Difference between revisions of "ISFDB:Community Portal"

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(archive through April 2022)
(→‎Shadow People: new section)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
<!-- End "Magic Word" section -->
 
<!-- End "Magic Word" section -->
 
{{isfdb-comm-portal-header}}
 
{{isfdb-comm-portal-header}}
 +
{{Shortcut3|shortcut1=ISFDB:COMMPORTAL|link1=ISFDB:COMMPORTAL|shortcut2=ISFDB:CP|link2=ISFDB:CP|shortcut3=COMMPORTAL|link3=COMMPORTAL}}
  
−
== Affonso Arinhos de Melo Franco = Afonso Arinos ==
+
== Through the Budgerigar ==
  
−
These [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?282041] [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?282041] are clearly the same person - same birthdate, deathdate, place of birth and Wikipedia EN link.  Both only have a single, different, item in their bibliographies.  I'm not familiar with Brazilian/Portuguese naming/publishing practices - does anyone have any opinion/preference on which should be the primary author record, and which the alternate? 
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?925198; While adding LCCN to Jones novel Transplant I noticed this book was added not long ago and while SFE mentions it and even a cover artist there seems to be no evidence of a cover online; can anyone find one? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:06, 3 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
Also, I note we have 3 different versions of the given name between the 2 records and the canonical/display and legal name fields: Affonso, Afonso and Alfonso.  I propose to leave the display names as-is, but use "Afonso" as the legal name, as that is what Wikipedia EN and PT both have.  If anyone can advise on whether "Arinos" should be grouped with the given name or the family name - as the two records split things differently at the moment -  that would be helpful too.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 12:46, 1 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== To the Sound of Freedom II==
  
−
== More Recent Dead ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal/Archive/Archive53#To_the_Sound_of_Freedom; I came across this record again today; should it get an all-8's date? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:24, 4 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?463527; When my edit is approved, which entered all 3 dozen or so missing stories from the only place I could find with the page numbers, a JAPANESE site, could someone who owns this book check the Simon, Arnzen, Jeffrey, Gay and Ryan publication histories, which I assume are at the back because they're not at the front? Arnzen published a book of poetry in 2005 from NAKED SNAKE Press with the same title as his poem here, the Ryan story was a digital short on Amazon in 2013, and Gay's story was in online zine Guernica in 2010. The Jeffrey and Simon works I made the same date as this anthology because I can't find anywhere that says they were published elsewhere. EDIT: While searching for something completely unrelated today I found a copy of this book, uploaded Dec. 2019, hiding on Archive.org; probably why I couldn't find it earlier is because Open Library lists both the original anthology and this sequel under the same title heading. So I rejected the Japanese edit and made a new one crediting the Archive copy, but what's interesting is while I was right about the Arnzen, Ryan and Gay stories, Jeffrey's story is from Alt-Zombie (2012), which has no contents on ISFDB, while Simon's poem is from Dead Set (2010), which has contents on ISFDB but not that poem, so I assume whoever entered credits forgot or didn't have complete info. So after this is approved I'll have to fix a few dates, and then look at those other 2 anthologies and see what I can do. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:14, 2 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== HG Wells and His Critics ==
  
−
== William Campbell ==
+
https://archive.org/search?query=wells-and-his-critics; Anyone know a way to tell which of the 3 publishers these copies are from so I can add links? The USA one has no record; maybe it was never actually published by them. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:38, 5 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?15478; The last 2 entries are for the guy who played Squire of Gothos on Star Trek; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Campbell_(actor). I don't think he's responsible for all the other stuff, but possibly those interviews aren't really supposed to be on here. Mods? --[[User:Username|Username]] 00:57, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Top Science Fiction ==
  
−
: Fixed. You really could do this on your own. But thanks! Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 06:08, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://archive.org/search?query=pachter-josh+top&sort=-addeddate; Someone added intros to this anthology recently, I added archived link long ago, just noticed a Spanish-language edition, La crema de la ciencia ficción, was upped to Archive.org in 2013 in case anyone fluent wants to enter that. EDIT: From the same publisher is La Crema del crimen, https://archive.org/search?query=crema-del-crimen, which includes a few stories from ISFDB judging by back cover. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:40, 6 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I will add the Spanish one. What the heck. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 13:12, 6 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
:: Deciding whether to completely delete non-ISFDB material wrongly entered here by other editors should be left up to moderators, not someone like me. --[[User:Username|Username]] 09:45, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Pachter ==
  
−
== Rhonda E. ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1914279; Josh Pachter is credited as "with" on title page of 2015 English edition on Archive.org. Should he be added as co-author? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:21, 6 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I didn't check the Archive.org copy, but the Look Inside on Amazon shows that "with" citation, but then on the copyright page it says the English translation is copyright 2015 Dhooge and Pachter.  There is also a copyright 2014 for Dhooge and the original publisher.  I interpret that to mean Pachter's role was (co-?)translator.  I found Pachter's [http://www.joshpachter.com/bib/bibliography.html bibliography page], and this listed in the "Translations" section.  But just to avoid having anything be too clear, he also has [http://www.joshpachter.com/bib/bib.styx.html this], where he talks about previously translating another Dhooge work and being asked to "collaborate on an American version" of this one.  So does that mean this isn't a translation but is actually a major revision?  Dunno.  Given that Pachter only takes credit for translating it, I think noting him as translator and documenting the "with" citation and the copyright statements (could throw in the Pachter site references as a bonus) should be sufficient.  --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 13:30, 6 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2964977; Eikamp's name is correct on contents page of webzine and in her bio; should it just be corrected or is a variant really necessary? --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:56, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Star Gors ==
  
−
== Wagner ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5851689; I was adding links and adding/fixing other stuff in some Gor editions, mostly UK Star PB, when I noticed an artist's signature for Players of Gor, Star edition, is on the cover but ISFDB had no credit. I tried several names I thought it could be and finally got Tony Masero who, as far as I can tell, is credited exactly once on the entire net for doing this cover, an AbeBooks/Biblio seller's description, but AbeBooks show the wrong (Daw Books) cover and Biblio's scan of the right cover is much too small to see the signature clearly. So I think I got a rare one. As can be seen here, [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/adv_search_results.cgi?USE_1=pub_title&O_1=exact&TERM_1=&C=AND&USE_2=pub_publisher&O_2=exact&TERM_2=star&USE_3=pub_title&O_3=contains&TERM_3=of+gor&USE_4=pub_title&O_4=exact&TERM_4=&USE_5=pub_title&O_5=exact&TERM_5=&USE_6=pub_title&O_6=exact&TERM_6=&USE_7=pub_title&O_7=exact&TERM_7=&USE_8=pub_title&O_8=exact&TERM_8=&USE_9=pub_title&O_9=exact&TERM_9=&USE_10=pub_title&O_10=exact&TERM_10=&ORDERBY=pub_year&ACTION=query&START=0&TYPE=Publication], there are 5 other Star editions with no cover credit; if anyone can find a signature on any of them, beat me to it and enter them yourselves. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:49, 6 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://archive.org/details/dli.ministry.22068; I randomly came across the record for noted anti-Semite and Hitler's favorite composer Richard Wagner, and added an appropriate photo to it; however, I had no idea his works were published as books, but there they are. Funny that there's such a huge gap between the original editions and the modern ones; surely there are many more that are missing. However, the only copy on Archive.org I can find of his complete trilogy is a crusty 1910 copy from the reliable old Public Library of India; I'm sure Arthur Rackham's illustrations were beautiful but in this poorly scanned copy they all look like Rorschach tests. I thought I'd mention it here in case anyone wants to enter it. --[[User:Username|Username]] 20:25, 4 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Night Mayor Cover Art ==
  
−
== Basil Copper Questions ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?474; I noticed that the cover art for the original UK HC and the US C&G HC, which is the same, is credited to 2 different artists here. It's easy to find photos of the back flap of US online which does say design by Roy Colmer but of the several eBay sellers who offer the UK none thought to show the back flap. There are many C&G Colmer design credits online so I'm thinking Kemp did the art and US just didn't credit him, only their designer. So should we make C&G artist Jon Kemp with a note about him not being credited? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:11, 10 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
I don't usually enter page # for editions that already have them entered for another edition with the same # of pages, but in this case, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?283565, the contents were out of order so I decided to enter the #. That opened up a bunch of other issues; first, someone wrote a note saying they got the month, November, from amazon.uk, but I only see a Jan. 1 date which means they didn't know when it was published, but certain other Amazon sites have an exact date of 11-16-1978. Where they got that from is unknown because book only says 1978, so if anyone knows of a photo showing publisher's slip with exact publication date then the date can be changed. Also, the 4 original stories were never given the month so I did that, but story lengths for 3 of them them weren't entered, either. 2 of them were obvious and were fixed, but "The Treasure of Our Lady" is right on the edge between novelette and novella, being 48 pages both in hardcover and paperback, so anyone who owns a print copy could do a word count and enter whatever the right length is. "The Great Vore" is a novella (fixed by me, also) but is on ISFDB in an issue of The Urbanite which only mentions his story "The Flabby Men" on the cover; there's no way they could have fit it into such a small mag so either someone here goofed and entered it incorrectly or there's just an extract in the magazine, so if anyone knows it can be fixed. Finally, Dalby's site says 219 pages for the Hale edition, just like the St. Martin's edition, but someone entered 224 here; many people worked on it over the years, so it's hard to tell who did it, but since Hale and St. Martin's editions back then were usually exactly the same except for prices and other minutiae, I suspect it's really supposed to be 219. --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:27, 5 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:I have the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?44644 UK hc of Kim Newman / The Night Mayor]. The rear flap of the dust jacket states: "Jacket Illustration: Jon Kemp" and "Jacket Design: Bostock & Pollitt Ltd." [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:44, 18 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== 2022-05-06: Brief downtime at 11am server time ==
+
== Darrah Chavey's Passing ==
  
−
The server will be unavailable between 11am and 11:05am. A software patch to automate the process of adding ISFDB templates will be installed. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 10:42, 6 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I was saddened to read this morning of [[User:Chavey|Chavey]]'s passing in [https://file770.com/pixel-scroll-1-10-24-tom-swift-and-his-scrolling-pixels/ File 770] (Number 7 in the Pixel Scroll).  It was always a pleasure to work with him here and he will be missed.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:49, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I replaced link on his page with an updated one; also, while adding a link to the issue of the zine, Aurora, where his Walton essays appeared I discovered that most issues of Aurora and its predecessor Janus are on Archive.org, he PV most (all?) of them, but some have full contents while others have nothing. I imported a few poems from Robert Frazier, Steven M. Tymon, etc. but there's a ton of other book reviews and articles and stuff for anyone who's interested. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:15, 11 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
: Everything should be back up. If you come across any issues with Notes templates, please post the URL of the affected record here. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:04, 6 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:: Sad news indeed. He had a heart attack a few years ago and has been less active since then, but he was only 69, so it was unexpected. Thanks for updating his User and Talk pages. I have updated user rights on his account. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 23:11, 12 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Rtrace, thanks for letting us all know. I echo your sentiments. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 08:47, 13 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Tem Title ==
+
== Barn Owl ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?4296; I made an edit for City of Hermits long ago and today added some more stuff; I think this Barn Owl is not the same as the other that published much later. Ann Jungman who wrote a few of the later ones has a Wiki page where it says she founded Barn Owl in 1999 so I think the 1983 one should get a USA or California or something added to it. Whoever wrote the note about Frances Lincoln here seems to have conflated the 2 publishers; the England location probably belongs with the later publisher. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 08:27, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I separated out [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?4296 Barn Owl Books (UK)] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?83339 Barn Owl Books (USA)] based on the ISBN's. I also updated the notes for Barn Owl Books (UK) based on [https://www.thebookseller.com/news/frances-lincoln-acquires-barn-owl this article]. When untangling publishers, the [https://grp.isbn-international.org/ Global Register of Publishers] can be of help. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:11, 13 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Pat Frank Title ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5856366; I added cover image long ago; just came across archived copy which was there years before my edit so I'm not sure why I didn't add it back then but I did now and also added dash in title, H-Bomb, but I noticed there's another part of the title that people can't decide on. Mhhutchins entered it with 3 dots but title page has one GIANT dot while facing page has long dash and LOC/WorldCat has comma. So what's the consensus? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:44, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Sue Robinson ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?16675; I added archived link and a few other things to the HC of Amendment; author is a respected American newsperson. She should be differed from the Australian author. 1992 story in Weird Tales may be by either of them or another person since there's no bio in that issue. Also, does anyone own Amendment PB? It has nice cover art but there's no back cover photo online where I assume the artist would be credited. I see some weird blocks in the lower right, P and another letter, maybe initials or maybe just part of the art. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:10, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I separated out ''The Amendment'' to {{A|Sue Robinson (I)|373246}}. The author blurb for ''The Amendment'' does not align with the bio for the more prominent newspaper reporter of the same name, nor does that person list ''The Amendment'' as one of their works on their personal or faculty website. So probably two different reporters with same name. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:55, 13 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Peter Goodfellow ==
 +
 
 +
http://petergoodfellow.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/18-misc2; I added a few credits for this artist but the last one has me stumped because the 1992 edition had the same cover as the last image here, http://petergoodfellow.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/18-misc2, but that was wrong because archived copy has the same Posen cover as the later printing on ISFDB. Goodfellow cover has an M for Mammoth so was it an earlier or later edition and why can't I find the original Methuen cover anywhere? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:54, 12 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== French Swastika ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5857839; French speakers, I made my usual shaky attempt at entering a foreign-language edition but I felt a book of such fame probably deserved it; after approval if anyone cares to look it over I'm sure it can be improved. I also made a follow-up edit changing date of French variant to a year earlier to match the date of this book. Also, those Feminist Press editions, https://archive.org/search?query=swastika-night&sort=-addeddate&and%5B%5D=mediatype%3A%22texts%22, are a mess, the one with the white cover matches the UK Lawrence & Wishart edition's cover but has the info of the '85 Feminist edition, while the other 2 with the face on the cover either a) have no price on the back and totally different back cover text but copyright page is the same or b) are a 4th printing from 2003, I think, with cover info on copyright page the '85 edition doesn't have and a missing back cover so no way to tell what was on there. If anyone cares to figure all that out. For some reason the French edition I mentioned above is in English according to Archive.org which is obviously wrong. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:59, 12 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== UK Omni ==
 +
 
 +
https://fantlab.ru/edition356174; I added archived links to the 6 volumes of Best of Omni and noticed FantLab has a photo of #6 with a UK price on it in case anyone knows more about that; maybe all 6 were published there but, if so, none are on ISFDB. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:23, 14 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Tiret-Bognet ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=bognet&type=Name; same Verne illustrator, same book in different languages, one should be parent and maybe some of the art needs merging, Holmesd worked on many of these Verne books so he'd probably know. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:48, 14 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Server maintenance 2024-01-15 at 3pm EST ==
 +
 
 +
The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance on 2024-01-15 (today) between 3pm and 3:10pm EST. The database and the Wiki will be unavailable. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:09, 15 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: The server is back up. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:06, 15 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== N. Katerli ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=katerli&type=Name; I found a huge (380+ pages) thread on FantLab's message boards with people who have died, many of which were never entered on ISFDB (not all genre, though, some footballers and other non-genre people are included, too) and while adding many dates and photos I came across Katerli; I added Wiki link, day of death, and photo to Nina's record but is that other spelling the same person? If so, some variant would probably be needed. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:25, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:It's very possible, given how things get romanized from Eastern European languages. Perhaps one of our Eastern European language people can do a little digging? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:30, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::Looking into it a bit myself, I'm 100% sure they are the same person. Working on connecting them. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:57, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::Okay, everything is [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?373565 here], now. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:27, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::: Thanks for working on her stories. I have added dates and updated the author record. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 21:51, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Terry Venables ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5861442; Is this the famous footballer (or soccer, as we Yanks call it)? There seem to be a lot of photos of him but some of them look like a different person so just making sure this is the right guy (he wrote some novels including Bornless Keeper which is on ISFDB but online info seems to suggest he didn't actually write any of it, Gordon Williams did). --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:44, 17 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: Yes, things like that do happen: there are several titles in the database for which it is doubtful if the featured prominent author did actually write them; and so, jugig from the photo and the theme of the listed title it is '''the''' Terry Venables. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 07:38, 18 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::I can confirm that the photo in your submission is indeed of the English footballer [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Venables Terry Venables]. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:42, 18 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Alchemy Magazine ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/seriesgrid.cgi?35135; Luminist.org has a lot of magazines not on Archive.org and while replacing cover and adding link to Alchemy #2 I noticed all 3 issues have a different format, TP/unknown/pulp. Those who know about such things may want to adjust those since I'm assuming they all should be the same format. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 01:11, 18 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Dinotopia Digest Novels ==
 +
 
 +
I just made about 20 edits for this series (https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5862661 through https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5862859) and as usual with series books it's a nightmare; I think I did as much as I could with what's available (oddly, only 1 book, Survive!, didn't have its original Random House edition entered on ISFDB so I had to scrounge up a copy on Google Books to enter info from). I think only one thing may raise questions and that's this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2230051, where an editor here in 2017 entered James Gurney as cover artist but even though he's mentioned on all copyright pages because he's the creator/owner of Dinotopia it was actually Michael Welply who did all the covers. Problem is after I removed cover credit (I didn't enter Welply because while it does say that in archived 3rd printing copy there are some 1st printings of books in the series that misspelled it as Welpley and then corrected that in later printings) I noticed the nomination for best cover in the art record. So I don't know what to make of that; was Gurney nominated because he's the creator or did someone make a mistake and not nominate the real artist, Welply? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:58, 18 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Pratchett's Eric - converting into novella? ==
 +
 
