User talk:MartyD/Archive - January 2016
This is an archived set of entries made to my talk page Feb 2012 - Jan 2016.
BCE of Burnt Offerings
Rummaging around in the garage, I discovered a box of book club editions that I'd never got around to entering into the database. One of them is a BCE of Burnt Offerings. Your verified record gives the page count of 277 and a gutter code. My copy is only 246 pages, and I could find no gutter code. Yet it still has the same id number (5567) on the back flap and "Book Club Edition" on the front flap. I'm pretty sure I got this direct from the Literary Guild sometime in the mid-70s, but can't say it was in the year of publication. There are two OCLC records for BCEs here with 246 pages and here with 277 pages. Because of the page difference, I'm going to create a new record, unless a check of your copy shows the same page count. Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 19:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- To determine if my copy may be missing a couple of page signatures, could you see how many chapters are in your copy? Mine has 11 chapters, the last one starting on page 232. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- I will check. Since I found the gutter code on p. 275, I imagine 277 reflects the last page number. --MartyD 02:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
- For once, a book easily found! Last page is indeed 277, and the gutter code is clear on bottom left of p. 275. Author's picture in landscape covers the back. "Printed in U.S.A." over "5567" at bottom right of back flap. Mine has 11 chapters, but 11 starts on 261 (each chapter's 1st page is unnumbered). Physical cover is black with gold lettering on spine. White endpapers. Let me know what else I can tell you about it. --MartyD 02:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
The Braintree Mission
- Thanks, it is now. --MartyD 11:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
There Will Be Time
- Looks good. I added the page number, too. --MartyD 01:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
The Stars My Destination
Expedition to Earth cover image
"Jupter", by Carol and Frederick Pohl
The current contents for your verified edition of this book includes "p. 111, Heavy Planet, by Milton A. Rothman [as by Lee Gregor]". My copy of this edition lists the author as "Milton A. Rothman", not "Lee Gregor", and spells the title "Heavyplanet", without the space. I assume some of this was inherited from other editions of this story, but I'm pretty sure we need to create a VT for this title here. Chavey 15:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, it made me smile. That's the first adult sci-fi book I ever bought. The title is "Heavyplanet" in TOC and on title page, and the author credit is "Milton A. Rothman". Looks like something got mis-merged. I will fix it. --MartyD 11:35, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
The Black Cloud
- Not at all. Thanks! --MartyD 11:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Riding Shotgun by Charles de Lint
You've placed a hold on my submission of the chapbook collection Riding Shotgun because of the publication type? It's a chapbook; what should I use besides cb? Ofearna 21:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
The Chessmen of Mars
I have been adding the essay "Jetan, or Martian Chess" to the US editions of Burroughs' The Chessmen of Mars per Henry Hardy Heins' A Golden Anniversary Bibliography of Edgar Rice Burroughs. Heins states that the 1963 Ballantine edition includes this appendix. Could you check your copy for this appendix? Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
- It's there. I didn't really consider it separate, as I also didn't record the "Prelude", which is a similar POV essay. But if there's a reason to record it, I'm happy to cooperate. I will add it. --MartyD 02:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking. The main reason that I added the essay is that Heins shows that it was included in the US editions but not the UK editions, at least through 1964. Since the the Ballantine editions published after Heins have the same page count as the 1963 edition, I suspected that the same plates were used and that the essay was included. Thanks again. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 01:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Children of the Lens
An interesting source of information has given me the dates for the first Ace printings of the ten Heinlein juveniles. Apparently Ace published one a month from Sept.'70 until June '71.
- Tunnel in the Sky 9-70
- The Star Beast 10-70
- The Rolling Stones 11-70
- Rocket Ship Galileo 12-70
- Red Planet 1-71
- Between Planets 2-71
- Have Space Suit - Will Travel 3-71
- Time for the Stars 4-71
- Space Cadet 5-71
- Citizen of the Galaxy 6-71
So, I'm going to update the records, citing a Mr. Stuart Wells. Figured one message was better than ten! He had an ad on AbeBooks selling the fine lot and noted he bought and bagged them when new, so they've never been read. I asked if he knew the order, and he answered! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:16, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's a nice find! --MartyD 10:07, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Indeed! And he asked if there were any other books /publishers I might need information .... damned near fell off my chair! He's been a seller/collector for at least 30 years or longer and reports "lots of data". I find his listings on AbeBooks most informative. I did put forth the idea he might join our project, but haven't heard back [hopefully he'll drop in and have a look]. He has contributed to bibliographic efforts at least once, collaborating with Grant Thiessen on Science Fiction Collector #3 to do a Galaxy Novels checklist. Keeping my fingers crossed. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats! Those are findings that make whole loads of effort worthwhile! Stonecreek 17:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Three new e-mails, with some scans. Mr. Wells did drop by and have a look. Just sent a long reply and hopefully he likes what we do [might have to dust the corners, shampoo the carpets, etc.]. He certainly seems willing to supply information, though it's yet to be determined if he wants to participate directly or indirectly. Just knowing he owns "every Ace lettered double and single" is impressive. We shall see!! --~ Bill, Bluesman 02:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
A Fighting Man of Mars
Oriental Stories Facsimile Copies
Marty, there is a problem with the first three Oriental Stories facsimile copies I entered. For example, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?387136, the first one. After entering the basic information, I imported the content, using the Complete Oriental Stories, Volume 1 as the basis. I expected to go back and remove the extra content. However, something didn't work right. When I went back to the first one and clicked on Remove Content, I got a red box listing 9 items that were missing and telling me to contact a moderator. The same items are missing from all three of the facsimile copies. I can see that some stories are missing from the lists, but they do not have the numbers that are shown in the red box.
The easiest thing might be to delete the pubs and reenter them. Since I imported the contents of the Complete Oriental Stories, Volume 1 I've gone back to that pub and entered the interiorart. If the existing facsimile copies can be fixed, it would still be necessary to reenter the interiorart for them. If the pubs are just tossed and reentered, the full contents can be imported from the updated Complete volume. Bob 19:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- Fascinating. No good deed goes unpunished. :-) Please leave them be for the moment so Ahasuerus can take a look at what happened to them. He has direct access to the database and may be able to get them back to a workable point. Thanks. --MartyD 11:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I have been able to recreate the problem on the test system. Here is the sequence of events:
- Editor creates a "Merge Title" submission for a title in a pub (or for multiple titles, as was the case here)
- Editor creates an "Import Contents" submission using the pub above as the source (steps 1 and 2 can occur in any order)
- Moderator approves the first submission. As luck would have it, the title record used above is deleted and the other title (from a different pub) is retained.
- Moderator approves the second submission. The import logic doesn't check whether the title record still exists, so it lets the moderator approve the submission.
- After these manipulations the pub has a "phantom" title associated with it, hence the red error that you get when you try to remove titles from the pub.
- The good news is that all we need to do in order to prevent this from happening in the future is add a check to the moderator approval page for the import/export/clone logic. The check will simply reject submissions that use non-existing title records.
