Sorry about availability lately. My home computer is flaking out. Intermittently goes through bouts of freezing up for minutes at a time. I haven't been able to figure it out, and it makes doing anything involving multiple actions challenging.... --MartyD 07:03, 4 January 2018 (EST)
No worries, take your time! One thing that I have come across is that very low humidity can cause ESD (electrostatic discharge) issues with CPUs. And, of course, low humidity is something that goes hand in hand with cold winters and using heaters. Ahasuerus 08:07, 4 January 2018 (EST)
Sorry, sorta bad news. You will need to rewrite at least a portion of it. The problem with "not exactly" and "does not contain" in the multi-table context is that with inner joins, those actually mean "has an XXX and XXX.yyy is not exactly/does not contain ZZZ". But the simple presentation leads one to expect the more intuitive: "does not have an XXX, or, if having XXX, XXX.yyy is not exactly/does not contain ZZZ". Notice you don't have the same problem with the complementary "is exactly" or "contains" because for those to work as expected, "has XXX" is quite obviously implicit and required.
So for those two operators, you would need outer join syntax instead, and then your query's test condition would need to treat null as equivalent to not matching/not containing. For example, ... and (pub_series.pub_series_name is null or pub_series.pub_series_name not like '%ZZZ%')... or a MySQL-specific ... and ifnull(pub_series.pub_series_name,'') not like '%ZZZ%'....
It's early in the morning, and I haven't yet had any coffee, but I think you might be able to rewrite the generation to do outer joins in all cases (rather than inner for some operators and outer for other operators) and always use the ifnull trick. If you didn't use ifnull, you'd need to vary the null checking -- is not null and... for the positive cases and is null or... for the negative cases. But with ifnull, you could always do ifnull(xxx,'') <comparison>.... I don't know if an empty string in ifnull would work. If not, you could pick some arbitrary string that won't match, like ISFDBWILLNOTMATCH. The danger with going all outer joins all the time is you might get some bad performance and/or high peak memory usage. The optimizer is not going to be able to reduce the main table candidate row set via the smaller tables.
One final warning: In SQLServer, I ran into some issues mixing ANSI outer join syntax with inline inner joins (vs. using explicit ANSI inner join syntax). I have no reason to believe that MySQL would have that problem, but I figured I'd mention it.
I hope that helps. If you're not familiar with outer joins, let me know and I can give you some full examples. --MartyD 08:20, 4 January 2018 (EST)
Thanks muchly! I remember reading about outer joins back when I was learning SQL, but I don't think I've ever had to use them. My earlier investigation had determined that the underlying problem was that inner joins assumed "has an XXX and XXX.yyy is not exactly/does not contain ZZZ", but I didn't realize that outer joins were the answer. I'll poke around to see what I can do... Ahasuerus 13:47, 4 January 2018 (EST)
I sent you some examples in email. Let me know if you didn't get them. Happy to help with reformulation if you decide to go there. --MartyD 18:57, 4 January 2018 (EST)

At the Earth's Core

I've added a line to the note for this pub regarding the publisher's address and the ad(s) at the end. My copy is for 1120 Avenue of the Americas and has one ERB ad with 18 titles, but rumor has it there's a version for 23 West 47th Street with only 3 ERB titles, plus other ads. Doug H 22:10, 8 January 2018 (EST)

Thanks, I will double-check my copy when I get a chance. --MartyD 14:37, 10 January 2018 (EST)
My copy is the latter. It does not match the current notes. I will clone and make another edition. Mine has the 23 West 47th Street. The ad page has ERB F-157 - F-159, plus Otis Adelbert Kline D-516 and D-531, Leigh Brackett F-123, and Marion Zimmer Bradley F-117 and F-153 . F-titles 40¢, D-titles 35¢, repeating the 23 W. 47th St. address for purchases. --MartyD 14:00, 14 January 2018 (EST)
p.s. If your copy has F-204 in the ad, we have that Ace edition as 1963-05-00 from the same source used for the 1962-09-00 date for At the Earth's Core. We have F-159 as 1962-10-00, but I suppose it would be reasonable for a September F-157 to have a future date for something coming out the next month. --MartyD 14:22, 14 January 2018 (EST)
Mine does include the F-204. I presume the address change gives an approximate date and order for the two versions, much like the ads, but I have nothing to work with besides a number of Burroughs editions. Doug H 17:27, 14 January 2018 (EST)

The Chessmen of Mars

Replaced Amazon image with scan and moved OCLC to External IDs in this publication. Doug H 12:16, 16 January 2018 (EST)

Synthetic Men of Mars

Replaced Amazon image with scan in this pub. Doug H 21:44, 16 January 2018 (EST)

Academ's Fury

Replaced Amazon image with scan in this pub.Doug H 11:34, 22 January 2018 (EST)

LitRPG Freaks

Thanks for getting me to look this up. LitRPG Freaks seems to be a real thing, or once was anyway. A google search leads me to this site but it hasn’t been updated since May of 2017. Witness this. I still don’t know if this is an online fan site, a publishing group, an online meeting place, or whatever. However, based on the content of this site, I think I will list them as a publisher. When somebody has some hard cold facts, like being a member of this collective/group/fan sit and they contact ISFDB then they correct or add to the known data. Let me know what you think. MLB 13:57, 13 February 2018 (EST)

I think that sounds fine. --MartyD 06:42, 14 February 2018 (EST)

Let me know when you are around

Thanks again for volunteering! Annie 16:55, 4 May 2018 (EDT)

I will check back in at 7:30 pm Eastern and then at 10 pm Eastern. Let's see if any of those work. Annie 17:52, 4 May 2018 (EDT)
Sorry, to have been unreliable. I likely won't make 7:30, but I will 10 pm. --MartyD 18:25, 4 May 2018 (EDT)
No worries at all. You around now by any chance? 18:36, 4 May 2018 (EDT)
All yours. Feel free to deal with them in anyway you see fit. Thanks again and have a good weekend. :) Annie 22:02, 4 May 2018 (EDT)
Thanks again for dealing with all of these! Annie 12:51, 21 May 2018 (EDT)

Karlo Yeager Rodríguez

Good morning -- could you correct Karlo Yeager Rodriguez to Karlo Yeager Rodríguez with an accent? He has one verified publication & the verifier confirms that the diacritic is there. Thanks --Vasha 07:28, 21 May 2018 (EDT)

All set. Did you see the alternate, hyphenated name? --MartyD 07:39, 21 May 2018 (EDT)
Yes-- the one publication where it appears didn't print the diacritic, so I guess we should leave it that way unless "Yeager-Rodríguez" turns up someplace. --Vasha 08:00, 21 May 2018 (EDT)

Held submission

I'm not sure what that's this submission about. 