 +
I did a word count on a digital version of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1832 Eric], and it's around 35000 words, i.e. clearly a novella. Comments on the title and various publication records point out how unusually short it is. [http://www.locusmag.com/index/b381.htm Locus] calls the first edition a novella, but later editions a novel. I think the novella classification is correct, but am hesitant in converting such a high-profile title. Any opinions? [[User:TerokNor|TerokNor]] ([[User talk:TerokNor|talk]]) 08:01, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: My electronic copy contains 34.2K words, so it's a novella. That said, I wonder about Locus changing its classification after the first edition. Is there any indication that later editions may have been longer? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 11:43, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:: I can find no indication of there being different editions of the text. I noticed however that after the original illustrated edition (which was billed "A Discworld Story"), it usually says "A Discworld Novel" on the covers, so Locus might have just gone with that. [[User:TerokNor|TerokNor]] ([[User talk:TerokNor|talk]]) 13:59, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: It sounds like it's a novella whose subtitle (but not the word count) was changed in later editions. I suggest we wait for other editors to share their thoughts before we change the type from NOVEL to SHORTFICTION. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:49, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::I added an Archive.org link in a PENDING edit to The Illustrated Eric, 2010 Gollancz HC, so that may help with the counting; page count said 144 but it is actually 131. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:26, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: I have approved the submission that corrected the page count and updated the Note field to indicate where the corrected page count comes from. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:49, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::::: (Chime) Not surprised, don't care, go ahead. ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] ([[User talk:Holmesd|talk]]) 21:26, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
(unindent) Hearing no objection, I have left a message on TerokNor's Talk page asking him to proceed with the proposed changes. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:38, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Thank you. I have submitted the first edit to begin the process. [[User:TerokNor|TerokNor]] ([[User talk:TerokNor|talk]]) 05:19, 2 February 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Late Mods ==
 +
 
 +
I had a thought while adding FantLab ID to a PV Brian Lumley book today; is there a way to remove the necessity of adding a note to the mod about what changes you made if the mod is deceased? There have been several mod losses recently, most of whom PV countless books, so it would save time to not have to write anything if the only PV's are ones who are not going to read those notes. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:23, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: I think there are two sides to this issue.
 +
 
 +
: The first one is technical, i.e. whether it would be possible to modify the software to check each primary verifier's Talk page to see if it starts with the "Deceased user" template. The short answer is "Yes, it would be possible, although it would also make our core software more closely intertwined with the Wiki software, which may become a minor nuisance during the next Wiki upgrade".
 +
 
 +
: The second one is functional, i.e. whether making this kind of change would be desirable. I am not sure it would. It would save some keystrokes, but there is value to having more detailed Edit History for primary verified publications even if their verifiers are no longer available. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:42, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Moll/Head Virgin Planet ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5864268; I added cover and prices but I think publisher should be changed to Wyndham, either Star or Tandem or Target which are all on ISFDB related to Wyndham, since their logo is on front and back covers, https://www.ebay.com/itm/143869122299. The other issue is the cover is the same Charles Moll art as earlier US paperbacks; Michael Head was a designer with 1 other ISFDB credit that notes say is just a photo and a Mike Head I noted in an edit earlier today as the designer for Piatkus edition of M. Bingley's Waiting Darkness did a cover which is just a photo of a fist. So where Head credit came from for Virgin Planet I don't know but I think Moll credit should replace it. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:09, 19 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== One Hundred Years of Science Fiction ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5864915; I'm guessing this Gollancz edition is rare judging by the fact there's almost no photos of the cover online. As can be seen in my edit, notes about year (probably very old and entered by the long-gone Bluesman) are obsolete now because the year is on the title page. Also, the price was entered by Mellotronman from his copy but for a 1969 UK book the pre-decimal price should be entered so that's what I did; problem is in his note to mod in edit history he says other price is 32s, not 30. So if he's still around he may want to PV and add a note about the alternate price (I'm assuming the archived copy's flap is badly framed which is why the other price is not visible) and delete year notes and add a new one saying the date is on the title page. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:31, 20 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:It doesn't help that two different printings share the same ISBN. Mine says 1970 on the front of the title page and 'second impression 1970' on the back of the same page. The price is most definitely listed on the dust jacket as '32s', an unusual way of writing 'shillings'. The more usual way would be '32/-'. Perhaps the first impression was 30s and the second 32? [[User:Mellotronman|Mellotronman]] ([[User talk:Mellotronman|talk]]) 16:55, 20 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::OK, I think it makes sense now, copy on Archive.org is '69 1st pr. with just s-price while your 1970 2nd pr. has both s-price and pounds. So after my edit is approved you may want to clone it and enter yours with new date and prices and PV it, too. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:07, 20 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Tom Palmer ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?98449; 2 or 3 different Palmers here; novels are by the guy pictured but the art credits are by the recently deceased (2022) famous comic artist who had a still-online site, tompalmerillustration, and a Wiki page as Tom Palmer (comics); the poem, judging by the bio at the archived Aphelion link, is by another likely American Palmer. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:58, 20 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Lone Star Law ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?80404; Anyone think this should be deleted? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:34, 21 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: The Note field says:
 +
:* Western story anthology. It may have some spec-fic stories, but otherwise, there's no reason for it to be in the database.
 +
: Have we been able to find this anthology's table of contents and determine whether any of the stories are SF? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:23, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::I was able to look at the ToC via the Amazon Look Inside feature for the pb edition (ISBN 978-1982153069) and I don't see anything there that looks like SF. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 15:38, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::: Reading the editor's introductions to each story I noticed that two stories were called "eerie". After reading them, I can confirm that one is an unambiguous ghost story while the other one is an ambiguous "curse" story. I have added them to the publication record and updated Notes. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 22:13, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Recording plagiarized work ==
 +
 
 +
A couple of days ago [https://file770.com/pixel-scroll-1-19-24-all-these-pixels-are-someone-elses-fault/ File 770 reported] (item 5) that [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3221864 "After the Flood" by John Kucera] was plagiarised from another author.  I've added a note to that title record, but I'm wondering whether anything else should be done, e.g. making it a variant? [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 01:36, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: Unless the poem uses the same wording I'd think the only thing we can do is to add notes to the title (and likely the publications the plagiat was published in). Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 01:32, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:All three of the works "by" this author that are listed on ISFDB appear to have been plagiarized. I've added notes to the title entries as well as the publication entries. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:59, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:: Thanks all! [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 15:22, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::At some point, we should probably make them variants since (in all the reports I've read) only the title were changed by the plagiarizer. Similar to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1570478 this one]. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:34, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::I've added the variants for the two I could figure out. Still unsure who originally wrote "[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3205023 Summer 1993]" and what the original title was. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 16:15, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::::How about this one, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2951283? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 16:29, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::Looks like it's the same guy per a Google search that brought up [https://eunoiareview.wordpress.com/2023/11/16/fanlight-and-ice/ this] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20240123001032/https://www.silverblade.net/tag/john-siepkes/ archive]), which is the same thing but under his Kucera name. Now to try to figure out who really wrote it. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 19:06, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::Some additional archive links to help us figure out all of this: [https://web.archive.org/web/20230604133528/https://thewildword.com/poetry-john-kucera/ Wild Word], [https://lothlorienpoetryjournal.blogspot.com/2024/01/john-kucera-exposed-as-serial-plagiarist.html Lothlorien Poetry Journal] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20240123004257/https://lothlorienpoetryjournal.blogspot.com/2024/01/john-kucera-exposed-as-serial-plagiarist.html archive]), [https://twitter.com/OneArtPoetry1/status/1747732242581876815 One Art Poetry on X], [https://web.archive.org/web/20230922115703/https://oneartpoetry.com/2023/09/11/two-poems-by-john-kucera/ One Art Poetry], [https://web.archive.org/web/20230530004119/https://www.fictionalcafe.com/spare-parts-poetry-by-john-kucera/ The Fictional Cafe], [https://web.archive.org/web/20240122101438/https://sparksofcalliope.com/2024/01/17/it-was-bound-to-happen-eventually/ Sparks of Calliope] (see also [https://web.archive.org/web/20240123004746/https://sparksofcalliope.com/2023/09/22/two-poems-by-john-kucera/ this page]), [https://issuu.com/newreadermagazine/docs/nrm_issue17_lowres_1_/s/16096176 New Reader Magazine] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20240123005036/https://issuu.com/newreadermagazine/docs/nrm_issue17_lowres_1_/s/16096176 archive]), [https://bsky.app/profile/wnwagner.bsky.social/post/3kj5gwyptla2o Wendy N. Wagner loves pie on BlueSky], and I'll add more later. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 20:31, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
(unindent) I suspect that the issue of plagiarized works is going to become harder to deal with in the near future. In the past we had to deal with two types of scenarios:
 +
 
 +
* word-for-word reprints with the title/credits changed, usually by shady publishers or self-publishers
 +
* more elaborate schemes whose perpetrators plagiarized sections of other authors' works
 +
 
 +
The first type is fairly straightforward, but the second type is hard to catch. For example, volumes 29 and 33 in the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?4950 ''Casca'' series] were retroactively removed from the series over allegations of plagiarism in April-June 2013. It happened 3-5 years after their original publication even though the Casca fandom is very active. It's not something that we, bibliographers, can realistically identify on our own.
 +
 
 +
Over the last few months I have seen a number of reports of plagiarists using software to scrape Web-published stories, massage them using ChatGPT and put them on Amazon, e.g. [https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgressionFantasy/comments/18v1d5e/attention_authors_of_rr_there_has_been_a_spree_of/ this episode over the Christmas holidays]. I suspect it's going to be a pain to deal with. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 22:29, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Bard II ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291859; Wrong cover, it has price and ISBN of earlier printing, I can't find right cover, if anyone else can, can you upload it and replace this one? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:47, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Also, The First Long Ship (or Longship on some sites) which has no cover online I can find so if it exists and someone can find it that needs uploading, too. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:03, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Galactic Central Images ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5867682; The only other site I can find that has this cover is Camelot Books; I was going to upload it when I thought of checking Philsp and found it hiding there. Is the owner(s) of that site ever going to upgrade to HTTPS? Right-click and "open image in new tab" does show the image but it still would be better if that didn't have to be done. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:43, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
: Last I heard, the owner said that he had no plans to upgrade to HTTPS. That said, browser vendors have been making it harder to access HTTP sites, which puts pressure on site owners to upgrade. It remains to be seen how it may affect Galactic Central in the future. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:21, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== German Playboy ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubseries.cgi?757; While replacing sideways Amazon cover with better straight cover for one of these books I noticed there are 8 or 9 that don't have cover credits (last book was unpublished so likely no cover exists); since most covers in the series were originally on English-language books it's likely the missing ones were, too, so if anyone can recognize the art then artists can be entered and variants can be made. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:08, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Brian Ames Title ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?119003; I added a link to a MOTA anthology over a year ago and there's a 2002 story by Brian Ames which editors before me seemed to have trouble deciding how to enter (see extensive title edit history), eventually settling on a symbol; however, in his collection someone entered the title as "grey blob", which is what it actually looks like in the anthology. So the 2 stories are the same and should be merged but what should the title be entered as? This reminds me of that David J. Schow horror story where nobody can ever decide how to enter it and eventually settled on "scribbled graffiti" or this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?76213, but at least Oates can get away with that because most of her work is pretentious "literary" stuff, anyway. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:22, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Merged [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2148942 here]. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 17:39, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Duplicate finder -- NOVEL/CHAPBOOK? ==
 +
 
 +
The "Duplicate Finder" program, which exists in three incarnations -- one for Author pages, one for Title pages and one for Publication pages -- searches for potential duplicate titles and then lets you merge them. Its default mode of operations is "exact", which means that two (or more) titles need to have the exact same spelling as well as the same authors in order to be considered potential duplicates.
 +
 
 +
The "exact" mode also ignores unlikely title type mismatches. For example, if one title record is SHORTFICTION and another one is NOVEL, they won't be flagged as potential duplicates. However, the "exact" mode currently flags NOVEL and CHAPBOOK titles with identical titles and authors as potential duplicates. I am thinking that this is likely more harmful than useful and would like to propose that we change the behavior of the "exact" mode to skip identical NOVEL/CHAPBOOK pairs. Ideas? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:35, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I agree. As it is currently, we could accidentally merge titles incorrectly. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 17:40, 24 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::I also agree.  --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 13:21, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::: I use that one a lot especially when adding juvenile chapbooks to prolific authors (mainly Fixer's) - because of how Amazon has these, they rarely make it to addPubs and not having the duplicate finder highlight the previously entered novel (a lot of these are stored as novels and need conversion) makes it more likely not to see the other version on the page. So I would rather not lose it... [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 18:43, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: Let me clarify that the Duplicate Finder's "similar" mode would continue to flag NOVEL, SHORTFICTION and CHAPBOOK titles as potential duplicates after the proposed change. Would it be sufficient for Fixer-originated use cases? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 21:41, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::: But we do not have a similar mode in the pubs/titles Duplicate finder. The one I use is the one that triggers when you click on "Check for Duplicate Titles" after a Pub/Title Edit. Which I believe is "exact". If I need to go to the author page every time to run a separate similar mode check, it will add steps. Plus in some of these authors, it will highlight a lot of things which is different from the current case where it is a quick check that finds usually a single match when it does. I can make it work - but it will add to the workflow. One option may be to allow the similar as an option on pub/title duplicate finder - keep the exact as a default but allow a similar to be run with a click how we do it on author page's find duplicates? A separate click which is right there will help.
 +
::::: And this is not just for Fixer usecases - I've needed it when moderating as well often enough in a similar usecase - we have chapbook/novel and a new(ish) member adds the same as the other.
 +
::::: If the proposal is to remove it from the 'Author' exact duplicate finder only with no change for the pub/title duplicate finder, then I am fine with removing it there. But the way the proposal reads, it sounds like we are not going to show it in the default mode in either :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 10:45, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::: Thanks for the clarification. I forgot about the fact that the versions of the Duplicate Finder software used on Publication and Title pages do not support "similar" and "aggressive" modes. If memory serves, the reason was performance -- there can be thousands of titles with "similar" spellings where "similar" is defined as an 85% overlap, the current threshold value.
 +
 
 +
:::::: It sounds like what we may need is a new Duplicate Finder mode. Something that would be the same as the "exact" mode except that it would also flag identical CHAPBOOK/NOVEL title pairs. It would be made available on all three Duplicate Finder pages.
 +
 
 +
:::::: If it sounds workable, I can look into what it would take to implement it. I suspect that it should be a fairly straightforward change, but I am not 100% sure. We'll also need to come up with an intuitive name for the new mode. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:11, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::: That will work for me. And if you are going to do it, we may think about throwing an anthology/collection/omnibus format mix in the same mode (same usecase essentially - especially around juveniles and novellas previously added as novels). And even poem/shortfiction? Maybe simply pull all the format discrepancy matches out from Exact (requiring a format match in it) and move them to their own type of duplicate finder mode. That will also make it less likely for someone to merge by mistake based on the standard duplicate find.[[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 12:27, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::::: You could have "type" be an independent modifier applied to any of the three modes. Something like "Match identical types only", on by default. That would also be easy to extend to other criteria (e.g., language) in the future without having a cross product of mode choices.  --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 14:26, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::::::::: Good point! [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:43, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
(unindent) After experimenting on the development server and paying closer attention when working on the Clean Authors cleanup, I think I have a better appreciation for Annie's concerns. At this point clicking "Check for Duplicate Titles" post-approval is second nature for moderators and self-approvers. When a submission adds a NOVEL publication, it's very helpful to know that a CHAPBOOK pub with the same title already exists in the database, especially if the submitter is a robot. Requiring the approving moderator to click yet another link/button would mess with the workflow.
 +
 
 +
I suppose we could change the Duplicate Finder logic to ignore CHAPBOOK/NOVEL duplicates by default, but display a yellow warning -- and a link to the more relaxed version of the Duplicate Finder -- if they exist. I am not sure it would be ideal, though. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 11:34, 31 January 2024 (EST)
 +
: As long as it is a link and not a need to go elsewhere or to go to the author level, that will work for me.
 +
: I'd also want to ask for the anthology/collection/omnibus and the poem/short fiction checks to be added to the chapbook/novel both for the yellow warning and the more relaxed one - both of these happen often enough to be annoying if we lose the ability to see them on the duplicate finder. Unless the plan is to leave these into the default one - in which case, we are fine. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:45, 31 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:: After thinking some more about this issue, it occurs to me that there may be another way to approach this issue. Currently, most post-approval Web pages display links that let you view/edit the updated/added record or, for some submission types like Make Variant, multiple records. A few post-submission pages also link to the Duplicate Finder or other pages.
 +
 