- I will create a Bug record for the problem, but it's 2am on the East Coast and I won't be able to fix it until tomorrow. I am glad we found it, though -- thanks for providing enough information about the problem to trace it to its roots! Ahasuerus 06:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- The coding changes have been completed and everything seems to be working OK, but I'd like to do a bit more testing before installing the fix. Tomorrow night, hopefully... Ahasuerus 05:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- There is another scenario that can cause deleted/merged Titles to linger in pub records. I am currently testing a fix that should address it as well. Ahasuerus 03:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Marty, it happened again with the second volume of "The Complete Oriental Stories, Volume 2". I left a note directly with Ahasuerus. Two stories plus their artwork seem to exist when I click on the title and are listed under the author, but can't be found by Advanced Search. Bob 15:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
"Chicks 'n Chained Males", by Edith/Esther Friesner
In our listing for this book, there is a note (presumably from you, as Locus verifier): "Edith Friesner" credited on the cover as well as publisher's Webscription page. The cover shown on that page credits "Esther Friesner", and the cover shown on the Webscription page link also credits "Esther Friesner". A search through all Abebooks vendor photos of the book showed no copy credited to "Edith". So I don't know whether there is a copy that actually credits "Edith", and we just have no proof of that, or whether you meant to make the point that it's not "Esther M.", and accidentally typed her name wrong. Chavey 14:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- I don't really remember, but it certainly looks to me like it's a typo/braino meaning to point out the lack of "M." -- Locus1 credits it to Esther M., not to just plain Esther. I'll go change it and clarify that part. --MartyD 01:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's an odd phenomenon that I also occasionally type her first name as "Edith". I wonder why the brain confuses those two names, out of all the possible "E" names? Chavey 04:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Philip Pullman: The Subtle Knife
Marty, I have the same first ed. you verified, i.e. price,full number line and same ISBN. However the cover is different. It says SPECIAL EDITION under the title and the monster is not showing next to the boy's head as shown on the cover from Amazon. Is your cover same as mine? Thanks.--Teddybear 14:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Mine matches the Amazon cover (mine's a little more cropped at the right, losing the monster's left ear and nail on the middle claw). No mention of "Special Edition"; looks like an ordinary Del Rey paperback. The artwork on mine actually looks exactly like this, (no "Copyrighted Material", obviously, and no "Author of The Amber Spyglass", with the "Phillip Pullman" placed just below the upper edge of his index finger). Yours is a paperback, 6-3/4" x 4-1/8", with a normal, unreinforced cover? --MartyD 15:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like my copy is not listed in the DB, even though mine has a full number line with May 1998 and same price $5.99 C$6.99. My copy is a normal sized paperback. The back cover has no bar code and says "Selected by the Book-of-the-Month Club". Think I should submit it?--Teddybear 15:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Sure. It's clearly another printing. Mine has a full UPC label on the back, with ISBN-10 and price in the bar code, plus "U.S. $5.99/Can. $6.99" within that label, above the ISBN. The numeric values on that are 70999-00599 and 41336. Above the UPC label, it does say "Selected by the Book-of-the-Month Club". On the inside of the front cover, along with an ad for The Golden Compass, is a similar label, but it is EAN instead of UPC, and the numbers swap places: 780345-413369 and 50599; same ISBN-10 printed across the top and the same price line above that.
- In the back, text ends on numbered page 288. Remaining pages are unnumbered: "END OF BOOK TWO", Coming soon in hardcover from Knopf! ... Book Three of His Dark Materials, The Subtle Knife w/www.randomhouse.com link, Don't miss where it all began... The Golden Compass w/www.randomhouse.com link, Del Rey Online blurb w/email address at end, and finally an undated "Free Drinks" survey/newsletter sign-up (no date, unfortunately). Pullman's picture and bio is on the inside back cover.
- You could ask on ISFDB:Verification_requests if anyone knows what the key differences may indicate. It could be one sans bar code is an Advance Read[er|ing] Copy (a.k.a. "ARC"), but I am no expert and really can't say. --MartyD 19:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Abused -- A Daughter’s Story
Excuse me if I'm intruding into a place where I shouldn't. I see that you are holding the story Abused. Let me explain why I tried listing it. It's true as her alter ego Lorraine Bartlett writes mostly cozy mysteries, but as L. L. Bartlett, all of stuff until present, except one, verges on the speculative side involving a detective with the second sight. That's why they are listed. I listed this story that you're holding only because everything else she has written under the L. L. Bartlett name falls into ISFDB directives. Sorry to have bothered you. MLB 12:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I left a note about this hold on your talk page and was waiting for an answer.... :-). I will see what people think about her relative to the "certain threshold". --MartyD 00:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Mission of Gravity
DAW Collectors publication series
I and a couple of other editors are trying to formalize the DAW Collectors Books publication series. The consensus is that we should include only those publications that explicitly list their DAW number, either on the cover, the spine, or the copyright page. This applies to, apparently, all first editions and to some reprint editions, but not to most of the reprints. You have verified several DAW reprint editions where the notes list the DAW number. However, I can't tell from the wording in the notes whether this number is listed because (i) it was actually stated on the book; or (ii) the number was inherited from other editions with the DAW number listed. If you have the time, I would appreciate it if you could check these reprints and when they have the number actually listed, update the notes to reflect that. For example, adding "(on cover)" or "(on copyright page)" to a phrase like "DAW Collectors No. 123". The publications you've verified that fall into this scenario are:
- Gayle Greeno's Finders-Seekers, 3rd printing
- Jennifer Roberson's Sword-Singer, 11th printing
- Tad Williams' City of Golden Shadow, 8th printing
Thanks much, Chavey 18:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- I will check them. Might not get to it until the weekend. I suspect it's explicitly listed on all of the covers, or I would not have mentioned it. --MartyD 00:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- It's all over them, and no different from a 1st printing. I will comment on the Community Portal. --MartyD 20:24, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help! I've added those books to the publication series. Chavey 16:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
The Tower and the Hive
For some reason, the cover image from Amazon to this entry http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?237005 is not coming up when I check your entry. Maybe it's just my computer, however, if not, I can submit another cover image if you want. MLB 08:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- That happens if they take away the image (here, they probably replaced what was originally there with the one they are now using for the Look Inside). I fixed it to point to a live one, but feel free to replace it with a scan if you want to. In general, feel free to fix any broken link and to replace links to external sites with your own scans if you have them. If the record is verified, treat it like adding a cover image to a record that doesn't have one: submit the change and notify the verifier. If the linked image is live and looks different from what you have, ask first instead -- it can be a warning that you have a different printing. --MartyD 01:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
E-mail addresses for user
Marty, there are two series of Conan books that have the same books under different names. "Conan of Cimmeria (Ballantine)" and "Robert E. Howard's Complete Conan of Cimmeria" each have three books and the corresponding numbers under each series are identical. For example The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian and Robert E. Howard's Complete Conan of Cimmeria: Volume One (1932-33) are the same book, except for details like color illustrations vs. B&W and similar details. How can I merge the titles? Bob 18:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- You might want to take this to the Help desk to get a wider range of opinions. And before making any changes, you'd need to run changes by any other verifiers. Since the books are the same works, with different titles, one set of them should be made variants of the other set, with the parent being whichever set is better known or perhaps more widely distributed. The next problem is then how to deal with the series. The use of "Conan of Cimmeria (Balantine)" is unfortunate, because it is tied to a publisher. At first I was thinking you'd need to make two publisher series and put the publications in those, but actually I don't see why "Conan of Cimmeria" is qualified with "(Ballantine)". Looks like that qualifier could be removed, and then the series name would naturally apply to either set of the titles, regardless of which one ends up the parent. --MartyD 02:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Cover credit for the Tor pb of Icehenge
