User talk:Rtrace/Archive12

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Author correction 1/3

Please change M. A. Fernandez-Delgado to M. A. Fernández-Delgado (PV confirms that's how it's printed in Locus). Thanks. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 22:13, 3 January 2019 (EST)

Done. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:01, 4 January 2019 (EST)

The external IDs

When you have a chance, can you stop by with an answer? :) Thanks! Annie 22:24, 3 January 2019 (EST)

Weird Tales

Hi Ron,

Can you look at the pages for the internal art here? It seems like the position and what to be shown had been swapped but there are also some very big numbers that do not make sense as positions? If I read the notation correctly "fcg 222" should mean facing page 222? If so I can correct all of these (or you can if you prefer). Thanks! Annie 00:54, 4 January 2019 (EST)

Fixed. They were reversed. However, I've changed my mind about stating "fcg X" for inserted plates and don't do it that way any more. The reason for the large numbers is that anything in volume 2 had 2000 added to the page number to keep the volumes in order. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:13, 4 January 2019 (EST)
Thanks! Something is still off - see "Arthur's Hall" and "The Doge and Dogess" for example. Also - I am not sure if the note makes sense when the 2000 is hiding in the "position". Annie 12:06, 4 January 2019 (EST)
I'm still not understanding what you see as off. The two stories you mention are in Vol. II, and thus appear after the Vol. I story. I did see one further error where an illustration was in the wrong volume and I've corrected that. I also removed the note which is a holdover from when we couldn't pipe the page number for ordering. Please let me know if I'm still missing something. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:23, 4 January 2019 (EST)
Me looking at it without thinking - for some reason I did not connect the "2 volumes" with the new number 1. All looks good now. Thanks! Annie 20:18, 4 January 2019 (EST)

The Pacha of Many Tales

Ron, For this collection of linked stories three publication records Saunders and Otley 1835 307398, Wallis & Newell 1836 674615, and Gutenberg #21571 333352 list known spec-fic contents only (wording varies, from Bluesman's keyboard and yours, probably). The selection is identical and last month I copied it to the new record Carey & Hart 1834 674613 --after one title change "The Story of the Greek Slave" by reference to the three e-copies.

Some publication notes contain this:

  • Speculative fiction content only. Data from Bleiler's "Science-Fiction: The Early Years".

The linked e-copies at Google books are adequate to provide all of the 1835/1836 page numbers, and other data that we provide except perhaps hc format. Does Bleiler's Science Fiction identify the selection of eight contents as spec-fic? Or have you supplemented Bleiler there? In general does Bleiler's "science fiction" correspond well to our speculative fiction scope? --Pwendt|talk 14:05, 8 January 2019 (EST)

Certainly anything in Bleiler's Early Years would be within the scope of the project. However its scope is narrower than ours. You can see which stories Bleiler specifically lists from the full listing beginning on page 479. They are the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Last Voyages of Huckaback. Of the remaining listed stories, Greek Slave and Scarred Lover both appear in other collections or anthologies. That leaves the two other Huckaback stories, which are probably added to complete the series, the majority of which are known to have speculative content. I will note that the collection is listed in Clute/Grant which has a different scope than Bleiler, i.e. Bleiler wouldn't list the fantastic or supernatural stories which is suggested by the listing in Clute/Grant. We may actually be listing fewer stories than we should. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:22, 8 January 2019 (EST)

Typo: Border Ghost Stories

In your verified publication Border Ghost Stories, the publisher should be "Erskine MacDonald". --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 22:38, 9 January 2019 (EST)

Fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:32, 10 January 2019 (EST)

Weird Bleiler in notes

Hi, you've secondary verified this pub, with the BREAK & early years in the notes (so I guess it's you who entered it originally), but without Bleiler ID added. Looks like it might have been a mistake. Can you have a look? Thanks! MagicUnk 08:57, 11 January 2019 (EST)

I probably shouldn't have added that template. While Bleiler notes the title and date of the Czech publication, he is really reviewing the English translation. I've removed the template. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:22, 11 January 2019 (EST)

Weird Tales, February 1924

I was looking something up and noticed your listing of the reprint of Weird Tales, February 1924. No date was given, so on a hunch, I checked out, and here is a half-date of 2016. If that sounds right, you can add it to your listing, or you can list it as a note. MLB 06:41, 13 January 2019 (EST)

I don't think that date is correct. My verification is dated 2014-10-08 so I had a copy in hand well before the 2016 date. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:30, 13 January 2019 (EST)

Artwork Naming

FYI, ISFDB:Community Portal#Merging illustrations

Happy New Year! --Pwendt|talk 17:00, 25 January 2019 (EST)


Hi, Abracadabra is not a poem, but a brief article, according to Dschultz. Is he right?--Dirk P Broer 06:39, 31 January 2019 (EST)

They're correct. I've changed it to an ESSAY. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:01, 31 January 2019 (EST)

Gnomes / Kabouter

Hi, Ron. There was the idea that this might somewhat likely be a fiction title, since it seems to tell the story (or stories) of the life of the Kabouters. Since you are a primary verifier, what's your opinion of the title? Christian Stonecreek 10:05, 31 January 2019 (EST)

I checked Reginald3 and he lists it as fiction. It certainly isn't a novel. I could see converting it to a collection. The problem is that the constituent parts are not all well defined. However, I'd be willing to give it a try, if folks would like. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:53, 31 January 2019 (EST)
Yes, that would be great. And the other PV (of the German edition) thinks along the same line. Christian Stonecreek 04:25, 1 February 2019 (EST)

The Star Rover

Hi, Ron. Thanks for your reply at Moderator's Noticeboard re The Research Magnificent. I know a lot more about that non-genre Wells novel, from 1915 newspapers and the Wikipedia book article that we had somehow overlooked (now linked here).

In 1915 newspapers I find data on The Star Rover by Jack London, which you verified from online copy at The Internet Archive. Now in bullet-list format I submit update of that publication record P345055 with Note "Please hold for PVerifier Rtrace."

That didn't work. Nihonjoe has approved it. Submission 4188348. If I understand correctly, you have a report of the old and new source code in "My Primary Verifications".

Concerning the first bullet point (usually I put "1st ed.", "1st US ed.", etc on the first line), my source for the main point is more than a dozen June to September items from UK, atop the search report for newspapers and magazines. The earliest says forthcoming early August and I didn't read further. Maybe later.

See the next section. --Pwendt 2019-02-07

You see that I replaced two lines of your Notes with data in the External IDs field. I have been mainly away since mid-December, and haven't yet read the instructions about the much-expanded External IDs. Please confirm (or correct me here) that I have done this correctly, and that this is now recommended to eliminate the {BREAK} to new page, in records where the new page contains nothing but Bleiler and Reginald citations. --Pwendt|talk 17:29, 6 February 2019 (EST)

Prior to the use of External IDs field, I always entered "15-19808" rather than 15019808, where "-" replaces all zeroes that follow the year, as instructed by Mhhutchins. For me that makes the year easier to read. Are you consistent in this now? (It may date from someone's ID migration.) --Pwendt|talk 17:35, 6 February 2019 (EST)
In my verifications, I can see which fields were changed, but only the current state of each field. However, there are no worries here. Your edits are fine. I now enter LCCNs in the manner you describe, but had not done so in the past. It took me a while to realize that the external ID field could handle the hyphenated format. Thanks for your edits. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:19, 6 February 2019 (EST)
Sorry, I was too speedy. :) ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:33, 7 February 2019 (EST)
No worries. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:27, 7 February 2019 (EST)

The Extra Day

Second of two from one editor today.

Ron, Thanks for your Monday reply at ISFDB:Moderator noticeboard#Currey book check. Here is another instance of the same problem but the mistake appears to be your own rather than Bluesman's.

Problem recap: secondary verification of Macmillan UK or US publication from Currey/Bleiler/Reginald. And also from WorldCat. Where it seems likely that the citation of WorldCat is a mistake --but Currey/Bleiler/Reginald should be checked for coherence: do/es it/they specify the UK or US edition?

The Extra Day, Algernon Blackwood (Macmillan, 1915) P352289
The cited WorldCat record states "Macmillan & Co.: London, 1915" which fits our convention. But we state "The Macmillan Company", which is New York.

There are 7 WorldCat records as 1915, four London and three New York.
(Same as The Research Magnificent by Wells, the Macmillans originally published this work almost simultaneously. I have assembled some data from 1915 newspapers London, New York, and Toronto. But I have not checked British Library or LC and I am out of time with 8:00 EST appointment across town. Good night.) --Pwendt|talk 19:25, 6 February 2019 (EST)

The Clutes don't specify country (or indeed publisher). All the other secondary sources note the London publisher, so I've changed it. I'll leave it to you if you want to clone it for a US edition based on the other Worldcat records. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:00, 6 February 2019 (EST)
See preceding sections too.
Thanks. I may do that for The Extra Day. For the record, however, the underscore note refers to The Star Rover, previously published in London as The Jacket. I confused the two works as I hustled to depart, and posted this second section here, 20 hours ago. --Pwendt|talk 14:25, 7 February 2019 (EST)

Salted Almonds

Hi, Ron. You entered contents of this Anstey collection P28799 relying on Bleiler's selection (and story length?); and on Google books, I infer, for subtitles and page numbers.