 +
:: However, there is nothing preventing the post-approval software from quietly checking the status of the added/updated record(s) and displaying appropriate warnings. For example, the post-approval page for NewPubs could run the Duplicate Finder behind the scenes and then display a message like:
 +
::* The added publication record includes a title record with the same title and authors as another title record. Use the Duplicate Finder link above to see the details.
 +
:: This warning message would be easy to implement and moderators would no longer have to worry about forgetting to click "Duplicate Finder" after approving NewPub submissions. Does this sound useful?
 +
:: If we choose to add this warning message, we could still decide to tweak the Duplicate Finder logic later, but I think the message should be implemented first since it changes the workflow. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 16:53, 2 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::: That will be useful -- I am not sure how many false alerts will show up and how they will be treated (especially from the less experienced moderating users - usually the self-approvers) but other from that, any checks the software can do for me are always welcome. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 14:08, 6 February 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: OK, {{FR|1592}}, "Warning after approving NewPub submissions which create potential duplicates", has been created. We'll see how useful it will be. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:48, 6 February 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
=== Duplicate Finder enhancements -- Outcome ===
 +
 
 +
{{FR|1592}} has been implemented. After approving NewPub/AddPub/ClonePub/EditPub submissions, moderators and self-approvers will now see a yellow warning and a link to the Duplicate Finder if the created/affected publication record contains one (or more) title records which have the same title(s) and author(s) as other title records in the database. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:58, 8 February 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Moondust ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?22737; I added a whole bunch of edits for Rosemary Harris books and also found a PDF link for her early uncollected story "Hamlin" at Galactic Journey. Looking through their list of PDF's I noticed a Swann link and, thinking it would be a short story, I clicked it and it turned out to be the full original edition of his novel Moondust which has no copies at the usual places like Internet Archive or Luminist. I'm guessing there's more novels hiding in that list but for now I'll just ask if anyone owns the book and wouldn't mind transcribing the text on the last 2 pages and adding it to the record because those are missing in the PDF. I'm not sure what copyright rules are for a 50+-year-old book but I think a page or two would count as an excerpt and wouldn't bother anyone, right? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:43, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:That can get complicated. Since this was first published in 1968 in the United States, and if it was published with a copyright notice, the copyright expires at the end of 2063 (meaning it becomes public domain on January 1, 2064). If it was published without a copyright notice, since it was published between 1964 and 1977, it is now in the public domain. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#When_does_copyright_expire? here] for more details. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:27, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Looking at the PDF copy from the link you submitted, the copyright notice is very clear on the back of the title page. This means the copyright doesn't expire until 2064, so we shouldn't be linking to a pirated PDF copy. I rejected the link addition. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:30, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::So does that mean that all the 330 or so Luminist.org PDF's currently linked on ISFDB are pirated, too? Because I don't think most of those are public domain; I would know because I'm the one who added most of the links. Has any mod in the history of this site ever gotten a request from anyone to remove a Luminist PDF? I'd be curious to know. When someone pirates something and uploads it, they love to add their name, fake as it may be, to the upload, similar to how computer game crackers decades ago loved to add their names to the crack, usually with some animation and music (which were sometimes better than those in the game itself); believe me, I could easily add hundreds of Internet Archive links to rare books right now except for the fact that the uploaders converted them to crap e-editions with removed page numbers. I don't see anything like that in Moondust so it's likely someone's personal copy they converted to a PDF; it's clearly the original paperback with page numbers and a bookstore sticker on the cover and everything. Since Swann died in 1976 and the last reprint as far as ISFDB (and WorldCat) say was in 1977 I doubt anyone would care if a PDF was linked to here; any serious collector would want a physical copy. My suggestion would be to un-reject it. Barring that, I'll just go ahead and make a note with the address of the PDF but not hot-linked so people know where it is but actually have to paste the URL into the address bar themselves in order to get it. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:47, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::This guy, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?286234, runs the site. Looks legit to me; he even published a magazine of the same title. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:08, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: The question about the status of Luminist-hosted PDF files is an interesting one. I should first note that I became aware of the Luminist Web site back in 2010 when we were given permission to link to Luminist-hosted images. I was under the impression that the files that they host were similar to [https://www.gutenberg.org/help/copyright.html Gutenberg-hosted "copyright-cleared" files], which is why I have been approving their addition for the last few years.
 +
 
 +
::::However, reading the copyright statement on the [http://www.luminist.org/archives/ main Luminist page]:
 +
::::* This collection may contain copyrighted material which has not been specifically authorized for our use. The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) provides for making “fair use” copies of copyrighted materials under certain conditions, including that that the reproduction is not to be used commercially or “for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” By accessing files linked to this site you are agreeing to abide by these restrictions. If you do not agree, do not download. If any copyright owner objects to our inclusion of their material on this web site, please do not harass our hosting providers; just contact us with the pertinent information. We will remove contested content promptly upon receipt of legitimate requests. Readers who wish to obtain a permanent copy of any item are encouraged to acquire one from a bookseller of their choice. Readers may contact us for assistance in locating copies for purchase.
 +
:::: I see that they expect their users to download PDF files for "private study, scholarship, or research" purposes and, apparently, not for permanent use. This relies on an interpretation of the [https://copyright.columbia.edu/basics/fair-use.html "fair use" doctrine] which seems a bit too stretchy to me, but I am not an expert in the field. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:09, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::::OK, sounds good to me, "private study" clearly can mean reading the book and since they're being linked at ISFDB that covers the scholarship/research part. Also, what I took to be a Galactic Journey magazine is just a few random pages from the webzine with a couple of essay links, 1 of which is movie-related and probably doesn't qualify, but there's some Hugo Award nomination so I guess they count; the first entry is totally blank and was actually entered by user "galacticjourney" himself with mods questioning on his page why he entered it since it's a webzine. The site is still running currently and has hundreds of essays, many of which would be suitable for entry here, I'm sure. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:25, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::: Let me clarify what I meant by "a bit too stretchy". The part of the Copyright Law that they cite -- "for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research" -- doesn't come from the "fair use" clause ([https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 Section 107 of the Copyright Act].) Instead it comes from [https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#108 Section 108, "Reproduction by libraries and archives"]. Section 108 is a lengthy section with a set of provisions that are completely different from the "fair use" provisions in Section 107. It's odd that the Luminist Web site cites Section 108 ("libraries and archives") language to support what they state is a Section 107 ("fair use") exception.
 +
 
 +
:::::: I should add that both Section 107 and Section 108 lawsuits can get complex and technical as we saw during [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachette_v._Internet_Archive Hachette v. Internet Archive] in 2020-2023. My knowledge of these topics is very limited, but hopefully other editors may have more in-depth knowledge and/or relevant experience in this field. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 21:38, 25 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::::::: I have started a [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Rules_and_standards_discussions#Linking_to_third_party_Web_pages_--_defining_.22legally_posted.22 Rules and Standards discussion] to see if we can come up with unambiguous rules for linking to third party-hosted texts. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 20:50, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Reactor?!? ==
 +
 
 +
I was at my awful local public library printing out various articles and short stories for free which is the only positive thing about libraries these days and after my hour was up I realized I forgot to check Tor.com to see if they published any new fiction (horror only, please, no SF or fantasy) so I checked when I got home and got a scary-looking page which made me think a computer virus had finally taken hold of my laptop after not having one for many years but it turns out that Tor apparently has re-named themselves Reactor. Is anyone else aware of this? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:08, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
: Yes, they announced it a few weeks ago. New site, new name (to differentiate them from the Tor.com publisher), same team, same contents. All the old links to their old site should be forwarding cleanly to the new one. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 17:30, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
: And the [https://reactormag.com/tor-com-to-become-reactor-debut-new-site-on-january-23rd/ announcement] and [https://reactormag.com/answering-your-questions-about-tor-coms-change-to-reactor/ Q&A] about it. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 17:31, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:: I suspect that the part of the FAQ that is most likely to affect us is this:
 +
::* SFF literature is still the heart of what we do, and that’s our priority. We’ll just also be open to related subjects of interest, from nonfic to romantasy, pirates to gardening, and so on.
 +
:: So it looks like they will have more non-genre content going forward, but they expect to remain primarily SF-oriented for the foreseeable future. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:23, 26 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Chinese Godzilla? ==
 +
 
 +
https://archive.org/search?query=%E6%80%AA%E7%8D%A3%E3%82%B4%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A9&and%5B%5D=mediatype%3A%22texts%22; If anyone knows what this is about and decides it warrants entering, thanks. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:18, 29 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Magic German Cats ==
 +
 
 +
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?33710; There was a 1999 German edition under a new title, https://archive.org/details/katmagie13katten0000unse, in case anyone fluent wants to enter that. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:02, 30 January 2024 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== ZOLTAR ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?34535; S.R. Tem's recent collection Thanatrauma has no contents entered here, but Best New Horror Vol. 31, not entered on ISFDB yet, has a story by him from that collection. While checking his online PDF bibliography there was a note that said the limited HC (only TP and E are entered here) contains an extra story, "Again, the Hit and Run", from 1981's Chrysalis 9, so I added that info to the title record, but there's no such story title, it's "Again, the Hit and Miss". Only sites that show the latter title are ISFDB and Philsp, so I assume that's where the info came from. The former title is much more common online, so I suspect it's the correct one, but there doesn't seem to be any photos of Chrysalis 9 contents online. A lot of older SF buffs on here, so I'm sure someone owns it and can verify what's the real title; problem then is how many other titles in the 10 volumes of Chrysalis may be wrong here. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:04, 6 May 2022 (EDT)
+
[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/adv_search_results.cgi?USE_1=pub_title&O_1=exact&TERM_1=&C=AND&USE_2=pub_verifier&O_2=exact&TERM_2=Zoltar&USE_3=pub_title&O_3=exact&TERM_3=&USE_4=pub_title&O_4=exact&TERM_4=&USE_5=pub_title&O_5=exact&TERM_5=&USE_6=pub_title&O_6=exact&TERM_6=&USE_7=pub_title&O_7=exact&TERM_7=&USE_8=pub_title&O_8=exact&TERM_8=&USE_9=pub_title&O_9=exact&TERM_9=&USE_10=pub_title&O_10=exact&TERM_10=&ORDERBY=pub_year&ACTION=query&START=0&TYPE=Publication]; Polish primary verifier seemed to be very active in 2012 and then nothing, they left a lot of their 300+ PV unfinished with missing info, mentioning this in case anyone fluent in Polish wants to follow up on any of them and add or fix anything. I thought of this before but remembered it today after finding a photo for Jerzy Sosnowski on FantLab and an archived copy of the anthology PL +50 which his story on ISFDB appears in. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:45, 30 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Peter Crowther Story/Collection ==
+
== verification email  ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2902166; Crowther published a collection with same title in 2021, not entered here; that's what the review is of, not the individual story. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:44, 6 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I have tried several times to elicit a verification email but nothing has arrived. I've checked junk & trash as well. Is this simply not working? {{unsigned|Starman99}}
  
−
:Please bring that to the attention of the PV: he might not see it here and would have to be asked anyway. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 07:31, 7 May 2022 (EDT)
+
: I am afraid this is a common occurrence, which we [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:FAQ#What_if_I_don.27t_receive_the_confirmation_email.3F discuss in the ISFDB FAQ]:
  
−
:: Done. They've already made an edit for the collection and imported contents; that was fast. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:26, 7 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:* Different email servers have different automated rules which may block email coming from certain Web sites, which makes it hard to tell what's preventing ISFDB confirmation email from being delivered to your mailbox.
  
−
::: Haha, you're welcome. ;) [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] 10:29, 7 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:* Note, however, that confirmation emails are optional as far as ISFDB is concerned. As long as you can log in, you have full access to all ISFDB features including Advanced Search, display preferences, submission creation etc.
  
−
== Oz Books ==
+
: Since you were able to post the message above, you should be all set :-) [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:11, 30 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://archive.org/details/@ximm?query=oz; 1916 Rinkitink edition has Reilly & Lee as publishers but note on ISFDB says they didn't appear until 1918. I'm sure some of these other books will be useful, too. This dude Ximm never had anything except cover photos whenever I came across him on the Archive, but I guess years ago he did add some actual books. --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:38, 6 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Ace Dates ==
−
:[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reilly_%26_Britton Wikipedia] dates Reilly & Britton becoming Reilly & Lee after 1918, which would put the 1916 first edition of Rinkitink as published under the original name of the firm.  Happily, there are numerous bibliographies of Baum and Oz available.  ''[http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?334034 The Book Collector's Guide to L. Frank Baum and Oz]'' is one such example.  Unfortunately, the two scans of Rinkitink (ignoring the Gutenberg link) in the page you cite do not have enough of the book scanned to uniquely identify the printing.  They aren't of the first or second printings which all have "Reilly & Britton" on the title page though there are binding variants of the 2nd with "Reilly & Lee" on the spine.  Given that the color plates do not have captions, this is likely a printing from about 1919 or 1920.  It could be further narrowed down by the titles listed on the verso of the ownership page, which is missing from the scans.  If the verso listed titles through ''The Tin Woodman of Oz'' it would be ca. 1919.  The ca. 1920 printing lists titles through ''Glinda of Oz''.  The captions with the plates were added with a variant of the ca. 1920 printing.  The color plates were gradually discontinued beginning in 1932 and were completely gone by 1935.  You could add an undated printing for this scan if you'd like.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:14, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:: Holy Christ, that was a beautiful block of info. Alas, I'm not really into the whole "minor variant" thing, but if I see any books in Ximm's collection that look unique I'll try to enter them. I wrote the above info mainly because I know there are people here who like entering multiple editions of the same book and detailing all the little differences, so this looked like a trove they could use. EDIT: Something I just noticed; The New Wizard of Oz is from Bobbs-Merrill, did a search and that's the only Oz book on ISFDB by that company, but Ximm's copy seems to be the 1903 original which isn't entered here (1903 here is 2nd ed.), and the page count, 208, fits the much later editions, not the earlier ones. Also, the copyright is 1899, because the original book was titled The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, but date here is 1900, with a long note explaining why. So there's some things to start with. --[[User:Username|Username]] 19:14, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5872024; Can someone on the long list of editors find out where someone got month from? Whoever entered many of these old PB long ago was very random about noting where they got the month, but I remember it was a checklist or something so that's likely where this one came from, too. I thought it would be obvious why I added the month since it's there throughout the contents but I guess not. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:27, 30 January 2024 (EST)
−
:::No, the cover is not that of the first printing of the second edition (First edition with the title change to ''The New Wizard of Oz''), that cover was first used for the fourth edition (ca. 1920), but binding cloth is wrong and the fourth edition has 259 as the last numbered page.  The archive.org edition appears to be the 4th printing of the Fifth edition which was published in the mid-1930s.  It is bound in light green cloth which started with the 3rd printing and it lacks a printers imprint on the copyright page which distinguishes it from the 3rd and 5th printings. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:30, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Dead Lee ==
+
== Berthon ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?152739; Death date given as 1986 but book is 1993; also, http://www.crimefictioniv.com/Part_17A.html, which says Ann, not Anne, with a note saying they corrected her middle name. --[[User:Username|Username]] 20:21, 7 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=theodore+le&type=Name; Space in first entry separates same essay from its appearances elsewhere; no essay title page I can find but I did see a contents page of Frankenstein File that says, um, Ted Le Berthon, https://www.ebay.com/itm/334647759422. So, if anyone can verify, a merge or variant will be needed. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 00:08, 31 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== 1992 & 1993 Hugo Awards - "Preliminary Nominees" entries ==
+
== I'm looking for a book title ==
  
−
I noticed that the [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ay.cgi?23+1992 1992] and [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ay.cgi?23+1993 1993] Hugo data has several entries categorized as "Preliminary Nominees".  I don't know if it's defined anywhere was exactly that term is supposed to mean - [[Schema:awards]] doesn't go into any detail - but I'm guessing it's for long lists and/or awards that have multiple rounds of nomination/voting, which AFAIK has never applied to the Hugos. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 12:36, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
Hello everyone,
 +
I'm looking for a book title. I read the book years ago probably in the 80s. A quick summary the world is divided by a massive mountain range. I think that the protagonist must climb the mountain range in order to become the ruler. They climb the mountain only to find a deep valley on the other side with an even higher mountain range behind it. The protagonist ultimately climbs the second mountain range where they find another land on the far side with another intelligent species. This has been driving me batty and I would appreciate it if anyone knows what this books title is and who wrote it. Thank you. {{Unsigned2|19:21, February 1, 2024‎| Firefighterbgrg }}
 +
:If no one here is able to help you, we have a [[ISFDB:FAQ#I need help finding a book|section in our FAQ]] that gives several places where you can ask for help finding the book. Good luck! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:15, 2 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
: Our "Special" award levels were created to reflect the variety of scenarios that we had come across over the years. There are no exact definitions; editors just use whatever seems the closest to the nomination that they happen to be working with. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 18:49, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Darrah Chavey ==
  
−
I dug out [https://www.thehugoawards.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/1993-Hugo-Statistics.pdf the stats PDF for the 1993 awards], and that indicates those entries are titles that weren't finalists, but appeared on at least 5% of ballots. That implies to me that these records would be better categorized as either "Honorable Mention" (which is what they are listed as in that PDF, and which was used for [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ay.cgi?23+1962 the 1962 Hugos], or "Nomination Below Cutoff" (which is what has been used for the "best of the rest" records since 1995).
+
I learn via [https://news.ansible.uk/a439.html Ansible] today that Darrah Chavey left this mortal coil on 6 January. He was always a learned and consistent editor to work alongside at the ISFDB... Happy trails Darrah, Rest In Peace. :( [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] ([[User talk:PeteYoung|talk]]) 10:39, 2 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Thoughts? [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 12:36, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
: Yes, indeed. There was a brief [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#Darrah_Chavey.27s_Passing Community Portal discussion on 2024-01-11] and Darrah's database record was updated. RIP. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:01, 2 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
:If the official PDF lists them as Honorable Mentions, that's what they should be listed as here. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:11, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Gardner F. Fox's text story in "Strange Adventures" ==
  