Can you confirm that John Harris is explicitly credited in this publication? The same art was used five years earlier on UK editions (both soft- and hardcover). Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 18:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes. "Cover art by John Harris" on the copyright page. I will update the notes. It's possible there's a signature. My wife has made off with my magnifying glass, though. When she gets home, I'll see if any of the scribblings might be one. --MartyD 20:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- Appreciate your looking (and I have my magnifying glass at my desk at all times, and not just for the small type!). I'll let the verifiers of the UK editions they can source your record for the cover art. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, well, it had been always at hand until she developed a need for reading graveyard maps.... Anyway, there is no signature or monogram that I can see. I double-checked Locus1, and it has the John Harris credit, but that's probably from the same copyright page statement, not an independent source. --MartyD 20:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Le Morte d'Arthur
I added the cover artist to your verified publication. While not credited elsewhere, the author credits him in her acknowledgments, and his web site confirmed this artwork as his. Chavey 20:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Cover artist "Alexander"
Does the signature on the covers of this pub and this one look like the signature of Paul Alexander? He has a pretty distinctive initial letter. I can't make out the signature of the Amazon-supplied scans. Mhhutchins 17:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, definitely the same. I will update the records, thanks. --MartyD 00:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- Welcome back! Glad to hear you are back to normal! Ahasuerus 05:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The Zero Stone
Something about Eve
The note I left was in the "Note to Moderator" section the last time I worked on the Howard essay Something about Eve. I got into the essay because of the the poem of the same name, which appears at the beginning of the essay. This essay is a review of the novel of that name by James Branch Cabell. In some pubs it is listed as a review, and in fact in the Amra appearance it is listed as both an essay and a review. Although I entered the Amra, I don't recall doubling up that entry; perhaps I did, but maybe someone else added the second designation. Not that it matters. Even when listed as a review, it is difficult to see that it was written a year or so after the novel was published. Seems to me it should be one or the other, and the timing of the review should be made clear. What should be done? Bob 17:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- I would enter it as a review (and the REVIEW title record should be dated when the review was published). If you also wanted to record the poem's appearance, you could add another content record for it. Yes, that gives two content records for one "column", but you could explain it in the notes and it will give the best cross-reference behavior. --MartyD 04:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- O.K., I'll make the changes to REVIEW. As for the poem, there are a bunch of similar poems, referred to as "verse headings". I've treated these separately only when they appear without the story, noting that they also appear in the story whenever it appears. See, for example, Hour of the Dragon for one where some editors have included the poem in addition to the story, or The Black Stone for a complex case where the verse appears in several stories. Bob 18:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Perma ed. of The Mysterious Island
I added a link to the Bookscans image of the cover of this publication, but I have a question: Most of the books by this publisher are entered as Permabooks, although there are a few given as "Perma Book". Based on the catalog numbering, I'm pretty sure this is the same publisher, but do you think there's a point where the name may have merged and we need to keep the records separate? Also, some of the records give a dash between the initial letter and the numbers in the catalog number, but some do not. Is this the publisher's inconsistency in presenting the numbers or the ISFDB editors not knowing whether to use a dash if the letter and numbers not printed together on the spine or front cover? (I've noticed most covers give the dash, but others give the letter above the number.) Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 00:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- One of my fine, early verifications, when I tended to leave what was in an existing record unless it was blantantly "wrong"....
- On the front cover, along the spine, is "PERMABOOK M•6002".
- On the spine is "M (over) 6002" at the top and "PERMA (over) BOOK" at the bottom.
- On the back cover, along the spine, is "PUBLISHED BY POCKET BOOKS, INC. • PRINTED IN U.S.A."
- On the title page is "PERMABOOKS • NEW YORK (over) Published by Pocket Books, Inc."
- On the copyright page is "PERMABOOK edition published January 1962 (over) 1st printing.....November 1961 (over) This PERMABOOK includes every word contained in the original, higher-priced edition.... PERMABOOK editions are distributed in the U.S. by ... PERMABOOK editions are published in the United States by Pocket Books, Inc...."
- So it looks like this should be "Permabooks / Pocket Books", should be dated 1962-01-00, not 1961-11-00, and should be #M-6002, not #M6002. Oh, and the ToC is on pages numbered v-vi. But other than that, the record is in good shape. :-) I haven't changed anything yet. Let me know if you disagree with any of that or think I missed anything. I have a feeling at least some of the "Permabooks" ones would rightly be "Permabooks / Pocket Books". --MartyD 04:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- p.s. I notice a similar dating issue with Island of Fear, and I'll bet others. Maybe someone entered a bunch of them that way. --MartyD 04:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with your proposed changes. About the Pocket Books connection: Permabooks was founded by Doubleday in 1949 to have a paperback publisher for their hardcover editions. They weren't very good at distributing paperbacks (back then it was a whole different game when it comes to book distribution), so after a few years of losing money, they sold Permabooks to Pocket in 1954. So essentially all books after that should be "Permabooks / Pocket Books". You can identify the Pocket editions by the catalog numbers starting with "M" instead of "P". Later on, they even had the same gold or silver band on the left side which identified Pocket Books in the fifties and sixties. Mhhutchins 04:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The Harrowing of Gwynedd
Uploading 1st printing cover scan from personal collection. Amazon's image does not show Canadian & U.S. prices.
P.S. If you have a better cover image than mine, go ahead and replace it.--Astromath 21:10, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
The Two Faces of Tomorrow
Various "Mageworlds" books
Hi, I'm adding the Canada price to the ones that don't have it - The Price of the Stars, By Honor Betray'd, The Stars Asunder. Easy to miss, it's on the bottom of the spine in tiny lettering. Great series, maybe it's time to re-read it again.... BungalowBarbara 21:57, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, you may be onto something. I did enjoy those quite a bit! --MartyD 18:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Bones : Terrifying Tales to Haunt Your Dreams
I just finished editing/verifying the book you had OCLC-verified at Bones : Terrifying Tales to Haunt Your Dreams, in case you're interested. I had to order this danged book direct from Scholastic!Ofearna 20:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- OCLC records don't provide page numbers for contents, so it's not necessary to notify the OCLC-verifier of additions to a record which are not implied as part of the verification. Please see this list to see what each verification implies. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:02, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- Another forgotten page! We really must highlight it better, that was excellent work on your part. No idea how best to do that though, I'm afraid. (You know I'm not that good with Wiki stuff.) In the remainder of your copious free time, could you also add explanations of all the Primary Types I created? And join in the discussion on whether we need more of such slots? (Again, that's on a lost Wiki page I'm sure I saw only yesterday, but I'm feeling rather scatter-brained at the moment. (I blame the recent lack of medication, or the sub-zero weather we're having here)). Oh, and what are your opinions on adding SFE3? Yea or Nay? BLongley 18:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
DragonLance Chronicles, Vol. 1: Dragons of Autumn Twilight
Re: DragonLance Chronicles, Vol. 1: Dragons of Autumn Twilight
Deleting first part of title. Reason: that is the series title.--Astromath 16:42, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Dragons of Winter Night
Dime Store Magic
Deleting front part of title. Reason: all Star Trek Deep Space Nine pubs have "Star Trek Deep Space Nine" as the header of the title page and this is the only record that includes the header in its pub title (as far as I can find).--Astromath 13:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Star Trek 3
You verified Star Trek 3 where the copyright page lists the publishing dates for 1st - 11th printings. I just uploaded my copy of the 10 printing. Could you add the date from your printing to this pub and note where it came from? Thx. BTW, I'm asking Willem H as well.--Astromath 15:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Publication date is september 1972. I added the information. --Willem H. 20:19, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
ISFDB build process
I believe at one point in 2009 we talked about the current build process and how suboptimal some parts of it were/are. Uzume has been working on cleaning it up lately and had the following suggestions/ideas:
- Use a Python-based dependency build system and dispense with make.