Is the first listed story, no page number, one that another editor has imported (this fortnight) or one that Bleiler reviews but Google books does not hit?

The collection title Note is one that I wrote hastily last week. I will revise it (partly from HathiTrust copy of the 2nd printing 17 stories listed) and your info will help. --Pwendt|talk 14:37, 9 February 2019 (EST)

That story isn't reviewed in Bleiler. Incidentally, I've been doing a second pass on Bleiler's Supernatural Guide, adding the reviews of the individual stories, though I'm only up to the "C"s. In any case, the stories appearing in Bleiler have a linked review for this collection. The story lengths are based, I assume, on the Google scan. I would guess that the unnumbered story was added due to its appearance in an anthology. I'll add the page number and adjust the note. I'll also link to the scan. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 15:10, 9 February 2019 (EST)
By the way, until you alerted me above #The Pacha of Many Tales, I didn't know that even the *books* reviewed in Bleiler bibliographies are entered thus in the database, so that our publication records for such as Science Fiction: The Early Years list their book reviews by page number.
Anyway, thanks to you and predecessors for this work. --Pwendt|talk 15:42, 9 February 2019 (EST)

The Illustrated London News

Ron, For HGWells short story under variant title "The Man Who Could Work Miracles: A Pantoum in Prose" T1509313, I submit change of date to 1898-06. Its only publications are two of your PV, one of which may give the date July.

In that I follow what appears to be your work (I infer from your three SV from Bleiler Early Years) at Magazine Issue Grid: The Graphic. That is, we rely on VFRG ( guide to The Illustrated London News and The Graphic for month and day of the Summer and Christmas special issues.

Thus --here for Illustrated London News-- I submit publication update

  • Title: change from "... July 1898" to "... Summer Number 1898"

That is the gist of it, with Date change from -07 to -06 because VFRG states "[June]". As usual I write that up in a publication Note. Right?

Is it standard procedure here to use a magazine issue title such as "The Illustrated London News, Summer Number 1898" --or your invention? I don't recall seeing it before.

Bleiler's Gernsback Years is probably the source for the July date (and title) for the Illustrated London News. If that was the "Summer Number", then it is appropriate to enter it as such. I expect that this entry was done by a now inactive editor who entered the bulk of Bleiler's Gernsback Years. In any case, your edits are good except for one. The variant title 1509313 should have the date that the title first appeared in that form, rather than the date it first appeared in any form. I'll approve your edits, but I'm going to change the date of that title to "1946-09-00". --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:26, 10 February 2019 (EST)
I seen now that the original appearance had the alternate title. I've restored your date edit, which is correct. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:31, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Back to those Christmas Numbers of The Graphic (issue grid above). Is it your oversight that format is "tabloid" for 1901, "unknown" for 1926 and 1897? Or from the sources? You cite one extra source for the 1901, Contento1, but that source (evidently this page, line one) does not give format data --and does enter the Christmas Number as "Dec 1901", where your date 1901-11-25 is from VFRG author index, I presume. --Pwendt|talk 17:59, 10 February 2019 (EST)

It is an oversight for the 1897 issue for which FictionMags notes the size. I've corrected that. Galactic Central notes that the The Graphic was "initially tabloid" and FictionMags does not have the size, so we'll have to leave that one as unknown, unless you have better information. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:26, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Asimov's Readers' Poll Results

I believe that I did as you requested on my talk page. I hope I got it right, but who knows? It was my first time doing this. MLB 01:03, 12 February 2019 (EST)

Unfortunately, the edits came through as no change. Without knowing exactly what you did, I suspect that you entered the the poll position correctly, but neglected to change the Award Level radio button from "Special" to "Poll Place". I've occasionally made the same mistake myself. Please go ahead and try again. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:34, 12 February 2019 (EST)
Just did the 2018 results, if this is okay, then I'll do 2017's. MLB 00:14, 13 February 2019 (EST)
You got all of them right except for this one. I think it's the same issue as the edit came through as no change. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:30, 13 February 2019 (EST)
Here’s one for you, this essay is listed on the 2018 awards page as a short story. The story should be listed instead of the essay, but I don’t have any experience in changing that. MLB 19:00, 14 February 2019 (EST)
I could do it for you if you'd like, but the edit isn't difficult. Just follow the Edit Title Data link on the title record, and then you can change it from ESSAY to SHORTFICTION. You would also want to select a length of short story. Let me know if you have any troubles, or if you want me to do it for you. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:35, 14 February 2019 (EST)
No, I think that you have mistaken what I meant, Confessions of a Con Girl is the short story. Untitled Asimov's Appreciation (Confessions of a Con Girl) is an essay, and it’s the latter that is listed when the former should be in its place. MLB 22:15, 14 February 2019 (EST)
I see. In that case what you want to do is get the title ID from the correct story (2276796). Then go to the record for the award, click on "Link Award". There you can replace the incorrect number, with the correct one. That should fix it. Again, let me know if you have any problems. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:23, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Lovell's Library

Hi, Ron. You entered one volume of [publisher John W.] Lovell's Library as "Lovell's Library Volume 5", 295. In a couple of PubUpdate now in the queue, I consolidate the series as "Lovell's Library" with available volume numbers relegated to the Notes. Evidently it's numbered 1 to 500 or more across those "volumes".

Yours is #295 as 1878 (with qualifications in the Notes), P408361 citing Bleiler Supernatural and Bleiler78. Does either source identify this as a hardcover book?

Later, perhaps today (night here), I will look for more info on Lovell's Library in newspapers. There isn't much because it is cheap series, perhaps by subscription to annual volumes. Then I'll clean up the publication records, perhaps partly by export to the Publication Series record. --Pwendt|talk 18:06, 18 February 2019 (EST)

