User talk:Mellotronman

Jump to navigation Jump to search


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

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

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

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --MartyD 10:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Adding new publications of recorded titles

Hi, and welcome. I accepted your submission of the 1974 Puffin The Old Powder Line. While researching it, I found a cover image associated with its ISBN on Amazon UK, so I added that as a cover link. Please review to make sure it matches your publication (if not, please delete the link or upload a scan and replace it with a link to that).

One tip about entering books: If searching by ISBN finds nothing, it is best to search for the title. If you find the title and click on it in the search results, you will be at a screen that lists all publications of that title. There, you will find "Add Publication to This Title" in the Editing Tools at the left, which you should use. Add New Novel (any of the Add New XXX) creates another title record and then adds the publication to that new title record. When that duplicates a title for which we already have a record, then a second "Merge" step is required to combine the two. It's not a big deal, but is a little more work and is also a manual step that might be forgotten, so Add Publication to This Title is preferable.

Your entry was, however, complete and correctly done. I hope we will see many more! Thanks for taking the time to review what should be entered, and thank you for contributing. --MartyD 10:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Improperly uploaded cover image file

This cover image file was not uploaded correctly. You should go to the publication record and click on the link labeled "Upload new cover scan" and follow the directions from there. After the file has been uploaded, click on the image and copy its URL. Then go back to the publication record, choose "Edit This Pub" link under the Editing Tools menu. On the edit page, paste the URL in the "Image URL" field. This should be done for each image file which you upload to the ISFDB server. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 20:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Oversized image

Re this image file: Its height exceeded the requested limit of 600 pixels (it was 794 pixels), so I resized it to be within the standards. Please link it to the publication record when you get a chance. Thanks. Mhhutchins 15:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for rejecting your submissions ...

... but you tried to establish a title series Star Trek Bantam Books (1967-1978) for several titles by James Blish, where you - I assume - wanted to establish a publication series. A fundamental difference between the two types of series is that a title series is never associated with one publisher. Any title may be published by a different publisher (and has in this case, for example by Corgi). So, a publication series would be added to the publication and usually belongs to only this publisher. Alas, to change or add information such as this to the single publications, you'd have first to discuss it with the primary verifier(s). Thanks, Stonecreek 14:56, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh well, I just saw that such a series is already established, so sorry again for rejecting! Please resubmit and take my apologies: maybe a moderator shuld moderate only things he knows about ;-). Stonecreek 15:14, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
-)) My intention is to trim Blish's lengthy SF entry down by putting all the Star Trek stories into the pre-existing series, making the database more accurate in the process. I wasn't sure what series title to use, so I just used the one the collections are already in. I've never thought of those episode short stories as such, as they've only ever been published within the books, but I suppose they fit the site category for SF! Andy/mellotronmanMellotronman 17:07, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
The individual stories though wouldn't fit well into a series titled "Star Trek Bantam Books (1967-1978)" since they have been published individually by other publishers like Dutton and Corgi. Why not enter them into Star Trek: Original Series, since they're prose adaptations of the screenplays of episodes from the original TV series? Just a suggestion. I know how tricky it can be working with series, as the case of Star Trek can be even more so, since it seems to be both a publication series and a title series. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 19:14, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Hold on. Looking at the title series Star Trek Bantam Books (1967-1978), it seems to have been "misnamed", since it includes all of the Blish adaptations, which have been published by several publishers other than Bantam. I'm going to rename the series "Star Trek Original TV Series Adaptations". A bit unwieldy as a title, but at least it's more accurate. I'll move the individual stories to this series as well. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Mhhutchins 19:19, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
That strikes me as an eminently suitable compromise! Thanks for moving the individual stories, including the J.A. Lawrence ones. You can see I've got nothing better to do at Christmas, can't you? :-) Mellotronman 16:00, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
And the time it took to move all of those stories into a series is a good indicator of just how busy I am as well! Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 16:12, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Geston series