- Use true Python libraries instead of copying them around and into the CGI space, which may also improve performance because the code will get compiled to .pyc
- Reduce the CGI "surface" (which could be construed as an attack surface from a security perspective) by reducing the number of CGI URLs and instead using a dispatcher to launch library modules via the request URL (e.g., PATH_INFO).
- Clean up the CGI interface by making it WSGI compatible thereby making the web application portable to other WSGI deployments instead of CGI. The Python standard library even includes such in its wsgiref module [available in Python 2.5.]
Since you are our resident expert on all things Python -- and since I am still a relative Python newbie -- I thought it would be best to start a discussion between you and Uzume and have other developer types jump in as needed. The first thing to do, I gather, would be an informal cost-benefit analysis of different types of changes, i.e. how much each possible approach will gain us in terms of better security, portability and performance and what its likely costs in terms of development man-hours and possible impact on software stability will be.
What do you think? Ahasuerus 21:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- I have already been working on a first step by cleaning up the existing make-based build process (I have not yet checked it in much less make an FR for it). Uzume 09:26, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yeesh! I'm more of a Python newbie than I thought, despite my 50+ accepted contributions. I don't even understand half the above proposals. But in my more general IT Consultant mode I can say that we really could do with improving security (I've used tools I shouldn't be allowed to use just by URL manipulation, and I daren't mention the SQL injection etc problems we're open to.) I'm not sure portability is an issue unless we are going to create a mobile-phone/Ipad version - something I'd love to see but is too much work for me. Performance seems fairly good to me apart from some of the Cleanup scripts I wrote - I won't be offended if somebody improves those. There are strange unavailability issues I can't pin down to "there's a backup going on now" or such, so maybe we do need to improve some things, but I can't say what without seeing log data that I'm doubtful we even collect. We can make some guesses and prevent searches with poorly specified parameters - I would assume a search for "%" kills our server for a while. Finally: I have to admit I have the time but not the knowledge to help at the moment. Hope these comments are useful. BLongley 17:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- The build process certainly could use cleaning up. I have no objection to make. There are also other perfectly good tools out there like ant. It would be nice to have something a little more platform-independent. I actually know next to nothing about Python, I'm afraid, and can't comment on its abilities to do build management. As for restructuring, there are security holes one could drive a truck through that are unrelated to overall structure. So I think you/we would need to decide which is the top priority: restructuring for maintainability or fixing security holes. I would not try to do both at the same time, as doing so would make each goal harder to reach. --MartyD 12:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, appreciate the feedback! Ahasuerus 01:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- There have been a number of Python tools available for build management. One more famous one is SCons. Some others are A-A-P and BitBake. However, I was seriously considering Waf. I was also considering if we might want some sort of continuous integration along the lines of Buildbot although I am not sure that is necessary as we could just create a Python "egg" and make it available on PyPI or some such. Uzume 12:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I would say our number one priority is to get more coders and testers working together. If you look at the list of recent changes, it's got a depressingly small variety of names on it, and if you dig deeper you'll find that we've taken over a year to implement some quite important changes. If that means taking a break from developing and doing some more training, so be it. When I started learning about the code I started documenting my thoughts on the underlying database: there's many times I've wished I'd continued as there's still many faults. (E.g. when you verify a pub, it doesn't use the verification primary key, it uses the position of the verification type in the overall list of types!) I could prove useful in documenting features we have that we're mostly not even aware of - e.g. I taught a fellow Mod about the Chronological display order option that he'd not noticed in several years and thousands of contributions. I even started writing a booklet about how to use the ISFDB but held that when I discovered I couldn't upload it - there's now an informal FR to rectify that, but as it's a Wiki thing it's beyond my abilities to code. I'd be quite happy to obsolete myself as a coder if we can get better ones, I think I could still be useful as a consultant on what needs doing. Which brings me to my considered priority two: get people to request changes properly, and have them discussed. For instance, I liked "My Messages" when it appeared but it suddenly changed to an edit mode rather than a read mode. I find it so unuseful now I've started looking at "Recent changes" whenever I get the warning, rather than click on the warning. I'm guilty of almost the opposite: coding an idea that I think is good, posting examples here, and then not following through with a proper FR and code submission. E.g. "Sourcing made easy" with automatic PVing and automatic notes. OK, I was asked to stop doing too much of this when Ahasuerus got overwhelmed, but I've now lost track of all the ideas I had and even if somebody with better wiki-remembrance than me could find them, I'm not sure I could find the code changes I made for them - and after a year of comparative inactivity for me I'd struggle to reconcile them with all the things Ahasuerus has done in the meantime. I'll stop at those two thoughts or I'll overwhelm your page, but please continue to think about how we can improve. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BLongley (talk • contribs) .
- It is sort of a catch-22. Since the code is sort of ugly and hard to maintain new coders are not highly interested or motivated but that is one of the reasons for wanting new blood to begin with. In variably new blood will want significant change. Much of that will be good but certainly not all and there will be growing pains along the way. A straightforward example is I am not thrilled with using a wiki to handle forum communication. MediaWiki works well enough and Wikimedia has been using it for years on projects like Wikipedia but even they have been looking for something better (i.e., LiquidThreads; but I do not really think a forum should be built on MediaWiki) Uzume 12:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not too worried about the build process, I can adapt to whatever turns out to be the preferred option. It's the design process I find frustrating. I've dummied up proposed changes and posted screenshots and explanations, but those never get a lot of comments, and they may well be lost in an archive before they get anywhere close to being submitted for testing, let alone implementation. We need more Ahasueri. BLongley 14:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I fully concur. There is want for new blood and ideas but most of my ideas if they are understood and accepted at all seem to go through a painfully slow process. Most of the time they get either not addressed at all or a "I am not sure I understand that but it sounds nice" type of response. Uzume 18:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Cover image for Starpilot's Grave
Starpilot's Grave: Replaced cover image URL (based on the ISBN) with a different one that is potentially more stable. Both images from Amazon, they are the same image, just a different URL. BungalowBarbara 04:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Great, thanks. Don't know how I left that one. --MartyD 04:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
John Carter of Mars / A Guide to Barsoom
as you can see, the front cover to A John Carter of Mars (originally full wrap) and its back cover, which as used for A Guide to Barsoom, are the same artwork. You put the variant-ing it on hold with no explanation on my discussion page, so I'm asking here... O'Fearna 13:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I wasn't doubting you. I was debating adding notes to the title records but have been wading through submissions and haven't yet had time to go upstairs and dig up my copy of the book, so I put it on hold. If I had a question, I would ask. I'm not shy. :-) --MartyD 13:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks!! O'Fearna 21:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
2001: A Space Odyssey
Star Hunter & Voodoo Planet
- Sorry about the delay. Yes, they are the same drawing. --MartyD 12:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'll submit a merge then. ForJohnScalzi 00:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC).