Bleiler (supernatural) doesn't mention the binding which usually indicates hardcover. However, I think we have other problems with this record. I also think that we may be treating Lovell's Library incorrectly. Both Bleiler records give the date as "[1878]" which is the stated copyright date in the Lovell's Library edition. I can find no evidence of a Lovell publication of this title prior to 1883 with the exception of this Worldcat record which may be dated purely from the copyright date. I'm beginning to think that the Lovell edition, referenced by Bleiler was actually published on November 22, 1883 as part of Lovell's Library. I'm also thinking that Lovell's library probably should be changed to a magazine rather than a publication series. Galactic Central, lists it among their magazines and it appears to be a dime novel. It seems clear from that scan that it was a daily periodical. Since you've started working on the series (as we have it now), have you encountered any information about the nature of Lovell's Library? --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:58, 19 February 2019 (EST)
Much. Yesterday I read numerous newspaper and magazine notices and several WorldCat records. Eventually I found most of the series "Additions to the Libraries" in semi-monthly The American Bookseller, or [AmBk at HDL]. Commonly 4 to 20 numbers of Lovell's Library are listed, or none.
  1. #295 Random Shots is dated 1883-11-22, as you say. provides a blurry cover image #295. "Daily". Annual subscription price illegible ($40?). The next image is Catalogue list #1 to 112.
  2. #453 The Black Poodle is dated 1884-11-01; "Annual Subscription $30.00." is clear at cover image #453. "Tri-Weekly".
  3. Not daily. Announced as "Weekly" in its Prospectus [AmBk at HDL]. There were in fact about 200 released during 1883, 1884, and 1885, then a decline. Those estimates are from the highest numbers listed in the mid-December "Additions", namely 1882 #50, 1883 #286, 1884 #482, 1885 #679, 1886 #837. There is some lag in those listings. Yours is listed at 20 cents in "Additions" 1884-01-01. That big batch must represent roughly November and December 1883. Mine with November-1 date is listed at 20 cents same day "Additions" 1884-11-01 [AmBk at HDL, two].
    I'm not concerned about changes in price or frequency. That's not uncommon for other periodicals. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:40, 21 February 2019 (EST)
  4. Inaugurated April 1882. "The volumes are 12mo, printed from clear type, with an attractive paper cover, and sold at 10 and 20 cents, for single and double numbers respectively." (Prices actually 10/15/20 cents initially; a few years later, some 25 and 30 cents.) Chicago Tribune 1884-08-27 p1[!] displays one retailer advertisement at 8c and 18c, "This is the cheapest library in the market. The books are printed on good paper in large type. These books being 12mo, in size are very convenient for the pocket or the gripsack." Almost all WorldCat records report 19 cm. Other notices mention "pocket" size but this is much larger than 1880s booklets I have seen, and tp format here. The Prospectus notes larger size.
  5. Somewhere ... one WorldCat record that I have misplaced? ... is noted that the binding is paper; cloth cover is designed to hold any number of Lovell's Library. Perhaps such a copy fooled Reginald1 (User talk:Chris J#Lovell's Library).
  6. Wikipedia: Dime novel. "Additions" sometimes ... covers Beadle's Dime Novels, iirc. I don't know how specifically the term is used at ISFDB or by others in this field. Tell me about the magazine treatment. These are genuine "books" defined by binding. That is stated in some comment or review ... not advertisement.
    I was going to point you to other publications of this type that have been done as magazines, but it appears that you have found them already. The two that seem the closest to me are the Harper's Franklin Square Library and The Seaside Library. On the other hand, The Seaside Pocket Library seemed more like a publication series. The fact that Galactic Central and the Dime Novel Bibliography list these makes me lean towards doing them as a magazine. The only pity is that we lose the overall title for the collections (we would list it in the notes). --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:40, 21 February 2019 (EST)
  7. P.S. Do you have a subscription to historical newspapers? I have one at the university library. Using its search feature I sometimes find material that can later be located at HathiTrust, free to view at least in the US --such as "Additions to the Libraries" [AmBk at HDL].
    No, I don't have access. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:40, 21 February 2019 (EST)
  8. Somewhere ... newspaper/magazine items related to copyright and piracy, I have yet to read. #453 The Black Poodle is roughly simultaneous with the UK and US hardcover eds. of that collection (in progress here).
  9. The Edward T. LeBlanc Memorial DIME NOVEL BIBLIOGRAPHY is new to me. I may continue and clean up the research, at least at point 3 above, and contribute a note.
    It's another source, though frustratingly incomplete for some titles, such as Lovell's Library. However, it's better than no information at all. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:40, 21 February 2019 (EST)
--Pwendt|talk 13:33, 20 February 2019 (EST)
Several WorldCat records identify issues of Lovell's Library issues as dime novels, by Library of Congress Subject Heading LCSH at Wikipedia.
WorldCat searches today:
  • se:Lovell's library (803 hits)
  • su:Dime novels, American Specimens (2055 hits)
  • su:Dime novels, American Specimens ; se:Lovell's library (22 "AND" hits)
Many do so without any substantial Subject Heading such as Orphans--Fiction, as if this heading is deemed to say all that is to be said about the book.
The open question may yet be how many other late 19c "Publication series" should be handled as magazine "Series", where I don't know the issues. Today I assemble some data at Publisher:John W. Lovell. --Pwendt|talk 17:49, 21 February 2019 (EST)
I've added comments above, inline. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:40, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Thanks. I need some more research and some more thought on this. I suppose the conversion is not onerous, at least for a moderator, and little is lost in completing an existing publication record as that of a book containing a novel. --Pwendt|talk 22:00, 22 February 2019 (EST)
Hi, I am in place again after a week away at the turn of the month. Soon I will get back to Lovell's and other "magazines". --Pwendt|talk 21:02, 7 March 2019 (EST)

Illustrator for From the Earth to the Moon Direct in Ninety-Seven Hours and Twenty Minutes and a Trip Round It

You seem to be the only one to have touched the Sampson Low and Scribner editions of From the Earth to the Moon Direct in Ninety-Seven Hours and Twenty Minutes and a Trip Round It so I figured I'd let you know about my submitted change. Both publications give the illustrator as Édouard Riou, although neither text actually states the name. Earlier French editions of De la Terre à la Lune: Trajet direct en 97 heures 20 minutes and Autour de la Lune have the same illustrations and are credited to De Montaut and to Emile Bayard et A. De Neuville respectively. I'll change both publications to refer to the individual content titles rather than the combined omnibus name, using the French art credit names and update the notes.

Doug (User:Holmesd) from User:Pwendt
As I understand this note, and the current publication records, you have revised the publication records as described here ...

The Sampson Low edition has "Sampson Low, Marston, Low, and Searle" in the copy, but the Bleiler "Sampson Low, Marston, Searle & Rivington" is used on the record. I suspect that Bleiler is using a later edition based on timelines for the company name documented here. I'll update the publisher to the name on the book. ../Doug H 22:41, 22 February 2019 (EST)

... and you intended, but neglected, to update the Sampson Low publisher name. I have found plenty of information in contemporary newspapers and magazines, including price and approximate publication date. This notice is all for now however. --Pwendt|talk 16:54, 23 February 2019 (EST)
I had duplicate edits going and this got dropped. Thanks for catching it. Edit is in the queue. Doug H 19:38, 23 February 2019 (EST)

Dragons & Nightmares: 4 Short Novels

Hi Ron, I've made a change to the Note for your verified pub Dragons and Nightmares: 4 Short Novels. I've had on hold for the last two weeks an edit by Elmsfan who wanted to entirely delete the second bullet point, with the reasoning (in the Note to Moderator) that "I have #161 in my hand and it is not signed and no indication that the 1,000 were signed - looking at copies for sale also shows most unsigned and those signed were done so personally NOT as part of Limited Edition release." My attempt at discussion on this editor's talk page drew no response, so after two weeks I'm rejecting the edit and instead adding a comment that the info in Chalker & Owings is disputed. Do let me know if you have an issue with this as PV. Cheers. PeteYoung 22:49, 24 February 2019 (EST)

My copy is not signed. While I don't have the 1991 edition of Chalker/Owings, I do have the 1998 edition. It does not mention that the the book was signed. Since the Electronic (1998) edition supersedes the earlier edition, I think it would be better to adjust the note to reference the later edition and remove the word signed. If you agree, I could make that change. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:21, 25 February 2019 (EST)
Sounds good, as one of the PVs you get to decide, not me! SFJuggler says he has a signed copy, no word from Bill yet. PeteYoung 03:38, 26 February 2019 (EST)

Unexplored Territory in Oz

Hi, I've changed things in your verified copy of Unexplored Territory in Oz based upon You may want to edit further, as you have the copy itself. Major change was the appendices, which you had as written by the original author, while the Oz fandom claims those were added in 1979, nineteen years after the death of the original author.--Dirk P Broer 19:47, 25 February 2019 (EST)

I took another look at the book and Maund does sign the last appendix, which could be taken as a credit for all of them. The edits are fine with me. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:23, 25 February 2019 (EST)

Bleiler on The Valley of Fear (Sherlock Holmes)

Hi, Ron. From Bleiler you verified The Strand Magazine issue September 1914 P307937, where we note "Speculative fiction content only." and list two works including The Valley of Fear, part 1, as non-genre. Has another editor added The Valley of Fear? Or another editor tagged that work as non-genre, where Bleiler has a reason to cover it? --Pwendt|talk 21:01, 7 March 2019 (EST)

Bleiler doesn't mention the Doyle story. I added it as a serialization of a title that is already in the database. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:14, 7 March 2019 (EST)

The Pirates of Zan

Hi, the cover artist of The Pirates of Zan (Ace double 1971) is Gil Cohen, as can be seen on Horzel 16:56, 13 March 2019 (EDT)

Magazine series and publ series

Ron, This week I have spent more time in late 19c newspapers and magazines. In the database I may have revised only one related record (publication record and series Note).

Namely, for "Cassell's Sunshine Series, July 18, 1892" (publication title retained) P304418, I entered the date from that title in the Date field and I entered the issue number from Notes in the Catalog ID field. Purpose: to see how those entries affect the Issue Grid: Cassell's Sunshine Series. (Probably you know the answer but I wonder whey you didn't make either one of those entries.)

  • There is no change in the one link target, nor in its linkname "July 18" --derived by parsing the Publication field?
  • The link is relocated from far right "No month" to column "Jul" --derived from the Date field evidently

If I understand correctly, then having an issue number and a month, but no day of the month, for a series known to be more frequent than monthly we should append issue number to the publication title. Thus "Cassell's Sunshine Series, No. 122", if the date for this one were unknown. Right? We would also use that publication title, having an issue number only, and the "No. 122" would appear in the under "No month". Right?

I am concerned about Format partly because I realize that I have added numerous publications as 'tp' and 'pb', derived from the reported size where I know "paper cover" --usually from a newspaper/magazine listing. I never learned that we have other formats for paper covers. This must generate numerous "unknown".

