User talk:Vornoff/Archive/2014

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, Vornoff/Archive/2014, 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! Mhhutchins 23:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hal Clement's review of Monsters in the Sky

I had to reject the submission to link the Kirkus review to this ISFDB record of Hal Clement's review. If it had been an online reprint of the same review, then it would have been OK to link them. Thanks for contributing. Mhhutchins 20:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Series data

I had to reject the submission to add series data to a couple of columns in this publication, because it was entered into the variant record and not the parent record. By entering series data in the parent record, the data is automatically visible in both title records.

I also changed the name of the series to "Reader's Preference Page" because there's no need to disambiguate a unique title by adding the magazine to it.

A question: is the "Reader's Preference Page" a letter column? If so, it should be credited to "various" instead of "uncredited".

Also, is "The Unusual Ghost" a work of uncredited fiction? It's not listed in any other reference for this publication.

One last thing: the Miller/Contento index gives the title of the editorial in this issue as "On Terror vs Horror". Is that present in your copy? If so, please update the title record to reflect that. The series data remains intact without having to give it as part of the title field. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 06:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I missed answering this one. Now I understand about not entering series in a variant record. Thanks.
As to the "Reader's Preference Page" as per our subsequent conversation, that should just be deleted as it is just a list of works for that issue for the readers' to vote on. Eventually, though, there are letter columns but it is one in which Lowndes quotes the letter writer's letter and then gives sometimes quite lengthy responses to them. I remember reading in the help section that lettercol's done like that could be credited to the editor. If I misinterpreted that, then it should be "various".
"An Unusual Ghost" is a half-page filler with no attribution. Maybe it WOULD be classified as essay because it's supposedly a reporting of a weird incident in Sweden "some years ago" that who knows if it's true or not.
On the actual page of the editorial, the title is "The Editor's Page" with no sub-title or further wording. In the TOC it's written as "The Editor's Page (On Terror vs. Horror)".
don't know if you prefer changing these items or if you want me to try to do them but it looks we should 1) Delete "Reader's Preference Page" 2) Put "An Unusual Ghost" in the Notes section and delete it as content. 3) Let me know how letter columns as I've mentioned should be handled. 4) Decide what you want to do with the title of the Editorial. Thanks much DougS 03:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
1) I have deleted the "Reader's Preference" records.
2) Please update the record to describe "An Unusual Ghost" in the Note field. You have the option to change it from SHORTFICTION to ESSAY.
3) A letter column can be entered as a content record of the ESSAY type. As you have described it, the essay record should be credited to Lowndes. In some cases, where there is no or very little editorial input, the column is credited to "various". You have the option of creating separate content records for each letter, but it is recommended (not required) that you only create records for those persons who are well-known (either before or after the writing of the letter.)
4) Because the editorials are not titled on the page that they appear, we do not use the TOC title. That is a rule for any work which has a title which differs from the TOC page. The title and author credit used on the title page trumps all other appearances in the publication.
Let me know if you need assistance for any of this. Mhhutchins

Weird Terror Tales, Summer 1970

I'm holding a submission to add an issue for this title (which, btw, you've entered as "WeirdTerror Tales"). We normally do not create individual content records for editor introductions unless they're of substantial length and substantially important. I will accept the submission and let you make any necessary changes to the record. Also, you're correct in your Note to Moderator that we don't create content records for polls, but we do for the results, e.g. Analog's "Analytical Laboratory". Are these "Reader Preference" pages just a list of that issue's stories which is then clipped out, completed, and mailed back in? We do create records for a "Upcoming" or "In the Next Issue" pages, but only if they're of substance, and not just a list of titles.

To respond to this message, click on the "[edit]" link to the right. Enter your response in the dialogue box which opens. Start your message with a colon (:) which separates and indents it from the previous message making it easier to follow the discussion. In successive messages, add another colon to the number in the previous message. End your entry with four tildes (~~~~), which will automatically "sign" and date your message. Then click the "Save page" button. When someone has left a message on your talk page, you will be notified by a highlighted "My Messages" link when you log into the ISFDB. I have placed a "Watch" on your talk page so that I will be notified when you respond. Keep all discussions on the same page on which it began. Do not respond on the other person's talk page.