Clarke's From the Ocean...
I've accepted a submission that added the gutter code to this record which indicates a printing in the last week of November 1961. This adds new light to the actual publication date, so I updated the Note field. Maybe it was "published" in 1962 but appeared late in 1961. Mhhutchins 20:48, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, C48 it is. Don't know how I missed it -- it's plain as day. Definitely no publication date, though. The copyright statement starts Copyright 1953, © 1956, 1957, 1958 by Arthur C. Clarke;... and goes on to list individual copyright dates and (non-Clarke) holders for some of the short stories. --MartyD 01:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Great Short Novels of Adult Fantasy: Volume II
David A. Hardy (III)
I found some information on David A. Hardy. According to information in The Cimmerian, he "has lived in places as varied as Isphahan, Prague, and Gainesville, Florida. He has been an ESL teacher, a radio talk show host, and was a regular contributor to Classic Pulp Fiction Stories magazine. Dave also helped the surviving Branch Davidians build a church on the ruins of Mt. Carmel." He currently lives in Austin, TX with his wife Julie and young daughter Brigid, as of 2005, and has been a regular attendee of Howard Days in Cross Plains, TX. Bob 16:27, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've created a bio page for the author using this data.
- BTW, the single record which was originally varianted to "David A. Hardy (II)" actually appears in the publication as by "David Hardy", so there was no need to create that disambiguated pseudonym, since it had already been disambiguated as "David Hardy (II)". So I deleted the variant record, which removed "David A. Hardy (II)" from the database. Was there any reason I'm missing why "David Hardy (II)" was made into a pseudonym of "David A. Hardy (II)"? Mhhutchins 18:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, guys. No, the only reason for the (II) was because it was a David A. Hardy to start with. I mentioned it in my write-up. I didn't know how that David Hardy-credited record got made into a David A. Hardy variant in the first place (although I do presume it was by mistake), so I had made the disambiguated pseudonym pending further research. Which I didn't get to yet. But I have no objection to the deletion, and now I won't bother. :-) --MartyD 01:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Please note that CVS commits have been suspended until the current crop has been sorted out and the rest of the Bugs/FRs have been prioritized. There is a bit of a collision with the monthly Fixer run, but hopefully it won't take too long to eliminate the backlog. Ahasuerus 00:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. I've built and installed all of the latest, but I haven't had any time to do much else. --MartyD 10:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
McCall's, August 1969
Sir, looking at my submission for this issue (and I can't add a link to it until it's accepted) I see that I forgot to put the date with the submitted title. I'm sorry. If this submission is accepted I'll add this information immediately. Again, I'm sorry. MLB 11:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, that was what I was going to ask about. I will put the date in to save you a submission cycle. --MartyD 11:28, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Found a wraparound image for [this], but it's of the first printing [same artwork]. The signature is that of Jordi Penalva, assuming it matches your third printing. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, it matches. I'll update the notes and add the credit. Thanks! --MartyD 16:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
- Great! My copy is a later printing and the barcode covers the exact area with the signature. --~ Bill, Bluesman 17:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
- It's a scribble, but knowing what it's supposed to be, I can definitely tell "J. Penalva______|" (looks like a flourish, not additional lettering). --MartyD 23:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I added the Canadian price to your verified
An added note
Cover art credit for Eight Tales of Terror
- Yes, that is it. Nice find. I will update the entry. --MartyD 10:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
The House that Stood Still
- Thanks. Moved 'em. Guess I should go back and find all my "transient"s from the pre-PV2-5 days.... --MartyD 01:33, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Eight Tales of Terror
- Oops. Thanks for catching that. :-) --MartyD 23:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The Best From Fantasy and Science Fiction, Tenth Series
- Yes, thanks for the catch. I have added it. --MartyD 13:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
This may be the wrong place to post this, but as I was signing off for the day I noticed several postings of mine were being held. I'm sorry if I've done anything wrong, but if there is any question as to whether or not Lavia Reasoner is Elizabeth Hallam, go here and you'll see that not only is Hallam listed as a pseudonym of Reasoner, but that she admits it at the end of her bio.I'm not really a romance fan, I just discovered this by accident, but if I did anything else wrong please tell me so that I can make it right. MLB 11:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- No, nothing was wrong (I would have posted on your talk page if I had a question or thought something was amiss). I was just checking on whether there should be a pseudonym relationship and got interrupted for a trip to church. Thanks for the pointer. I made the pseudonym and accepted the submissions. --MartyD 13:17, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Planet des Ungehorsams
I put a hold on three submissions, stemming from [this] discussion. While the attempt is the right thing the way the submissions are done isn't. They would create a couple of strays, at least, and more than a few edits to fix. I'm sure there's a better way since you already set up the novella and variant. If the uncredited version wasn't in there it would be fairly easy. I'm just not sure how this three-way variance would work. --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- It wouldn't be a three-way variance. He's changing the record from a variant of the novel to a variant of the novella. This would break the relationship as it now stands and create a new one. The German titles wouldn't be merged because they're credited to two different authors, with both varianted to the same English title. The only missing submission is one that adds a CHAPTERBOOK title reference to the publication record. (He should have done this in the submission that changes the publication to a CHAPTERBOOK, but even veteran editors forget to do this.) Unless I'm missing something, the other submissions look OK to me. Mhhutchins 05:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, they look ok to me, too. He has found both the translation I questioned originally (on an unrelated topic -- lucky find) and this one are of the short story ". . . And Then There Were None" instead of of the derived longer work The Great Explosion, and he's going back and making his previously submitted and accepted NOVEL be a CHAPTERBOOK, like the one I dealt with. When I made his other submission a CHAPTERBOOK, I wasn't very explicit about CHAPTERBOOK's need for two titles, so he may not even be aware of it. Looks like you could accept them and add the CHAPTERBOOK record for him or let him do it. Dumb question: Do we NOT merge CHAPTERBOOKs? I seem to recall something about that but now can't find it. --MartyD 10:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- I know what he's trying to accomplish. The one edit wants to change a title record from Novel to shortfiction, instead of to Chapterbook. That's what would create the stray. I'll take the holds off. --~ Bill, Bluesman 13:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- Right, need to add the chapterbook (vs. add the short fiction, had he done novel->chapterbook). But here it's actually better -- term used loosely -- he did it this way due to his variant-making (we want that shortfiction record to be a variant, not the chapterbook title record). Anyway, thanks, I'll fix it up and leave him a note. --MartyD 15:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the note about replacing data from secondary sources with that of primary ones. I should have realized that.
I have two questions though: 1) What is the best way to respond to Moderator comments?
- The best way, and the ISFDB practice, is to reply "in place", which is to say, you should edit the section the moderator leaves on your talk page. We indent each response/counter-response by adding an increasing number of colons (":") onto the front of the text (see the section immediately above this, for example; you can "edit" it to see the Wiki text). The reason we do it this way is to keep the entire discussion in one place, instead of having to hop back and forth between two or more people's talk pages. It's up to everyone to watch changes to the other pages where they are participating in discussions. The moderators will definitely do that.