I made a change, but not there and all the changes I recall have been accomplished. I always leave a note--was there a note? Luci 15:33, 23 May 2018 (EDT)

At a second glance it appears the same record of that number was previously approved the previous day; so somehow that record was duplicated almost 24 hours later. Luci 16:32, 23 May 2018 (EDT)

Tonight's author correcion

Could you correct Francisco J. Perez to Francisco J. Pérez? Thanks --Vasha 20:33, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

Lots of computer problems since the last batch of M$ updates, but done. It set his language to English. --MartyD 20:39, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

A Fighting Man of Mars - Edgar Rice Burroughs

I recently added a variation here of the publication you had verified here. The two versions differ in the ads in the final pages, which I documented in the notes. I had arbitrarily chosen which ads were associated with each publication, so you may need to move your verification to the other copy, depending on what you have in your copy. ../Doug H 17:16, 28 July 2018 (EDT)

Yes, thanks. I moderated that submission and checked my copy, which matched your notes. --MartyD 08:24, 29 July 2018 (EDT)

Star Trek 4 (German Terra Astra 122) and Star Trek 7 (Bantam Books, 1979)

Hi, I've placed a link in the notes at the German Terra Astra publication with a link to this page, where it says "This cover illustration was used for: Terra Astra #222 (Pabel, 1975) and Star Trek 7 (Bantam Books, 1979)".--Dirk P Broer 04:47, 31 July 2018 (EDT)

BB Codes discussion

When you get a chance, could you please review this discussion? It's the latest iteration of the security-related issues which we discussed in the past. TIA! Ahasuerus 15:42, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

E-mail problems

I am trying to figure out if any of my attempts to e-mail you earlier today made it through since I have received a bunch of delivery failure notifications. Could you please respond here to let me know if the e-mail made it? Ahasuerus 21:43, 13 August 2018 (EDT)

Hi. No, nothing from you since 8/12 3:35pm with the numbered list, to which I replied about #3 with regard to zapping tags not whitelisted. Nothing in spam filter. --MartyD 07:49, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
Thanks, I'll try again. Both your main address and the Sourceforge one returned multiple errors: like "multiple delivery attempts failed" and "SMTP error from remote server for TEXT command, host: ([IP address]) reason: 550 This message scored 23.3 points." I may need to edit my email and remove the iffy bits in case it's a problem with the payload. Ahasuerus 09:06, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
SourceForge has returned yet another delivery failure message. I then used the ISFDB e-mail server and received a copy of my e-mail from SourceForge. I guess it means that SourceForge is OK, but the final destination is having issues. As I recall, they had problems last week, but I thought they were fixed. Ahasuerus 10:09, 14 August 2018 (EDT)

Updating SERIAL Help

I am leaving this message on the Talk pages of active editors who (AFAIK) are currently active in the magazine/fanzine area. Based on recent feedback from a new editor, I have attempted to streamline our Help templates which govern the use of the SERIAL title type. I have posted a proposal which shuffles the relevant snippets between 3 different Help templates and clarifies a few things. When you get a chance, could you please review the proposed language to make sure that it's accurate and comprehensive? TIA! Ahasuerus 15:24, 24 August 2018 (EDT)

About the Illustrator (A Wizard of Earthsea)

Hi. We have 5 or 6 title records for About the Illustrator (A Wizard of Earthsea), some of which are in the queue as I depart [4]. Some of the later ones may be about illustrators other than Ruth Robbins, for all I know.

That listed in the January 1982 Bantam 16th printing, verified by you and Marc Kupper, is distinctive in crediting illustrator Ruth Robbins as the author of the essay T360461. I see that it may be useful to have that work listed on the Robbins summary bibliography page, but I doubt that she is credited for it. Do you know of any discussion, or proposal, to make ESSAY and NONFICTION about a person easier to find, whether by work-around or database augmentation?

Anyway, if your copy of the book is handy, does the essay provide no useful information about Ruth Robbins? (This weekend I provided what little we have.) --Pwendt|talk 22:36, 10 September 2018 (EDT)

The essay is uncredited. The credit is on the title page, "Illustrated by Ruth Robbins", and on the copyright page, "Copyright (c) 1968 …, by Ruth Robbins for drawings."
The entirety of the essay is:
Ruth Robbins illustrated A Penny and a Perriwinkle, Fisherman's Luck, Wild Animals of the Far West, Stories California Indians Told and Ishi, Last of His Tribe (an ALA Notable Book). She is the author of Baboushka and the Three Kings (Caldecott Award), The Emperor and the Drummer Boy (an ALA Notable Book) and Harlequin and Mother Goose. She lives in Berkeley, California, with her husband and son.
FWIW, the "About the Author" isn't credited, either. --MartyD 22:20, 11 September 2018 (EDT)
Thanks for the transcript. --Pwendt|talk 12:02, 12 September 2018 (EDT)


Added notes and a cover scan to your verified Jupiter.

Magazine dates redux

A quick FYI: the issue of magazine dates has resurfaced. I have copy-pasted your August proposal. Ahasuerus 11:04, 1 October 2018 (EDT)

Onthuld duplicate epub submitted?

Hi, I noticed you submitted a kindle edition of Onthuld. This is (highly likely) a duplicate of the already-existing entry with ISBN 978-90-00-34317-1; this is evidenced by the fact that the publication dates are the same and, when searching with this ISBN on, the kindle edition is retrieved. The fact that the publisher is different is not sufficient to warrant a separate entry since De Boekerij and Van Goor are part of the same publishers' group, and the entered publisher is likely in error (we won't know for sure unless we can check an electronic copy of the ebook; however, ISBN series 978-90-00 is typically used by Van Goor).
I therefore suggest to merge both pub records, and make notes. Are you OK with that? Thanks! MagicUnk 04:48, 9 November 2018 (EST)

PS: A nice graph can be found here where you can see that Van Goor and De Boekerij both belong to LannooMeulenhoff bv

Sorry, I was out of town for a few days. Yes, merging them seems appropriate. I somehow missed the existing entry. --MartyD 07:01, 11 November 2018 (EST)
np. I'll take care of the merger. Thanks for the confirmation. MagicUnk 12:48, 11 November 2018 (EST)

Weird LCCN

Hello Marty,

I am trying to clear the remaining non-linked and not-migrated LCCNs in the system and got to this one. The number 200304618 does not seem to lead anywhere however the hardcover from the previous year (same publisher), has 2003042618. Is there a typo in the book? Or did a "2" in the middle get missed during the entry creation?

If it is a book typo, I would like to document that and template the actual number. Or just template the actual number if it is a typo in our DB. I will also direct the other PV here so we have the conversation in one place. Thanks! Annie 13:43, 26 November 2018 (EST)

I couldn't immediately find the book on my shelves. I will dig through the boxes tonight. --MartyD 08:14, 27 November 2018 (EST)
Hi Annie. I found the book, and it is as documented. The bottom 1/4th of the copyright page:
ISBN 0-765-34390-8
EAN 978-0765-34390-1
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 200304618

First Edition: May 2003
First mass market edition: May 2004

Printed in the United States of America

0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Feel free to do what you want with it. --MartyD 21:24, 27 November 2018 (EST)
Thanks for tracking it down. I edited to add what I found (if we know it, why not document it). Feel free to edit further if you want :) Annie 21:40, 27 November 2018 (EST)


Thank you, I would like to include an essay that Charles R. Saunder wrote for Dragon magazine, but I do not know how to put an issue, he also did one for The Savage Sword of Conan, but that one is not registered. Hyju 09:16, 30 March 2019 (EDT)

The issue where he published is # 122 (1987), which is not registered. Hyju 10:11, 30 March 2019 (EDT)

Steel Brother

You primary-verified this item: . I added publication information on the story "Out of the Darkness," taken from that edition's acknowledgments. Hifrommike65 7:14, 2 June 2019 (CDT)

Whispers II

You primary-verified this item: . I added a OCLC link. Hifrommike65 8:29, 10 July 2019 (CDT)

Ee Leen Lee update

I was trying to set the primary language to English, but it seems like that's already the case. I'll cancel the edit.