I'll hold the submission until you've responded. Mhhutchins 17:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Another question about this issue: is "The Cellar Room" given as an excerpt on its title page (115)? Mhhutchins 17:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about the typo in the title! As to the introductions, they're pretty interesting and run from one-half to a full page before the stories. I didn't put them in for any of the shorter, perfunctory introductions. Lowndes had a lot of knowledge and insight about all things pulp and sci-fi. But if the intros are customarily not entered I have no problem with deleting them, if I can figure out how to do it. I'm new to entering data in the ISFDB so I have a learning curve to get over. The "Readers' Preference" pages are indeed a list of the stories for the reader to tear out or copy and then send in his ratings. They should be deleted. In this mag the results of these polls show up in another department called "The Reckoning". As to "The Cellar Room", it's an excerpt for one of the stories coming in the next issue and is one page long. At the top of the page is a header "Coming Next Issue", followed by the excerpt (a full page), beneath that a blurb reading "Don't miss this strange and absorbing tale", and beneath that "The Cellar Room by Steffan B. Aletti". To me it seemed like a genuine excerpt that was housed inside a department/feature entitled "Coming Next Issue" and I'm not really sure how to handle that one. Thanks for the tips. Please let me know any items you'd like me to change. It's very helpful and provides valuable information for any submissions I might do in the future. I do look at the help pages but there's a lot of stuff there and I can miss things. DougS 01:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I assume DougS and Vornoff are the same person. It would be better to log-in to one account, and use that single username for editing the database. That will make things a lot simpler for both of us. :)
I will keep the introductions based on your description. Since the excerpt is from an upcoming issue, and serves no other purpose than to promote the next issue, I will remove and delete the content record, and make a note of its appearance to the Note field.
Thank you for choosing to contribute to the ISFDB as an editor. Adding and updating publication records in the ISFDB is not a simple process. We don't expect all editors to get it right the first time, and we know it may take some time to learn the ins and outs, and all of the tricks. Please be patient with us as we guide you through this process. We will also try our best to be patient. Together we can build a better database. The best piece of advice I can offer is to take some time to read this help page. It has instructions on how to enter each field of a publication record. If you need further assistance, don't hesitate to inquire at the help desk. Again, thank you for becoming a vital part of the ISFDB. Mhhutchins 02:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
A record for the issue is now in the database. I've made another change: deleted the "untitled" and "uncredited" interiorart piece on page 118, but noted it in the Note field.Mhhutchins 02:32, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
There are still some questions that need to be answered from the previous issue (see the topic "Series Data" above). For example, the title of the editorial. Miller/Contento says that the editorial is titled "Forbidden Knowledge". Mhhutchins 02:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
A question about this issue: is the author of the story on page 6 credited as "Sewell Peaselee Wright" or "Sewell Peaslee Wright"? Mhhutchins 02:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I will see if I can keep the login straight - I don't even know how the two user names got in there.
See topic "Series Data" above for my response to your questions. I hadn't been paying attention and missed that topic!
In both the TOC and the actual story the author is credited as "Sewell Peaselee Wright". I see that the canonical name is the second option above. How do you know if the former is a misspelling or a variant name? DougS 03:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
We don't have to make such judgements. We only record it as it is published. It's obviously a typo, but we have to create a pseudonym and make the record into a variant of the canonical record. I'll do that for you. (As I said above, we don't use the TOC to record either story title or author credit. Both are taken from the page on which the work first appears.) Mhhutchins 02:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I think I see what's going on with the variant names. I assume that when the indexer spots a non-canonical name on the title page of the work, he enters it as is, then makes a note of the variant spelling in the Notes. This alerts the moderator that the indexer hasn't just mistyped the author's name. Makes sense.
Question on my login. When I signed up I used the username DougS and a password, asking it to remember me. Now when I login it defaults to "Vornoff" as the username and allows me to login with accreditations on what I've done under the "Vornoff" moniker, which is fine with me. But up in the right corner, next to the "my talk" link, it shows that link as "DougS". Is there some way to change username to match "Vornoff" (I didn't see any) so that the credits for work done are not lost?
One question on the letter column for Weird Terror Tales: this is the content entitled "The Star Chamber". It does run for all three of the issues so I presume that should be made into a series, albeit a short-lived one. I understand what you said about the "various" vs attribution to the editor. And who to add or not add as letter content. I presume if the letter writer's name already exists in the db, it's okay to add his letter as content.
Thanks for all your patience and help for a newbie - it's been VERY helpful to me. I'm guessing I don't have a lot of new content to enter as I've noticed most of everything I've looked at up till now has already been in the db. But I know there are lots of other things to put in - tags, synopses, verifications if there are none. I do have the third and final issue of Weird Terror Tales and I'll try to take a stab at it tomorrow.