I'm holding your submissions to place three novels by Geston into a sequential and numbered series titled "The Wars". I can find no source that indicates that these works are connected by anything other than certain themes and "moods" (according to The Science Fiction Encyclopedia.) Do you know if this is an authorized designation by the author himself? What is the source for your data, other than the Baen omnibus which brings the three works under one cover? (That's not sufficient reason to consider them a series.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi - having just read the omnibus ed., the first two have a common setting, although, set some centuries apart, no common characters. I'll admit that the third is less obviously connected, but appears to be set in the same 'world'. Here's an edited quote from the author's introduction to the omnibus ed.:

"The three novels collected here were not originally designed as a unified trilogy...Completion of the first unexpectedly suggested the second, which may therefore be loosely considered a sequel...When I picked things up again with The Siege of Wonder, the appeal of violent histories distant enough to be myths and the incongruity of the pedestrian and the recognizable in direct conflict with the literally divine and magical in such settings was as strong as it had been before." Perhaps 'The Siege of Wonder' should be removed from the series, but the first two titles are direct, if slightly distant sequels. To be honest, 'Siege' is more of a sequel to the other two than Joe Haldeman's 'Forever Peace', listed on the site as book 2 of the 'Forever War' series, which it absolutely isn't! [Thinks: Should I attempt to de-series that title, if only to see what happens?] However, you're the moderator, which makes it your call :-) Oh, and you're absolutely right re.omnibuses not necessarily denoting series - the same applies to the Haldeman! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mellotronman (talkcontribs) .

I'll accept the submissions. Don't be surprised if another editor comes along who doesn't consider it a series and wants to change it again. When the connections are this tenuous, it's too subjective to make a definitive decision. If you have a case against the Haldeman series, leave a message on the talk pages of the verifying editors. Again, someone thought it was a series. I'd bet the author considers it a thematic series, or he would have come up with another name. Mhhutchins 18:40, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
I'd strenuously argue the first two - let's see what happens. I'll take your advice on the Haldemans. I think he *does* consider it a thematic series, but once again, while two titles are directly connected, the other... isn't.

The Wonderful Secret

I have rejected your submissions to re-variant The Wonderful Secret (Part 1 of 2) and The Wonderful Secret (Part 2 of 2) to The Ultimax Man. According to the notes, "The Wonderful Secret" was a novella that was serialized in two parts. "The Ultimax Man" is a novel that was an expansion of the "The Wonderful Secret". As such, for ISFDB purposes, they are not the same work. Variants are for variant titles; not variant works (unless minor). If you think I missed something, please let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, but there doesn't seem to be any essential difference between this case and, say, Laumer's A Plague of Demons, initially serialized (in an earlier, shorter form) as The Hounds of Hell (Part 1 of 2) and The Hounds of Hell (Part 2 of 2). My intention was to shift The Wonderful Secret out of his regular run of shortfiction, as it seems to bear the same relationship to The Ultimax Man as "The Hounds of Hell" does to "A Plague of Demons", saving completists from tracking down a work they probably already own.
We are not always consistent on these things. A few of our rules depend on interpretation. This is one of those (how much difference is enough difference). In general, we leave that to the verifiers to resolve through discussion. If you wish to pursue the change, you are welcome to discuss it with the magazine verifiers (go to the serial title records, click on the magazine which will list the verifiers; you can click on the verifiers name get to their wiki user page) and see if they would agree. If they agree, I doubt a moderator would object to the change. Hope that helps. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I doubt whether I'm bothered enough to go through anything major - I was hoping to be able to add some useful info, but, as you say, interpretation has probably reared its ugly head!

Sue Burstzynski

I've put your submission to make Sue Burstzynski a pseudonym of Sue Bursztynski on hold. Please check with the verifier of the pub that this is not a typo.--Rkihara 17:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC) Sorry to take so long to reply! To be perfectly honest, I don't own this publication - it's simply what seems to be a duplicate author I spotted while browsing the site. I've no idea how to verify whether or not this is a typo, and it probably doesn't matter THAT much in the grand scheme of things!