To be continued, not today Thursday. --Pwendt|talk 21:40, 14 March 2019 (EDT)

I'm not clear as to what the title of the publication record was prior to your edit. However, it appears to be fine now. By my reading of our policies, it is never proper to enter both an issue number and a date as part of a magazine title. However, there are several examples in the database where it has been done that way. There's just nothing in the help pages to support that format. The date is always preferable and issue number should be used only when date isn't present or can't be determined. There is also an exception for "magazines like Interzone" and magazines from France to use only issue numbers, but it is not well defined. The Catalog ID should not be used for the issue number by current policy. Having it in the notes is fine. We have several formats that are specific to magazines by size, but you need to know the size to select the one that is closest. Unknown is fine when we don't know the size and it can probably be assumed that magazines have paper covers. I only know of a handful of examples that are hardcover. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:58, 14 March 2019 (EDT)
Not both issue number and date in the publication title: yes, I suppose "Cassell's Sunshine Series, No. 122" would be used here for instance, if we did not know the date --regardless whether we know or expect that the issue is dated, whence "No. 122" is provisional, or undated.
I didn't revise the Publication field "Cassell's Sunshine Series, July 18, 1892" --which must have been parsed automatically to generate the linkname "July 18" that was displayed in the "No month" column. Replacing "00-00" with "07-18" in the Date field merely caused the link (same target, same name) to be displayed in column "Jul" of the Issue Grid.
(University library hours are reduced for winter break --I just learned; begins in four hours-- which means both my access to historical newspapers/magazines and the quality of my internet interface.) --Pwendt|talk 12:58, 16 March 2019 (EDT)

Jules Verne "Shipwrecked in the Air"

'You had verified this pub for OCLC, Reginald and Bleiler. I checked the OCLC and they list the title as "The mysterious island. Part first, Shipwrecked in the air." and an image from a seller here lists the same title. Do you have any objection if I change the title or is there a reason to keep the simpler form? ../Doug H 22:10, 15 March 2019 (EDT)

I'd prefer if we didn't change the title. Both Reginald and Bleiler list the book as simply "Shipwrecked in the Air". Our policy with series names is not to include them in the title (see this help section under subtitles). While this isn't the completely the same thing as a series, it seems analogous to me. If you disagree, we could post this question on the community portal and solicit more opinions. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:57, 16 March 2019 (EDT)
At this point, I'm just trying to sort out translations. I'm fine with the title for now. I've added a note regarding the title to the publication. If we were to have a discussion on the title(s), I'd rather deal with them all together rather than piece-meal. Maybe next year. ../Doug H 11:48, 16 March 2019 (EDT)

Munro's Library (and digest book format)

(Set aside the matter of magazine format for now.)

We now have publication series Munro's Library with two records (two Haggard parodies, probably your work alone). One is booked as 'tp' and one 'pb'. The series is 'tp' format, relying on size 20cm reported in the library records we cite.

I agree about the size. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:50, 17 March 2019 (EDT)

P274876 reports Allan Quatermain published as Munro's Library v50 n738 1887-05-31. That record needs integration with the publ series, including elimination of the unique publisher name --but it is primary verified by someone absent for 10 years.
I find #738 at WorldCat OCLC 559522312, as octavo, size not stated.

Our stated 'digest' format is one I have never used for a book, and Help:Screen:NewPub#Format does not tell me how it differs from 'pb' ("similar in size and binding to digest-formatted magazines", where the stated sizes appear to match).

P412225 reports He, a Companion to She as Norman L. Munro 1887, no series. That belongs in series as Munro's Library v50 n721, according to our cited WorldCat record only (LC does not report same).

We incorrectly had this as a hard cover and I've changed it to tp per Reginald.--Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:50, 17 March 2019 (EDT)

Later I will check American Bookseller for these numbers. --Pwendt|talk 15:50, 17 March 2019 (EDT)

Please proceed with putting these in the series and the above publisher change. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:50, 17 March 2019 (EDT)

Illustration titles included in The Pirates of Venus and Lost on Venus.

You were a secondary verifier on this publication. It has included each of the 25 illustrations as a separate content item and named it oddly - it seems as if it is based on the original serial publication. I've asked a general question in the Help Desk but the sole answer doesn't seem to help. I was wondering if you knew anything about the entered illustration titles. Thanks for reading this far. ../Doug H 11:47, 19 March 2019 (EDT)

Books to Look (F&SF, July-August 2016)

Regarding Books to Look (F&SF, July-August 2016) from your verified pub: The other essays in this series are all named "Books to Look For". Is "Books to Look" a database typo or a pub typo? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2019 (EDT)

Corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:05, 22 March 2019 (EDT)

Among the Gnomes

Ron, For the 1895 T. Fisher Unwin edition P307990, I inserted the definite article in subtitle "... in the Untersberg", which you, Bleiler, or Reginald must have missed. British Library and the cited WorldCat record both show it, as does WorldCat for the 1896 US edition (OCLC 13487271, 225663520). Does Bleiler or Reginald know that this is the 1st English-language publication, or first of the unidentified translation? --Pwendt|talk 22:17, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

Reginald wouldn't mention that. Bleiler does not mention this as being a translation. He notes that while Hartmann was German-born, he was a long resident of Great Britain and America. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:23, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

The Baum Bugle, Autumn 2005

Hi, we got a question about this pub. It includes an interior art Der Wunderbare Zuberer von Oz that might be German and the artist might be, too. And we wonder if he is identic with Martin Auer. See: here. It would be great if You could compare these artworks. --Zapp 15:04, 15 April 2019 (EDT)

I got that credit entirely wrong. It is a detail of the same cover art, which is credits as the cover of the translation by Martin Auer. Weinheim being the city of the publisher. The artist is not credited. I'll also highlight that the Bugle definitely characterizes it as a translation and we appear to have it as a retelling under Auer's authorship instead. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:07, 15 April 2019 (EDT)
If that interior art is a part of this cover, the artist can be cross referenced. --Zapp 06:58, 16 April 2019 (EDT)
I see. Fixed. Thanks.--Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:38, 16 April 2019 (EDT)

Back to Methuselah

Hi. You verified from Bleiler 2003 all of our 4(*) publications of the variant Title "Preface: An Infidel Half Century" T2473177. (Now four --1921, 1922, 1945, and 1947-- of which I might correct some before you read this.) Is Bleiler the source for "An" rather than "The"? That is spurious for 1921/1922, HathiTrust views show, so I wonder about the 1940s Oxford editions.

Does Bleiler note that the Brentano's 1922 title page is 7th or 8th printing t.p. verso at HathiTrust? I have submitted update of our "1922" publication as the Brentano's May 1921 1st printing. To proofread and complete tomorrow. --Pwendt|talk 17:23, 23 April 2019 (EDT)

Does Bleiler report 1945 publication or 1945 copyright only? I will update the publication to July 1946, with note of the commonly reported 1945 copyright date, based on newspaper coverage. Celebration of Shaw's 90th birthday by Oxford publication of this new edition (Penguin Books re-issue of 8 single plays, and another book).

  • There I will also correct what must be a typo mis-spelling "Postsript".
  • Also I will move the 1940s from publication series Oxford World's Classics to series The World's Classics, of which the 1946 is #500.

I won't get out of the 1920s today. --Pwendt|talk 16:56, 23 April 2019 (EDT)

Bleiler actually considers this a single play and he doesn't detail any of the parts or essays, aside from stating that a postscript was added with the Oxford University Press editions, London, 1946, New York, 1947. Worldcat is probably the source for the 1945 date. The record may have existed when I got to it and Bleiler is occasionally off by a bit. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:11, 23 April 2019 (EDT)


Wanted to let you know I just submitted an update to the notes of your PV'd pub. Let me know if you disagree. Regards, MagicUnk 14:53, 25 April 2019 (EDT)

Flowers for Algernon

...and I submitted an update of the notes for this pub too... Regards, MagicUnk 17:56, 25 April 2019 (EDT)

Publication vs. Title titles

I'm somewhat confused by a couple of entries and how they deal with the TITLE title vs. the PUBLICATION title. Starting with L'île à hélice I can see multiple translations under "The Floating Island", and one under "The Floating Island: The Pearl of the Pacific". The first translated title under "The Floating Island" contains four publications, two of which are titled "The Floating Island; or, The Pearl of the Pacific" and the others as "The Floating Island". The longer-named publications do have content titles with the shorter name, but also have interior art contents for the longer name - giving a mix. This looks wrong. I'd figured that the publication title should match the title title except in the cases of additional content (essays, previews, introductions) or container titles (omnibuses, collections, anthologies). Am I right to be confused or am I missing something?