−
:: Thanks both. Unless there are any objections raised here, I'll switch the offending records from "Preliminary Nominee" to "Honorable Mention" in a few days' time.
+
Earlier today a Usenet poster pointed out that {{A|Gardner F. Fox}} published "The Magic Maker of Rann", a text story, in the comic ''Strange Adventures'' #226. The story is lavishly illustrated, but the text works just fine even if you were to reprint it without illustrations, which is how we determine whether a story is "graphic".
−
:: BTW, I see we also have a gap for these not-quite-Hugo-finalists between 2003 and 2009 inclusive.  I see that [https://www.thehugoawards.org/content/pdf/2003HugoStatistics-Nominating.pdf the full stats for 2003] at the very least were published, so I guess I've just created a mini-project for myself to add all those in... [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 16:58, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Asimov's A Problem of Numbers marked as non-genre ==
+
The whole thing is available [https://thedorkreview.blogspot.com/2012/01/adam-stranges-magic-maker-of-rann.html online], illustrations included. Should we treat ''Strange Adventures'' as a non-genre periodical and list this story? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 16:32, 2 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
[http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?62433 This story] is not speculative in any way or form. After adding its original magazine, it had been marked as such. If anyone disagrees, please point me to the part that would make it speculative - I did not spot even a hint of it while reading it. :) Thanks! [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 18:40, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:I've entered a number of Eando Binder stories from the {{Series|Lieutenant Jon Jarl of the Space Patrol}} series that originally appeared in {{Series|Captain Marvel Adventures}} comic, and I entered them in exactly the manner you suggest. I believe some of these stories have been reprinted as text alone, so I felt I was on pretty safe ground. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 16:43, 2 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Superhorror ==
+
== Lost Ark Storybook ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?35586; Donald Grant actually Don Grant (FantLab flap photo), but that's alternate of Donald M. Grant, who didn't do cover art, so I made it Don Grant (artist); real artist Donald Grant only did French covers. Who's this mysterious Don? While doing this I noticed Gordon Grant's art credit actually belonged to Gordon Grant (artist), so I fixed that, too. --[[User:Username|Username]] 19:53, 9 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5880702; ISBN belongs to Scholastic edition judging by a back cover I saw online. There's a later (3rd) trade printing on Archive.org with trade and library ISBN on the copyright page so either this record should be made Scholastic or a new record created for Random House edition(s). I've been adding dozens of Wikipedia links to novelizations recently and I've come across some other issues like this (only one I can remember is Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade by Anne Digby which has pub. series as Hippo Books but that actually belongs to the UK edition which I made a new record for) so when these are approved a check and some fixing/adding is probably needed for at least a few of them. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:50, 3 February 2024 (EST)
−
:Sometimes cover art is licensed, too, and sometimes people who normally only work in one language will do work in another. This is especially true of art, since it generally doesn't require any translation or modification. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:20, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Alphabetizing secondary verifications ==
+
== Rise of the Silver Surfer ==
  
−
We are up to [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/verification_sources.cgi 14 secondary verification sources]. They are not sorted on most Web pages and it can take a few seconds to find the one that you need. I propose that we alphabetize them. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 16:33, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?346021; I made an edit fixing typo "udpated" to "updated", surprisingly the only such error on all of ISFDB, and realized that this edition was likely never published with AbeBooks having a weird "cover to be unveiled" photo. So unless someone can find evidence of a copy I think this should get the unpublished date. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:30, 3 February 2024 (EST)
−
:I like that idea. It will make finding them easier, especially if we add more. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:06, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:: Right! For now the list seems sufficient, but upon adding more and more, it'll be better to have them ordered. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:34, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Parnassus Wizard of Earthsea ==
  
−
::: The change has been implemented. Thanks for the comments! [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 17:57, 13 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://archive.org/details/wizardofearthsea00ursu; I added a link to a Parnassus edition based on someone's extensive notes here (no number line or smudge on title page) but there are some editions of this book only linked from Open Library including the one above which has a price much higher than any other book from the publisher on ISFDB but copyright page has same info as 1969 2nd printing so if anyone knows a way to determine the date a new edition can be added. There's an ancient ISFDB bibliography from 2006 by Ahasuerus, https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Author:Ursula_K._Le_Guin, which could probably use some updating unless it's been updated somewhere else. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:08, 4 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== French Dark Love ==
+
== Pranks ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?70551; Mes amis, this, https://archive.org/details/noircommelamour0000unse, has 2000 date on p. 511 but has Albin Michel as publisher, not LGF as OL says, and the cover's gray, not green like the original edition. French contents were never entered here, so this is some sort of edition to be entered. --[[User:Username|Username]] 21:15, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?17626; I've made edits for all editions before, original 1983 Amazon cover seems to have disappeared leading to a broken image so I replaced it, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5882029, then I replaced OL/Archive cover which is too dark with an Amazon cover, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5882020, that isn't great but is brighter and still retains the sparkly stuff on the title that Leisure used to attract people to buy their books which then led to disappointment when the buyers realized the novels themselves were usually crap, the latest edition is fine as is, so now I think the 1983 edition with the wrong price and ISBN should be deleted and the image uploaded by Chris J. should be removed from the Wiki since it seems to be the badly creased cover that's still on Amazon with unnecessary back cover included. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:17, 5 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Szabo B. ==
+
== Felix Kelly ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?212434; cover of 2 zombie books is same, PV of 1st long-gone, Balasz is not used in either 1 on Archive.org, it's Balaz in both. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:37, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I entered new records for Faber anthologies Best Murder Stories and Best Murder Stories 2 which are mostly genre or by genre authors; I also looked at Best Tales of Terror, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?4213, and even though I know I've seen that cover many times I never noticed until seeing it full-sized on FantLab that there's a very clear signature lower right, FELIX KELLY. I entered that in an edit but the problem is that the record for him, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?255975, might be the same artist who did the 1956 art but can't be the guy from 1879. So there may be 2 Felix Kellys in case anyone can find out more and separate them into 2 records; it's also possible that the 1956 art was not new but taken from something drawn by the older Kelly. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:09, 6 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Also added Margaret Wolpe as cover artist for Best Tales of Terror 2; no signature I can see but FantLab credits her + there's a copy on Dalby's site whose front flap says she did "jacket design" and the art does look like many of her other Faber covers. Also greatly updated her record with lots of bio info and noted she was married to Berthold, also an artist, and updated his record as well. Dalby's copy has a pounds price sticker covering another pound price so I'm getting the impression Faber reprinted their anthologies many times with no way to tell except the prices kept getting higher; lots of printings are probably missing so if anyone has any not on ISFDB it would be good to enter them. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:03, 6 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Satanists ==
+
== The Adventure of the Peerless Peer ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1317298; I did several edits for this anthology today; it was a mess, with both HC having no page #, but more importantly Haining's introduction being given its actual title and the 2 Sun essays having to be imported to the editions that were missing them (and both being misspelled). But the Derleth intro is the most curious, because it was only in the American Pyramid edition on ISFDB, but the cover of the American Taplinger edition clearly mentions it, so I imported that, but neither British edition mentions it; is it possible it was written especially for the Americans? I changed the date to match that of Taplinger, but if anyone can verify it was in the British HC then date can be adjusted (and imported to British PB if anyone can verify it was in there, too). --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:39, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
+
Are there any objections to converting [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?11929 this] to a novella? The recent ebook reprint is marked as 27k words by Kobo USA and looking at the page numbers and some of the other editions, it does feel too small to be a novel. Thanks! [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 17:41, 6 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Potter? ==
+
: It's definitely a novella. The Titan Books edition (2011) is well over 200 pages and looks like a bona fide novel, but its apparent length is due to the addition of a very long promotional excerpt from {{A|Kim Newman}}'s ''Moriarty: The Hound of the D'Urbervilles''. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:16, 7 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubseries.cgi?2682; That Bloch cover looked familiar; turns out it was from Lisa Cantrell's Manse, so I changed artist to Bob Eggleton and made a variant; however, 2 of the other Potter books are OK but the Leiber cover has no variant (clearly Potter's style, though); so does anyone know where it originally came from? --[[User:Username|Username]] 15:33, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Termush - convert to novella ==
−
:Which books are you meaning? You linked to a publication series with a bunch of titles. You can post links to the specific publications, that will be helpful. Thanks! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 18:10, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
: I would have, except there's only 1 Leiber book on the page. When I wrote that the other 2 books are OK that meant I didn't need to ask anything about them. --[[User:Username|Username]] 19:25, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
+
Another recent reprint shows [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1443797 this one] as 25k words in English (Kobo USA count) which will leave it well short of 40K in its original Danish as well. Any objections to converting this to a novella? [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 18:27, 6 February 2024 (EST)
−
::It still would have reduced the effort required to figure out what you're talking about if you have [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?420980 linked directly] to the publication. Like that. The easier you make it for people to help you, the quicker you'll get the response you want. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 20:07, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::: Having another one of your bad days, Joe? Also, if you're going to reject so many of my author images because they're book covers, regardless of how uncommon they are or whether, as in Richard Wagner's case, they illustrate an important point about the man himself, not to mention that I've seen probably thousands of author images on ISFDB that are book or magazine covers, raising the question of why those were accepted by you and other mods, especially since in many/most cases non-book/magazine images are available online, and you're going to unnecessarily import photos to the Wiki, the least you could do is find images that aren't at the top of the authors' Wikipedia pages, as is the case with all 3 (Wagner, Fuller, Brown) you rejected today. Also also, what's the point of deleting Green Manifesto out of all the contents reviewed in that magazine issue, negating the substantial info I added to its record, instead of just marking it "non-genre" like countless other books on ISFDB? --[[User:Username|Username]] 20:19, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== John Stanley ==
−
::::Please stop being a jerk. We aren't your slaves, and you seem to take great glee in being as obtuse and difficult as possible. You've been asked countless times now to include reasons for your submissions, to include links to what you're specifically talking about in your posts here, and to not treat moderators as your personal slaves. Still, you persist. If you took just a couple extra moments to make our job easier, you wouldn't have so many submission waiting for approval or questions left unanswered here because you refuse to use common courtesy. This is a ''collaborative'' project, so please try to be a little more collaborative in the future.
 
−
::::Regarding author images, it's always best to use an image that isn't a book cover as using the book cover is somewhat iffy when it comes to fair use. If there's an acceptable image, even if it's used on Wikipedia, then we should use that image (or one of the images, if there are multiple images available). Any authors that are using a full book cover as the author image should be reviewed to see if there's a better image available.
 
−
::::As for the non-genre book and review that were removed, they were removed because the book is non-genre (it's a political book about steps that should be taken to save the planet) and neither author is above the threshold (this non-genre book was their ''only'' work recorded here). I placed the review information in the notes of the publication in which the review appeared. I noticed it appeared to be non-genre, so I checked to see if the authors were above the threshold. When I discovered they weren't, I deleted it. Pretty simple, really. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 20:33, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Uploaded But Unused ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5883789; See my note about artist, that Little Lulu credit in the original Stanley record belongs with I's record because, as my note in the original says, he was born in '39 or '40 so he would only have been 9 or 10 if he did that art which is unlikely; this is the right Stanley, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stanley_(cartoonist). The Melvin Monster credits belong with I, too. I have to assume the Fengriffen Stanley is not the same as I because it's a UK edition and he's American plus it's a photograph, not drawn. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 00:10, 7 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
With the recent Bruno Elettori or whatever his real name is discussions I was looking at books with his cover art and did a few cleanups for the James V. Smith books, but as I went to upload the Grafton cover for Beaststalker it told me there was already an image, and it turns out that OSTRICHSACK uploaded it in 2018 but never actually added it to the book's record, so I did. Is there a way to check and see how many other cover images they may have uploaded but never added? --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:48, 15 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Doolin ==
−
:I think Ahaseurus might need to make a special report that shows that. The wiki has an [[:Special:Unusedimages|Unused images]] special page, but it likely doesn't know if they are used by the main database (since that's outside the wiki software). ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:21, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::You are correct that Unused images is only for the wiki and does not take the database into account. It gets tricky finding true unused ones as some images (example, alternate covers or back covers) are only used in notes so you cannot just look at the publication image field. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 15:24, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
 
−
:::It would probably require it to review all the images in that list of unused images, then check the direct URLs for those images against those used in the database, and eliminate any that are used. A report could then be generated based on those images remaining. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 21:24, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Advanced Search options limited to registered users for performance reasons ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?431777; Late PV entered James Doolin based on signature but there is none, FantLab photo has initials JPD, it's actually Joseph Doolin, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?27894, and he has an entry for the same art, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1590968. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:48, 7 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
All Advanced Search menu options have been limited to registered users for performance reasons. Hopefully this should help with the robot problems that we have been having recently. We'll see how it goes and tweak other software components as needed. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 17:58, 15 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Uncorrected Proofs ==
  
−
== Severance Package ==
+
I'm holding [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5870146 this submission] to update {{P|29328|this record}}.  I noticed that the record states that it was unpublished (8888-00-00), yet there appears to be a cover that was just added.  More importantly it also describes this as an "uncorrected proof" and I had thought that proofs were outside of our [[ISFDB:Policy#Contents/Project Scope Policy|scope]].  The policy specifically excludes Advance Reading Copies unless available for sale to the public.  Do uncorrected proofs differ from ARCs in terms of determining scope?  This seems straightforward to me and I believe the publication should be deleted.  If others disagree and this requires a full discussion, we can move this the the Rules and Standards board.  Thoughts?  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:59, 7 February 2024 (EST)
 +
: I read the rules the same way you do - ARCs and uncorrected proofs are out. However, we do keep records of unpublished but announced books (these are in scope under the <i>announced but never published (entered as "unpublished")</i> part of ROA) so I would not delete this one as it is under that category. So ARC/uncorrected proof of a book that comes out will not be eligible but if the book never makes it out, adding the notes about it into the 8888 book are fine I think. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:22, 7 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1360869; I don't think that HC with the insane price was ever published; this link, https://picclick.com/Severance-Package-by-Duane-Swierczynski-Paperback-First-Edition-224552226535.html, doesn't mention an earlier edition on copyright page (although there is a 2007 date also; not sure what that's about, so maybe the book was delayed). --[[User:Username|Username]] 20:42, 15 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:: Comparing this publication record with [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3379 other, published, editions of the book], I note that it has a different ISBN in addition to a different publisher name. I typically enter announced-then-canceled ISBNs as 8888-00-00 publication records under the rule referenced by Annie. Their presence in our database helps answer a common question: "Whatever happened to this apparent first edition? Why can't I find any copies for sale?" We all know how obsessed collectors can get when it comes to first editions and our database is frequently the only readily accessible place that explains what happened to a "disappeared" ISBN. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 11:51, 7 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:::I've no argument with a publication record for an announced, but unpublished book.  However, an unpublished book and an uncorrected proof are two different things. The notes on this record confuse the issue as to what the record represents.  The addition of a cover scan and artist further confuses things.  How are we able to display a cover of a book that was never published?  I would suggest that the notes be reworked to indicate that a proof was done as evidence of the planned publication.  We could replace the first two sentences with "The Bluejay Books imprint was dissolved late in 1986 just after an uncorrected proof for this planned edition was printed in September of that year."  I would also recommend deleting the cover of the proof and rejecting the addition of an artist.  I do worry that if we were to make an exception and allow a record specifically for an uncorrected proof when the book is never published, it would encourage the addition of other proofs and ARCs especially by those editors who surmise rules by examples of what is already in the database.  If others think this should be a valid exception to allow records for proofs, then we should document it in the scope page as is done with ARCs offered for sale.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:00, 7 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:::: That sounds like a plan and the proposed change in the notes sounds fine to me - that will make it clear that the record is here because the book was announced and not because it had an ARC/uncorrected proofs done. I am at two minds about the cover - if it was announced with the book, recording it makes sense as it may help trace it to an artist later on and as it is part of the record after all. But other from that - I agree that we need to be careful not to confuse ARCs and unpublished books per se - although when a publication fails through often varies so there are ARCs out there for books that do not make it - that one being an example. Maybe all we need is to strengthen the language to specify that the exclusion is for books that end up being published - thus allowing the usecase we have here without a concern. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 19:06, 7 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== LibriVox ==
+
:::::I agree that the pub record should stay because it falls under "announced but never published" and agree with Ron that the problem with it as it stands is that the pub note gives the impression that the record has been created for the proof, not the unpublished book. Ron's tweak to the pub note solves this problem.
 +
:::::Further notes and suggestions:
 +
:::::1) I agree that mentioning the proof in the pub note is a good idea. It is evidence that the book was announced.
 +
:::::2) I definitely think the cover image should be deleted. It should either be omitted or of the final cover. The latter assumes the publisher reached that stage and that we could find the image. All very unlikely. The cover image is more than just the artwork; it's also the colouring, wording, layout and typography and those aspects of the proof cover clearly wouldn't reflect the final version.
 +
:::::3) I would delete the OCLC/WorldCat External ID and just mention it in the pub note because it refers specifically to the uncorrected proof and not the unpublished final work.
 +
:::::4) I'm ambivalent about importing the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?950860 coverart record]. It's clear from the cover of the proof that Ron Walotsky was the intended artist so this falls under "announced but never published" but it would need a pub note explaining the source and why there's no image.
 +
:::::5) I'm broadly against making an exception for including ARC's / proofs when the book was unpublished although I do see Annie's point of view. But I think it's an unnecessary complication and veers back towards Ron's point about "encourage the addition of other proofs and ARC's especially by those editors who surmise rules by examples of what is already in the database" which is something I strongly agree we want to avoid. Also, if we do permit this exception, how do we implement it? Does it mean we would have two pub records: one for the unpublished work and one for the proof? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 07:46, 8 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::I've gone ahead and change the notes as discussed above.  I've also moved the Worldcat number and the cover into the notes so that it's clear the record is for the unpublished work and not for the proof.  I'll reject the held edit.  Let me know if someone disagrees with these changes.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:47, 12 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?29415; I added a link to the 2022 Vampire Nemesis, was told it should be made its own record, and that was just approved; I'm wondering why there's such a huge gap, 2015-2022? Did they go out of business and then recently start again, or is there 7 years worth of genre works that were never entered here? --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:19, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== N. Carroll ==
  