Of Time and Space and Other Things

You primary-verified this edition: I added OCLC number to External ID, shifted the LCCN number from pub note to External ID, and lightly edited the pub note for consistent capitalization. Mike 18:49, 3 October 2019 (CST)

I have submitted a removal of the LCCN number from the pub note, since the number was for Doubleday's first edition, not this one. Mike 12:28, 9 October 2019 (EDT)
The only problem I have with these changes is that now the documentation that the book lists an LCCN on its copyright page has been lost. I would rather than had been converted to a note saying what LCCN is listed and pointing out it's for a different edition. I will probably dig up my copy of the book and put that information back into the notes. --MartyD 10:10, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
Not sure why the removal was approved - when Mike shifted it to the External ID earlier this month, I moved it back to the notes and left it there as it was (and explained why). I tend to do notes instead of deleting - especially because these are on the copyright pages a lot. Annie 10:25, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
Yeah, I did not investigate. It's ok, I can easily reconstruct it. :-) --MartyD 10:43, 10 October 2019 (EDT)


Hi MartyD, The editor is not the most responsive but he adds works we do miss so... I tend to do some more legwork than usual - usually adding ASINs while I am at that when he adds kindle works. This is the book he is trying to add. Amazon has it as 86 pages which in any other language would be a novella; not entirely sure for Japanese but I rarely see him mixing up the containers lately. You may want to ping Nihonjoe for an opinion but at 86, I am pretty sure it will be too short for a novel. Annie 22:14, 5 November 2019 (EST)

Ok, thanks. I am away this week and did not have time to do the research. I will fix it up when I get a chance. --MartyD 07:36, 7 November 2019 (EST)

The Story Behind the Foundation - Asimov essay

Hi, could you please confirm whether the essay in your PV here is actually the 1982-12-00 date? I'm asking because I have the same title but dated 1986 in a different Grafton edition and I'm trying to sort out loose ends. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 23:22, 8 December 2019 (EST)

For technical reasons, could you not change any records at the moment, if you think they might need it: Annie's sorting out some background stuff first. Hope this is ok with you. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 00:46, 9 December 2019 (EST)
After restoring back to where we were before I merged, this one indeed remained with the 1982 ones (where it was before) so the question still stands - if these essays are indeed different, is this one really the early one and not the revised? (newly written?) 1986 version? :) Thanks for the patience, gentlemen. Annie 12:24, 9 December 2019 (EST)

(unindent) MartyD, could you please compare your essay with this 1986 one [5] and let me know when yours is dated for. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 19:57, 9 December 2019 (EST)

Sorry, I've been a bit busy. The one in my book matches the picture and is dated 1986 (as that one is). Someone probably merged it with something dated 1982. I will put a note in the pub about the essay credit but will otherwise leave everything else alone -- I assume one of you will fix the date. --MartyD 07:46, 10 December 2019 (EST)
Thanks Marty! I will go chase a few more PVs - I think that all the Foundation and Earth books have the newer essay - but we have enough verifier to check. Annie 11:36, 10 December 2019 (EST)

Proven Guilty - Jim Butcher

I see you're a PV for [6]. Does your copy match the cover illustration exactly? Mine (1st printing, full numline) has different wording, and a 'As seen on SciFi' circle. --GlennMcG 16:49, 6 August 2020 (EDT)

Seeing it's an Amazon-provided cover pic, chances are it's not the actual cover that's shown. I'll let Marty confirm for this case, but it's good practice (imo) to always replace any external cover link with a scan of the actual book at hand. I myself have had several occasions where cover of a book I own differs (considerably) from what Amazon shows. MagicUnk 03:32, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
Sorry for the delay. I will check on it later today. --MartyD 13:37, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
No, it no longer matches. Mine has the "As seen on SciFi" circle, and the ROC logo is in the bottom left, not the bottom right. I will do a scan for it. --MartyD 08:31, 8 August 2020 (EDT)

Orc's opal

MartyD. I took your suggestion and tried to add a note regarding the erroneous LCCN on my copy. Was my post unacceptable. I did not include the correct LCCN 90-39230. Should I have? The submission number is 4720764. I don't know which moderator is handling. Thanks for your help. Scifibones 14:53, 12 August 2020 (EDT)

Sorry, my availability is a little sporadic. I see Annie handled the submission since you posted this. Submissions sometimes sit because no moderator has gotten to them yet. A wait does not necessarily imply that anything is wrong. If a moderator handles a submission and finds a problem with it, they will contact you, rest assured. If something is not the way it should be, the moderator's responsibilities include coaching the submitter to avoid the same problem in the future -- community training! :-) --MartyD 10:58, 14 August 2020 (EDT)

Lord Halifax's Complete Ghost Book

As verifier of Lord Halifax's Complete Ghost Book, please see this discussion. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:23, 17 October 2020 (EDT)

Industrial Magic

since the covers were "same" I replaced the image that was changed -- can you confirm Industrial Magic Susan O'Fearna 15:13, 2 November 2020 (EST)

Hi Susan. You say "Industrial Magic", but the link is to "Dime Store Magic", and it looks like you did that in 2013. I did not see any of my primary verifications that you changed recently, so I'm not sure what's up. I looked for "Magic" in the pending Moderator queue and don't see anything there, either. --MartyD 15:38, 4 November 2020 (EST)
Marty, I think this was the change. As it is an ISFDB cover, specifically added to this publication, being replaced with an Amazon one and the moderator note made no sense considering where the cover was, I was very reluctant to approve without a positive note by the PVs. And I did not see this thread because the names did not match... You can unreject if it is a valid change (and the ISFDB cover will need to be deleted). Annie 15:52, 4 November 2020 (EST)
Ah, got it. Looks like the original cover image addition was a mistake -- it's the wrong cover. The Amazon link in the rejected change is better (correct photo/art) but is still not the right cover (no Bantam logo + price line). I will scan and add the right one. --MartyD 09:50, 6 November 2020 (EST)

Wells Omnibus

I've got a question about your verified publication. We have the title as "The War of the Worlds and The Time Machine" which certainly matches the cover and also the Worldcat record. However, Reginald1 has the title as "The Time Machine; and, The War of the Worlds" for the 1961 Dolphin edition. He specifically indicates that it is a variant title of the 1956 Globe edition. Could you double check and see if the title page differs from the cover, and our record? Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 11:20, 5 December 2020 (EST)

Hi Ron. Sorry about the delay -- I had this shelved in an unexpected spot.... The immediate 1st interior endpaper-ish page and the title page both have the same
The only difference between those and the cover is the formatting (titles in all-caps, "and" italicized). The back cover and spine omit the "and", simply stacking the two all-caps titles. Definitely Dolphin, 1961. 95c on the cover. Maybe he mixed up which edition has which text? --MartyD 08:19, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Storm Front

There appear to be two publication records for the same publication. Both are the 18th printing with one record using the ISBN10 and the other the ISBN13 of the same ISBN. I suspect you and the other editor should work out how to combine them or to add notes that explain why there are two records and how to distinguish the publications.