My purpose is that I have a copy to enter titled "Floating Island or The Pearl of the Pacific", and with or without the colon to separate the sub-title, is not present as a title, but is present under another title. The reason for contacting you directly was my previous post on titles and your having (secondary) verifications on some of these. ../Doug H 12:33, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

There are several undocumented standards that are coming into play here. One of these is that we don't create variants for the presence of absence of a subtitle. In these cases, the title record doesn't reflect the subtitle which will appear only on those publications where it is present. I recall a discussion of this some years ago. I don't believe it was ever formally documented. There was also a more recent discussion regarding alternate titles. Unfortunately, it didn't result in a clear standard and was completely silent on whether these necessitate a separate title. I would follow the same standard as we have with subtitles, and not create alternate title records. I also tend to standardize the punctuation (as we do with subtitles) following the <Title>; or, <Alternate Title> format. With those rules, the 1989 and 2002 English translation title records could be combined, unless, of course, they are thought to be different translations. If it looks like they are Gordon translation, they could be merged with the 1896 title record. As for your new publication, I would suggest putting it under the 1929 title record, unless, again, we think it is a different translation.--Ron ~ RtraceTalk 16:24, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
Up to about 2004, there as only one translation, so I'll look into merging. I'll post a question about the undocumented standard in the Rules Forum and see if someone will take a stab at updating the documentation and taking the flak. Thanks for the help. ../Doug H 19:41, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
I tried describing the situation and ran across a conflict. You can't easily create a NOVEL type publication with a different title than the TITLE record. A direct creation applies the TITLE title to both, while Adding a Pub to an existing title doesn't allow you to change the title. So for my record, were you suggesting I create the record with a sub-title and then merge it (if you can merge unlike named titles)? Given the difficulties, I'd have to guess you're suggesting I Add a Pub to the 1929 and simply note the sub-title - contrary to the explicit rules in the help for adding a pub. I guess you could add it as additional content and then drop the un-sub-titled version. I'm not even sure how this publication got created. ../Doug H 20:13, 4 May 2019 (EDT)
You're right, it does take two edits. Once a publication is created, you can alter either the publication record's title, or the title record's title. You can enter both of them in the publication record, provided that the title record has a single publication. Otherwise, the title has to be edited separately. Merging as you describe, also works. You can find records different title fields through either the advanced search or by listing all the titles in an author's bibliography, though for the latter to work, they'd have to be in the same page. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:50, 4 May 2019 (EDT)

Dr Bloodmoney

Hi, you PV'd Philip K. Dick's Dr Bloodmoney. Could you check your copy and confirm that there's no period printed after the 'Dr', and that the actual title on the title page is the short form Dr Bloodmoney (and not the long one)? Thanks! MagicUnk 12:24, 7 May 2019 (EDT)

It's "Dr. Bloodmoney" with no alternate title which matches the publication record. I'm a little confused as your note indicates that I had it without the period. In any case, it has one now and I can't find an edit that was made to it today. I see that the canonical title record has the alternate title. There is an unwritten standard to include subtitles, only in the title record, but not in the publication record. I found this discussion from 2010. I recently had a similar discussion (directly above) and I hadn't revisited the 2010 one in a while. I actually think that alternate titles (<Title>; or, <Alt Title>) should be treated the same as subtitles in regards to creating variants. In this case, I would recommend that the canonical title be "Dr. Bloodmoney" with the only English variant for "Dr Bloodmoney". It may be worth opening a new R&S discussion to clarify the rules. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:48, 7 May 2019 (EDT)
Is it really "Dr. Bloodmoney" - including the period after 'Dr' on the title page of your copy? I'm asking because the period doesn't show on the cover of your PV'd copy.
Yes, I stand by my statement.
Concerning the discussion on titles vs extended titles vs subtitles, I'd consider the current case an extended title. Using a colon would have identified it as a subtitle case, but since it is currently entered in the DB without colon in any of the title records bar one, I guess the editors who have entered these records seem to treat it this way too. So, since the shorter Dr Bloodmoney has been published after the extended title variant, the shorter title should be varianted to the extended one (at least according to the preferences voiced in the 2010 discussion). Accepting that, I would want to remove this extended title from your PV'd pub, and replace it with the (already available) varianted shorter title - see here for what I want to do with your PV'd record. This is contrary to your suggestion, but doing it this way provides the benefit that the contents appears exactly as in the pub, and provides information that there are pubs out there with an extended title (ie Dr. Bloodmoney or How We Got Along After the Bomb). Also, I think this proposal would be more in line with current practice. What do you think? MagicUnk 13:42, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
I disagree. It meets the definition of an alternate title, which is a type of subtitle (see Wikipedia). The term "extended title" was invented for that 2010 discussion (note the quotes), and isn't really a defined thing. We standardize the punctuation of subtitles which is well documented. For alternate titles, a standardization has yet to be agreed to (see this). The question boils down to whether the presence of absence of a subtitle of any sort should result in a variant titles or not. My understanding based on the 2010 discussion is that they should not.--Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:02, 11 May 2019 (EDT)

The Mystery of the Sea

Hi, Ron. For the [now unique] 1902 UK edition of this Bram Stoker novel P84070, we show your recent secondary verification from Bleiler. Does Bleiler report a page count?

Background (not essential, and I see related anomalies as I depart for today):

Entered by Bluesman, evidently, we have page count viii+454 from the linked WorldCat record (and perhaps Reginald1 also); with note on "Tuck who has the page count as 510".

Evidently Tuck's publication is the one HathiTrust provides as Heinemann 1902, which fits the title page. Its interior arabic-numbered pages 3-498 match the US 1st ed. (also viewed at HathiTrust). Its count is x+498, by difference in numbering the list of Contents --why would that be re-set?-- and its exhibits pp. [xi] and [xii] and internal half-title page [1] must explain Tuck's report of 510 pages.

The novel ends at page 454, so Arabic count 454 would be an edition without the Appendix (A to E) or with those pages unnumbered. --Pwendt|talk 22:10, 10 May 2019 (EDT)

That makes sense and we ordinarily would include the appendices in our page count. Both Bleiler78 and Reginald1 have the 454 page count. The other Bleiler resources don't give page counts. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:07, 11 May 2019 (EDT)

Northwest of Earth

Hello Ron. I was wondering whether this collection should not be unmerged from this earlier publication ? They only have five stories in common, as against ten different ones ! I have just varianted the French translation of the former to the common title, but I'm a bit unhappy about it, as it really should really be varianted to the later collection. Would you agree to unmerge the title you are VP1 of ? TIA, Linguist 10:16, 13 May 2019 (EDT).

Agreed. I made the changes and moved the variant to the new title. It's a little odd as the French collection predates the English one. I kept the English title record as parent, as on first thought, it would be odd to have the collection and the stories be mismatched in parent language. If you don't agree, we could reverse them, though there would not be a translator for the collection going from French to English. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:37, 15 May 2019 (EDT)
Thanks for the changes ! I would have done the same. And I have just realized that this second Northwest of Earth collection is itself a variant of that one, which solves the problem of the date. I'll deal with it. Thanks again, Linguist 04:27, 16 May 2019 (EDT).
Here is the result. Linguist 04:29, 16 May 2019 (EDT).

The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, November-December 2015

Hi, you are PV2 here. I'm adding missing info "Whole number 722", as per other issues. Thanks. BanjoKev 00:18, 17 May 2019 (EDT)

Uneasy Alliances Introduction

Your verified Uneasy Alliances shows a 16-page "Introduction", an essay. Is this an essay or really a short story? A German version has been submitted as a variant, but it's a short story. Bob 17:04, 28 May 2019 (EDT)

Hello Ron, I changed all Introductions of this series to shortfiction/shortstory because the introductions are fictional, do you agree with that opinion? See you after my vacation next week. Regards Henna 18:09, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
That's fine, you can approve the edit. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:45, 28 May 2019 (EDT)

The Quantum Magician

Hello, could you check the back of your copy of The Quantum Magician and confirm the price is £7.99? My copy of the first printing has £8.99 on the back. Would be weird if prices were different... MagicUnk 09:30, 9 June 2019 (EDT)

Corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:17, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
Thanks! I've also submitted additions to the notes - details in the note to moderators field. HOpe you don't mind. MagicUnk 15:56, 9 June 2019 (EDT)

A Choice of Gods

Cover artist of this is Vincent Di Fate, the original is shown here with a clear signature VDiFate (click on magnifying glass). Horzel 17:27, 10 June 2019 (EDT)

A Son of Perdition

Ron, Perhaps you mark the 1st ed. publication record P417819 Primary Verified. That or you copy-pasted two lines of HathiTrust boilerplate and neglected to delete the second. I expanded it substantially, including publication date from the listing as "Ready March 25" on catalogue page 14 (viewed at HathiTrust).