Earl Aubec and Other Stories

Hello, in fact the correct way to this would have been a set of two submissions: 1) the first for removing the SHORTSTORY (this one) via the "Remove Titles From This Pub" link, 2) the second to add the NOVEL (here) either by entering its TitleID via "Import Content : OPTION 2" or by directly editing the publication (note that in this case a third step may be required to variant or to merge). I've done this for you. Note that these changes also require to transform the title from COLLECTION to OMNIBUS. Hauck 17:55, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Many thanks for fixing this on my behalf - I'm sure you did it in a fraction of the time it would've taken me :-) Sometimes isfdb's editing procedures seem slightly arcane, until I think about the complexity of what's actually being done! I know for next time, now... Incidentally, I don't know if it makes any 'real world' difference, but the subtitle 'A Fable' isn't present in the Earl Aubec collection (or, rather, omnibus).
Yes, it's the problem of putting the subtitles at title level, which is IMHO not a very good idea. Hauck 14:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I see your point. Should the subtitle-less version be made into a variant title? Or is that going a bit too far? :-)
IMHO we should keep it like this, in this case the problem is compounded by the fact that the novel is included in an omnibus which do not allow us something like this. Hauck 16:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I see! The complexities of correct indexing are... complex :-) Incidentally, I've no idea how this could be done, but Earl Aubec is vol.13 of the 'Eternal Champion' tp series, but, given that most vols are *also* parts of other series (which take precedence), there doesn't seem to be any way of listing that series in its own right. I suppose something can't be in two places at once...
It seems that it's already the case, see here. Some volumes may seem to be in two places at once because one of this places is a Title series and the other a Publication series. Hauck 18:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah - Pub.series is listed alongside publisher and can be viewed from the link, in other words, publications CAN be found under two different series! I've learnt something today :-)

Distant Seas


About this one. Is that a fixup by adding additional material or by just adding the different stories one after another (the way Asimov's Foundation was done)? If the latter, we will keep that as a collection so that we can connect to the original material. If it is indeed a fix-up with new material, there still can be a case to keep it as a collection and add the new pieces as a stories. Let me know what you think. Annie 02:05, 14 October 2020 (EDT)

And while we are on the topic of Distant Seas :) How about instead of changing the series, we just rename the existing one to "Primrose / Distant Seas"? Annie 02:10, 14 October 2020 (EDT)

Hi Annie. There's minimal extra material, as in, 'a one-page introduction', so Foundation is a suitable comparison. Interestingly, although I see that the Foundation titles are listed as collections, two similar cases I was referencing, this one and this one are 'novels'. This is your classic 'grey area', isn't it? :-) This is one for you mods, I think! Renaming the series as you suggest makes sense. Andy

It has to do with how similar the original text is - aka - were the stories rewritten to some extent to fit as a novel (I think Anderson did that) or literally put in the book as they were (Asimov's case). But yes - it is a grey area. Let me do some digging and see if I can find an answer :) Annie 13:42, 16 October 2020 (EDT)
I kept is a a collection for now - but added your notes. It is easily changeable if we decide to make it a novel downstream. Thanks for finding the data about this one. Annie 13:12, 18 October 2020 (EDT)

Cool :-) The separate SF are still in 'short fiction series' under 'Distant Seas', though - shall I change them to the new series?

Oops - fixed. Here. Annie 20:22, 19 October 2020 (EDT)

Thanks! I suppose it makes sense to maintain the sub-series, too.

Non-genre stories

I had to reject your edit to Tel Aviv Noir. It is a non-genre anthology so we only add the genre stories (As "Only genre contents, the introduction and interior art are indexed." in the notes indicates. This is why only 5 stories are listed. The note for the 14 stories is still correct, we just do not list the ones which are not speculative fiction.

If you believe that anything else is speculative or there are mistakes in the page numbers, please discuss with the PV first. :)

Also - when trying to reorder an anthology, please do NOT swap stories around, just use the number of pages. This will reorder it without moving translations between authors - the way you were trying to reorder them, would have sent any existing variant to the wrong place (as you were effectively editing title records). Thanks and let me know if you have any questions. Annie 00:54, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Fair points, Annie! Apologies for wasting your time. I made the rookie error of treating an anthology as if it were a collection.