Log-in problems

You should decide which user name you want to keep as your one (and only) ISFDB account. Once you've done that, go to the front page of the database. Click the "Log Out" link under the Logged In As menu. Once you've logged-out, click on the "Log-In" link. If you've asked your browser to remember your user name and password for this site, the fields will be pre-filled. If this is not the user name you've chosen to keep, then clear both fields and enter the user name you've chosen as the one to keep. If it is, then click the "submit" button. You will have to do the same thing for the wiki (where you're at now). The database and the wiki are two distinct entities and each require that you use a user name and password. You MUST use the same user name and password for both parts in order to avoid confusion between you and the moderators working on your submissions. Mhhutchins 23:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - that helped a lot. I think I've got it straightened out now. Vornoff 02:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Edgar Rice Burroughs Quarterly, Fall 1982

There's a few problems with this record which I'll correct after you've acknowledged reading this.

  • No work should be titled "Untitled" unless that is its actual title. The title of an untitled illustration is determined by what it illustrates. In this case it illustrates this periodical, and show should be titled "Edgar Rice Burroughs Quarterly, Fall 1982". There are three pieces in this publication which needs to be titled this way. Because they have three artist credits, there is no need to disambiguate them.
  • We only disambiguate the second and following works by the same artist which illustrates the same work. So the record on page 12 should just be titled "Jungle Tales of Tarzan".
  • Because the three works which illustrate "Bibliographer's Corner: A Princess of Mars" is by three different artists, they don't have to be disambiguated. We only disambiguate if both the title and credit are identical.
  • If the artwork on page 38 illustrates the essay whose text begins on page 39, then the essay itself also starts on page 38.
  • In a paginated publication, the page number of a content which appears on an unnumbered page can be determined by going forward or backward to the nearest numbered page. We only use brackets for page numbers if the content appears in an unnumbered section of a paginated publication, or in a publication which is entirely unpaginated. So I assume the work you've entered as "[2]" is on the page between 1 and 3, which is entered as "2".
  • Does the work you've given "fep" as the page number appear on the inside front cover facing a page which would be considered page 1 if you use the page-number-determining method I describe above?

Again, I will fix these or if you wish, you can take a stab at them. Up to you. Mhhutchins 17:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help - it's really invaluable to me.
I guess I need to have clarified the titling in this case. In this mag, the artwork on pgs. 8, 12, 16 & 24 each have captions at the bottom of the art which I used for the titles but they are all by Hogarth, embedded within the interview of Hogarth, so in one way they belong to the content, but then again, they were not made specifically for this interview, obviously. So I have a dilemma in titling them for the periodical, the work or their own captions. The same question could be applied to the art on pg. 38, a painting by Frazetta, obviously not done for the article on pg 39 but is appropriate for the subject. It also is captioned at the bottom (which I used).
I think I understand the disambiguation process better now - thanks.
Pagination brings up another question. The rules state "For magazines, the convention is to use the actual page count - including the cover." In this mag there is no numbering on either the inside, front or back covers. Pages 1 & 2 have no numbers and the pagination starts on 3 and ends at 52, just before the inside back cover. For the total page count I added 4 + 52 to get 56 pages total. Another rule states: "[##] Any page for which a number is derived by counting, possibly from a previously or subsequently numbered page, but the page carries no actual page number, should be listed in [brackets]". This is the reason I used [2] for page 2, since it bears no number. Am I reading this wrong?
Yes, the [fep] is the inside front cover. The next page is what would have been page 1 if they had put the number on the page.
I'd like to try fixing the above myself but I'll wait until hearing from you about the title and paging questions. In the meantime I'll attempt to upload the cover. Vornoff 23:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
If an illustration is captioned, you have the option to use that caption as its title, or to title it for the work it illustrates. The instructions you quote concerning unnumbered pages is incorrect, and is not the de facto standard. If that rule were followed as documented, then half the content records in the database would have bracketed pages. Pick up your nearest book of short stories or a magazine issue, and you find in most cases the title pages of the stories aren't numbered. Unfortunately, some parts of the help pages haven't been updated for some time and don't follow the current standards.
Your method of counting the pages of the magazine is correct. If the cover isn't numbered (when the first inside page is numbered 1 and not 3), you have to add 4 to the number of the last page facing the inside back cover. Please proceed to edit the record based on the info given here. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I've made the corrections as best I could. Thanks again. Vornoff 04:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Mislinked cover image

The wrong cover image file was linked to this record. It was the same one linked to this record. Mhhutchins 04:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

You meant to link this file. Mhhutchins 04:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Uploaded proper one. Vornoff 06:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Merging titles