--Marc Kupper 15:33, 21 December 2020 (EST)

Hmm. Thanks. Looks like that second one is even a clone of the first -- it has exactly my same note about the source of the cover credit. I wonder why it was let through. I'll try to figure out what's going on. --MartyD 14:31, 24 December 2020 (EST)

Nick St(r)aguzzi

Hi, Marty, a good new year to you! The co-author of the story in this magazine likely is Nick Straguzzi, but if there's a typo in the magazine or one in our database, that's the question. Are you able to take a look? Christian Stonecreek 03:56, 3 January 2021 (EST)

Yes, definitely a typo. Fixed. Thanks! --MartyD 12:05, 4 January 2021 (EST)

Now & Beyond

Hi I noticed that we have the editor of Now & Beyond listed as "Ivan Howard" and I believe that his is the actual editor. However, Reginald1 and Worldcat do not list an editor. Contento1 does list Howard as the editor but notes that the book was published as by "Anonymous" (equivalent to our "uncredited"). Could you double check the title page and if no editor is credited, I think we should changed the record to uncredited and make a variant of the resulting title to Howard. I'm leaving the same note on Stoecker's and Willem H.'s pages as they are the other verifiers who have been active in the last 3 months. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:55, 31 January 2021 (EST)

Sorry, it was a bit of an archeological excavation to find the book. 12 years ago is a long time! There is absolutely no editor credit anywhere in/on the book, nor is there any sort of preface/introduction or afterword -- it's just the bare 8 stories. I wouldn't have created the credit. Unfortunately, I don't know if the record was there with the credit and I blindly "verified" it, or if someone added it from a secondary source. I'm ok with changing it to uncredited if we don't have any such source. It is copyright 1952, 1955, 1956, 1958 by Columbia Productions, Inc. I suspect that's for four of the stories, but it's not explicit in that regard. --MartyD 18:16, 12 February 2021 (EST)

The Mule

Isaac Asimov. I think this is actually a novel, not a novella. I estimate it at 50000 words. Ommadawndk 15:59, 31 March 2021 (EDT)

I dug up my Doubleday omnibus and see it's about 143 full pages (roughly 138 full pages and 10 half pages). The density is about 350 words per page, so your estimate of 50000 looks right to me. --MartyD 08:47, 5 April 2021 (EDT)

Magic Kingdom of Landover

As a PV of at least one volume please follow link to review proposed changes to Magic Kingdom of Landover map consolidation. John, Scifibones 19:27, 24 April 2021 (EDT)

on or On?; typing "moving on" as an exact title shows maybe a dozen titles, and only the one I made an edit for has "on" in lowercase, so should all the others be lowercase, too? --Username 08:29, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

There is a reference in this discussion. I don't know that anything has changed. ../Doug H 14:46, 9 May 2021 (EDT)
Sorry for the delay, I was visiting my mother yesterday.... Under the current rules, "on" should only be capitalized if it is the first word in the title (or subtitle), regardless of its part of speech. So, yes, the instances where it is capitalized as "Moving On" are the non-conformers. --MartyD 12:05, 10 May 2021 (EDT)


Hi Marty, I started to verify Terminal and I saw the this note ' "03549" on rear cover '. What does that mean? Thanks, John Scifibones 17:54, 19 May 2021 (EDT)

I have looked high and low and haven't been able to find the book. It's here somewhere, but where exactly is a mystery.... My guess is there was a small white box in a lower corner with that number in it. I was probably somewhat worried that it might be a book club edition. If that were the case, the presence/absence of that number could be a clue for how to distinguish the retail edition from the book club edition. --MartyD 10:00, 22 May 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for checking, Marty. My guess was that the book club editon was accidently verified. Should I remove that note, or clone the pub and create a true first edition? If I clone, we should remove the date, price, and printing note from the verified record. Let me know which you prefer John Scifibones 19:17, 22 May 2021 (EDT)
I pointed Gzuckier to this to see if he can contribute any information about his copy. I wish I could find mine. In the absence of that, my inclination is for you to clone it and make a record for your copy, noting the absence of any number on the back, and then add a note to this record that it's a likely book club edition. --MartyD 07:19, 27 May 2021 (EDT)
I submitted the edit to your pub as suggested. I left the other fields unchanged. If you do find it, and it is indeed a book club edition, the other fields should be changed. I'm curious to see if Gzuckier responds, his verification on 2016-11-09 was transient. I know I wouldn't remember that far back. John Scifibones 18:09, 27 May 2021 (EDT)
If we keep this as an SFBC, shouldn't the publisher be changed into 'G. P. Putnam's Sons / SFBC' as well? Thanks! MagicUnk 11:20, 28 May 2021 (EDT)
We would use BCE unless we knew it to be SFBC specifically. I sort of doubt this would have been an SFBC, but we might be able to check catalogues/lists for that. --MartyD 08:28, 29 May 2021 (EDT)
Hi. I'm afraid my copy's gone free range around the house somewhere, but if it turns up I'll let you guys know. Thanks for the infogzuckier 01:10, 2 June 2021 (EDT)
Hi me again. I found my copy, and it doesn't have the number box on the back cover.gzuckier 11:53, 3 June 2021 (EDT)

The Bite of Monsters / O'Neal

My copy of [7] has a copyright in Roman numerals. Does yours? --GlennMcG 01:22, 1 June 2021 (EDT)

Sorry, I have not been able to find it. The book storage area has been subject to some rearrangement, so I suspect it got mis-shelved. I will keep looking. But my copy apparently had no copyright date (from what my comment says), so if yours has a copyright, it is probably a different edition. --MartyD 14:18, 6 June 2021 (EDT)

Ok, I've cloned it and noted the copyright. (My copy has a copyright page with just the single line near the bottom of the page). --GlennMcG 16:54, 6 June 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 17:31, 14 August 2021 (EDT)

Ok, I'll take a look and straighten it out. Thanks. --MartyD 07:28, 15 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 07:40, 15 August 2021 (EDT)

MediaWiki upgrade


We have a new contributor, Klaus Elsbernd, who has been looking into upgrading MySQL, MediaWiki and HTTPS. I am currently working with him on the HTTPS migration, but I am a bit out of my depth on the MediaWiki side. When you have a free moment, do you think you could take a look at the proposed authentication upgrade for MedaWiki 1.25+? It's in the Discussion section of SR 184. TIA! Ahasuerus 11:17, 26 August 2021 (EDT)