You say 'please discuss with the PV first'. As in 'primary verification'? Sorry to sound like an idiot, but I don't know who or how to discuss issues before making changes! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mellotronman (talkcontribs) .

No need to apologize at all - I just wish you did not lose your time adding them :( They can be added to the notes if you feel like doing that (as in "The following stories are also included but not indexed as they are not genre").
Same applies for collections by the way - unless we consider the author above threshold (in which case all their fiction and all their non-fiction books are eligible), we won't list the complete collection either.
Oops - sorry for the unclear note. Yes - PV is a Primary Verifier. If there is someone in that table, it means that they worked from a copy of the book (permanent means they also have the book in their possession). In order to discuss with them, click on their name in the PV box and then go to their Discussion tab, press the "+" sign in the middle of the tabs and you can leave them a message (the way I left you one). You may want to also click on "Watch this page" checkbox at the bottom before submitting (so when they respond, you will see it in Your Watchlist. In this case, the page you want is Pete's Talk page.
Let me know if that explained it and if I can assist further. Annie 04:48, 3 February 2021 (EST)
Thank you! That makes more sense now :-) I like to do my bit for the database, but sometimes get a bit over-enthusiastic :-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mellotronman (talkcontribs) .
We all do :) And all help is always appreciated - even when something needs to be rejected :)
A couple of housekeeping items: When adding an answer in the wiki, use an extra ":" compared to what whatever you are answering to is using so the conversation looks ordered (I added one to your answer so you can see what I mean). Also - sign your messages by typing 4 tildes (~~~~) so people know who said what. I added the unsigned templates above for the same reason. When you use the tildes, you get a signature like mine basically :) And there is also a sign button at the top you can use instead of typing if you prefer (the one before the last). Annie 07:08, 3 February 2021 (EST)
Like this? :-) Mellotronman 11:52, 3 February 2021 (EST)
Probably? As long as you did not do it manually. :) Annie 12:05, 3 February 2021 (EST)
Er, I did :-) I'll use the signature button this time. Honest!--Mellotronman 12:21, 3 February 2021 (EST)
Nah, you can write the tildes (I always do) - but after you post there is no way to see if you used tildes or hardcoded the whole string with the links and date and so on :) Annie 12:37, 3 February 2021 (EST)

Spirits of Salt: A Tale of the Coral Sword

About this change: There are two possible cases here:

  • It was misprinted in the book. In this case we record AS PRINTED and variant to the other title.
  • Someone fat-typed it here. Then we need to change it.

There is no way to know which case we are in - unless you have the book or can find a scan/Look Inside somewhere. As one of the books have an active verifier, please discuss the change with him (he may be able to open the book and change) so we can find out how/what needs to be done. Please let me know if you have any questions/concerns. Annie 15:49, 8 February 2021 (EST)