2) Where can I find a list of the macro commands for inserting/editing wiki comments? (like the four ~'s for name and date) --PortForlorn 01:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- There's some high-level help at Help:Editing and some examples of the most common Wiki text at Help:Wikitext_examples to get you going. There's also a reference card available that you can print out. If you want to do some sort of formatting or shortcut thing and can't figure it out, just ask. Everyone's friendly and willing to help. --MartyD 10:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Replaced the amazon scan in [this] record. Also deleted a link to a discussion that had been on Verification Request page as the link just went to the page and the discussion has been archived [when/where?]. Up to you if you want to find/add it back, I had no trouble reading the signature on my copy. --~ Bill, Bluesman 01:21, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
We have a few outstanding questions about retrieving data from ISFDB using SQL and I wonder if you may be able to take a look and advise the poster? (I have also asked Bill Longley who has just resurfaced.) I'll comment on some basic issues with the posted queries in the meantime. Ahasuerus 00:51, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem. Won't get to it until later today. --MartyD 13:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks muchly! :-) Ahasuerus 00:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
- I've tried out the refactored SQL... and it produces almost the same results as the original version did. The variations are
- the sequence of the reviewed titles within an issue
- the number of rows returned, the original SQL gives 170 rows, the refactored SQL only 169
- variations in author names, eg the author of 'The Issue At Hand' appears as Blish rather than Atheling (June 65). Atheling being the Blish pseudonym under which the reviewed book was published.
- variations in titles of some anthologies, eg Merril's 'The 9th Annual of the Year's Best S-F' (April 65)
- The first can be fixed by removing title_title from the ORDER BY clause; sorting on the title_id gives us the reviews in the order they appeared in the magazine column. The missing title appears in the Feb 1968 Galaxy, and is 'This New Ocean' by uncredited.
- The divergence in the number of rows returned by the 2 versions of the SQL also occurs for the other 3 sets (F&SF 1975-1983, 1983-1986, 1987-1993) of reviews: original 169, 188, 143; refactored 175, 195, 144. I'll check those results in detail to see what the differences are.
- I've checked the results for F&SF 1975-1983, and the refactored SQL returns the correct info for the reviewed titles, but the original SQL returns the info as listed in the magazine columns. For four reviewed titles, the info in the magazine columns lists fewer authors than the ISFDB has for the reviewed books.
- F&SF, May '76: The 1975 Annual World's Best SF, the magazine, and the ISFDB entry for the review column, has Wollheim alone as editor, whereas the ISFDB has Wollheim & Saha - the refactored SQL returns rows for both editors.
- F&SF, June '77: The Book of Virgil Finlay, magazine has de la ree only, ISFDB has de la Ree & Finlay.
- F&SF, December '79: The End of Summer, magazine has Malzberg only, ISFDB has Malzberg & Pronzini.
- F&SF, August '80: A Reader's Guide to SF, magazine has Searles, et al, ISFDB has Searles, Last, Meacham & Franklin.
- No time now to check the other batches of F&SF, but the reason for the extra rows may well be the same.
- PS Your refactored SQL led me to the solution for my original question about how to distinguish the Anthologies; I've posted a comment on the Community Portal topic with the details, and updated my online pages with improved content. Mjcrossuk 23:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
- The authorship discrepancies are because the review records do not match the titles they are linked to. They should probably be corrected. But, if you'd rather have the information from the review records instead of the information from the reviewed (canonical) titles, then you can use
ca_status = 3to get the reviewed author ID (joining on the
title_idcolumn with the review's ID). You can also use the review title's
title_titleinstead of the reviewed title's. I'll take a look at the missing title when I get a chance. --MartyD 11:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- The authorship discrepancies are because the review records do not match the titles they are linked to. They should probably be corrected. But, if you'd rather have the information from the review records instead of the information from the reviewed (canonical) titles, then you can use
- I've identified the extra rows for the remaining F&SF issues, and the reason is the same... the magazine columns omitted authors. I've added the details to the page at http://www.michaelcross.me.uk/ajbbm/, together with some comments about other inconsistencies. Mjcrossuk 23:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- p.s. You cannot guarantee proper order. Sorting by ID works only if they were entered in the order they appear. If someone discovers a missing review and adds it later, the ID sort won't work. Your best bet is to sort by page number first, then title ID. Sorry about title_title -- I was just doing that while evaluating and forgot to take it out. --MartyD 11:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- I take your point about ordering on page number then title_id can only completely work if the reviews were entered into the ISFDB in the correct order... but I think I can be fairly confident about that for this range of F&SF issues at least as I supplied the raw data to Al via flat files back in the day! (You weren't to know that, though :) ) Mjcrossuk 23:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry about the delay. Yes, it does. A one-sided leaf between pp. 120 and 121. --MartyD 00:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
When you get a chance, could you please take a peek at the latest discussion of the development process on the Community Portal? TIA! Ahasuerus 22:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! Ahasuerus 17:37, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not going to argue with anything that's said there. The blow-it-up vs. work-with-what's-there debate is a bit of a religious one. I also live true, high-volume parallel development and know what a nightmare it is to manage, even when one has reasonable tools. Nothing is free. --MartyD 18:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- In my prior life I (occasionally) had to support a fairly large number of development and testing environments. It was a headache for the development team even though the volume of changes was relatively low. I kind of hoped that perhaps there was some recently discovered (?) clever trick to make these problems go away, but it sounds like the answer is "Heck, no!". Oh well :) Ahasuerus 03:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- I do think you/we would be better off with serial, directed projects whose work is divided and executed in parallel, as opposed to scattershot development efforts all going on in parallel. That's especially true where some of the contributors are inclined to alter or remove existing things, while others are inclined to add more functions making use of those very same existing things. No branching/merging capabilities will help with that -- it needs to be planned and managed to let one go, then the other. --MartyD 18:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- Well... Every time a prospective developer approaches me and shares his plans for making the world a better place, I suggest that it may be better if he started small. Perhaps implement a single requested feature or fix a reported bug. It never seems to elicit much enthusiasm for various reasons.
- Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts! Ahasuerus 03:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
The Tombs of Atuan
I added notes and scanned cover to your verified The Tombs of Atuan. I also have a question on the "About the Author" essay. It is credited to Le Guin. However, this looks like a standard publisher blurb (third person, etc.). I believe this should be credited as "uncredited"? Since this essay appears in multiple verified editions, I'll ask the other verifiers to weigh in as well. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with the proposed change. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Lifted the cover information for my entry Druids from your entry. Turnabout is fair play, please feel free to lift my cover image if you wish if yours completely matches mine. MLB 00:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
KHM (Kinder und Hausmärchen)
I changed the series number of http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1605352 this title] from 151 to 152, since there was one already with that number. If this is incorrect, please update the record. (This was found using the appropriate clean-up script.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, the problem is the original series has 210, with a single 151, and Bell in 1897 decided to present that 151 as two stories. I was waiting on Darrah's opinion about what we should do. See this, and please chime in. I imagine you've probably run into something like this before. Thanks. --MartyD 03:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
- Not really. I've never had to deal with a series with duplicate numbering. (Otherwise they'd be more than this series showing up on the clean-up script.) With the recent implementation of the acceptance of non-whole integers for series numbering, I'd suggest that each be given a fraction, i.e. 151.1 and 151.2. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
The Rebels of Tuglan
Hello, Marty! I added a note on the influence of the cover art for this publication. I wouldn't go as far as to variant the art, or would you think otherwise? Christian Stonecreek 07:38, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Very interesting. You can see they are defintely not the same. We don't normally make variants for "derived" works -- we either decide two versions of the work are similar enough to be treated as the same and ignore the differences, or we decide the two versions are dissimilar enough to be treated as different works. To me, that thinking should apply to artwork as well as text. Here, we can see the differences in the drawing, and we do not even know that both paintings are by the same artist. So I think one should not be made a variant of the other, for both of those reasons. --MartyD 11:29, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yep, I don't see it otherwise. Stonecreek 16:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Adding covers for Die sanfte Invasion
Is there a reason why my uploaded cover scans for the above named title are not visible? I've already replaced the inital huge ones with two that fall into the accepted range.--Dirk P Broer 12:11, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the links weren't added to the publication records. I did so, and they now should appear. Stonecreek 17:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- Oops! I had forgotten to place those links! I was secretly hoping that when I upload a cover using the page for a record that those links would appear with that record automatically. I don't kmow where I have that idea from. Perhaps others have made the same mistake as well and do we have a queue with covers that do not show with their records? Maybe something for a future wish-list...--Dirk P Broer 17:25, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I did not notice you had uploaded the cover images, or I would have added them. I wouldn't change a submission without leaving a note, but please do ask anytime you see something amiss. Thanks. --MartyD 00:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Space, Time & Crime
Hi, Marty! I think the cover for [this] is by Jack Gaughan. Definitely his style, and, though small, the image seems to have his initials [of the series of 'bubbles' at the bottom, on the right edge of the right white one] ... if these old eyes aren't getting all clouded?¿? I don't have a copy to check and didn't notify the other verifiers in case I'm mistaken. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:57, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Wow. Good eyes! I almost didn't find it even knowing where to look! I will update the entry. Thanks. --MartyD 00:45, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
World of Ptaavs
Ship Who Sang
Voyage to a Forgotten Sun
Replaced the amazon image for [this]. The artist's signature is on the cover, about an inch up and not quite an inch in from the bottom right, running along the black divider line just below the 'sunburst'. Altered the note accordingly. Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 18:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for accepting my submissions for Archon, but I'm a little confused as to what happened. I had intended to create a new title "Archon" as by "Richard Gordon" to be varianted to "Archon!" as by "Stuart Gordon". I seem to have ended up with "Archon" as by "Stuart Gordon". Did I do something wrong, and how do I progress from here? Many thanks. --AliHarlow 08:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I was cross-posting on your talk page about this very thing. I will continue the follow-up there. --MartyD 08:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
The Unknown Five
Filling in Author profile/bibliography
Not sure if this is the right place, but I just wanted to ask how I could add my published works to my author page: (http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?203027), and if they need to be verified.
Cheers, Jeremy Szal JeremySzal 03:00, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, and welcome. Yes, this is the right place. By the way, ISDFB community practice is to answer a question (and have any further discussion) on the page where it is first posted, keeping the conversation all on one page. That means the onus is on the poster to watch that page for further changes.
- To answer your question: First see ISFDB:Policy for some background. The ISFDB records published speculative fiction. The database is driven by recording publications and their contents. As publications are recorded, the author summary pages get populated. So, for example, what you did with Robot and Raygun #2 got the Jeremy Szal page started. You can record other publications the same way (or, if we already have the publications, add contents to them if missing). Other things you can do:
- Go here, gotten to by clicking "Edit Author Data" from the Jeremy Szal summary page, and fill out anything you're comfortable having in a public database.
- Go to Bio:Jeremy Szal and add a biographic sketch (such as you might send to a publisher), if you want to.
- Go to Author:Jeremy Szal and add any bibliographic notes, if you want to. This is a place where you could also provide information about works not eligible for inclusion in the database proper.
- Two Wiki pages you should be aware of are the Help Desk, a good place for how-to questions, where you can ask the broader community for help (rather than relying on one person to respond in timely-for-you fasion), and Moderator Noticeboard, where you can give the moderator pool information about submissions or ask that someone with moderator privileges do something for you.
- Database submissions are moderated, so you can try your hand at anything without worrying about whether you're doing it right -- you can't do any harm, and someone will help you with the rough spots. If you need help, just ask. We all value new contributions, and everyone's friendly and happy to lend a hand as needed. --MartyD 10:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Race against time
- I am away from my books until tomorrow. I will check when I return. --MartyD 10:10, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
The Broken Sword
The Black Cloud
- Thanks. Looks like the publisher should be Signet / New American Library, too. I will fix that. --MartyD 01:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Double toil and trouble
Hello Marty. Since you have been accepting all those Italian submissions of mine, could you help me with one point : it appears that two stories by Corrado Alvaro contained in the anthology have generated two distinct author records : 205618 and 205619 (the link doesn't seem to accept the name, on top of this). Same spelling, same parameters (i.e., none so far). I tried to find a way to merge them, to no avail. Thanks for your welcome help. Linguist 12:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
- The way you can deal with that is, from one of the author pages, edit the author and change the name, which will change it in all of the pubs and titles. Then go to each of those and edit the name there back to the correct name, which should now find the other author record (as it will be the only one with the matching name). Since it's several edits, I will take care of it to save you all of the submit + review cycles. --MartyD 23:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- p.s. Given that those author IDs are one apart, I think perhaps two submissions were accepted concurrently, so each did not find a record for the author and created one. --MartyD 23:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I added the Canadian price to your verified
Credit on "Under the Pyramids" in The Thing on the Doorstep
It's been almost a month since you held this submission. I seriously doubt keeping in the queue is going to get you a response to your message. In any case, it's a stub record for an undated issue of a magazine without contents, and isn't worth keeping anyway. I'll create a record for the missing issue #2. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Now that I've added the missing issue, I'm pretty sure that was the original intention of the submitter. It was the only issue with artwork by "Kurtstone". Mhhutchins 21:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, will reject it. I had received some email from him and was hoping he'd come back, but nothing. --MartyD 02:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
New image for Arthur C. Clarke's Ghost from the Grand Banks
Updating image for Harry Harrison's The Deathworld Trilogy
L. E. Modesitt, Jr.'s The Spellsong War
The Crossroads of Time
Greg Bear's / (Slant)
Orson Scott Cards' Lovelock
Gordon R. Dickson's The Dragon and the Djinn
I added the Canadian price and number line to your verified
William Gibson's The Difference Engine
Gordon R. Dickson's The Dragon in Lyonesse
T. H. White's The Book of Merlyn
Editor credit for Night Visions 8
Proposed Make changes
I know that your availability is very low at the moment, but I thought I'd mention that a new contributor, Mike Arnautov, has posted some suggestions re: the installation process. Ahasuerus 01:46, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Very nice to see someone taking interest! --MartyD 13:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking! Ahasuerus 22:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Introductions: Shortstory vs. Essay
Usually, the introduction to a book is an essay, but some of the books that you have verified list their introduction as a fictional short story. Could you check these and, if they really are short stories, add a title note to the Introduction record noting something like "Fictional introduction"? And of course if they actually are essays, then correct them? Works that fit under this question are:
Thanks, Chavey 06:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hauk verified that the first one was a fictional introduction, so I've added a note to that effect in its title rec, and crossed it off the list above. Chavey 18:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, yes, it is fictional. I will fix. --MartyD 12:44, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
The Waste Lands: Disambiguation of "Argument" content item
This record used to have the generic title "Argument". I disambiguated the title to say "Argument (The Waste Lands)", using the canonical title of the novel that it is connected to. The record appears in this publication that you have verified. Let me know if you want the disambiguated title to say "Argument (The Dark Tower III: The Waste Lands)" to match the title of your publication. I have invited other involved editors to participate in this discussion. Thanks, Patrick -- Herzbube Talk 17:10, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- "Argument (The Waste Lands)" is good enough for me. --Willem 19:39, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with Willem. No need for "The Dark Tower III:". --MartyD 20:09, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
"Tim" or Jim Thiesen
- It's clearly "Tim" in my copy. You can see it in this Look Inside. --MartyD 11:55, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- One of them must be a misprint, and "Tim" is only credited in this record while "Jim" has a couple dozen. I'll leave it to you to correct it, make a "pseudonym", or leave it alone. 18:25, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well, I'm pretty convinced the "Tim" credit is across printings in this book. Found a note saying The Relic Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child (Tor 0-812-54326-2, Feb ’97 [Jan ’97], $6.99, 474pp, pb) [Relic] Reissue (Forge 1995 as Relic) horror novel. A deadly relic wakes in a New York museum. This is a second movie tie-in edition, with a different cover, apparently a photo, though the copyright page still credits Tim Thiesen; second printing. on locusmag.com. Found same credit transcription at Toronto Public Library.