Because the other HathiTrust copy, from original at New York Public Library, does not include the catalogue (nor any back pages), I added a note to that effect. Do you know enough about publications 100 years ago, and library practices since then, to say whether there was a difference between the two books (different states if not unstated printings of the 1st ed.)? The HDL copy from NYPL does not include a cover image. Might a library remove the publisher's catalogue when it replaces the binding? Anyway, do bibliographers call it "two states" of the printing when different advertisements, etc, are bound at the back? --Pwendt|talk 14:31, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

I have no information on the practices of libraries and their rebinding. I think your notes are fine. I don't know whether we have enough information to determine whether the two scans are of separate states. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:58, 14 June 2019 (EDT)

Lightspeed: Queers Destroy Science Fiction! Special Issue (trade paper version)

Hi, Ron. Re: your PV'd (trade paper version of this issue of Lightspeed), my copy does not match the Amazon image in your listing (it includes "Limited Edition" on the front cover), and it has an ISBN on the copyright page (which is not included in your PV'd listing.) Do we have the same book? If so, I'll PV and edit. If not, I'll clone a new listing for the "Limited Edition". Thanks. Markwood 17:31, 22 June 2019 (EDT)

We have different editions. Mine is marked "Trade Edition" next to the ISBN on the copyright page. I'll note that in the record. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:05, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
We may still have the same edition: mine also has "Trade Edition" by ISBN 978-1512142303 on the copyright page. Does yours have "Limited Edition" on the front cover? If so, it's the same as mine. Markwood 18:24, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
No, the cover of mine is the same as the Amazon cover pictured. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:17, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
OK, I've created listing for my copy: Suggest you edit your PV'd version to highlight the significant differences from my version. I'm really curious to find out what's different in the 'Limited Edition'. Thanks. Markwood 16:00, 25 June 2019 (EDT)

The Warlord of the Air

You primary-verified this book I have submitted a correction on the cover attribution. Hifrommike65 18:07, 26 June 2019 (CST)

Land Under England cover artist

Hi Ron, I've disambiguated the cover artist for your verified Land Under England to "Wallace Smith (I)", to separate him from this guy. Cheers. PeteYoung 00:20, 5 July 2019 (EDT)

Gothic Tales of Terror vol. 1

You primary-verified this title: . I have submitted a length for Matthew G. Lewis's story "The Anaconda" as "novella," since it runs 50 pages. Hifrommike65 17:20, 9 July 2019 (CDT)

D. F. Hannigan

Hi, Ron! Since you verified this, do you think it's possible that the Hannigan who has a piece in this book might be identical to Dennis Francis Hannigan with a piece here? Christian Stonecreek 03:56, 12 July 2019 (EDT)

There isn't really anything in either appearance to indicate that they are the same aside from the initials. Given the 30+ years between the two stories, I would speculate that they are probably two different persons, but there really isn't enough data to be sure. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:54, 12 July 2019 (EDT)

The Death of Baldur

I'm holding an edit that would change The Death of Baldur to "The Death of Balder". Per Amazon Look Inside, "Balder" is the spelling used in the ToC. Would you please check your edition of Norse Mythology to see what it's title page has? I will also ping the other verifiers in case it changed between editions. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2019 (EDT)

You can approve the edit (at least as far as my copy is concerned, it should be "Balder"). Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:58, 14 July 2019 (EDT)


Can you check this one? Is that a Reginald1 or a Reginald3 number? Can you move it into its proper external ID space? Thanks! Annie 21:04, 24 July 2019 (EDT)

Same for Mythology Abroad if you do not mind checking. Thanks! Annie 21:07, 24 July 2019 (EDT)
And one more: In the Grip of Terror (I know you had not verified that one but Bill is not around much so I thought I should ask). Does it mean both 1 and 3 or did someone just missed a number? Thanks! Annie 21:10, 24 July 2019 (EDT)
I've added the appropriate external IDs. I thought perhaps the first two could be in both, which very occasionally happens. However the were both published well after Reginald1. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:17, 24 July 2019 (EDT)
Did not even think to check the dates. Thanks. Annie 23:10, 24 July 2019 (EDT)

My Haunted House

Ron, You entered one publication P23214 of this story, apparently from Bleiler only, as a novel; publisher Nimmo's Popular Tales. I determined certainly that Nimmo's Popular Tales is a publication series (or perhaps "magazine") from William P. Nimmo. 12 numbered volumes were issued 1866 and 1867, supposedly ready on the first of the month (maybe not dated even by the month).

Mainly I added some notes to "Nimmo" publisher records, but at the last before I must depart I submit a minimal PubUpdate submission --with citation of meagre OCLC record and the wrong BL record! (should be BL 000012617) --but I must run

Does Bleiler say anything about the length of the story, or its content? Does it index Nimmo's? --Pwendt|talk 21:50, 31 July 2019 (EDT)

Alas, no. Bleiler78 doesn't give much information beyond title, author, publisher and date. He does list page counts, though not for this title. He also lists subject codes which indicates that this is about "Ghosts, hauntings". Sorry there isn't more. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:12, 31 July 2019 (EDT)

The Trouble With Project Slickenslide

Would you mind double checking the story on page 4 of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, March 1973? I'm holding an edit that would change it from "Slickenslide" to "Slickenside". Based on secondary sources, the edit seems correct, but since it is primary verified... Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:43, 4 August 2019 (EDT)

You can go ahead and approve the edit. It should be "Slickenside". Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:06, 4 August 2019 (EDT)

Weird Tales, May-June-July 1924

In Your PV anthology there is page 152: "In The Weird Light Wright • (1924) • novelette by Edward Everett and Ralph Howard Wright". I guess that's an typewriting error. This page shows the Full text of the pub and says: "IN THE "WEIRD LIGHT, by Edward Everett Wright and Ralph Howard Wright". Can You please have a look ? --Zapp 16:27, 10 August 2019 (EDT)

Corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:01, 24 August 2019 (EDT)

Possible Typos

Mind checking if these typos are in the pubs or are database issues?

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:10, 11 August 2019 (EDT)

All corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 11:43, 24 August 2019 (EDT)

The Drowned Kingdom of Ker-Ys original

Hello Ron. Would the inside art corresponding to The Drowned Kingdom of Ker-Ys by (Évariste) Luminais in your verified be this one ? This would help me give it its original title and date. TIA, Linguist 11:10, 31 August 2019 (EDT).

They're the same painting. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:58, 1 September 2019 (EDT)
Thanks a lot ! Linguist 10:21, 1 September 2019 (EDT).

Your name came up

in this discussion of Verification of electronic copies. Doug H 11:13, 31 August 2019 (EDT)

W. I. Van der Poel vs W. J. Van der Poel

Hi, You verified copy of They'd Rather Be Right has as illustrator of the cover art W. J. Van der Poel. Could that be a typo for W. I. Van der Poel? Wikipedia seems to think so.--Dirk P Broer 20:40, 3 September 2019 (EDT)

She (Macdonald Illustrated Edition)

Ron, Our record of She in its Macdonald Illustrated Edition (new publication series when the submissions queue is cleared), P325014 is one that you created from Tuck alone, evidently. I suppose that "essay by Hookway Cowles" is a mistake for INTERIORART, as Cowles is the illustrator of most volumes.

Does Tuck give "M. Erwin" for the other essay? Or "M. Elwin"? This must be Malcolm Elwin. I suppose I should note the name Tuck gives, if the surname differs.

P.S. Does Tuck routinely, or frequently, credit contributors by first initial where the title page does give a full name? (that's all for now as i must run) --Pwendt|talk 20:01, 8 September 2019 (EDT)

Tuck notes that there are two introductions and only gives the Cowles introduction as by "H. Cowles". So yes, Tuck frequently only identifies contributors by initial and I wouldn't expect it to necessarily match a title page. The other introduction is noted as "special introduction" and Tuck does give that author as "M. Erwin". I may or may not have entered the original record, but I certainly wouldn't have expanded the Cowles' first name to Hookway based on Tuck alone. Hope this helps. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:33, 8 September 2019 (EDT)

Kain / Kaïn

Hello Ron. I had to disambiguate Kaïn (I) from Kain in your verified and other books of the same pub series, as these pseudos refer to two different people. Cheers ! Linguist 08:37, 9 September 2019 (EDT).

Cleopatra (Longmans 1889)

Ron, Our record of the Haggard novel Cleopatra in its 1889 Longmans edition P324512 gives page count 242. Is that from Tuck or Bleiler78, the secondary sources you cite?

Our other known source is WorldCat record OCLC: 3465581: "xvi, 336 pages, 29 unnumbered leaves of plates". The last fits VisualHaggard description of the 1st ed. with 29 full-page illus, 18 Greiffenhagen and 11 Woodville.

HathiTrust holds one copy of 1889 Longmans (probably 1st) and one copy of 1891 Longmans (as "New ed."). Both show the novel ending on page 336 (1889 and 1891, followed by 16-page and 24-page catalogues). Our cited WorldCat record notes the 16 back pages.

I suppose this discrepancy in arabic numeral page counts should be noted, if genuine; it implies an edition unknown to us. --16:50, 9 September 2019 (EDT)

As I depart for today at least, I submit incomplete PubUpdate as "to be continued" following consultation [1]. --Pwendt|talk 20:45, 9 September 2019 (EDT)
I've no idea as to the source of the page count of 242. Both Tuck and Bleiler78 list the page count as 316. I'd suggest going with the scan from HaithiTrust and note the discrepancy with the two secondary sources. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:32, 10 September 2019 (EDT)
Moments ago I revised the publication record to do that much. Above I corrected the HathiTrust linknames to "1889" and "1891". --Pwendt|talk 16:01, 14 September 2019 (EDT)

Phoney cover images

Ron, I have supposed that such cover images as these two are created by Google Books from selected interior illustrations.