Hi Annie, I haven't just assumed this one, I'm doing it from an e-version! The title is listed four times throughout, all as 'Heart', not 'Sword'. I can provide screengrabs, if they're any use! I can see how someone looked at the text, got 'sword' stuck in their head and typed it by mistake :-) Is contacting the verifier fairly simple? Andy Mellotronman 16:01, 8 February 2021 (EST)
So we know the ebook has this title. There is still a chance that in some printed versions, it was misspelled - which we will want to record. So go to the verified book here, save the link, click on the name of the verifier which will get you to His user page, click on "discussion" (opening this) and press the plus sign. Make sure you mention the title and leave a link (the one we saved) to it so Bob knows what you are talking about. As a rule, verified data is changed only after we check with the PV (the active ones - if we cannot find them, we can change and leave a note if we are sure of a change). Depending on the result, we may need to unmerge here or just rename. If he says the typo is in the DB, then we can rename and merge (or merge directly ;)) Hope that makes some sense. Annie 16:19, 8 February 2021 (EST)
Thanks Annie, have messaged him. Hope what I said makes sense! Mellotronman 16:29, 8 February 2021 (EST)
So either you pressed "Edit" and not "plus" or did not give a title to your message there. :) Which still added it but as a note at the end of the previous one - making it hard to read. I fixed that -- but keep that for next time. That way when he clicks on his notification, it will send him to the message directly. And yes - it looks fine - if he is unclear, he will ask :) Annie 16:33, 8 February 2021 (EST)
I didn't give it a title :-( You must all get a bit sick of nursing 'us lot' through the labyrinthine ISFDB editing functions! BTW, thanks for fixing my last edit's sub-series! Mellotronman 16:47, 8 February 2021 (EST)
Not at all - noone is born knowing everything and I would rather help now than get people learn bad habits and try to undo that. And our DB can be... interesting. :)
In case you did not check "Watch this page" at the bottom of the message or at the top of the page, Bob's answer won't show in your Watchlist (that's how I see who had responded to me ;) ) but Bob responded that it was indeed a DB typo and not a book typo - so he will update and merge. :) Annie 16:56, 8 February 2021 (EST)
No, I didn't see that... :-) I assumed his reply would flag up the same way as yours! NEVER assume... :-)) I can always refer back to this discussion when responding to inevitable future messages, as I'm bound to forget the subtler points of ISFDB protocol! :-) Thanks for passing his message on, as I'm still not sure how to see it for myself! Good to know I wasn't making the whole thing up, too :-) Mellotronman 17:10, 8 February 2021 (EST)
The yellow flag is for "someone posted on your page". For other people's pages, you need to add them to your watchlist and check it occasionally :) If it is not on your watchlist, you can see it by going to his page: here directly. The easiest way to find it is by My contributions from the top of the Wiki page - you will see all your recent posts including the ones on other pages and you can click on them.
Noone thought you are making it up - but it would have helped a bit if you had said in the moderator note that the ebook had the title the other way - then we would have started from message 3 above. Mind you - I would have still sent you to the PV. ;) Annie 17:22, 8 February 2021 (EST)
It's a steep learning curve :-))) Mellotronman 06:20, 9 February 2021 (EST)

(Unindent) Hi Annie, sorry to bother you, as this is a different subject entirely, but you've been very helpful recently! I'm about to enter the contents of a collection, Alongside eight SF/novelettes, it includes a 30,000-word novella, new to the database, which the publication notes state was originally published in Italian translation in 1977! How *on earth* do I add this? Should it be listed under its Italian title (I Predoni), with its subsequent translation (The Predators) as a variant? Given that Bounds wrote in English (being, y'know, British), surely it would be more useful to list it under its English title? Aargh! There may be something in the FAQ about dealing with this, but it's a fairly unusual situation... I had a look at Harry Harrison's entry, as his later Deathworld novels were only published in Russian, but they've never had English-language publication, so that didn't help :-( Incidentally, thanks for replying to my Monteleone query on the Wiki help desk - I've only just remembered I posted something :-/ Mellotronman 06:41, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