Well, during my ongoing manual acquisition of my SF collection (using Book Collector) I stumbled on ISFDB and used it a lot for my english SF. So I want to support your effort over all these years. Since I'd like to support OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana too, I created a local copy of ISFDB and upgraded it to the current software: Mariadb 10.3, Phyton 2.7, MediaWiki 1.36.1, Apache 2.4 and converting the database (including MediaWiki) to move to HTTPS (using bash-scripts).
Mediawiki has changed since version 1.24 the method of storing passwords in its databases, which ISFDB uses. From then on, PBKDF2 is used. At least, one reference to the password in ISFDB-wiki is the login cgi-script submitlogin.cgi. I changed this script to support the newer MediaWiki, as can be seen in sourceforge support-requests 184. It should be compatible to an old MediaWiki, because the code around the MD5-checksum isn't removed.
The move of MD5 to PBKDF2 is referred in the documentation of MediaWiki somewhere. I have to search for it again, if needed. There are notes about changing the password hash in the database during user-login into the wiki automatically (first login).
MediaWiki 1.36.1 suggests a minimal password length of 10 characters. Can be skipped, but is somewhat annoying.
There is another small problem, I described too: The remove of mw_user->user_options, which is referred in some maintenance scripts scripts/ This column is removed in MediaWiki 1.19.
During the upgrade process in MediaWiki, this column is removed smoothly in the database. But the ISFDB script has to remove the reference too.
With the help of scripts sourceforge feature-requests 1298 I then changed all references in the MediaWiki-database to use HTTPS. elsbernd 23:45, 26 August 2021 (EDT) (modified references --elsbernd 06:42, 28 August 2021 (EDT))
Roger. Will look at it. I did an upgrade of a (work) MediaWiki installation from 1.16 to 1.34 and had no problems on the MediaWiki side. A few plug-ins were my only issue, and our use of Semantic MediaWiki made it a little more painful (had to do a few intermediate upgrades). If our code is hashing the password and looking it up in MediaWiki, then we'd necessarily have to change what we're doing if they changed their hash algorithm. That makes sense to me. --MartyD 16:36, 27 August 2021 (EDT)
Thanks! :) Ahasuerus 18:36, 27 August 2021 (EDT)
From MediaWiki 1.36.1, file HISTORY: Configuration changes in 1.24:
* The default password type for MediaWiki has been changed from MD5 to PBKDF2. Password hashes will automatically be updated as users log in. If necessary, the old MD5 hashing can be restored by changing $wgPasswordDefault to 'B'. In addition, there is a maintenance script wrapOldPassword.php that can wrap all passwords in PBKDF2 (or the hashing algorithm of your choice) if you don't want to wait for your users to log in.--elsbernd 07:15, 28 August 2021 (EDT)
Ah, right. One thing we have to consider is that people will log into the main ISFDB instead of into the Wiki, in which case there will be no automatic upgrade benefit. So perhaps forcing it to continue to use the old algorithm would be best. But ideally, it would be good to upgrade to the better algorithm, so maybe just force everyone to log in again after the upgrade. You could post a notice. Shouldn't be too bad. I don't quite understand about how a wrapper would work -- the existing hash can't be used to make a compatible new hash. Seems hack-ish and worth avoiding. May as go one of the two straightforward routes. My vote would be to upgrade to the new hash and force everyone to log in again. --MartyD 09:47, 29 August 2021 (EDT)
MD5 is broken a dozen years ago. Staying with the old algorithm should therefore be avoided. Using the wrapper script I'll have to look at it, but I can't imagine how this can be archived. So I would "vote" (I'm not in that position) too to force everyone to change the password. There could be a hint, if submitlogin.cgi detects the MD5-storage. Additionally this would not only use the modern/better storage-algorithm, but although a longer password :-)
I always login into first, and then have to login into the wiki again. Don't know what arguments would do it the other way round.
Thanks to Ahasuerus, who has already included the modification in patch-level 718 Development/Recent_Patches He works hard on all those changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Elsbernd (talkcontribs) .

Llana of Gathol / John Carter of Mars

Your PV'd pub of Llana of Gathol has a date of April 1979 and states it is the 11 printing of the US edition. April 1979 is also the date of the second Canadian printing, distinguished only by "Printed in Canada". A reference work I have to hand states that no eleventh US printing has been discovered. I was wondering if yours could be one. Could you check the print country? (P.S. if it is the US, I'd like to submit images of the cover/copyright page if possible). Many thanks ../Doug H 22:49, 2 September 2021 (EDT)

I see that John Carter of Mars presents the same question, albeit as the ninth US vs third Canadian printing. ../Doug H 15:40, 3 September 2021 (EDT)

Llana of Gathol -- I can't speak to the authority of your reference work, but my copy appears to me clearly a U.S. edition. Title page has "Ballantine Books - New York". Copyright page states "Published by Ballantine Books, a division of Random House, Inc., New York, and simultaneously in Canada by Random House of Canada, Limited, Toronto, Canada." Below that, it says: "Manufactured in the United States of America". I can't interpret that as anything but a U.S. printing.
The are four printing dates given:
First U.S. Printing: August 1963
Eleventh U.S. Printing: April 1979
First Canadian Printing: September 1963
Second Canadian Printing: April 1979
So it seems April 1979 does indeed have both a U.S. and a Canadian printing.
John Carter of Mars -- This has all of the same details as above, except for the printing dates:
First U.S. Printing: April 1965
Ninth U.S. Printing: April 1979
First Canadian Printing: June 1965
Third Canadian Printing: April 1979
So here, too, looks like two editions on April 1979 (makes sense -- they probably re-published the entire set), with the book I have the U.S. edition. --MartyD 18:09, 3 September 2021 (EDT)
p.s. I noticed while uploading cover images that both say "Cover printed in USA" at the bottom right corner on the back. I have uploaded pictures of everything.:
Sorry about the flash glare on the cover shots. Let me know if you need anything else. --MartyD 18:55, 3 September 2021 (EDT)
As to the authority, what he claims to have seen, he either has in his possession or has images of (I sent a number of Canadian editions). What he claims doesn't exist - absence of proof is not proof of absence and that's pretty much what he's going on. I've sent the images to him, we'll see what he says. ../Doug H 15:28, 5 September 2021 (EDT)
After checking his inventory again, kicking himself and apologizing, he acknowledged that he actually owns the same US editions you have. It's the corresponding Canadian ones he believes exist but has no evidence for. Thanks for helping set things straight. ../Doug H 11:32, 13 September 2021 (EDT)
Nice. Glad the info was useful. Thanks for the follow-up. --MartyD 12:23, 13 September 2021 (EDT)

La Cuisine Humaine: How to Cook Like a Human Being

Hi Marty,

I am very confused by this update. Why would a non-fiction book that has no fiction elements be a chapbook when we require fiction (poem, story, serial) for chapbooks? Thanks! Annie 15:28, 5 October 2021 (EDT)

I don't remember what was going on at the time. I'm pretty sure I concluded it's not non-fiction, so CHAPBOOK seemed best, despite the ESSAY type. Feel free to change it. --MartyD 13:40, 6 October 2021 (EDT)
Well, if it is not non-fiction, a fiction type of a title needs to be added (changing the essay or adding a second one). We cannot have empty chapbooks. :) I will do some digging and see what may be best. Annie 13:46, 6 October 2021 (EDT)
Changed it back and added a note to the nonfiction container. Looks like a fictional essay... which can be tricky. Maybe that essay needs to become a story actually. :) Will chase a few PVs in a bit. Annie 14:01, 6 October 2021 (EDT)

Bulfinch's Mythology

In digging around the archives for ISFDB's take on mythology, I ran across this discussion on Bulfinch's Mythology. You seemed to have agreed with keeping these as collections, but have not entered your 1978 copy, nor responded to Vasha's request to enter the contents. Do yo have any comments before I submit my reprinted 1960's editions of these books? ../Doug H 11:05, 11 January 2022 (EST)

Wow, there's a bit of a blast from the past. I don't know that I formed an opinion; I was only trying to provide information. To be honest, it is not clear to me if this material should be "in" under ISFDB policy. Anyway, I have no objection to your adding the information. Maybe that will motivate me to add mine :-) --MartyD 13:32, 11 January 2022 (EST)
I've submitted the Collection without contents for now, I figure I can import them easily enough. I did notice - based on the one edition that did include the detailed contents - that there is an extra section in my edition - List of Illustrative Passages. And, based on the preface, think there's an entirely new section in the Age of Chivalry called "The Knights of English History" added by Edward Everett Hale in 1883. I agree the inclusion is debatable, the reason I dug it up was trying to figure out whether to enter any of the Icelandic eddas and sagas. And by the by, 2016 isn't that long ago, I've only been here a year longer than you. ../Doug H 14:16, 11 January 2022 (EST)
You want a real (but relevant) blast from the past - see this. ../Doug H 14:20, 11 January 2022 (EST)

No The in the Title; The extra "the" in the title is only in the original. The reprint doesn't have it; see title page at link. --Username 10:50, 12 February 2022 (EST)