Now that you've added this publication, we would ordinarily expect an editor to merge the new content title records with those already in the database. If you feel up to that task, here are the instructions. (It's really not as complicated as it looks. I can explain it in a quarter of the verbiage.) If not, let me know and I'll do it for you. Mhhutchins 04:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I merged the titles (only the ones I added to the Finlay book) but found a few glitches - let's see if I've got it right:
1) 6 of the titles to be merged didn't show up as dupes because the originals were titled with (Complete Novel) or (reprint) added on. I suppose these now would have to be made variants.
2) 2 of the titles made it into the dupes but would not go thru because of capitalization differences in small words like From/from and That/that. Don't know if you correct the titles one way or the other or variant them.
3) 3 of the titles didn't show as dupes because the originals were parts of serials running across several mags and they had the (Part etc) appended to the title. Plus you don't know for sure which part the new title belongs to Vornoff 06:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Treasury of Great Science Fiction Stories, Number 1

Hello, I've put your submission for the image change on hold. Even if it's very likely that the "wrong" cover is presently displayed (as per the visible numbers), such proposed change must be cleared beforehand with the PV(s). So, can you please contact swfritter to have his approval. Thanks. Hauck 06:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I uploaded a correction, at least I thought I did. I notified Swfritter as per your instructions. Thanks Vornoff 18:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Hauck 19:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Fantastic Adventures, September 1939

Submission updating this record was accept. Concerning the question you asked in the "Note to Moderator" field: varianting a record and creating a pseudonym are two different functions. Doing one doesn't affect the other. If you want to make this title into a variant, click on the "Make This Title a Variant Title or Pseudonymous Work" under the Editing Tools menu. At the bottom of the next page, in the Author1 field, change "Jerry Bixby" to "Jerome Bixby" and submit. This creates a new parent record for the title, which will be moved from the summary page for Jerry Bixby to the page for the canonical author Jerome Bixby. If the first name had not already been made into a pseudonym, you'd have to do that in a separate submission. In this case, the pseuodnym has already been established.

BTW, it's best not to ask questions in the "Note to Moderator" field. All questions should be asked at the ISFDB:Help desk or on the page of the moderator who is working with you, hopefully before you make a submission. It might save you some time and trouble. The "Note to Moderator" field is used to supply further information about the submission (not the publication) which helps the moderator in the decision to accept the submission. Thanks. Mhhutchins 05:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I submitted the variant title for the Bixby letter. Also submitted pseudonym for Arthur Saha. I will submit variant title for his title when/if accepted. Thanks Doug/Vornoff 19:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Submission to create the Saha pseudonym accepted. Now you need to make the title into a variant. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. Doug/Vornoff 20:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

The Sensuous Dirty Old Man

There was already a title record for this work in the database: here. To add this publication to the database, you should have gone to that title record and used the "Add Publication to This Title" function. By using the "Add New Nonfiction" function, you created a duplicate title record. Keep that in mind when creating new publication records. I'll merge the two title records into one after you've read this message. (Or if you're up to, you can try it yourself. Go to the summary page of the "author" and click the "Check for Duplicate Titles" link.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I really messed that one up. I started the merging process and I got two warnings. One was a date warning as the original hc book was 1971 and the edition I have is 1972, they didn't match (unless I've got something basic wrong here in my thinking). And also there was a parent title conflict. I don't know why that is so. So I didn't want to submit them if I was going to make it worse. Maybe I could do it if you could explain what's happening there. Thanks for your time. -Doug/Vornoff 04:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
You're merging titles, not publications, so it should be easy to reconcile the differences between the two title records. In most cases, you'd choose the earliest date (because the date field of a title record is when the work was first published.) And 99% of the time, if it's a variant, you keep it as a variant (that's the parent title conflict.) In this case, choose "1971-00-00", and choose "895058" (the number of the parent title record credited to Isaac Asimov.) They should already be bulleted as the choices. Then click "Complete Merge". Mhhutchins 05:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, done. I do understand what I did wrong to get into this in the first place and will be more careful now. I hope I'll be catching on to the finer points as I go along. Thanks -Doug/Vornoff 05:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Cover image limits

It is ISFDB policy to keep cover image files at 150 KB or less in order to save space on the server (and various copyright reasons.) So I reduced slightly the resolution of this file, which changed its size from 160 KB to 139 KB. You should receive a warning if you upload files larger than 150 KB, although we make exceptions for the images of wraparound cover art and allow files up to 200 KB. In those cases, you can choose to ignore the warning. Thanks. Mhhutchins 20:47, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I noticed the error warning the first time I uploaded the file so reduced the file to what my program said was 132 KB and rechose, then uploaded it again. But obviously something went wrong somewhere along the line. When you check these reuploaded covers, do you compare the old and the new to verify that there was an actual improvement between them? DougVornoff 01:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