  1. 1898 novel The Magic Nuts, Project Gutenberg Ebook #39662
  2. 1900 collection Black Heart and White Heart, 1st ed. P264715

What do you think? I see you have added the "phoney cover image"(?) for the latter the website. --Pwendt|talk 21:53, 13 September 2019 (EDT)

Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been rather busy combined with an internet outage. I don't recall what I was thinking when I uploaded the latter, and I've removed it. As for the Gutenberg edition, we enter those as a separate publication and if one of these covers created from one of the interior illustrations is used by Gutenberg as a cover image, I would argue that it is appropriate to both upload the image and reflect it as the cover of that publication record. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:39, 29 September 2019 (EDT)

Four Ghost Stories

Ron, You entered this Molesworth collection in its 1st ed. P308827, PV from images at Google Books and several SV.
Two hours ago I submitted --without Note to Moderator-- update now in the queue: British Library ID, price, and the third bullet item.
Sometime this week I added the second item (and bullet format probably), a linked cross-reference to Project Gutenberg Ebook #31019. --Pwendt|talk 15:28, 14 September 2019 (EDT)

Amazing Stories - Robur the Conqueror

You have verified Amazing Stories, December 1927 which contains a story - Robur the Conqueror (Part 1 of 2). The next issue (not verified by you) contains Robur the Conqueror or the Clipper of the Clouds (Part 2 of 2) with a note regarding how it was given yet another title in the table of contents. Could you please check if your copy has a sub-title consistent with part 2. While you're there, could you check that it is the translation which begins " 'Bang! Bang!' The pistol-shots were almost simultaneous. A cow peacefully grazing fifty yards away received one of the bullets in her back.". Many thanks. ../Doug H 16:10, 25 September 2019 (EDT)

Updated the records. Yes, that is the translation. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:52, 29 September 2019 (EDT)

The Best from Fantasy & Science Fiction: 9th Series

You are PV1 for this edition: I have submitted an OCLC external ID. Hifrommike65 7:35, 3 October 2019 (CST)

In the pub notes, I clarified the cover and spine title as "Flowers for Algernon and Other Stories" as a reference to the 1968 film, not the story's popularity. Hifrommike65 17:04, 3 October 2019 (CST)

The Lives and Times of Jerry Cornelius

The cover artist of this is Jim Starlin, his JPS (James P. Starlin) signature is visible on the cover. (Compare to signature on Savage Sword of Conan #26). Horzel 10:03, 4 October 2019 (EDT)

Two and Two Make Five

Hi, Ron. You verified this year from Bleiler Supernatural our 1935 publication record P302129 (otherwise years ago by Bluesman). I wonder about the last four or five Contents. They appear to be tacked on the bottom (although Bluesman may have entered INTERIORART last).

Our linked WorldCat record is the only one that lists Contents, 11 of the first 12 that we list, in same sequence, without "The Chimpanzee". Clute/Grant (Brian Stableford) concludes, "Eight stories from the later collections were reprinted, along with four new ones, in Two and Two Make Five (coll 1935)." That seems to describe the first 12 we list, as we don't have the first four in earlier publication records and we do have the next eight.

Our publication implies the first four and last four of 16 stories all new in this collection. None of the "Mr." stories is in the database except this publication. --Pwendt|talk 18:13, 7 October 2019 (EDT)

Here is a listing that matches our cover image and list of 16 stories concluding with four "Mr" titles.
The publisher notes "12/Twelve Fantastic Tales" in both of the only advertisements I find (title search of historical newspapers at, using university subscription), 1935-11-22 and -12-05.
That's all for me now. --Pwendt|talk 18:38, 7 October 2019 (EDT)
Bleiler lists all those stories. You'll note that there is a review record for each of them which you can find on the stories title page. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:00, 8 October 2019 (EDT)

Kraken: An Anatomy


Shouldn't this be under "Macmillan UK"? We split the Macmillans based on which side of the pond they are and this is definitely the UK cover. Thanks! Annie 04:48, 1 November 2019 (EDT)

Updated. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:55, 1 November 2019 (EDT)

The House of the Wolfings

Hi, Ron. I plan to remove the comma from the title of both early publications and I hope that is appropriate also for your 1978 Newcastle ed. P267498, rather than create a new title.

The layout in both early publications is one unbroken line with no punctuation but the closing dot:

A Tale of the House of the Wolfings and All the Kindreds of the Mark Written in Prose and in Verse by William Morris.

Viewed at HathiTrust: t.p. 1889 UK, t.p. 1890 US

I think it's reasonable to parse that as Library of Congress does, for the 1978 Newcastle LCCN 78-105005 same as the 1st ed. Many library records of various editions append "Written in Prose and in Verse" --as does Gutenberg #2885, probably reconstructing the 1904 Longmans title page typography and layout. What do you think? --Pwendt|talk 20:54, 4 November 2019 (EST)

There is no comma in the Newcastle edition, so please feel free to remove it. The title appears exactly as you describe it (with the exception of a hyphen due to a line break in Kindred). I'm ambivalent as to whether "Written in Prose and Verse" should be part of the title, so I'll leave that up to you. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:13, 4 November 2019 (EST)
Done with "Written in Prose and Verse" relegated to a NOVEL title note.
The soft hyphen is original and noted in my submission.
(Above I amended one t.p. link and one linkname.) --Pwendt|talk 13:00, 5 November 2019 (EST)


I added the missing essay by Sarah Monette (page 43) to you verified Concussed --Willem 17:09, 9 November 2019 (EST)

A Scanner Darkly : PKD

Hi Ron, you are PV for this. Could you check your copy to see if the John Brenner quotation is in that position relative to the author name or more to the right as in the 2nd printing here - see the "N.B." in the notes section there. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 21:15, 15 November 2019 (EST)

Good catch. It's further to the right. I've replaced the scan with one of my actual copy. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:32, 15 November 2019 (EST)
I'm glad that was worthwhile :) Kev. BanjoKev 23:04, 15 November 2019 (EST)

Messages Found in an Oxygen Bottle by Bob Shaw

In the Bob Shaw part this verified pub four titles are marked as SHORTFICTION. Three of these are speeches by Bob Shaw and the fourth is an essay from Hyphen. I would like to change these to essays, and merge/variant them with the essays from other Shaw publications (1, 2, 3 and 4). Any problems with that? Thanks, --Willem 11:26, 28 November 2019 (EST)

No concerns. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 11:45, 28 November 2019 (EST)
Thanks for the quick response. I'll wait a while for Mark's opinion. --Willem 15:08, 28 November 2019 (EST)

Undine: A Miniature Romance; Miniature Romances

Ron, You verified publications 1839 anthology P344816 from WorldCat 38163140 ("Data from Google Books") and 1841 anthology P550657 from Google Books and several secondary sources. Those are our two stated publications of the Thomas Tracy translation of Undine (currently, as two SHORTFICTION title records as 1839).

Resources include:

  • HathiTrust, 1839 title page as "Samuel Colman" [2] --but catalogued as "S. Coleman", cf. OCLC 669308340
  • OCLC 38163140 as "Colman", which you cite
  • Google Books, 1841 page 13, Undine Chapter I [3]

From the latter, scrolling up, it appears that "Advertisement" p[vii]-xi, Errata p[xii], Undine begins p[13] (where "2" means perhaps the beginning of the 2nd 16-page signature). So the page number "2" should be "13".

Do you have a source for 1839 --T1939791 now states "third volume of the New York 'Library of Romance' (1939)"-- as the first publication of the translation?

(I will look up Samuel Colman and Colman's Library of Romance in old newspapers, probably not today.) --Pwendt|talk 16:15, 4 December 2019 (EST)

I see that the 1839 publication record of Undine is a Secondary rather than Primary verification, so I proceed improving that one --initially concerning Coleman/Colman alone. (It's the third volume of the Library of Romance as you say, but only the second number, as #1 is two-volume edition of Phantasmion, now in the queue.) --Pwendt|talk 17:20, 5 December 2019 (EST)
Bleiler's Guide to Supernatural Fiction is the secondary source for the 1839 collection, but he doesn't identify the translator. Reginald wouldn't have that sort of detail. Clute/Grant lists the 1818 Soane translation as the first edition in English. That comment on the title record is suspicious as it asserts a first appearance in 1939 of a story known to appear in an 1841 collection. Tracy is the editor of the 1841 collection, so it does seem likely that he may have also been the translator even though Bleiler doesn't specifically mention that he did the translations. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:10, 5 December 2019 (EST)

The Keepsake for MDCCCXXIX (also 1830)

Ron, Romantic Circles has moved online. My update submission for the 1829 annual is substantial (see Note to Moderator). For the second point, citation of Bleiler, I rely on comparison with your publication note on the same annual for 1830 P311586 and our previous discussion. Please confirm or correct.
(I anticipate finding price data in contemporary newspapers, probably before you read this, and augmenting this note.) --Pwendt|talk 17:15, 9 December 2019 (EST)

The number of advertisements surprises me --multiple printings of one advert, essentially, and it does include prices 21/- and 52/6 (or 1 and 2.5 guineas).