- I honestly believe that when an art credit is an obvious typo, it should be corrected and noted. It shouldn't be handled as if it were a pseudonym, and nothing in the rules explicitly states that it should (or at least I can't find it.) This topic came up for discussion years ago, and it was determined (but surely not documented) that an obvious error for a cover art credit should be corrected. Errors in credits for fiction are handled differently, as they should, since this is primarily a fiction database. The only time someone would search for "Tim Thiesen" is if they have a copy of the printings in which this typo was made. If that's the case, they could just as easily look at the ISFDB record for the publication and find the note about it being a typo. I see no value in creating pseudonyms and variant records, and I felt the issue had been settled. But working on and trying to clear the cleanup report which finds "near matches" in author names (Suspected Duplicate Authors) I'm finding that many editors are handling art credits the same as they would for fiction credits. Perhaps it's time to bring the subject up again, and this time to make it official by documenting any consensus in the help pages. Mhhutchins 05:29, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry about the delay. I finally made this change. I updated it in place and added a note to all three copies. --MartyD 03:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Lost Dorsai cover artist is Enric
You are one of the active verifiers of an edition of Lost Dorsai where the cover is credited to Fernando Fernandez. I would like to change the credit to Enric, based on this notification. Please join the discussion. Thanks, --Willem 20:26, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Crossroads of Time
"The Restaurant at the End of the Universe", by Douglas Adams
"Chicks 'n Chained Males", ed. by Esther Friesner
You did a Locus verification of this publication, so I thought I'd mention a couple of changes I made to it when doing a Primary Verification. The story "May/December at the Mall" was credited to "Brian D. Akers", presumably because that's how it was credited in the ToC, but it's credited to "Brian Dana Akers" at the title page, so I corrected that. The main thing, though, is that I changed the listed price. I gave my evidence there, but it appears that Locus just erred in their listing, either because of a typo or because they used an advance publisher's notice without having the book in hand. Chavey 17:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- Wow, a Locus1 verification from six years ago. Now I feel old! :-) --MartyD 11:09, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
New cover scan for Tor Icehenge
cover art credit
The One Tree
Default display of non-English translations
When you get a chance, could you please review this discussion? The proposal basically boils down to changing the behavior of the Summary Bibliography when the viewing user is not logged in. Currently only English translations are displayed for unauthenticated users. The proposal would change it to displaying all translations. The downside is that the Summary page could get longer and harder to navigate.
I am trying to get a sense of how widespread the support for this change is. TIA! Ahasuerus 01:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I believe you may have misinformed a new editor about how to title omnibuses which contain the constituent titles in their overall titles. There are more than 1100 OMNIBUS-typed records which have " / " instead of "/". Perhaps you meant the opposite? Mhhutchins|talk 17:20, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
- Well, the help explicitly calls for spaces around the slash in imprint + publisher and, in contrast, only says to separate titles in an omnibus with a slash. But I can't ever keep the nuances straight. Thanks for mentioning it. I will put them back. --MartyD 01:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The Number of the Beast
Scanned cover image for Jim Butcher's "White Night"
Scanned cover image for Jim Butcher's "Turn Coat"
I added the Canadian price to your verified
A Wizard of Earthsea
1. I plan to change credits for "About the Author" and "About the Illustrator" from Le Guin and Robbins to "uncredited" as for other printings of the book, eg 4th printing .
2. The Notes imply to me a transcript from the 16th ed. copyright page: a list of dates for the 1st to 14th printings that omits the 15th. Is that correct?
- I have provided a partial answer at User talk:Marc Kupper#A Wizard of Earthsea. --Marc Kupper|talk 22:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- I added my comments there. --MartyD 11:52, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Pebble in the Sky cover artist
Reviews of CHAPBOOKs
Reviews of CHAPBOOKs should be linked to their SHORTFICTION content, per ISFDB standards. I've corrected the two that were reviewed in the latest issues of Theaker's Quarterly. (They showed up on the cleanup report which finds such reviews.) Thanks. Mhhutchins|talk 07:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Michael. Brain cramp. --MartyD 03:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Just a question to both of you about the exclusion of CHAPBOOKs from title series: I've missed the initial discussion which must have preceded the setting of this standard. So, what was the reason for that? After all, afaik they are viewed as a special type of COLLECTION, and those aren't excluded. There are certain cases where it wouldn't hurt (and be more correct than the standard) to have them in a title series (and some cases there are where it hurts the eye — at least mine): for example in the case of shared universes. Thanks in advance for any information and thoughts. Christian Stonecreek 07:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know the answer. I'd be interested to find out. --MartyD 03:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Because the CHAPBOOK and SHORTFICTION title records both can't contain series data (or they would be duplicated in the series display), a decision had to be made about which one would contain the data. So the consensus arrived at was to go with the SHORTFICTION title record, since it would be part of the series regardless of what type of publication in which it was published: MAGAZINE, CHAPBOOK, COLLECTION, or ANTHOLOGY. Mhhutchins|talk 04:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Your verified records are showing up on this cleanup report. Also, I'm uncertain why Jeff Rubens is credited as the editor. We normally don't credit the editor of non-genre magazines, basically to avoid creating records for a non-genre author. Mhhutchins|talk 00:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, I haven't finished with them yet. Real life interrupted before I could spend the time figuring out what binding(s) best match the oddball sizes this magazine uses. I only credited Rubens because he wrote the foreword on the book collecting the first set of the Chthonic stories, so he already had an author record. I didn't credit Edgar Kaplan on the issues where he was the editor. If it were up to me, I would not do a joint editorial credit (I'd use Rubens on the ones where I wanted to record him, Editors of The Bridge World on the ones where I don't want to record anyone), but that's not what the help calls for. But as for the Rubens credits, I don't have strong feelings; I only did it because I have the information and he had an author record anyway. If you think I should remove the credits, I will. --MartyD 23:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)