−
::By a (probably not) coincidence that gap corresponds to the time frame in which I was inactive. Sounds like a good project to go through [https://librivox.org/search?primary_key=0&search_category=genre&search_page=1&search_form=get_results The Fantastic Fiction] links that appear on this page. Each category may be listed by release date and sorted by most recent.--[[User:Swfritter|swfritter]] 19:40, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?165703; The stories belong with the other Carroll but that ndp thing doesn't look right to me so maybe some other differing addition should replace it. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:58, 7 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Author attribution on the three stories, initially credited to Noël Carrol, has been corrected. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 07:57, 8 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Thanks. I still think it's weird about that (ndp) because there's thousands of nom de plumes on ISFDB but this is the only one that has that added on the end of the name. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 08:28, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Mon Mohan ==
+
::: Well, we have some with (pseudonym) attached, and I'd think that'd be more meaningful (ndp isn't a colloquial abbreviation), or just a (I) attached. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 11:52, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/note_search_results.cgi?OPERATOR=contains&NOTE_VALUE=mon+mohan; Notes about Brian Aldiss book cover designs by this person, but they also have a cover art credit, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?232231, which is blank. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:01, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::::I don't think we should use any parentheticals if we can avoid it. Since we have the (I) thing we already use extensively, I think that would be the best option for any that are currently using "(pseudonym)" as a disambiguator. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:20, 8 February 2024 (EST)
−
:Empty record deleted. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 15:25, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Nicobobinus ==
+
::::: There are reasons why I chose to set the author up as Noel Carroll (ndp). However, it's not worth our time to debate. I have changed it to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?373877 Noel Carroll]. Not sure that the standards imply that Roman numerals are the preferred dismbiguator. [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Help:How_to_separate_two_authors_with_the_same_name Here] is the applicable help section. Thanks for your interest, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 14:06, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?17241; I added Amazon cover to Puffin edition but it's blurry because it's small; Archive.org copy has no OL cover and it's a later printing anyway with a higher price; the interior illustrations likely come from the original British HC edition which is not entered here, and possibly belong to the American edition, too (and the American cover likely dates from British HC edition), and the Puffin cover seems similar but not quite to the earlier editions, plus there's a German edition on Goodreads which has a completely different cover but other foreign editions have the same cover online. So maybe people here own any one of these many editions and can enter them here to lessen the confusion. EDIT: Also, I wonder if anyone knows why the cover image for the American edition on OL shows a cartoon of Riker from Star Trek: TNG taking a dump on a toilet that not only has the expected brown stains but also what looks like radioactive slime. Also, he's reading a Star Trek magazine; very meta. --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:07, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Karen Simmons ==
  
−
== Dark Voices ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1117998; She's the wife of Dan Simmons, credited for author photograph in the HC which can be seen on eBay, [https://www.picclickimg.com/images/g/04sAAOSw1Mdltkv~/s-l1600.jpg], art is likely by one of the regular Headline cover artists, Chris Moore maybe, but I don't see a signature. So her credit should be removed. I noticed a 2nd printing of the Headline PB on Archive.org which has that same art (and price) but different blurbs on top and bottom so I'm going to enter that now. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:37, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?12252; Heads up that after someone uploaded Dark Voices 2 to Archive.org a year and a half ago the other volumes, most of which weren't published in America, are being added, but weirdly someone added 4 to Community Texts back in March while someone else just added it to Books to Borrow, which seems pointless since the Community edition is fully readable. However, 5 is also there (in Books to Borrow); what's odd about this volume is that while almost all the contributors are semi-famous/famous genre authors, the last story is by a complete genre unknown American, Myrna Elana, who apparently published no other horror fiction (regardless of her bio which says she's at work on a horror novel) and seems to have spent her time publishing and writing LESBIAN EROTICA. --[[User:Username|Username]] 18:50, 16 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:Hi! There's a primary verification by Faustus. It'd be meaningful if you contact him to shed some light on the actual credit. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 11:49, 8 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Hi! There's no credit on the PB because there's no author photo like there is on the back of the HC. 2nd printing PB I just entered has no art credit. I'm sure someone here familiar with UK PB artists will identify it in some artist's book sooner or later but it's certainly not by Dan's wife. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:08, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Tales of Terror ==
+
== Wesso ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?783292; This seems like a problem, because the ISBN seems to be from the Magnet PB here, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1786522; the Methuen (not Metheun) HC was already entered years earlier. Delete? --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:06, 17 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5885644; Wiki says 1893. Anyone here who can find proof it's really 1894? I looked for a headstone but couldn't find one. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:49, 8 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== The Surrogate Covers ==
+
== Story about the Premiere of Rite of Spring ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?998393; I added OL ID to Signet edition which has been on Archive.org since 2010; someone here added cover artist based on Paperbacks From Hell, but the British edition has most of the same art, except they changed the doll. Should cover art credit be imported? British copy on eBay doesn't have any credit. --[[User:Username|Username]] 08:40, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I'm looking for the short story (probably from 1970s) about recreating the experience of the premiere of The Rite of Spring by giving all of the audience members a new drug. I believe this was in one of the better short story annuals of the era.
  
−
== Thinner ==
+
Most of my book collection is in storage, alas, so I can't find this by leafing through my old pulp. {{Unsigned2|17:38, February 8, 2024‎| Martycohen36 }}
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?414371; I just entered the real 1985 Bachman edition; this has a price almost double and should really be in the Stephen King record judging by the note. PV's gone so someone should decide what to do with this; maybe they have a copy of this edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:41, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Black Christmas ==
  
−
== Gutenberg and LibriVox publications ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?878255; While entering Wikipedia links for tons of novelizations I came across this rare 1976 one for the classic 1974 horror film. The original edition is apparently very rare because I've looked everywhere and can't find a copyright page that doesn't have the word FANGORIA on it because apparently Fangoria Magazine reprinted it in 2008 (although there is very little mention of this online). It does include the original info so I was able to enter the month (February, which is odd because you'd think it would be late in the year to capitalize on the holiday) but if anyone has a 1976 copy can you verify what it says on it? The film was Canadian and book says "Printed in Canada" so possibly it was only published there in which case the price will need a C added to it. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:18, 9 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
''Note. Some issues re Webpages links from our title and publication records pertain equally to HathiTrust Digital Library, and the Internet Archive, for instance, but we do not treat HDL and Archive.org images as publications.''
+
== Riddle of the Exodus ==
  
−
We treat Gutenberg texts and LibriVox audio-recorded readings as publications. I understand we do not treat different file formats as different publications. Right? Therefore, it seems to me appropriate that our publication records link to Gutenberg and LibriVox catalogue pages (let me call them) which offer visitors a choice of formats. Right?
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?185298; Not fiction, religious history book, https://openlibrary.org/works/OL8166080W/The_Riddle_of_the_Exodus?edition=key%3A/books/OL8566162M, probably should be deleted. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:30, 9 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Deleted. I question if the author of the religious book is the same author as of the BattleTech books. I couldn't find anything on the religious author's sites that connect him to the BattleTech books. I will ping the active verifier for the BattleTech book to see if there is an author blurb. If not (or it indicates it is a different author), I will remove the the current author info from {{A|James D. Long}}. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 12:31, 10 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Philfreund has confirmed the BattleTech book provides no biographical information on the author. I have removed the author info from {{A|James D. Long}} as it is more than likely a different person. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 08:28, 11 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
I find that our publication records of Gutenberg and LibriVox editions generally do not link to Gutenberg and LibriVox at all. Advanced search yields these counts of records whose Webpages field "contains" the string (that is, as part of a URL):
+
== Mutant Chronicles ==
−
* librivox : '''1762 titles, 2 publications''' [publisher LibriVox, 710]
 
−
* gutenberg : 12 titles, 5 publications [publisher Project Gutenberg, 4494]
 
−
* archive.org : '''3314 titles, 4882 publications'''
 
−
* hathitrust : 468 titles, 68 publications
 
−
* loc.gov : 18 titles, 18 publications
 
−
Evidently we are migrating archive.org links from title to publication records. And not migrating librivox.org links.
 
  
−
I conducted these searches today after submitting my first update of a LibriVox publication [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5321408 5321408], in which I did add what would be our third publication Webpage at librivox. <br>(FWIW, I don't think we should have any LibriVox publications that neglect to identify the reader when LibriVox does so [always, I guess]; it appears that I updated such a one without adding that datum. So I have some sympathy.)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?250352; I replaced the cover; if anyone knows about the old one, whether it was an early one that was rejected or if it belongs to a different edition, a note about early art or a new record for the other edition if it exists would be good. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:09, 11 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
A majority (3) of our 5 publications with webpages at gutenberg[.something] are non-gutenberg editions for which gutenberg is one of our sources. Two are gutenberg.net.AU pages for PG of Australia ebooks.
+
== Lieutenant Teasdale R.O.N. ==
  
−
Probably I missed a policy: we don't use the Webpages field to link the publisher's product page for the edition/printing. Right? --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 21:52, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I need to make several changes to the pub records for [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3126730 Lieutenant Teasdale R.O.N.]. The tp edition has a sole PV by the late Biomassbob but he somehow missed showing that Paula Goodlett is the co-author of the work. Amazon also shows the pub date for that edition as 2023-12-07, not 2023-12-02 as currently shown in the pub record. The 12-07 date makes more sense since all of the other self-published books by Gorg Hoff and Paula Goodlett have the ebook edition published the day prior to the tp edition. Any objection to my making changes? [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 12:21, 12 February 2024 (EST)
−
:It depends:
+
: Mistakes happen :) Go ahead - make sure the notes clarify where the date is coming from. And while you are there, we do not use "Independently published" as a publisher - so can you also fix that (author names are used when there is no publisher). I will sort out the other 2 we have under that publisher later today. Thanks for finding this one! :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 13:44, 12 February 2024 (EST)
−
:*All [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?13741 Project Gutenberg] publications automatically link to their respective Project Gutenberg pages. The ISFDB software creates the link automatically which is under "Other Links" in the left menu. There is no need to duplicate it in the web page field.
+
::Done. I also corrected the title for the Interiorart maps record to match current standards. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 15:29, 12 February 2024 (EST)
−
::: Thanks. I had forgotten that Gutenberg link in the margin.  
 
−
::: We don't generate such a link for publication records of PG Australia ebooks, so our present Webpages links to gutenberg.net.au (2 of those 5 gutenberg links) are appropriate. Probably we should link gutenberg.ca among Webpages of PG Canada ebooks for the same reason. --Pwendt
 
  
−
:*For Library of Congress, if it is a LoC Catalog Number, then it should go in the External IDs which will automatically create a link. For older pubs (such as {{P|270575|Famous Mystery Stories}}), the link is not the LoC Catalog record (https://lccn.loc.gov/22005893), but to a LoC hosted scan of the publication (https://www.loc.gov/item/22005893). I would still add the LoC Catalog number to to publication record.
+
== Locus1 Secondary Verifications ==
−
:*The others are generally publication specific items and should be in the publication web link. However, we have not always had a publication web field and so older ones were entered at the title level. There has not been a systematic cleanup to move them to their respective publications.
 
−
:*As for publisher webpages, it depends. If the webpage is for that specific publication and has meaningful information, it can be on the publication level. If it's just an ad, I wouldn't bother.
 
−
:Hope that helps. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:05, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::: (contd from inline above) By "publisher" I did mean narrowly Gutenberg for ebooks and LibriVox for audiobooks --publisher page being the one with metadata and a choice of formats, all of which we consider a single publication.  
+
Occasionally I come across pubs that have been SVd to Locus1 solely on the basis of their mention as the first edition of a later publication. The first one I encountered, as a very rookie editor, was this one: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?197293 David Brin / Sundiver]. I asked the SVer, Rtrace, about it and received [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Rtrace/Archive15#David_Brin_.2F_Sundiver this explanation]. For the purposes of this thread I shall refer to these as "indirect listings".
−
::: My move of one link to LibriVox was approved overnight, so I am happy to update:
+
<br>
−
::: * librivox : '''1761 titles, 3 publications'''
+
The most recent one I have encountered is [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?191929 David Gerrold / Chess with a Dragon] and it is this pub record that has prompted this thread because there is a clear contradiction between the SV to Locus1 and the pub note "Locus1 fails to list this pub (as of 2010-06-21)."
−
::: I agree with the apparent consensus that it has low priority. For me something to do given another reason to revise the records, such as here--to identify the translator. --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 13:46, 22 May 2022 (EDT)
+
<br>
 +
So my question is: should these indirect listings be allowed as SVs to Locus1? If I ruled the world I would not permit them because I don't think they conform to a general user's expectation of a Locus1 listing and they can cause confusion and inconsistencies as demonstrated by the Gerrold record. However, I do not feel strongly about this. I accept Ron's point that these indirect listings provide at least as much information as Clute/Nicholls and if the consensus is that they should be allowed then I can live quite happily with this.
 +
<br>
 +
However, if we do allow them then this Help page: [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Reference:Verification_Sources Reference:Verification_Sources] needs amendment. The matrix currently states that Locus1 provides "All" the information for fields such as Pages, Price and others but this is not true for the indirect listings. So either:
 +
<br>
 +
a) The relevant fields for Locus1 should be changed from "All" to "Some" (or maybe "Most").
 +
<br>
 +
or
 +
<br>
 +
b) A note should be added to the page explaining Locus1 indirect listings and clarifying that the values in the matrix for Locus1 only apply to full listings.
 +
<br>
 +
I prefer solution b).
 +
<br>
 +
Opinions please. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:38, 15 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Index of Project Gutenberg Works ... ==
+
: An interesting point. So basically Locus1 has two types of records. One type covers editions published between 1984 and 2007 and includes publication details. The other type covers first editions (including editions published before 1984) and only lists their year and publisher. In an ideal world, we may want to create a separate Secondary Verification type for the latter and call it something like "Locus1-First Edition". Unfortunately, I am not sure it would be feasible since we have over [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/stats.cgi?2 50,000 Locus1 verifications] and separating them would be a very time-consuming project. If we decide not to do it, then I agree that we should update [[Reference:Verification_Sources]] to reflect the fact that not all Locus1-verified publication records can be expected to have publication level data.
  