The Third Book of Virgil Finlay

I made a few changes to this verified pub. I added Gerry de la Ree as author (he edited the book), changed the title of the illustration on page 128 to 'Colophon (The Third Book of Virgil Finlay)', the same illustration was used for all the de la Ree limited editions of that period. I also added notes about the limitation statement and the publication date. Hope you can agree. Thanks, --Willem H. 19:25, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thanks for the additions. Doug Vornoff 05:01, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Purpose of the Note to Moderator field

The "Note to Moderator" field in a submission entry form should be used to provide additional information about the submission that will help in the moderator's decision to accept, or reject, the submission. It should not be used to provide additional information about the publication. That data should be entered into the "Note" field, because all of the data in the "Note to Moderator" field is "lost and gone forever" once the submission is accepted (or rejected). Do not ask questions of the moderator in the "Note to Moderator" field. Moderators can not answer questions from the submission form. All questions should be asked on the ISFDB:Help desk before the submission is made. Once the submission has been made, the moderator is not in a position to respond. We can only accept or reject the submission. Nothing in the submission can be changed in the acceptance process. I have accepted your submission to add Fantasy Mongers 11 to the database. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have about this publication here on your talk page. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying the Note to Moderator feature. After looking over the fanzine again, I'm left with one question: the review for "Cast a Cold Eye" was by Wayne C. Rogers. Already in ISFDB is a name, Wayne C Rogers, probably the same person but no period after the "C". How would this be handled? Also, I'll be adding in a couple of page #s left out and adding a cover scan. Thanks for your help. Doug / Vornoff 04:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
About Rogers: It's very likely not the same guy. One had a single review in an obscure fanzine 30 years. The other has a story published in a Tasmanian anthology a few years ago. If it could be established that they're the same, we'd make one into a pseudonym of the other and create a variant record to get them onto the same summary page. I don't see that happening in this case. To upload a cover scan, click on the appropriate link in the publication record, and follow the directions. Then update the pub record to link it to the uploaded cover image file. Thanks. Mhhutchins 06:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the help! Doug / Vornoff 15:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Fantasy Mongers 13

Re this record: If it's certain that a piece is credited to the editor by using initials ("WPG"), it's better to change the record to credit the full name and then note it in the publication record. Also, the record of the review of Thinner should give the author of the novel as it is given in the publication. Otherwise a user might believe that in 1984, when the review first came out, that this fanzine was aware of Bachman's identity. We only make corrections in a reviewed work's author when there is an obvious error. For example, if a review of The Gods Themselves gives the author as "Isaac Azimov". (We'll change errors in the reviewed work's author, but we do not correct errors if the reviewer, the one who wrote the review, is incorrectly credited. If that's the case, we enter the reviewer's name as credited. Hope I make the distinction clear.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I wondered about both those points myself. On the "WPG" issue, I was relying on some help screen that I thought said to use the name as it is actually given in the piece itself as opposed to what may be elsewhere in the pub and then make a variant but this makes a lot more sense. Does this just apply to editors, then, and not authors? I also wondered about the Bachman entry as well and used the King name only because in some pubs for that work he is credited, but what you explain makes more sense to me. Thanks. Doug / Vornoff 15:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
The initial rule is usually only invoked in magazines. Occasionally you may see the end of an author's introduction to a collection of stories signed with initials. For example in a magazine, if the heading of a review column gives the name of three different reviewers, and each review is "signed" at the end by an initial, it's OK to credit the full name to the individual reviews. If an editorial is signed with initials, and the editor is credited on the magazine's masthead, then you can use the full credit. I'm not even sure if this "rule" is documented, but using the "credit as is" standard seems silly in these cases. Other editors may disagree. Mhhutchins 00:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. Doug / Vornoff 23:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

The Third Book of Virgil Finlay

I recently finished adding the content to The Book of Virgil Finlay and The Second Book of Virgil Finlay. If you agree, I would like to work on The Third Book of Virgil Finlay where you have already entered content, to enter the years before the titles and to variant or add notes to the individual items identifying the original appearances of the artwork. I also will add bracketed numbers for titles that are represented in the earlier de la Ree Finlay books to disambiguate them. Bob 20:37, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

That would be fantastic - have at it! Doug / Vornoff 22:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

"Frederic Pohl"?