You are overthinking it. :) Add the novella in English to the book, using the date of the book and NOT 1977. This will be the parent record - because this is the original text regardless of what got published when. If you know where it was published in Italian, add the book/magazine - that will create the Italian story. Then variant the Italian story to the English one (and add notes in the English one explaining the situation and in the Italian one explaining that this was the first publication. If you do not know where it was published, add all you know about that Italian edition in the notes of the English story. This is one of the rare usecases where the parent date will be after a variant date legitimately. Annie 06:57, 12 April 2021 (EDT)
Thank you :-) To add to the fun, the 2016 ed. (which I have) is revised from the 2005 ed., so I'll have to add the new novella as 2016, not 2005, as I don't know whether or not it was in the first edition! Hey, at least it'll be added to the database :-) Since there doesn't appear to be any way of amending brand-new additions, I'll have to wait until this has been approved, then go back and do the various housekeeping tasks you've outlined :-) Mellotronman 07:23, 12 April 2021 (EDT)
Approved although I entertained the idea of rejecting it. That’s not how you add existing stories to a book - what you did created a new record for each story - which I had to merge after that one by one. Next time use Import (option 2 in this case). Look at the publication, left menu and locate Import. Click on it - and there is a help page linked. Saves you typing and saves in the merges after that. :) And while doing all the other housekeeping, please also update the title of the Introduction essay - add the book name in brackets. This is always required for essays with common names. Annie 07:39, 12 April 2021 (EDT)
And I rejected the second one. I can do the import for you if you would rather not do it but approving it in this form would have required 18 merges after that. So let’s try with import. And watch out for that Introduction. :) Annie 07:43, 12 April 2021 (EDT)
Just kill me now :-( User edits aren't supposed to make MORE work for you mods! I'll go back and do it properly. "Stay after class and write 'I shall not make extra work for mods' 100 times" :-/ Mellotronman 07:48, 12 April 2021 (EDT)
Newish editors, especially the ones who want to learn the DB, get a few free passes. More than a few if you get a friendly moderator. :) You could not have known if you had never added contents before. Live and learn. I should have approved and made you submit the 18 merges but that would have added 18 more submissions to the queue and we are in a bit of bottleneck just now so I’d rather just teach you how to do Import (as opposed to teaching you how to do import and making you clean up after the edit). Think of this that way - if you are typing a title, you are creating a new record. If this is not what you want to do, you need Import and not Edit for contents and Add/Clone and not New (for books):) Annie 07:57, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

merge vs. variant

Hello. When encountering duplicate title records, these should be merged, not varianted - variants are for different title record, either different titles and/or authors for the same work. Regards, MagicUnk 14:03, 27 August 2021 (EDT)

Hi - sorry! I'm not sure which of my edits this refers to, but I'll try to get this right next time! Mellotronman 04:01, 31 August 2021 (EDT)


I'm holding your merge submission because this is just the first step. These three publications will need to be converted to CHAPBOOKS. Will you be submitting the edits, or would you like me to do it? I'll approve this submission as soon as you let me know. John Scifibones 09:22, 23 June 2022 (EDT)

I took care of it. John Scifibones 17:45, 27 June 2022 (EDT)
Thanks, John - sorry, I was away for a few days and didn't look at the site. I'm afraid it didn't occur to me to change these entries to chapbooks! Mellotronman 10:50, 29 June 2022 (EDT)
No problem, it's a team effort! John Scifibones!
:-) Mellotronman 08:45, 30 June 2022 (EDT)

The Mouser Goes Below

First of all, apologies for the extremely long delay. About your proposal to change the type from NOVELLA to NOVEL: as it is a change with considerable impact on several Primary Verified publications, please reach out to the active PV and ask for their input before changing the title type. (and if agreed, it would entail more than just changing the type of the title record, too...) Regards, MagicUnk (talk) 08:58, 6 January 2023 (EST)

I agree with this change. Also see this discussion. Collections containing "The Mouser Goes Below" remain collections. --Willem (talk) 09:27, 6 January 2023 (EST)
Apologies to MagicUnk for not coming back to this sooner! And sorry for causing such (admittedly low-level) havoc... However, it's not as if the title in question is borderline-length! I'm slightly confused now - what's the verdict? I see the entries are currently still listed as novellas. Looking at the discussions referenced in your messages, though, the collections should clearly remain collections, as they contain just one novel and some short stories. A rule needed to be made, and it was! Mellotronman (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2023 (EDT)
I pinged Magicunk about this yesterday here. He still has the edit on hold, so I can't approve it myself. Hope he responds soon. --Willem (talk) 11:03, 3 May 2023 (EDT)
Is it really nine months since I read that? I can see that I've given you an awkward one, but I just couldn't let it go :-) Anyway, after so long, what's another few days? Mellotronman (talk) 12:00, 3 May 2023 (EDT)
I just added links in pending edits to the Morrow book club edition and the original Ace edition of Knight and Knave of Swords, which contains this story. --Username (talk) 13:00, 3 May 2023 (EDT)

Gollancz 100 Years of SF --Username (talk) 12:32, 20 January 2024 (EST)