−
''Index of the Project Gutenberg Works of Haggard'', ed. David Widger, 2018-10-29, Ebook #58163 :
+
: As far as cases like {{A|David Gerrold}}'s [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?191929 Chess with a Dragon] go, I would reword Notes. Instead of saying "Locus1 fails to list this pub (as of 2010-06-21)", I would say something like "Locus1 doesn't have a detailed record for this edition, but multiple records for reprint editions refer to it as the first edition." [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:48, 16 February 2024 (EST)
−
[https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/58163 catalogue page] ;
+
::Yes, I realised when I started the thread that if we disallow the Locus1 indirect listings there could be a legacy issue of past records SVd to Locus1 that would be difficult to amend. This is often a problem when rules and standards are changed. So although in theory I would vote to disallow these cases, I accept it is not practical to do so. Consequently I am happy with leaving them as they are and updating [[Reference:Verification_Sources]] to reflect the fact that not all Locus1-verified publication records can be expected to have publication level data, which we both agree with.
−
[https://www.gutenberg.org/files/58163/58163-h/58163-h.htm html format (top)]
+
::I am working on [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?191929 David Gerrold / Chess with a Dragon] and so will incorporate the change to the Locus1 pub note as you suggest. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 17:08, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
What should we make of Ebook #58163? Is it NONFICTION we should acquire? Is its catalogue page no more than an Author webpage? Or something in between? --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 22:03, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::: Hearing no objection, I have clarified the "Locus1" row of [[Reference:Verification Sources]]. Thanks for identifying this issue. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:12, 26 February 2024 (EST)
−
:As it is a downloadable ebook, it is within the ISFDB scope. It can be entered as NONFICTION as we do with physical checklist publications. It is more a question as to whether you feel there is enough value in the Project Gutenberg indexes to take your time adding them or if you have other work you would rather do. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:10, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::::Thank you. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 16:27, 2 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Darkfuse ==
+
== Necronomicon in Sweden ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2072743; Wordgrinder entered Penkas story as "Note Seen" in HC; they haven't been here in many years, and ISFDB is the only search on Google for "Note Seen", so it's likely "Not Seen", in case anyone else has the HC and can correct it. --[[User:Username|Username]] 08:53, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=d+bergho&type=Name; First name likely misspelled by PV (or magazine it appeared in) and essay is in second name's record with a much earlier date. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:47, 15 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Twenty Years (or, It Just Feels Like It) ==
+
== Garland Library of SF ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5317059; I was confused about this until I realized I submitted my edit on 5-14 and a person who isn't a regular coincidentally PV it and entered price info a couple of days after me which was approved very quickly (cough), so now instead of my entry of the page #'s from the only copy I could find on the web that actually showed contents page being approved I'm supposed to check with this person first, who didn't enter those #'s even though they must have a copy otherwise they wouldn't have PV it; if anyone else wants to enter those page numbers and then check with PV go ahead, since I'm not re-doing rejected edits anymore. Now that I look at edit history I realize this person deleted my price info which was entered months ago and just replaced it with their own instead of adding their info to my existing info; talk about etiquette. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:13, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubseries.cgi?8067; I made a couple of edits adding archived link, LCCN and cover image to Past Master when I noticed that there is 1 book in the series with a UK price and 1 without any price. So if anyone can fill in the missing one and add US one (moving UK to notes) for the other then everything will be uniform. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:44, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== For Want of a Nail ==
+
== Lou J. Berger ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5317182; Can anyone substitute a better cover that isn't faded and dirty like the current one but also shows the NAIL on the right side? --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:21, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
+
The author has requested we change his canonical name from [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?186596 Lou J. Berger] to "Lou J Berger" (no period after the "J"). See mod note [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5878281 here]. Any objections? [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:32, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Gilbert Wright ==
+
: Checking Amazon.com's Look Inside, I see that the name was spelled "Lou J. Berger" in 2013-2014 and changed to "Lou J Berger" in 2015/2016. By now the majority of the stories use the "Lou J Berger" form of the name, so it should be our canonical name. We just need to make sure that we use the right form for the transitional (2015-2016) period. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 16:05, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
While checking info for an unnecessarily rejected edit of mine I came across this, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?15653; I doubt a British artist from 1911 also published a story in a 1945 American magazine (Blue Book), but it's possible, in case anyone knows for sure, and if they're not the same then (artist) could be added to the 1911 guy. --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:19, 24 May 2022 (EDT)
+
:: Author attributions were reviewed and corrected resulting in compliance with the author's request. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:16, 17 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Confusing Cacek ==
+
== Locus on Microfilm ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?3865; Someone's been entering missing collections of P.D. Cacek's short stories lately, and I noticed that "...with bright and shining eyes..." was entered as original, but I knew that wasn't right because I added a gothic.net link a while back, remembered from when I found it years ago, and also entered info for Quietly Now, the anthology where the story either first appeared or was reprinted, hard to tell. However, as I checked further there were like half-a-dozen stories by her that were marked original that really aren't, and it's hard to say how titles appeared because a lot of them appeared in REALLY obscure publications. So I mention all this in case when my variant edits are approved anyone may look into them further and possibly un-variant a few, because some of them seem pretty fishy to me and probably do have exactly the same titles between original publication and her collections and were just entered wrong here. --[[User:Username|Username]] 21:45, 24 May 2022 (EDT)
+
I recently added links to the handful of random print issues of Locus that are on Archive.org, one a very early issue and the others more recent, but I just stumbled on a huge cache of microfilmed 1973-2015 issues uploaded by MicrofilmIssueGenerator so I added a link, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5893289. Not sure if this is known about already but if not I'm sure it will come in handy here for research. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:39, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Titled excerpts ==
+
== Server maintenance 2024-02-18 at 11am EST ==
  
−
What's the best way to handle excerpts that have their own title? I just came across a 6-page excerpt introduced as "There Are Elves Out There" [over] "An Excerpt from" [over] <i>Born to Run</i>. I think it should be a SHORTFICTION with a title note that it's an excerpt. Opinions? [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] 08:35, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
The server will be down for maintenance later today (2024-02-18) between 11am and 11:10am EST. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 10:20, 18 February 2024 (EST)
−
: The [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:TitleFields:Title help page] spells it out clearly: " If the excerpt has a different title that the work from which it is excerpted, use that title. Otherwise, use the title of the excerpted work, but add " (excerpt)" to the end; e.g. "A Feast for Crows (excerpt)"." :)
 
−
: So yes, it should be "There Are Elves Out There", short fiction, with a note explaining that it is an excerpt and from where. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 14:59, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::Thanks! Some days are just derp... [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] 15:09, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
 
−
:::Oh, I know - too many different things to remember (some of which are not very common so they kinda get forgotten). Which is why I pointed out where it is in the help page - it may be my most visited page around here... :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 15:12, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Rex Miller - Above the threshold?  ==
+
: The server is back up. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
I'm holding a submission to add a non-genre novel by [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?1551 Rex Miller].  Do we think he is above the threshold?  I see there is one non-genre story in his bibliography, but that is included in an genre anthology.  What do folks think?  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:43, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Sword of the Samurai ==
  
−
: I am not familiar with this author's work, but reviews suggest that his main splatterpunk series, "Chaingang", is borderline SF at best. The only speculative element that I could find is that the serial killer protagonist seems to have a "danger sense" of sorts. Some plots are also wildly implausible to the point of being almost surrealistic, but not really speculative. If this can be confirmed, we may want to make these title "non-genre" or at least add notes explaining that they are borderline SF. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:50, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5894874; I have owned a copy since the 1980s and PV it here in 2022, copy uploaded to Archive.org last summer but not added until a few days ago, I think I got the right page count but if anyone disagrees feel free to tweak it a bit, you don't have to ask me. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:41, 18 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:I see a note in the UK edition's record here says [236] so I think they counted the illustration between the first 19 pages and the start of the novel itself. Should that count? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:44, 18 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::I would count it one way or the other, either as part of the introductory material (so, technically on [20]) or as part of the main material. A page number on that first page of main text would have been a useful guide....  I found an eBay listing of the Puffin edition that has some interior photographs.  Not of the page in question, but the TOC and other leading material looks identical to what Archive.org shows for the edition you have.  Extrapolating that to content that follows it suggests Reginald did count that illustration as part of the main material. Given the [236] there, what I will do is tweak your count to [236] and add a note about the illustration's appearance relative to the text on the surrounding pages. Just trying to save you an edit cycle; feel free to adjust it to be however you prefer -- I do not mean to insist on anything.  --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 12:07, 18 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:::Sounds good, thanks. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:18, 18 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
::That's a different issue and if investigation bears out, we could change them.  The [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/mod/submission_review.cgi?5321502 submission] I am holding is to add a new non-genre novel.  I'm just trying to determine whether the consensus is that this author is above the threshold so that we should list all of his non-genre works.  It was reviewed in ''[http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1877587 Locus]'', but in 2015, [[User:Hauck|Hauck]] converted it to a review of a non-genre work.  I assume the the original review was of type REVIEW and was presumably linked to a title record.  I speculate that Hauck deleted any existing title or publication records for this novel at the same time. The ultimate question is whether we want to undo the 2015 work and re-add this novel. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 13:38, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
== Bibliographic impact of the 2023 Hugo Awards ==
−
::: I don't think so - his horror is marginally ours because of essentially a sixth sense kinda thing; that should not make all his other work eligible though... [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 15:03, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::::Hearing no arguments for including this title, I've rejected the submission.  Thanks all. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:31, 29 May 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::::: Shame about that; it would have been cool to have a novel about Vietnam approved on Memorial Day weekend. So I guess nothing changes with the Locus review, right? Anyway, to all my fellow Americans reading this, Happy Memorial Day and God Bless America. Before I go, I think now is an appropriate time to mention the case of the missing Trump, by which I mean that to-do months ago where some mod with a grudge didn't accept my photo of Trump because it had a political message on it, which resulted in someone else uploading a non-political photo to our Wiki, which then mysteriously disappeared recently, which I believe only a mod has the permission to do. I recently found another photo that I liked and that's in his record now, but I'm still curious about who was responsible for that; I'm sure the trail can be traced. --[[User:Username|Username]] 18:23, 29 May 2022 (EDT)
+
The current pre-release cover of {{A|Samantha Mills}}'s debut novel [https://www.amazon.com/Wings-Upon-Her-Back-ebook/dp/B0CVS2RDH8 ''The Wings Upon Her Back''] says "Nebula and Hugo Award Winner". On 2024-02-17 Mills disavowed the award and announced that she would have "Hugo winner" removed from future editions of the book:
  
−
== Twin Lynches ==
+
* [https://samtasticbooks.com/2024/02/17/rabbit-test-unwins-the-hugo/ “Rabbit Test” unwins the Hugo]: ... on Tuesday I’ll send a very awkward email to my agent and editor summarizing the situation ... and figure out the logistics of removing “Hugo winner” from the ebook and future printings. The first print run will be a limited edition novelty, I suppose? Jeez.
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?23755; David K. Lynch just showed up on the recent activity list, and I see that interview belongs to the other David Lynch of Twin Peaks fame, but it's in a PV issue of TZ magazine, so a decision needs to be made about how to separate him from the other Lynch. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:19, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
This may not be an isolated occurrence since, as Samantha Mills wrote (among other things):
  
−
== PV Dagon ==
+
* On February 14, a report written by Jason Sanford and Chris M. Barkley was simultaneously released on the [https://jasonsanford.substack.com/p/the-2023-hugo-awards-a-report-on Genre Grapevine] and [https://file770.com/the-2023-hugo-awards-a-report-on-censorship-and-exclusion/ File770]. ... we also got a look at [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rhCwKLMydCto6HvXvcqjR553DqrhTfBu/view the validation list itself], aka the tables of frontrunner nominees being vetted for the final ballot, and a horrible pattern emerged, especially in the fiction categories: there were a whole lot of Chinese nominees in frontrunner positions who just… vanished, and never made it onto the final ballot. There were so many, in fact, that if I am reading this document correctly: ''not a single fiction winner'' (short story, novelette, novella, novel, or series) would have even been a finalist if those nominees hadn’t been taken off.
 +
* There’s an indicator of why in the apology letter from the admin who leaked the emails and validation tables: “We were told there was collusion in a Chinese publication that had published a nominations list, a slate as it were, and so those ballots were identified and eliminated.”
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?277149; Surprisingly there's still a lot of work to be done on Arkham House books, and while doing some I came across that page which is PV not by the usual Arkham PV but 2 uncommon PV, one of whom hasn't left a message in a year and a half (might need a "no longer active") and the other who clearly won't be responding to anything anymore judging by his messages, so someone may want to look at this, because that "none" under Catalog ID seems unnecessary. EDIT: Also noticed this is a rare Arkham book with an unstable Amazon image; didn't replace it but found this, https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/dagon-macabre-tales-p-lovecraft-1845762682, which is that 4th printing but has a $10.00 sticker over the previous price, so I don't know if that counts as another edition or what. --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:50, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
From our perspective, this means that we will need to:
 +
* Update the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?78890 “Rabbit Test” Award record] to indicate that the author disavowed the award, similar to how [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?9534 this award record] explains that {{A|Judy-Lynn del Rey}}'s posthumous "Best Professional Editor" award was refused by her husband {{A|Lester del Rey}}.
 +
* Keep an eye on [https://www.amazon.com/Wings-Upon-Her-Back-ebook/dp/B0CVS2RDH8 ''The Wings Upon Her Back''] to make sure that the correct covers are used for the first and any subsequent editions of the novel.
 +
* Be on the lookout for possible other announcements of authors disavowing 2023 Hugo awards.
 +
* Occasionally check "Worldcon Intellectual Property" announcements. On January 30, 2024 they issued [https://www.wsfs.org/2024/01/31/announcements-from-worldcon-intellectual-property/ a statement] censuring multiple people "for actions of the Hugo Administration Committee of the Chengdu Worldcon" and said that "There may be other actions taken or to be taken that are not in this announcement." If and when they make additional statements about the Hugos awarded at the 2023 Worldcon, we may need to update our records.
  
−
== Curwen Street ==
+
[[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:55, 19 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?63286; original Arkham has "House ON Curwen Street", not OF, and so does the Carroll & Graf which I just entered page #'s for. "Of" doesn't make sense, so this may be an entry error here of long standing. EDIT: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1358135 (right title with subtitle), http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?978579 (right title with shorter subtitle), http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?563345 (right title). --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:57, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
: Earlier today {{A|Adrian Tchaikovsky}} disavowed his 2023 Hugo award for Best Series on [https://adriantchaikovsky.com/ his Web site]. The [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?78915 award record] has been updated. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:56, 21 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::These notes are exactly the correct action for us, I think. If we had notes for an award year, it would probably be desirable to add something for the 2023 Hugos. Although, getting a properly neutral description of the controversy free of personal biases (and I have many in this instance), would be tricky. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Kull ==
+
::: One of the challenges that the 2023 Hugos present is that it's still a developing story. What we knew 10 days ago is very different from what we know today. Perhaps we'll learn more in the future.
  
−
https://www.ebay.com/itm/234404262828; No Archive copies or searchable Google copies, 2 ISFDB records (1 of which likely should be deleted), eBay link verifies date on copyright page and price on back cover barcode, but # of pages is a mystery; is it 214, 256, 224 as Open Library says, or something else? Anyone here have a copy? http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?10220 --[[User:Username|Username]] 18:01, 27 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::: For example, back in late January I came across a re-post/translation of a Chinese fan's comments about the Hugos. The post stated that the fan had been involved in the Hugo process (committee member?) and that he or she had a conflict with Chinese members of the Hugo committee with various accusations flying back and forth. At the time I had trouble parsing the post, in part due to lacking context and in part due to the quality of the translation. In retrospect it may have been related to the following email sent by Dave McCarthy on June 7, 2023 at 6:18pm (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_QqmsxQkACoYcxSx2LVqbxD39-DJI_gS/view), which says:
 +
:::* Tomorrow I have a 4 hour meeting with my chinese counterparts to look at ballot detail and determine if any ballots are to be voided
 +
::: Perhaps either this fan or other members of the 2023 Hugo committee may clarify matters at some point. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:33, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Bogus image-related yellow warnings fixed ==
+
:: It would especially be useful to note that the nomination totals and the EPH points appear to be completely unreliable, since those are noted in each nomination award record. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
I believe I have fixed the software bug which caused invalid yellow warning to be displayed on submission review pages for Author Edit and Clone Publication submissions when editing image URLs. If you come across anything unusual or unexpected, please let me know. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 13:46, 29 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::: One thing that comes to mind is that we could change the way opening sentences are phrased. Instead of the current "1674 valid ballots cast, 944 valid ballots cast in category" we could say something like "According to the [https://www.thehugoawards.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2023-Hugo-Award-Stats-Final.pdf voting statistics] released [https://www.thehugoawards.org/2024/01/2023-nominating-and-final-ballot-statistics-published/?ref=astrolabe.aidanmoher.com on 2024-01-20], there were 1674 valid ballots cast, 944 valid ballots cast in category". It's not much, but it would at least clarify which version of the stats our records use. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:20, 22 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::::I've added your suggested text to the records in the Best Novel category.  In addition to the ballot count at the head, I've also added it to the nomination numbers at the foot.  I think it's more important there as that is where there is evidence of shenanigans. In any case, let me know if it looks good and I can update the remaining records or we tweak it if desired. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:26, 27 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::::: Everything looks good, thanks. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 22:40, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Nightwalker Editions ==
+
:: I recall that award year notes has been suggested before and there may be a feature request, though I suspect that how the award tables are structured may make this difficult. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/nightwalker-thomas-tessier-centipede-1761310973; http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?14418; I did a lot of Thomas Tessier edits recently, and I think most of them are approved now, but since I check my edits afterwards I see that apparently I forgot to backdate the intro by Jack Ketchum to 2008 because it was originally from Leisure, not Centipede. Checking further, the afterword by Tessier actually has a title, Back Then, so I fixed that and imported it into Centipede, too, and that Worthpoint link above shows a piece of it and after typing the phrase "was hot stuff" which I can barely make out I can confirm that it got a hit for the Google Books copy of the Crossroad Press edition, which is not on ISFDB but may be in that Tomes of Terror, which is a Crossroad omnibus; I don't see the Ketchum intro, though, so maybe they dropped it. So all this is a long way of saying that after all my Tessier edits are approved anyone owning any editions may want to do any further tweaking that may be needed, because they just reprinted the hell out of this guy's books, and Centipede's site going on about new material seems to be the usual publisher BS (unless there's also a new intro and afterword in that edition along with the old ones, in which case, go Centipede). --[[User:Username|Username]] 23:34, 29 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::: Yes, indeed. {{FR|1086}}, "Change the award year field to a drop-down list", says "Create a new record type for award years. We can call it something like "award year" or "award ceremony". Once we have it, we will be able to add notes to award years. Notes can be used to specify when the awards were announced, when and where they were given, eligibility rules changes, etc." Unfortunately, as you said, it would be fairly time-consuming to implement. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:12, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Falcons of Narabedla ==
+
:: In any case, I do have one suggestion for the del Rey award record.  We currently have the explanation of the non-acceptance of the award noted in the title field of what should be an untitled award.  Perhaps we didn't have award level notes at the point that award was added.  I feel that the verbiage in the title should be moved to notes and replaced with "untitled".  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
A few months back Stonecreek opened [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#MZB.27s_.27Falcons_of_Narabedla.27 this discussion], suggesting Falcons of Narabedla should be a novella in stead of a novel. There were two responses, both against this change. Surprisingly (or not) yesterday he changed it anyway (see http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1946 here], except for four publications that have primary verifications by others (see [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3040549 here], probably because he knew this would leat to protests. Now we have the same text under two different titlerecords. Do we accept this behaviour? --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 05:37, 31 May 2022 (EDT)
+
::: I agree. It's exactly as you said -- award records didn't have a Notes field back then. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:12, 22 February 2024 (EST)
−
:This isn't correct and the changes should be reverted.  We have the exception for works less than novel length being considered novels if they appear in an Ace Double.  If someone wants to change that exception, we would need to reach consensus in the Rules and Standards board before doing so.  I'd like to hear why [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] made this change and split this title into two different ones.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:36, 31 May 2022 (EDT)t
+
::::I've updated [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?9534 this] and expanded the comment as a note taking my queue from Judy-Lynn's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy-Lynn_del_Rey Wikipedia article].  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:26, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
:: I didn't split that title into two: there already was the novella of the same title (and also [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?549068 a CHAPBOOK]): I have just merged the ones that were quite obviously publications of texts of the novella with the existing one.
+
::::: Thanks. I have hyper-linked Lester del Rey's name and clarified that he was Judy-Lynn's husband. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 22:40, 27 February 2024 (EST)
−
:: I can only give advice to you, Willem, to do some research before pleading 'guilty': you then would have found ''Originally published in May, 1957, in Other Worlds magazine'' with publications maculated by you.  
 