Yeah, thanks. I figured it out and fixed it up. We needed a variant, which I've put in place. --MartyD 10:55, 12 February 2022 (EST)
I made an edit with the cover artist's name, and found this, [8], which gives month and day of birth but also says he died in 1963, not 1966. --Username 19:23, 12 February 2022 (EST)
I noticed the bio on the 1937 dust jacket (facsimile here) says he's 33, so that at least corroborates the 1904. This site says 1966 and age 62, and it looks like Contento also thinks 1966. --MartyD 07:48, 13 February 2022 (EST)
Oh, check out this site. This confirms 1966. They also have a scan of the original record. --MartyD 07:52, 13 February 2022 (EST)
And here gives us Sep 1904 birth date, although it looks like the registry is July - September, so one can't tell the month precisely. --MartyD 07:54, 13 February 2022 (EST)

Lot No. 249

Regarding 874151: Variants are dated based on the first appearance under that title and artist credit. 1892 was the original appearance of the story, not the original appearance of this variant. Doyle was not knighted until 1902 so any credit with Sir has to be after that date. I have restored the prior date. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:35, 19 February 2022 (EST)

Oops, missed that. The book gave 1892, and I failed to think about it further. --MartyD 06:55, 20 February 2022 (EST)

The High Lord

For The High Lord, do you mind if I change the page count to [10]+531 and add titles for the maps on [8], "Lord Dannyl's Guide to Slum Slang (The High Lord)" on pg 527, and "Glossary (The High Lord)" on pg 529? Thanks! Phil 12:49, 10 March 2022 (EST)

Not at all. Knock yourself out! --MartyD 14:35, 10 March 2022 (EST)

The Best of the Bolos: Their Finest Hour cover

Hi, minor question, does the cover for your copy of The Best of the Bolos: Their Finest Hour look like the current Amazon link [9]? Mine (same isbn, first printing) has a BAEN logon in the top left corner and a blurb printed over the lower left. Thanks. gzuckier 23:57, 12 April 2022 (EDT)

Sorry about the delay. No, it does not. I'll scan mine. --MartyD 18:01, 20 April 2022 (EDT)
Replaced it with [10] --MartyD 18:17, 20 April 2022 (EDT)
Thanks gzuckier 17:58, 24 April 2022 (EDT)

Star Trek 10

Added link to image to your verified pub here. ../Doug H 22:28, 7 May 2022 (EDT)

MediaWiki (Again)

So I've been working on a modern LAMP stack, and as of this weekend Ahasuerus and I have the result up and running at Current versions are:

  • Linux: 4.18.0-240.15.1.el8_3.x86_64 x86_64
  • Apache: Apache/2.4.37 (AlmaLinux)
  • MySQL: 8.0.26
  • Python: 2.7.18

There is no MediaWiki installed, but we have the full MySQL backup running there, meaning all the current MediaWiki tables are present. So this is a slightly different situation than upgrading MediaWiki on the isfdb live server, given that (simplistically), we just drop down the latest version of MediaWiki, run some magic upgrade script, and then... do something about the add-ons.

So what are your suggested steps for upgrading in this case? We can afford to experiment at the staging site, since we can simply re-read in the database dump if things go askew. Alvonruff 20:48, 8 May 2022 (EDT)

I think all you need to do is put down the latest MediaWiki (or whatever version you want to run) and extensions that are being used, copy the current installation's LocalSettings.php into it, update some of the things in LocalSettings.php to work the new (incompatible) way, and then run update.php to convert the database. I know some of skin-type stuff has changed, and they changed the way you load extensions. There may also be some new variables, but I don't remember off the top of my head. I followed this documentation and had remarkably good results. If you could use some help, let me know. --MartyD 07:05, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
A quick reminder: an earlier review discovered that scripts/ wouldn't work with modern versions of MediaWiki due to a change in the table layout. Granted, we only run wikitrim when we need to reclaim disk space, so it won't be needed if and when we move to a server with more disk space. Ahasuerus 12:31, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
The current MediaWiki has a deleteOldRevisions.php maintenance script that purges all but the latest revision of a list of pages (or all pages). It could probably be adapted to keep a few more revisions. You then run purgeOldText.php (a wrapper for purgeRedundantText() in Maintenance.php) to get rid of of the orphaned text, which shouldn't need any change. If disk space is an issue, you could also look at turning on compression. --MartyD 13:53, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
Oh, I see. Yes, $wgCompressRevisions and/or deleteOldRevisions.php would help address the issue. Ahasuerus 17:40, 9 May 2022 (EDT)

The Wind's Twelve Quarters 3rd printing

Based on the printing history on the 4th printing copyright page here, I'd like to change the date on the 3rd printing to 1977-09-00 and add a source note. Would that be a problem? Phil 06:57, 25 May 2022 (EDT)

No, not at all. Perfect. Nice find! --MartyD 08:15, 26 May 2022 (EDT)

The Secret Texts

For Vengeance of Dragons, would you mind if I add the map on page [xii] to the titles?

For Courage of Falcons, would you mind if I change the page count to xxiii+433 and add the map on page [xii] to the titles?

Thanks! Phil 12:30, 28 May 2022 (EDT)

No objection. Feel free. --MartyD 18:30, 31 May 2022 (EDT)

Houndstooth; I added OL ID and also replaced the unstable Amazon cover with OL cover, which is a bit sharper. --Username 11:22, 9 July 2022 (EDT)

Adult Fantasy: Volume II; I replaced Amazon cover with Bookscans. --Username 11:36, 13 August 2022 (EDT)

Bloodsongs; Current cover is small and unstable; you may want to replace it with OL cover. --Username 09:26, 20 August 2022 (EDT)

Did that. Thanks for the suggestion. --MartyD 11:22, 20 August 2022 (EDT)

Time Echo; While adding the few Arcadia House SF books on in edits (most of them they have are westerns, mysteries and nurse novels) this one came up because it has the publisher's name on the copyright page. I added the Archive link but you may want to replace the now unstable cover with another one. --Username (talk) 00:07, 4 November 2022 (EDT)

I came across it again today and replaced cover with Bookscans cover which looks better. --Username (talk) 19:48, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
Sorry, I'm a bit behind. Thanks, this one does look better. --MartyD (talk) 08:19, 31 March 2024 (EDT)

Barker's In the Flesh; I replaced the unstable "G" image with another Amazon image that's stable and looks better; OK? --Username (talk) 10:55, 15 December 2022 (EST)

Looks good, thanks. I accepted the submission. --MartyD (talk) 08:11, 19 December 2022 (EST)

Orbit One

I have added the cover artist to both the Macfadden & Uni Book version (Jack Faragasso) the art can be found here aardvark7 (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2022 (EST)

Thanks. I accepted both of the related submissions. When you discover something like this and add the credit, you should record the source in the Pub Notes, not just in notes to the moderator (unless you happen to see it is on the publication itself). The source for any piece of information that is not on/in the publication should be documented in the notes. I took the information you gave and added it to the notes for each pub. --MartyD (talk) 08:18, 19 December 2022 (EST)

Baynes Illustrations for Tolkien

Hi MartyD

I'm holding two submissions here and here. These would replace the single INTERIORART record for our mutually verified Smith of Wooten Major & Farmer Giles of Ham withe separate INTERIORART records for the illustrations from the separate publications of the two stories. If I were the sole verifier, I would approve these, but I'm actually ambivalent about the change. Do you have an opinion on whether these edits should be approved or rejected? I'm leaving the same note on all the active verifiers page and will follow up if we have a disagreement on what to do. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:22, 5 January 2023 (EST)