Could you please confirm that the title of this review of Thomas D. Clareson's Frederik Pohl is "Frederic Pohl"? TIA! Ahasuerus 00:26, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I goofed up. The title Ganley uses in the review is "Frederick Pohl". I should have changed it to "Frederick Pohl" and that would have matched up with the existing work under review. Instead I changed it to "Frederic Pohl". My mistake. I've submitted a correction. Hopefully I did it correctly. If not, please let me know what I should have done. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 00:52, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
No worries, typos happen all the time. That's one of the reasons why we have an extra pair of eyeballs checking each submission :) The change has been approved and everything looks good. Thanks! Ahasuerus 01:01, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The Many Worlds of Duane Rimel

According to WorldCat, The Many Worlds of Duane Rimel was edited by Ralph Vaughan, but the text was primarily by Duane W. Rimel. Could you please confirm based on W. Paul Ganley's review in Fantasy Mongers Quarterly, Autumn 1988? Ahasuerus 00:34, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The review is of a 42 pp digest-sized book. Ganley credits Vaughan as editor, and Rimel as being a writer and poet, so I assume that he is the author of the stories therein. Does that mean both should be entered as author? I see that this book does not yet exist in the database. Doug / Vornoff 00:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, at this time ISFDB records do not have a separate field for editors of single-author collections, so we just enter them in Notes. I have created a record for this collection based on the OCLC data -- could you please check it against what's in the review? TIA! Ahasuerus 01:16, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
The title in the review matches. Ganley calls it a 42 page, digest-size, $3.00 ppd copy. No other book details are given. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 01:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Details added, thanks! Ahasuerus 01:35, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Reviews of non-eligible works

I changed the REVIEW of a work not eligible for the database (Dick Smith's Do-It-Yourself Monster Make-Up Handbook) into an ESSAY in this record. (See the "Reviews" section of this help page for the explanation of doing so.) I also created publication records for the two titles by Ian McMahan which weren't in the database, and then linked the reviews to their title records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I think I see what you're doing in the first case. By making the former review into an essay you can reference the work but it will never link to the work, which is ineligible to ever be in the database. Would it have been better then to have never entered it in the first place, with perhaps some kind of note of explanation? Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 05:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
We try to add all the contents of a spec-fic periodical, even if those contents are not spec-fic related. (That's why we have all of those science articles from SF magazines like Analog.) If a periodical is non-genre (like The New Yorker, for example), we'd only add the contents that are speculative fiction. And you're correct as to the reason why they're entered as ESSAYs instead of REVIEWs. If the review is of a work that is not eligible for the database, entering it under a REVIEW typed content record would create a dangling author, i.e. an author that has no title in the database. If you're adding a publication and have a question about whether a review should be typed as REVIEW or ESSAY, just ask at the Moderator desk. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying - got it. Doug / Vornoff 23:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Novel-length work published in periodicals

Re this publication record: The NOVEL type is restricted to book publications. Any work of novel-length (more than 40,000 words) published in a periodical should be entered under the SERIAL type. If it appears in more than one issue, the title is disambiguated with number of the part, i.e. "Title (Part 1 of 3)". If it appears in a single issue, it should be titled "Title (Complete Novel)". I'll correct the title field and type of the novel published in this periodical. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:11, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd seen that before and was wondering about it. Thanks for the explanation. Doug / Vornoff 21:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Incorrectly uploaded image file

This cover image file was uploaded to the ISFDB server without going through the publication record upload link, so it's lacking most the necessary data that is automatically generated when the publication record link is used. I'll have to delete it, but will wait to see if you have a copy to re-upload properly. Let me know. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I do have a copy. I guess I misunderstood what's going on here as I just tried re-uploading and all the info was the same but I went thru the process anyway. Don't remember what I did to foul this up. Doug / Vornoff 00:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
You uploaded it using the "Upload file" link here on the wiki. That works for some files, but not for publication cover images. You have to go to the publication record and click on the link "Upload Cover Scan". I know you've done it in the past. Look at this one you uploaded yesterday and then compare it to the one you just uploaded (twice). You'll find there is no fair use license attached. It's not linked to the pub record. It's not placed into the artist's wiki category. It's name doesn't match the publication tag (a unique number which makes it impossible for a user to upload an image using the same file name and thus overwrite another file.) If you need further instructions let me know and I can step you through the process. Remember that once you've uploaded the image you then have to update the publication record and link it to the image file. Mhhutchins 00:28, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I had to reject the submission to update High Adventure #76 because it made no changes to the record. What were you attempting? Mhhutchins 00:45, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Here's what it looks like might have happened. I log into ISFDB. I find the pub I want to upload a pic to. It takes me to the Wiki section but I haven't logged in so it asks me to. I log in to the Wiki. It then shows a link: Return to Special Upload or something. That takes me to an upload page and that's where the mistake is, I think. What I should have done after I logged into Wiki is go back to the pub and hit the upload cover again to take me to the proper wiki upload page. Anyway, that's my best guess and I won't do it that way again. I uploaded the cover for High Adventure #76 again and it looks to me that it was okay this time. Doug / Vornoff 07:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for providing what is a logical explanation of what happened. This has happened to other editors who insisted that they used the proper link. Now I know that I need to have them log into the wiki before clicking on the database publication link. Mhhutchins 16:43, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Author data