−
:: (An aside: you really want to state that the Ace Doubles have near to 350 words on a page?) Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 04:45, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::Looking at last week's database dump, Stonecreek is correct that there was already a NOVEL and a SHORTFICTION (novella) record. However, in the processing of merging, Stonecreek turned what was the NOVEL record (1946) into the novella and created a new NOVEL record (3040549) with the old novella record no longer existing. This wasn't the greatest as any external links to the NOVEL record would now be incorrect. He also left a {{P|549421|a novel}} publication under the novella record. While a discussion on how Ace Double should be handled is better suited for the Rules and standards, if these two records are really for the exact same text, having it as a NOVEL and a novella is not the best solution. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 07:27, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Kater-Bound ==
  
−
:::: Yeah, sorry for hitting the wrong title (1964) to merge with, could have bitten into my ass (and would have done so, if I would have been able to reach it).
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?22308; On all of the web there seems to be only 1 mention of Borgo Press and Kater-Bound together, https://www.lawrenceperson.com/?p=22429, although it does get a handful of hits in a text search, https://archive.org/search?query=%22kater-bound%22+%22borgo%22&sin=TXT&sort=-addeddate. This Archive.org page, https://archive.org/search?query=compton+farewell+bliss&sort=-addeddate, shows 2 editions with one being Borgo but with price on front covered and Kater-Bound sticker on back. Could this be the mysterious Borgo HC mentioned in the book's record? Also, the note about artist is wrong because he's credited on copyright page and back cover, the latter of which can be seen in the cover image. TP PV doesn't respond much so I'm asking on this board. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:09, 19 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::: I really do think we only have texts of novella length in this case, with the 1964 Ace publication maybe slightly expanded (or maybe just revised).
+
:The Archive.org copy is a library book, and Kater-Craft does library bindings. I believe it is not uncommon to have a retail hardcover edition and a library-binding hardcover edition of the same book. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 17:44, 19 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::: I just set out to adapt the remaining incongruency when this again unnecessary discussion popped up. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 08:55, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::Believe it or not, I have library hardcover versions of Ace Doubles.  All should be listed in my opinion. [[User:MLB|MLB]] ([[User talk:MLB|talk]]) 01:00, 20 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::: Done. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 10:50, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::::: A few things:
+
== Miriam Allen de Ford ==
−
::::: ''I didn't split that title into two'': yes you did. The novella in Otherworlds is completely different from the novel. I downloaded the text from Gutenberg, it has exactly 26.727 words and starts with the same phrase as the novel, but ends with "She smiled. "Does it?" But her bright eyes had given me my answer, and I never had to make up my mind again". Now this title is polluted with the expanded edition that ends with "I heard it, drew a deep breath and then put my arm around Cynara, calling to Adric to come and share it with me". A little research would have prevented this mistake. {{unsigned|Willem H.}}
 
−
:::::: No, I didn't. I unmerged the falsely connected titles and merged them with an ''existing'' one. For your willingly not understanding mind that does mean that the split existed before. (added by Stonecreek)
 
−
::::::: Yes you did. You split out every non-verified record. Or do you really think the 188 page Portuguese edition, or the 154 page trade paperback contain the short version? And what is your source for the e-book editions? --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 05:55, 7 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
:::::::: No, I didn't: two versions were there before, and the same two versions are there after. And do you have nearer insight of the Portuguese edition (any word count, number of pages with fiction, no illustrations or other additional material), and yes, the tp seems to hold a text of only novella length, like the one that was already there). (added by Stonecreek)
 
−
::::::::: See above for how the two versions end. It's quite easy to determine which it is, or should I ask Mavmaramis since you refuse to answer questions? --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 14:12, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::::: ''Originally published in May, 1957, in Other Worlds magazine'' is not mentioned in the Ace double editions. Only "©1964, by Ace Books, Inc." {{unsigned|Willem H.}}
+
Per the ''Spaces in Names'' subsection of [[:Template:PublicationFields:Author]], Miriam Allen de Ford should be standardized as {{A|Miriam Allen deFord}}. However, we have a {{A|Miriam Allen de Ford}} alternate name which was recently edited so the notes copy the rules saying it should be standardized. Instead, I propose we merge the alternate name to the canonical name in accordance with the rules. As there are a number of verified pubs, I will point the verifiers to the this discussion, If there are any objections, then we should probably have a Rules and standards discussions. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 18:28, 19 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::::: You may have noted that these publications still have (mistakenly, see above and below) the text as novels. (added by Stonecreek)
+
:I guess it would be like calling somebody named MacIntosh being called Mac Intosh. Still, I'll go with the majority. [[User:MLB|MLB]] ([[User talk:MLB|talk]]) 00:58, 20 February 2024 (EST)
−
::::::: Yes. and don't you dare touch these! So far I count two people opposing your change, and you are the only one in favor. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 05:55, 7 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::No objection to merging, but I think the actual spelling of the name should be made clear in the notes. [[User:Linguist|Linguist]] ([[User talk:Linguist|talk]]) 04:06, 20 February 2024 (EST).
−
:::::::: Well, two people vs. me and your own estimate: It's possible that it's a novel, but the estimates do point towards a higher likelihood that it is a novella. So, I repeat again: why do you do an estimate and then don't use it? Please explain. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 06:54, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:::No objection, I had three pubs, two in Croatian language I already corrected, but I have also one in Serbian language. In Serbian language names are written as they are pronounced, in this case same as written. Should I change this one as well? This is publication in question: https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2277217 {{unsigned|Debolestis}}
−
::::::::: I will use it, but I have the habit of discussing things '''before''' making changes. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 14:12, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
::::: ''you really want to state that the Ace Doubles have near to 350 words on a page?'': no, it's only 323 words per page. I counted (in the 2nd printing) three (average) pages, and that's the average. Multiplied by 127 pages of text that gives 39.729 words or very close to novel length. How did you count Christian? --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 15:32, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
:::::: That's close to novel length but still ''below''. How do you come to the conclusion that a count below a threshold qualifies a text to lie above it? I do think your argumentation is getting weirder and weirder and deviates more and more from facts, Willem. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 01:44, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::::::: Ever heard of a margin of error Christian? It's less than 1%, so unless you want to count every word in the book, it should remain as it was. By the way, you didn't answer my question. By what method tid you reach the amazingly incorrect wordcount of ''the publications of the original novella can't have more than 35,000 words''. See above for an exact wordcount of the novella. Either your count is 8.000 too high (if you counted the novella), or 5.000 words too low (if you counted the novel). --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 05:55, 7 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::::::: What is wrong with 'can't have more than 35,000 words' when the actual word count lies below it? It was a very rough estimate for an upper limit - just to ensure the title type - but absolutely correct to ensure it's of novella length. I do give a specific range (for example 30,000 - 32,000), when the estimate is finer.
+
== Ruben De Anda ==
−
:::::::: And why do you do an estimate when you don't intend to use the result?
 
−
:::::::: Your estimate seems to be quite incorrect: there are 12 chapters for which one has easily to substract about 1,000 words (likely more) for empty space around their respective beginnings / endings. And this would put the corrected estimate for the expanded / revised 1964 version at about 38,000 - 39,000 words, I think. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 08:54, 7 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::::::::: So you finally do acknowledge that there are two different versions of the story. Now which version did you do a "very rough" word count of, the original novella or the expanded edition? Your remarks above seem to imply the first. You verified two publications, the German translation and the 1984 http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?640300 Arrow edition]. I can't imagine you used the German translation (could be abridged), so that leaves the Arrow wdition, but according to Worldcat and the British Library that one states ©1964, the date of the Ace version and thus the expanded edition. Please explain. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 16:03, 10 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::::::::: So your counting ability has also suffered a loss, you may have to count again. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 06:54, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1476655; https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2552505; Can anyone find proof that these are the same artists? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:45, 20 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:I don't know. But [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?107431 The Galaxy Primes] (Ace 1976) appears also to be signed by R. De Anda. [[User:Horzel|Horzel]] ([[User talk:Horzel|talk]]) 08:52, 23 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Probably is but since last name is mostly covered it's hard to tell. PV Willem H. noted that it may be Rafael M. De Soto but I doubt it because he has no original cover credits on ISFDB after 1964 and this book is from 1976. There's a copy on Archive.org which I've added a link to in a PENDING edit. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:44, 23 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
::::::::::: I copied the Other Worlds text of Falcons from the title to the last word using the "Full Text" option on Archive.org and pasted it on the site I mentioned somewhere above a while back, wordcount.com, and got these results: 27,462 Words 154,640 Characters 120,876 Characters without space 36,576 Syllables 1,890 Sentences 4,654 Paragraphs. In case that makes a difference as to what length it should be entered as here. --[[User:Username|Username]] 07:25, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Steve Miller: RIP ==
  
−
:::::::::::: Many thanks for your assistance; it seems that we do have the original text (novella - the one with an estimate of 27,462 words, first published 1957) and a somewhat expanded version (most likely a novella - by all word count estimates so far - Willem just conceded that his original estimate of 39.729 words was too high, this text was first published in 1964 by Ace). Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 07:33, 11 June 2022 (EDT):  
+
For those who may not have seen an announcement, [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?214 Steve Miller], co-author of the Liaden Universe, et al., died on February 20, 2024 at his home in Maine. His wife, author [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?418 Sharon Lee], posted [https://korval.com/2024/02/21/steven-richard-miller-1950-2024/ this obituary]. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 07:41, 22 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:I added photo from FantLab which is a little bigger and shows his face better than Fantastic Fiction's photo. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:42, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
::::::::::::: OK. Also, I just added Archive link to the 1974 Spanish-language edition, awaiting approval, which was uploaded early last year. There's also this, https://archive.org/details/Dimensions1419540506, which includes Falcons' first chapter and mentions in the uploader's note that the second chapter was published in the next issue of Dimensions, but that doesn't seem to be on Archive, and magazine went out of business so serialization was never completed, anyway. Also, https://archive.org/details/falconsofnarabedla_1709_librivox, because as I mentioned somewhere recently there's a huge gap in LibriVox entries on ISFDB and this is probably one of many that should be on here. I at first thought the title was NARABEDIA, and that actually gets a few hits, https://archive.org/search.php?query=%22falcons%20of%20narabedia%22&sin=TXT, so other people thought that was the title, too. There's also this, https://openlibrary.org/books/OL27044742M/I_falconi_di_Narabedla, which says previewable when searching for the title but seems that got taken down, but anyway it's an edition not on ISFDB. I also added Archive link, awaiting approval, to the 1979 Ace edition, uploaded way back in 2010, but oddly it doesn't show up when searching for the title on Archive.org, only on OL. There's also 2 records on OL for a March 1988 Time Warner UK edition, but WorldCat link leads to 1984 Arrow. Also added Luminist PDF, awaiting approval, to the 1964 dos version. So it's not surprising there's questions about the word count because they reprinted this thing so many times and in so many ways it's hard to know what the definitive text is. --[[User:Username|Username]] 08:03, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Last User Activity ==
  
−
:::::::::::::: Nobody denied that the Other Worlds version is a novella. Above I gave a wordcount of 26.727 as athe result of pasting the text in MS Word. Also I did '''not''' say anything about my estimate of 39.729 words for the expanded version. Christian, do not try to twist my words, but answer my question. Which version of the text did you do a "very rough" word count of. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 08:11, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?895338; What does this mean exactly? There was a question of contacting this PV RedDragonBooks about something related to a mod note I made and checking their page the last answer they gave or contribution they made was in spring of 2022 but the activity at the bottom of the record linked above says a few days ago. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:03, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
::::::::::::::: So, you deny that you phrased something like 'the book, it should remain as it was' (meaning that you're convinced that it's not a novella)?
+
:There are two databases: The wiki and the bibliographic database. What you see for User Contributions on their user/talk page is just their Wiki edits.  What you see for Last User Activity in the verifiers' list is the date of their last activity in the bibliographic side -- the Wiki software does not know about that, only about the Wiki. That user did some verifications on 2024-02-18 but hasn't posted anything to the wiki in the past couple of years. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 13:56, 22 February 2024 (EST)
−
::::::::::::::: Don't try to circumnavigate the point, Willem! That is, we try to determine the length of the second version, which seems to have to stay as a novel because of a faulty overestimation of yours (and of which you decided that it should not count towards determining the title type). Please come up with a corrected estimate that takes the empty spaces into the account. It really seems that there's no novel of the title ''Falcons of Narabedla'' by MZB anywhere in sight. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 10:49, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::::::::::::::: 1. "it should remain as it was" because novel length falls within the margin of error. Is that so hard to understand?
+
:: Just a quick note to clarify that the software that displays the Last User Activity date checks both the Wiki side and the database side. It then displays the latest date that it finds. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:36, 22 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::::::::::::::: 2. If you want to prove anything, come up with a far better wordcount than you did.
 
−
:::::::::::::::: 3. You are not helping to determine which publication has which version of the story. So for the third time, which version of the text did you do a "very rough" word count of. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 14:12, 11 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::::::::::::::::: ad 1.: You wrote of a margin of error of 1%. That may have had some validity for your faulty word count of 39.729, which is too high, as you condescended. So, once again, please supply a more correct word count, Willem. What is wrong with your attitude that you can't supply that, it's really only a rough count of the empty spaces: how much pages does it add up to?
+
== Ermengarde Fisk = Evelyn E. Smith? ==
−
::::::::::::::::: ad 2.: See below (ad. 3.).
 
  
−
::::::::::::::::: ad 3.: As explained in the discussion above: I didn't do a 'rough word count', I supplied an upper limit for the initially 1957 published text. There the corresponding note appears: what did you not understand about the note? You are constantly failing to supply a more correct word count for the 1964 version. So, I assume it would be right to add a note to it that it's most likely a novella? (And, please no more circumnavigating of yours). Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 06:32, 12 June 2022 (EDT)
+
One of my friends pointed me at [https://www.fanac.org/fanzines/Oopsla/Oopsla10.pdf#view=Fit issue #10 of the 'zine Oopsla], specifically page 13. The "SHORT STORIES" section says:
  
−
:::::::::::::::::: ad 1.:I explained my method of counting above and I'm satisfied with the result. If you have doubts, provide a better word count yourself, don't try command me. You're getting abusive again.
+
  Third goes to another brand-new author, [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?1254 Evelyn E. Smith] ... is better known to fandom as the pseudonymous authoress of the "New York Letter" column in Slant--yeah, that's right, she's [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?266764 Ermengarde Fiske].
−
:::::::::::::::::: ad 3.:Then let's go back to the [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#MZB.27s_.27Falcons_of_Narabedla.27 original discussion], or have you forgotten about that. Do you still think [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?640300 this publication] contains the original novella? Do some research before accusing me af anything! --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 04:50, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::::::::::::::::::: ad 1.: So I ask you again: How much of the blank space (if any) has gone into your estimate? And what was the abusive phrase I supplied: instead of stating things like those, please give a concrete citation. I just asked to give a more correct estimate.
+
As I don't know what the accuracy of fan writing was like nearly two decades before I was born, I don't know how reliable this info might be.  Any objections to varianting these author records?  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 13:49, 23 February 2024 (EST)
−
::::::::::::::::::: ad 3.: You are correct: all the texts of this title that I have seen are of novella length. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 08:44, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: We already have a pseudonym there: Evelyn Smythe (intentional corruption of Evelyn Smyth E.?) which I think is based exactly on the note you cited above. I am not sure if we have enough evidence to connect the two Evelyn E. Smith's though - while very very likely, the name is not very uncommon. Maybe add some notes to both accounts until we find a better proof that the two are one and the same? [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 14:50, 23 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:: Never mind, I looked at the fanzine itself now - you actually missed the smoking gun while quoting - that award over there is for a story that belongs to Evelyn E. Smith (Tea Tray in the Sky) - so yes, they are the same person. Connect them away. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 14:54, 23 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::: This is now done. Had a bit of a headscratcher with Ermengarde Fiske having its own alternate names, but I think everything is now correct, with all the authors pointing at Evelyn E. Smith as the canonical, and all of the title records having parent titles with that author record.  However I wouldn't say no if someone wants to double check that everything is now as it should be. Thanks! [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 13:44, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
(unindent) I am trying to wrap my head around this discussion, but a number of comments are unsigned and I am having trouble figuring out who said what. Could the contributors please sign their comments above? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:07, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== J. Watson ==
  
−
: Done so far for mine comments with '(added by Stonecreek)', I'd think. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 11:34, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?224483; What do you suggest is best to add to differ 1966 Thunderbirds artist from Leading Edge writer/artist? He's on Wikipedia so I'll add that link (as Jim Watson). --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:48, 24 February 2024 (EST)
−
:: Added the'unsigned' template to mine. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 12:46, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::: Thanks for clarification. I will review the discussion and hopefully comment tomorrow morning. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 18:58, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: See [[Help:How_to_separate_two_authors_with_the_same_name]] for ideas. Looks like "James Watson (1960s)" would work here and might be more helpful than "(I)". The situation is quite similar to the Jame Cooper examples given in that bullet.  In light of the disparity in volume between their bibliographies, I think you could treat the James Watson from the 1980s as "more prominent/widely known in the Spec-Fic world" and leave it with no embedded disambiguation. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 12:04, 25 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::OK, thanks. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:30, 25 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
(unindent)
+
== Tem Title ==
−
It looks like there are a few separate issues here. The first one is substantive, i.e. the issue of separating the two different texts now that we have confirmed that the original story was expanded for book publication (which SFE [https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/bradley_marion_zimmer agrees with].) I have checked my copy of ''Marion Zimmer Bradley Super Pack'' and confirmed that it contains the shorter, 1957, version of the text. We should ask primary verifiers of the affected pubs (including translations) to check what the last sentence says and update their verified records to avoid questions in the future.
 