Sorry, some family things had me out of town for a few days.... That's funny, I have a like pair of submissions here and here for the same change to a different edition (where I am sole verifier) on hold because I wanted to go dig out the book and take a look at what's actually in it. I don't care much one way or the other, but I wanted to double-check that there are indeed separate illustrations for each story and that the two artists were each solely responsible for the respective art. If that is the case, the change is fine with me. If you have already checked, go for it. I will try to dig the books up sometime today. --MartyD (talk) 08:36, 9 January 2023 (EST)
I took a look, and it seems ok to me. I was thinking it's more one set of illustrations across the entire book, but you can see the styles are different. Smith of Wootton Major has fewer, large full-page illustrations, while Farmer Giles of Ham has many small illustrations embedded in the text. So I am good with splitting if that's what consensus wants to do. --MartyD (talk) 06:44, 10 January 2023 (EST)
I'm going to go ahead and approve the edits. There is a partial scan of a 1978 standalone edition of SWM where the title page matches ours. There is also a full scan of FGH included in a different collection in 1977 and with matching illustrations. While these are later printings, they all bear the same original copyright dates. These aren't definitive proof, but do suggest that the illustrations are the same as the original standalone publications. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:43, 13 January 2023 (EST)

Asimov - I, Robot - by Fawcett Crest

Hello Marty, re your PV here, this is just a heads-up to point to my discussion with Tom Taweiss regarding Fawcett covers and this 1970 printing. You might find something there for yours. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 00:54, 25 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks. Commented there. --MartyD (talk) 08:36, 26 February 2023 (EST)

Podkayne of Mars

I have an earlier edition than your Podkayne of Mars with the same cover. Mine differs from the listed entry in having the author credit on the title page as "Robert Heinlein" rather than "Robert A. Heinlein". None of the PV's are available, but I wondered if your later printing suffered the same problem. How is the author listed on the title page for your copy? P.S. I've asked all three of the active PVs. ../Doug H (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2023 (EDT)

Sorry for the delay. Needed to do a bit of excavation. Mine indeed has "Robert Heinlein" on the title page (as well as front and spine). The only "A." is on the copyright statement. I can only plead brain cramp. I will fix the record for mine. --MartyD (talk) 11:29, 27 April 2023 (EDT)
I have fixed this up for the third printing. Based on what you said, I made the date on the variant be 1964-04-00. I assume you will be updating the record for the first printing, but if you'd rather I did it, let me know -- it takes a couple of submissions to switch out the title. --MartyD (talk) 11:46, 27 April 2023 (EDT)
Thanks for checking. I think I got mine done (self-moderated) correctly. ../Doug H (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2023 (EDT)

Defining "Published"

A quick heads-up since you participated in this Rules and Standards discussion back in February: a new version of the proposed Policy update has been posted and is available for review/discussion. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2023 (EDT)

Deathstone; I was doing some Ken Eulo edits and you PV 2 of them back in '09; this one has an unstable "G" image, not a thing back then, so if you'd like to replace it with a modern stable image that would be great. --Username (talk) 00:38, 26 May 2023 (EDT)

Element of Doubt; I added to your entry in case you want to approve it before someone else sees it and decides to do the same. --Username (talk) 08:47, 8 July 2023 (EDT)

Oh, nice find! Thanks! --MartyD (talk) 08:49, 8 July 2023 (EDT)

SciFiwise magazine stories not merged

Hello, you recently approved my entry for SciFiwise magazine May 2023. I just reviewed everything, and I found that every story in the magazine (they are all reprints) now has two separate entries, one entry for all its past publications, and one for its publication in SciFiwise magazine. An example of this is Kris Rusch's story "The Observer". Its SciFiwise publication page is here: and its other publications are all recorded here:

This is just one example, every story contained in the SciFiwise Magazine May 2023 isfdb record is like this.

My questions are (1) do these kind of things eventually get merged. and (2) Did I do anything wrong when I entered the data that caused this? I naively thought that if I was careful to match title, author, and date of publication then isfdb would figure out the story publication is a reprint that should be listed along with other printings. Was there some field I should have filled out to make this work, but somehow missed?

I ask because I am planning to start submitting the April, May, and June SciFiwise magazines, and those stories are also reprints. So if I did something wrong, I'd like to correct the error in future submisions.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide! Petersdrang (talk) 12:43, 11 July 2023 (EDT)

Sorry, poor moderatorship on my part. If a publication is created with all of the contents entered from scratch (which is fine and normal), after the submission is accepted, someone has to run Check for Duplicate Titles (available in the Editing Tools section of the navigation menu when viewing the publication record) and merge any of the newly-created content titles with existing title records for the same work. Since you can't do that until after acceptance, the accepting moderator will normally do it (and I will go do that now), although anyone can do it -- merging is a moderated action, just like most other edits, so you can't hurt anything by proposing a merge. To avoid the merge process, an alternative approach for a publication with not-original contents is to supply just any original contents on the initial submission and, after that is accepted, use Import Content (also in Editing Tools when viewing the publication) to bring in the existing title records. If you want to bring in only a couple of titles, or if you want to bring in a bunch of titles that come from only one or two publications, Import Content works well. But since you have to do one import submission per title or per other-publication, it is rather tedious if you have many titles from many other publications to bring in. Check-for-Duplicates after the fact and submitting the individual merges is easier in that case.
Not relevant to your situation, one other option is Clone This Pub. If you have a new publication with a lot of contents similar to another publication's, you can clone it, which makes you a new publication that will include all of the other publication's contents. You can add more at submission time, and after the submission is accepted you can remove any contents that do not belong.
So the TL;DR version of all of that: Sorry, I forgot to merge those titles, and I will go do it now. :) --MartyD (talk) 07:20, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
It should be all set now. I merged the duplicates and made "10^16 to 1" a variant of "10¹⁶ to 1". --MartyD (talk) 07:25, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
p.s. To answer your questions: You did nothing wrong. Unlike author credits, the software does not automatically match-and-merge titles, even if all of the information is the same. You should enter contents exactly as credited in the publication (except normalizing case/punctuation) per the help's instructions. So use the publication's exact title wording and exact author credit. For reprinted works, supply as much of the original publication date as you know, otherwise just leave it blank. The Check For Duplicate Titles operation will match things up whose title wording and author credits are the same. Those can be merged (and during that operation, you can choose which date to keep if they differ). For previously published items where the title wording is different or the author's name is credited differently, we have to make variant titles link titles with differing wording and/or author credit to each other. Depending on what information already exists, that variant process can be anything from easy to mildly complicated. In its simplest form, you find the canonical title, copy its ID or link (as you did above), then go to the newly added title and choose Make This Title a Variant. In there is an option to link it to an existing title, and you paste the ID/link in there and submit. If you run into one of those, just ask and someone will help you. --MartyD (talk) 07:41, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
Thanks for all your help and the detailed explanation! Petersdrang (talk) 11:12, 15 July 2023 (EDT)

Saberhagen, Zelazny - The Black Throne

Hello Marty, I'm adding Reginald3 ID# to your PV pub here. As I'm adding a lot of Reg3 ID#s, could you let me know if you want to be notified every time I make those edits? Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2023 (EDT)

Hi. Thanks for the warning, but adding secondary IDs and/or verification is not something you normally need to notify PVers about. No harm in doing so, of course. You are welcome to add such IDs, or notes about secondary sources, to any of my PVed pubs without notifying me; just make sure the Note to the Moderator says what you did. --MartyD (talk) 06:58, 17 July 2023 (EDT)
Thanks for your considerate answer :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 12:07, 17 July 2023 (EDT)