Please confirm the spelling of the legal name you added for Jon L. Blummer. Also, that field should be entered in the format: Lastname, Firstname Middlename. Thanks. Mhhutchins 03:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I verified it from pulpartists.com from a pretty deep article on Blummer, whose father, Louis J. Blumer, emigrated from Romania. I'm also going to submit on Blummer's page a link to that page on the website. I've asked and received permission from the website owner. Doug / Vornoff 04:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm also sure that John Blummer (a name he also used is the same person as Jon L. Blummer, so I'm submitting a pseudonym as well. Doug / Vornoff 04:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
That's fine. Just be sure to correct the format. Also, you don't have to get permission to link to a webpage. That's only necessary if you "deep-link" to an image file. (Deep-linking is displaying an image on one website that's actually hosted on another server. Some websites consider that bandwidth theft and won't allow it.) Thanks. Mhhutchins 04:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Legal name correction submitted. Thanks for the info on linking. Doug / Vornoff 04:42, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Fiction Illustrated's Chandler

This is a publication series, not a periodical. I understand what you're trying to do with this record, but it's better to update it to match this other work in the series. I'm going to accept your submission but change the record's type to a CHAPTERBOOK and its title back to Chandler. Also, it seems that the author is credited as just "Steranko", according to most sources. The pub type looks closer to "digest' than "tp" (defined as a softcover book taller than 7 inches). I'm not even certain if the work qualifies for the database, because a) it's not spec-fic, and b) it's author may not be above the threshold. That can be debated once the record has been fixed. Mhhutchins 00:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I see what you've done and I understand. I guess I'm just a little hazy then on differentiating a publisher's series from a magazine, especially in this case. I suppose the fact that there was no notation of publishing frequency should have been a giveaway. One thing, though, is that it is paginated, with the page after the inside cover being #1 (though not printed as such) and the last content page has 127 on it. Also if you look here: http://www.dougcomicworld.com/INVENTORY-ComicDigestSite.html down towards the bottom, you see that there are variants of these books. But it looks like the only difference is one has a Pyramid Logo and the other has a Curtiss CC 02764 logo on it. Is that enough for someone to make another pub? Let me know what you want to do with #3 and with #1. Also #2 (already verified) exists with two versions (one verified) with different dates, so there's that to think about. Thanks for the help, Doug / Vornoff 00:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
I added the brackets because you clearly noted that the publication was unpaginated. Please fix any errors I may have made in this (reasonable) assumption. There's also problems with this record, which I will allow you to correct based on this discussion. One big problem is that you overwrote the title reference record, changing it into an ESSAY record for the foreword. An editor should NEVER overwrite the title reference field (which is visible, and editable, in some records, but not all.) Another problem is an ISBN-13 in a record for a publication which appeared 30 years before the ISBN-13 was conceived. To fix this record, you will have to do the following:
  1. Change the title field to the work's name.
  2. Change the type to COLLECTION
  3. Enter the ISBN as printed exactly in the publication.
  4. In the contents section, create a new title reference record of the COLLECTION type.
  5. In the contents section, add title records for the SHORTFICTION content and INTERIORART, if the stories have any spec-fic content.
If you need any help, just ask. Mhhutchins 00:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I re-submitted before getting your note. I'll have to try again to finish it off. Yes, my mistake on the pagination - the evils of copy and paste without engaging brain. Doug / Vornoff 01:07, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Is the publisher given on the title page as "Pyramid Publications" (like the other books in the series), or "Pyramid Books"? Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 04:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Actually it's given as "Pyramid Publications" on the title page of all 3 books that I have, Schlomo, Starfawn and Chandler. Doug / Vornoff 04:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

High Adventures #63

In this issue, is "City of Deadly Sleep" stated as a reprint of the "complete novel" first published in Captain Zero? If so, it should be typed as SERIAL, and titled "City of Deadly Sleep (Complete Novel)". This will then be varianted to the title record for the NOVEL. Mhhutchins 17:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

About your note concerning the pub format: ordinarily "quarto" is used for magazines, indicating a saddle-stapled 17" x 11" sheets (folded to create a size of 8 1/2" x 11"). Because of the recent rise in POD magazines, using the perfect binding method (cut sheets, either glued or side-stapled, with a flat binding edge), this binding is more properly typed as "tp". I'll add this to the help page. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Mhhutchins 17:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