Does Bleiler report month October 1828? I find it first advertised as forthcoming "first week of November" and not published until 1828-11-25, or later. Reporting all 7 advertisement copies found by automated search:

Foreign Q Rvw 1828-09 p4 "In the first week of November next will be published, ..."
Lit Gazette 1828-10-04 p640 "IN THE PRESS. In the First Week of November next [identical]
Examiner -10-26 p704 "Early in November next [identical]
Observer -11-02 p1 "Early this Month will be published [identical]
Spectator -11-15 p320 "On the 25th of November will be Published [abbreviated]
Examiner -11-16 p752 "On the 25th inst. will be published [abbrev.]
Examiner -12-14 p816 "Just published in crimson silk, price 21s. ... [abbrev.] ... "A few Copies are printed in royal 8vo. with India Proofs of the Plates, price [52/6] and for them early application is necessary."

Concerning The Keepsake for MDCCCXXX we should use publication year 1829, consistently, as the title page states 1830 only in the title of the book. --Pwendt|talk 17:05, 10 December 2019 (EST)

Bleiler only gives the year. I'd be hesitant to trust any statements of future or planned publication as there could have been delays. However, you should be able to narrow it down given the dates of these notices. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:06, 10 December 2019 (EST)
I plan to align all of the SHORTFICTION Title records for stories published in anthology Series The Keepsake with the convention that publication year is the year before the roman-numeral year of the book title; with no publication month specified. For Mary Shelley this concerns about 10 stories, where we now have such as 1833 story, "First published in the 1833 edition of The Keepsake." and also 1833 story, "First published in The Keepsake for 1834, 1833."
The anthologies are not in the database, except your two for MDCCCXXIX and for MDCCCXXX, where I hope for publication dates 1828 and 1829. --Pwendt|talk 20:13, 12 December 2019 (EST)
I depart for today having submitted updates for those two stories only subm. subm. --Pwendt|talk 20:41, 12 December 2019 (EST)
As I depart next day, all Mary Shelley Keepsake stories in the database (15?) now have date YYYY as the year prior to the annual title year; and title Note that states "late YYYY", cites page numbers viewed at Google Books. --Pwendt|talk 20:49, 13 December 2019 (EST)
Some rationale and sources:
Our/your publication date 1828-10-00 for MDCCCXXIX P334045 may be a typo for '1828-00-00', or may originate in someone's misinterpretation of newspaper coverage, most likely a review that implies the book in hand. The advertisements cited above show it not yet published in mid-November.
Where we/you have publication date 1830 for MDCCCXXX P311586, ie the title year, newspaper coverage implies the book was published no later than November. Eg one theatrical notice of 1829-11-20 "Surrey Theatre.--[... Scott's The House of Aspen] which is published in The Keepsake for 1830, has been brought out here with complete success; ..."
Title page design as "The Keepsake for MDCCC----", no publication date, appears to be retained thru the volume for MDCCCXLIV (snippet view only at Google; the latest full view I find is MDCCCXL at Google). Then design change as "The Keepsake 1845", still no footer date (full view at Google).
--Pwendt|talk 20:13, 12 December 2019 (EST)

(flushleft) I add the subtitle to variant novelette (pending approval) "Ferdinando Eboli: A Tale" by The Author of Frankenstein, whose only ISFDB publication is The Keepsake for MDCCCXXIX (page 195, viewed at Google Books). --Pwendt|talk 18:43, 16 December 2019 (EST)

The Story Behind the Foundation - Asimov essay

Hi Ron, regarding your PV here, could you please compare your 1982-12-00 essay text with this one [4] uploaded specifically for the purpose and let me know what changes, if any, there are. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 19:44, 9 December 2019 (EST)

They're different essays. The 1982 essay is much longer that the 1986 one. I've also noted that my copy has a slightly different title, which I'll correct. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:04, 10 December 2019 (EST)
Thanks, Ron! Annie 11:38, 10 December 2019 (EST)

Amazing Stories, Fall/Worldcon 2018

Hello Ron,

Fixer found this edition of your your verified and outside of the price being printed in yours and not on the Amazon copy (which may or may not be a correct image), I am not sure if this is a second edition or just Amazon being Amazon. What do you think? Annie 03:53, 13 December 2019 (EST)

I added it for now - it does seem to be a second edition of the same issue. Annie 21:21, 14 December 2019 (EST)
Hi Annie - Sorry for my delay in responding. I've had a cold for the last few days. I have pulled my copies of that issue of Amazing and it does have the price on the cover. The publisher had a booth at Balticon this year and I recall that they were selling these deluxe editions for all their back issues. Also, their web site has these editions for sale, though there they refer to them as either "Premium Paperback Edition" or simply "Paperback Edition". In fact, the only back issue that they sell on the website in a regular saddle stapled edition is the Fall 2018 issue. I've been subscribing to AS since they re-launched, but had some problems receiving my issues. Consequently, by the time I got replacement copies, they sent me the perfect bound editions. Thus I have saddle stapled issues for Fall and Winter 2018 and the remaining ones are all perfect bound. I don't think the Fall 2019 issue was part of the mailing of missing issues and I suspect that they may have only done a "Paperback Edition" of that issue. Also, it appears that there are Kindle editions of all the issues and an audio edition of the Fall 2018 issue. Clearly, I haven't gotten around to entering these yet, though it is my intent to do so at some point. I'll only enter those issues for which I've got clear evidence of their existence. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:52, 15 December 2019 (EST)
I hope you are feeling better. Thanks for all the details. Amazon calls that the Premium edition so it seems to be inline with what you are describing. So I think we are all good with it for now. Annie 13:09, 15 December 2019 (EST)

Typewriter in the Sky

Hello, I recently acquired a copy of Typewriter in the Sky. I want to update the notes with additional Canada price, statement this is first printing, and that novel ends on p192 (and about the author on pp193-197). Are you OK with that? Also, I couldn't find a reference to where the month of publication came from (none given in the notes). Any idea? Thanks! --MagicUnk 16:29, 13 December 2019 (EST)

Please proceed. The month of publication is in Locus1 and I've marked that verification. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 15 December 2019 (EST)

Queer Visitors from the Marvelous Land of Oz

This collection has seven SERIAL type contents titles, that pop up on the "Title Dates Before First Publication Date" cleanup report. Shouldn't these be SHORTFICTION, since the SERIAL type should only be used in magazines, fanzines and chapbooks? They are on page 52, 53, 63, 64, 65, 66 and 67. Thanks for checking, --Willem 09:40, 30 December 2019 (EST)

I actually think that serial is appropriate here. This was originally syndicated to newspapers through the McClure Newspaper Syndicate. The reprint, I believe is a facsimile of the original appearance. In any case, each of the first 5 installments is is printed with a title and a part number. There is an additional subtitle for each installment. Parts 2 and 3 both share the same subtitle. Also each of the first 5 installments ends with "(To be continued)". The following three installments, which I entered as SHORTFICTION, drop the "A Fairy Tale" subtitle and any text about part number or continuation, which is probably why I entered them that way. The January 5 installment is clearly part of the same story. The remaining installments start drifting from the original story as set up in parts 1-5. Ideally, I would have added non-genre records for a newspaper where these were originally published. Unfortunately, I've been unable to find any information about which papers carried these stories. The original publication dates are from the Sunday Press book. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:28, 1 January 2020 (EST)
I see your point about the 'Billy Bounce' serial. We recently had a discussion about serials where serial titles in collections and anthologies came up too. I think we do need a title note explaining the difference in the earliest publication date in the database and the date of the title record though. Is the reasoning for the other pair of serial titles ('Denslow's Scarecrow and the Tin-Man Recaptured' on pages 52 and 53) the same? I.m.o. these would need title notes as well. --Willem 15:13, 1 January 2020 (EST)
I've added title notes to all. The "Scarecrow and Tin-Man" serial is a different situation. Denslow was publishing a series of stories for the McClure Syndicate. For two of the installments, he took his earlier published story and split it for two of the syndicated installments. They weren't really presented as serials, but as two separate stories. I re-read the rules for titling serials and removed the "Part x of x" from the titles as well. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:47, 4 January 2020 (EST)