The Castle Keeps

Germane to this edition you PV'd: I submitted note to moderator: Submitting pub note additions (Berkley Pub. Corp., assumed 1st ed., number on spine), & Goodreads external ID. Cheers. Mike (talk) 03:38, 21 August 2023 (EDT)

Taper; I have a question about this. My edit adding the price sat around for more than 2 months for some reason until you approved it today; when I added it the guy who wrote the long note hadn't PV the book yet and didn't do so until nearly 2 weeks later. So why exactly wasn't my edit approved back when I made it? It wasn't the usual "you have to check with PV first before making any changes" thing mods always complain about because it wasn't verified yet. So now my note about where I found the price is gone and it looks like PV is solely responsible for adding the price. I suppose it makes more sense since he has an actual copy of the book with the price in it but still. --Username (talk) 10:00, 9 September 2023 (EDT)

Hi. Sorry, I don't know why it would have been sitting there for so long, as the edits were straightforward and there was no PV at the time. As for the note about the price, the notes are meant to document information whose source is not the book itself, not who contributed the information. Since the PV's edit added the price in that later submission, I assume it is on the book itself. If I had left the note you added, it would have implied (at least, to me) that the price came from somewhere other than that book. So I removed it to avoid potential confusion about its source. I did not mean to minimize your research effort or contributions to the record. If you look at the Edit History, that your submission provided price, a note regarding provenance, and external ID(s) is documented and preserved. If you think your note should still appear in the record's notes, I'd be happy to restore it with a slightly modified label (e.g., "Price corroborated by:" instead of "Price from:"). Let me know. Thanks. --MartyD (talk) 10:31, 9 September 2023 (EDT)
It's OK, no need to add anything. He has a copy of the actual book so that's more trustworthy than a price from a newspaper, although he oddly mentioned price info twice in the same note. I'm just trying to get all or at least most of my (currently) 1,150 edits to be approved (or at least rejected with good reason) before 10/1 when I resume editing because I plan to add as many horror-related edits as I can during the month of October before hopefully giving up editing on a regular basis. --Username (talk) 11:01, 9 September 2023 (EDT)


I think you've put message to Chavey in the middle instead of at the end of their very long list. --Username (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2023 (EDT)

No good deed goes unpunished. Thanks, moved it. --MartyD (talk) 13:46, 7 October 2023 (EDT)
OK. Can I ask if you clicked on my link before you moved it because it was a completely wrong one from another book that I was working on at the same time. Was it Blaedud or was it Stepford when (if) you looked at it? It bothers me that I made such a careless mistake but I'm sure you knew what I was really referring to because I put the right title in the title bar above. --Username (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2023 (EDT)
Yes, the link was wrong when I looked at it, but I knew what you were talking about. --MartyD (talk) 07:48, 9 October 2023 (EDT)

Shadow of the Mutant Master; That copy has 152 pages. What does your PV copy say? --Username (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2023 (EDT)

The disconnect is that these are recorded as magazine issues, rather than as books. The page count rule for magazines is different (see the first bullet of Help:Screen:EditPub#Pages; also the instructions in the next bullet about handling cross-issue numbering). For those, the page count is all of the pages, including the covers. So while the last numbered page is 152, the total page count is 164, which matches the scan (and my copy). I don't know why these are recorded as magazines. --MartyD (talk) 08:04, 9 October 2023 (EDT)

Empire by Orson Scott Card

Added an image for your verified pub. ../Doug H (talk) 22:05, 18 December 2023 (EST)

Harry Harrison / Make Room(!) Make Room(!)

I'm looking at my copy of Make Room Make Room and completely agree with the final pub note regarding the punctuation of the title. It seems to me that the title of this pub should be changed to remove the exclamation marks and then varianted. Do you agree? If so, I'm happy to submit the edits. Teallach (talk) 17:54, 19 December 2023 (EST)

Hi. I, along with whoever was the accepting moderator at the time, was happy to avoid making the variant, since the canonical form was also used in many places on the publication. If you want to set up a variant, though, it's ok with me. --MartyD (talk) 09:52, 21 December 2023 (EST)
Thanks. I'll proceed with the title change and varianting. Teallach (talk) 17:54, 21 December 2023 (EST)

Dixie Ray; I stumbled on the fact that a 40-something printing of Fahrenheit 451 has art by Whistlin' Dixie, not Whistl'n, and since the 2 PV printings are by Don Erikson who dropped out of here years ago I changed it. He also PV 1 printing of October Country and someone from the old days named CoachPaul PV another but you are the only active PV. So if you can check and fix OC's artist to Whistlin' if that's what yours says. --Username (talk) 17:37, 12 February 2024 (EST)

Hey, I could actually find my copy of OC! It's very clearly "Cover art by Whistl'n Dixie", though. --MartyD (talk) 17:58, 13 February 2024 (EST)
Uh oh, that's a problem because now it will need to be decided which fake name should be the parent. --Username (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2024 (EST)
Whichever has the most entries, unless we know who used it as a pseudonym. Then we can variant each of the pseudonyms to the actual name. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:03, 13 February 2024 (EST)
Another problem because after my fix is approved each name will have 1 entry. --Username (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2024 (EST)
Then I'd pick the oldest. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 10:33, 14 February 2024 (EST)
I suspect "Whistl'n" is correct. I found this: . Era corresponds, and the OC cover, at least, does look like the same style. --MartyD (talk) 08:38, 16 February 2024 (EST)
p.s. I also found which shows "Whistl'n Dixie" for the 45th printing of the Ballantine Farenheit 451. I've held the title-level change and also added a note to the record for the 45th edition (I will add a note to the record for my OC copy as well). When I get a chance, I will unmerge and do varianting.... If we can find copyright page pictures of Farenheit 451 editions, that would be helpful. --MartyD (talk) 10:49, 16 February 2024 (EST)
In case anyone cares, I was able to find more copyright page pictures on eBay, so we have this evidence:
ISBN Printing Date Artist credit
0-345-25027-3[-150] 40th 1975-12-00 no credit at all
0-345-25027-3[-150] 43rd 1976-08-00 Whistlin' Dixie
0-345-27431-8 44th 1977-08-00 Whistlin' Dixie
0-345-27431-8 45th 1977-11-00 Whistl'n Dixie
0-345-27431-8 46th 1978-08-00 Whistl'n Dixie
I think I have everything fixed up. See this. I made records for additional printings and documented the credit in each. Let me know if anything looks wrong. I also started this discussion about how to handle the credit for the 40th printing. --MartyD (talk) 07:22, 17 February 2024 (EST)

291; I replaced unstable image with one that's slightly bigger and less ragged at the corners. --Username (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2024 (EST)

Got it, thanks. --MartyD (talk) 10:38, 27 February 2024 (EST)

The Year's Best Horror Stories: XIX

This submission that you've on hold needs to be rejected as editor states ...roman and arab numbers are sequential.. It would imply 378 pages instead of the actual 366. Notes to clarify may be in order. MagicUnk (talk) 13:11, 21 March 2024 (EDT)

Well, yes, but not everyone agrees. See ISFDB:Moderator_noticeboard#Roman_Numerals. I have held it pending the outcome. --MartyD (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
Thanks for the pointer. I added my thoughts there. MagicUnk (talk) 11:01, 25 March 2024 (EDT)