On copyright page: "CITY OF DEADLY SLEEP, Captain Zero, November 1949. Copyright ©1949 by Popular Publications, Inc. Copyright renewed © 1977 and assigned to Argosy Communications, Inc. "Captain Zero" and its distinctive logo and symbolism and all related elements are trademarks and are the property of Argosy Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reprinted by arrangement with Argosy Communications, Inc." So no actual statement that it reprints the complete novel. It is 99 pages long, a facsimile with original drawings (looks like to me) and original ads. Doug / Vornoff 17:22, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Then it would appear to be a complete reprint of the serial. I'll make the title correction and linked it to the novel record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Your submission: "Doc Savage: Skull Island"

In your "Notes to the Moderator" for this submission, you mentioned that the information was coming from your personal copy, but you did not "Verify" it as a personal copy. I encourage you to add that verification as well, since those "Notes" disappeared once the submission was accepted.

For whatever reason, I thought you were not supposed to prime verify a previously existing unverified pub until your new changes had been accepted. Then I would verify. You're saying I should make the submission and also verify simultaneously, I gather. That's fine, I just didn't know. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 14:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
It used to be that you couldn't verify a publication until after it had been approved. But now when you do a submission, you should find a place near the bottom of the submission form for "Source of the data". This allows you to click the button saying "I own this", and then you don't have to remember to come back to the book later. To me, at least, this was a big improvement in the submission process. Chavey 18:04, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
I've done that okay for any new pubs I've done but, unless I'm missing it, I don't see that option when you edit a previously entered, unverified pub. So I thought, if it's not there, maybe they want it verified after the submission is accepted. What I started doing is noting that I have the pub and then verify upon acceptance. But I can just as easily verify as soon as I've submitted the data if that's how it's to be done. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 18:44, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
You're right! It's not there on an Edit Pub, which I hadn't noticed before. I can see why also -- if you become, say, the third person to verify a pub, the code to look down the list of verification spots to find the first open one becomes awkward. The reason I hadn't noticed it before is because if I'm verifying+editing a book, I always verify first, then edit second. When you verify a book, e.g. stating "I'm going to check all those details", after verifying it the system asks you if you want to "View This Pub", "Edit This Pub" or "Add More Verifications", so after I register my verification, I generally go to "Edit" (especially if I'm the first verifier) and add my corrections/notes then. Chavey 19:13, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Okay, good to know I'm not too crazy. I'll do it your way in the future. Thanks, Doug / Vornoff 20:17, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Vertex, April 1973

Is the cartoon on page 97 of this publication explicitly credited to "G. Barr"? If the identification is based solely on the signature, then the canonical form of the artist's name should be used as the credit. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Only credit is the signature "G. Barr". I'd thought about your point but couldn't remember if it applied to cartoons as well as it does to other interior art. Doug / Vornoff 01:22, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
The same rule applies for crediting both COVERART and INTERIORART records. Thanks. Mhhutchins 01:37, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

What Happened to Emily Goode After the Great Exhibition

Is your submission to change the cover art credit of this publication from "Frank Kelly Freas" to "Kelly Freas" based solely on a visible signature? If so, then you should use the canonical form of the artist's name, not the signature. The only time you'd use a pseudonym for cover art credit is if there is a stated credit for it, e.g. "Cover art by Kelly Freas". I'll hold your submission until you get a chance to respond here. Mhhutchins 03:29, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Both the cover and title page state "Edited and illustrated by Polly and Kelly Freas". I think I added that in a note and mentioned that I assumed that since the cover and interior art are signed only by Kelly that Polly did not contribute to it and did editing duties. Also, you can see it if you look at the enlarged view of the cover. I actually was paying attention to what you said in your last notation to me above and thought I got it right this time. But...stranger things have happened when I start indexing these pubs. :-) Doug / Vornoff 03:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Because cover and interior art are sometimes created by different artists, an ISFDB editor cannot assume that when a credit states "Illustrated by A" that it refers to the cover. 995 of the time that is exclusively used as an indication of the interior art. Since there is no explicit credit for the cover art, and you're basing the credit solely on the signature, then the cover art must be credit to Frank Kelly Freas. As I stated in the previous message which you cited "If the identification is based solely on the signature, then the canonical form of the artist's name should be used as the credit." The credit for the interior art is explicitly credited to "Kelly Freas", so you were correct to credit it that way. I'll accept the submission and change the cover credit back to FKF. I'll also create a variant of the interior art record to FKF. Thanks. BTW, my question was not directed to the Polly Freas reference. Mhhutchins 04:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I see where you're coming from on that one, now, and that makes sense to me. I'll keep that in mind for future work. Thanks. Doug / Vornoff 04:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Vornoff/Archive/2014&oldid=416193"