  
−
We should also add a note explaining that some editions claim that this work is part of the Darkover series, but, as SFE says, the link is "marginal". This is also the case with ''The Door Through Space'', another early Bradley novel, which also needs to be updated with this information. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 13:56, 14 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?67830; Archived link to recently uploaded Chrysalis 9 HC just added by me in a PENDING edit, PV doesn't respond much, PB has one or two active PV so if they can verify it's Hit-and-Run there, too, not Hit-and-Miss, title should be changed. I vaguely remember asking about this long ago after noticing title was different in Tem's online bibliography. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 15:32, 25 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
: Word counts have been added and Notes have been expanded. I have also updated all versions of ''Falcons of Narabedla'' and ''The Door Through Space'' with information about their links to the Darkover series. I have also created a series for the 3 versions of ''The Door Through Space'' and added notes about its unusual history. SFE will be updated shortly. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:35, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== The Hole of the Pit ==
  
−
The second issue is deciding whether we want to make the expanded 1964 text a novella as opposed to a novel. As was pointed out during the [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#MZB.27s_.27Falcons_of_Narabedla.27 first iteration of this discussion], [[Template:TitleFields:TitleType]] says:
+
https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal/Archive/Archive53#Uncanny_Banquet_and_Leisure; Exactly a year-and-a-half ago I asked about Uncanny Banquet and noted the rare novel contained in it; a copy of the Oleander Press edition including the novel with a short story and a poem was recently added to Archive.org so I've added a link in a PENDING edit. Still waiting for a copy of that anthology to show up somewhere...anywhere. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:55, 25 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
* NOVEL. ... For Ace Doubles, each content title will typically be a NOVEL, rather than SHORTFICTION, unless one of the constituent works is itself an anthology or a collection.
+
== Series sort order? ==
  
−
Given that our current best estimate is 39,729 words, the rules as currently formulated clearly favor making it a NOVEL. We should explicitly document this application of the rules in the Note field of the [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3040549 novel title]. We should also state the known word count of [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1946 the 1957 version] in its Note field.
+
I was looking at a [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?2278 page for a series] and couldn't figure out the basis for the order of the sub-series. First come the numbered sub-series, in numerical order. Then the 'loose' items in chronological order. Then come the unnumbered sub-series, which are neither alphabetical or chronological by any of their contained titles. Is there a particular order to them? ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] ([[User talk:Holmesd|talk]]) 09:04, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
The third issue is whether the current Help exception for Ace Doubles is a good idea. My current take on it is "maybe not", but that's something to discuss on the Rules and Standards page, assuming that there is interest.
+
: The only order that the display software enforces is as you described above: all numbered sub-series are displayed first and the rest are displayed randomly. I think it would be fairly easy to display unnumbered sub-series alphabetically. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
The fourth issue is the steps taken by Stonecreek to move these two texts between publications. The right way to do it would have been to re-open the February discussion and post new evidence suggesting that certain publication records had been linked to the wrong title record. Then other editors would have been able to check the word counts and first/last lines of whatever editions they had access to -- see Username's comments and my ''Marion Zimmer Bradley Super Pack'' example above -- instead of relying on what he thought was "quite obvious".
+
::: (after edit conflict) A more thorough review discovered that Summary pages were already sorting unnumbered sub-series alphabetically. I have adjusted the software to do the same on Series pages. Thanks for identifying the problem! [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
The way it was done, i.e. without re-opening the discussion and against the outcome of an older one, caused confusion, stress, distrust and a variety of data problems, which were outlined in JLaTondre's response above. This was a self-inflicted wound which should not have happened and then it just spun out of control, causing defensive responses, flaming and even more stress for everyone involved.
+
::Since series tend to be written in order, displaying the unnumbered titles in chronological order may make more sense. Although, sub-series wouldn't have a date and extrapolating the date from the earliest contained title would be more complex.  Perhaps, numbered items followed by unnumbered sub-series followed by everything else in chronological order. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:34, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
This is not something that a self-approver should be doing. As I wrote on Stonecreek's Talk page [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Stonecreek#Ministry_for_the_Future_title_.26_pub_dates in January 2022]:
+
::: Could you please clarify what you mean by "items" in this case? Series may contain both title records and sub-series records. They use different, unrelated, numbering systems. For example, a series may contain 3 titles numbered "0.5", "1" and "2", as well as two sub-series numbered "1" and "2". [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 19:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
* Since you are a self-approver, the responsibility to enforce ISFDB conventions and keep records self-consistent falls on you. Please make sure this doesn't happen again or else it will jeopardize your self-approver status.
+
::::I intended items to mean both title records amd sub-series records, either of which may be numbered.  What I was suggesting is that within a series (parent), each numbered item would display based on the numbering.  In your example, there would be a conflict as there are both titles numbered "1" and "2" and sub-series numbered "1" and "2".  Ideally, we would never assert that both a title and a sub-series should occur first in the parent series. Clearly, numbering only applies within the parent series.  I believe that for numbered "items", I am not suggesting any changes to how things currently work.  I had suggested a chronological sort for the remaining items based on your now corrected statement that they were displayed randomly. Given that we're already sorting alphabetically, it's probably fine to leave things as they are, unless others think a chronological sort would be preferable. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:13, 28 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Given my [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Stonecreek#Ministry_for_the_Future_title_.26_pub_dates repeated warnings on Stonecreek's Talk page], e.g.:
+
== BattleTech Universe ==
  
−
* This is not what the self-approver status was created for; additional instances of this behavior or ''any'' other abuse of the privileges will result in their termination.
+
The [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?1991 BattleTech Universe] series and it's sub-series all list having an Issue Grid, which suggests they are Serials / Magazines. They look like books to me. Is it a mistake in the software or entry? Might the existence of one Serial in the series propagate? ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] ([[User talk:Holmesd|talk]]) 09:12, 29 February 2024 (EST)
 +
: Yep - if there is one magazine series somewhere in the sub series inside of a bigger series, the whole set and any sunsets of it shows the grid links. It is how the software is built. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 10:00, 29 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
I don't think Stonecreek's self-approver privileges can be retained. I will let him respond here before I make the final determination.
+
:: Good catch. {{Bug|842}}, "Extraneous 'View Issue Grid' links on series pages", has been created. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:15, 29 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
P.S. I have notified SFE about various minor issues with their Bradley entry. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 13:56, 14 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Database Backup ==
  
−
: I do apologize if I turned wrong in any of my actions. Alone: I didn't touch the Ace Books, I only merged the novella length publications with the already existing novella title (and I checked the available sources, i.e. Amazon's Look Inside - the archive.org links are no help, so I think I did use the available information). The reason it got reprinted so much after 2010 is the expiry of the 1957 copyright. And I'm sincerely sorry for causing any stress & problems in the data (but I think this is independent from this specific problem, it may have occurred in an unrelated act) but where there really any? (I don't remember deleting any title, only transforming them, so any relation should have remained!).
+
Can you please save the database with InnoDB utf8mb4 so accented and Chinese characters will show up correctly? As it now with MyISAM utf8, Иван Константинович Айвазовский shows up as &#1048;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1050;&#1086;&#1085;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1090;&#1080;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1080;&#1095; &#1040;&#1081;&#1074;&#1072;&#1079;&#1086;&#1074;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081;. It makes it hard to work with the database and makes it a lot larger than it has to be. {{unsigned|Catpoolfan}}
−
: Finally, if there are really only two versions of "Falcons of Narabedla" they both seem to be novellas: the Arrow publication is considerably shorter than 39.729 words, and the German translation of 2001 is longer with about 38,000 words (but it should be with German needing a bit more words to express the same). Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 16:27, 14 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:: I am going to revoke Stonecreek's self-approver privileges for the time being. After a 2 week cooldown period -- let's make it until July 1 to be it exact -- Stonecreek will be able to re-apply for the self-approver status using the regular nomination/self-nomination process. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 20:48, 14 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: For historical reasons -- the ISFDB project started in 1995 -- ISFDB tables use "latin1_swedish_ci". You can see it if you run "SELECT TABLE_CATALOG, TABLE_SCHEMA, TABLE_NAME, TABLE_COLLATION FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES" in MySQL. Non-Latin-1 Unicode characters are stored in the database as HTML entities. When you see "&#1081;" (i.e. "&#1081") displayed, that's because that's what's stored in the database.
  
−
::: Thanks. Not being aware that my privileges were seemingly not used in a proper way, I'll nevertheless seek concordance in possibly upcoming cases like these. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 01:50, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: There are plans to migrate from HTML entities to native Unicode, but it will be a major project with a number of dependencies. There is no ETA at this time. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 10:42, 1 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
:::: :::: I'll let this discussion rest, and try to establish which publication should be under which title. It seems plausible that the post 2010 e-books and super-packs contain the 1957 version (a few notes would have helped a lot). I'll ask Stonecreek about the German translations and Mavmaramis about the Arrow edition. I assume the Portuguese translation is of the 1964 text (188 pages). If no proof otherwise is given, I'll return that one to the expanded title. The 2013 Marion Zimmer Bradley Literary Works Trust edition is definitely the 1964 text. Amazon shows the first pages of the kindle version of that book, which I compared to the Ace Double and Gutenberg text. --[[User:Willem H.|Willem]] 14:49, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== I Stole You ==
  
−
::::: For the Arrow edition I have come to an average of about 254 words per page, with an absolute high of 266 words on one page in my sample, and with an overall majority seeming to lie just beneath or around 250 words a page: the reason for the difference to Mavmaramis' estimate seems to lie in not discounting the empty space and the shorter lines (for example of dialogue and paragraph endings). I think the right way to do an estimate is to actually count the words on representative sample pages (and discount unused space of chapter endings & beginnings). Thus, this word count estimate does lie beneath the threshold of 40,000 words: at 37,772 (just taking the high point page), at 36,608 for the average, and even below that for the 'impressionist' average. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 01:03, 16 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisheryear.cgi?60942+2017; A copy of Tripping... was recently uploaded so I added a link and the stories' numbers, there's also supposedly a copy of Ringman's collection but when I saw the red hardcover I knew that couldn't be right and it wasn't; it's a copy of some old romance novel by Jane Aiken Hodge. I checked all the usual sites but can't get contents page of TP so if anyone can or owns a copy fill in the page numbers if you wish. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:40, 1 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Son of the Flying Tiger ==
+
== Mandarin ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?824087; Anyone have a copy of the original 1973 edition? Someone (possibly) bootlegged it in 2020 and uploaded to Archive.org (in Community Texts so the net police wouldn't find it), and its covers and title/copyright pages are original with just a 1-line publisher/date added by the (possible) bootlegger. However, the novel ends on p. 181 and ISFDB's sources say 189. My page change was rejected, so I'd like to know if it's really 181 so it can be un-rejected. Anyway, I'm not adding the new edition, but the (possibly) bootleg copy is fully readable. --[[User:Username|Username]] 21:59, 31 May 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5905095; Is anyone familiar with Mandarin paperbacks who can say why ISBN on back cover doesn't match any other Mandarin PB on ISFDB which (almost) all start with 0-7493? This book's ISBN, 0-09, seems to have been used by Cresset per online searching but there is no mention of them anywhere in it; a couple of Cresset Editions books on ISFDB do have an ISBN which starts with that. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:14, 2 March 2024 (EST)
−
:Even if someone were to confirm a different page count, the submission could not be unrejected as it also attempts to add a scan of the 2020 Orphanwerk Press edition to the 1973 Venus Freeway Press edition.  Scans are great, but they should only be added to the publication record which appears in the scan. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:25, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:: Important thing is getting the right page count confirmed and entered if someone says it's 181 (well, important for the purposes of this database; nobody really gives a damn what the page count is); that (possibly) bootleg edition should have been put in note to mod by me just to show the last page is 181, not put in web page section, so my edit can stay rejected and I will enter the new page count in another edit. --[[User:Username|Username]] 17:36, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Donkerste Dag ==
−
:::Two different Worldcat records have the page count as 189, Reginald1 has it as 188 (discrepancy could be due to an unnumbered final page).  A scan of a different edition is not a more authoritative source than those cited.  If you come up with a better source that the page count is incorrect, then it can be changed.  If you can't, please don't attempt to change the page count. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:14, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:::: To be clear, the page count will stay the way it is now unless someone who owns/can get their hands on the 1973 edition responds here with verification (a photo of the last page would be nice) of 181. I won't change it otherwise. Let's be honest, odds are nobody will ever respond and I'll forget about this quickly and go do edits for a thousand other things. --[[User:Username|Username]] 18:24, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5905146; Nico Richter has 1 credit on ISFDB for a German Neil Gaiman edition but here he's credited for design. Sheila Metzner is a famed artist and I don't know what Ortikol is so if anyone thinks any of them should be entered as cover artist they can do that. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 14:12, 2 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Where in the WorldCat ==
+
== Shadow Regions ==
  
−
WorldCat's dead. --[[User:Username|Username]] 09:24, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?295434; The woman who ran the publisher whose imprint put out this anthology, Tammy Perron, apparently was a crook who didn't pay most of the authors or even give some of them copies which is detailed in the link from Absolute Write that I added some time ago. In September 2023 some mysterious person uploaded a copy on Archive.org and it was finally added a few weeks ago (I stumbled on it completely by accident) so I've added a link in a PENDING edit along with the price and the stories' numbers. Maybe it was one of the authors using their own copy because this seems a very rare book with WorldCat not finding any copies; there's only 1 sad review on Goodreads where one of the authors crows about having a story in it...little did he know. According to ISFDB only 3 of the 20 stories have been reprinted since it came out nearly two decades ago so if anyone was interested in reading it you should do so because you never know if old Tammy may crawl out of the woodwork to have it taken down. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:55, 2 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
:Ah, that was the reason I didn't found an entry for a recently added publication. Though I expect the line "WorldCat will return", like in a certain 2022 movie, will hold true. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 10:48, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Adam L. G. Nevill canonical name ==
  
−
:I just visited the Worldcat site. It seems to be having a database problem (it's only giving errors when you do a search). ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:37, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
I think it is time to swap the canonical name [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?134040 here] to Adam L. G. Nevill. Any objections? [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 15:18, 4 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
:: It has returned! Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 15:03, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: We have 8 book-length works as by {{A|Adam Nevill}} and 8 book titles as by {{A|Adam L. G. Nevill}}. All books published over the last 5 years have appeared exclusively as by "Adam L. G. Nevill". SHORTFICTION: 8 as by "Adam Nevill" and 27 as by "Adam L. G. Nevill".
  
−
== Cover modification bug fixed ==
+
: Given the numbers and the timeline, I think it's fair to say that "Adam L. G. Nevill" is the most recognizable form of his name within the genre as of 2024. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 16:19, 4 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
{{Bug|642}}, "Cover Art Modification Bug":
+
== The Under-People ==
  
−
: If only the date [or another field value in a COVERART record] is changed, it still shows the title and artist as having been changed.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3046564; https://archive.org/search?query=the-under-people&sort=-addeddate; No reason for this to be here, it's one of dozens of junk science "non-fiction" books by Norman/Steiger published back in the day. I think it should be deleted. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:52, 4 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
has been fixed. If you come across anything unexpected, please let me know. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 17:52, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Collection contents question ==
  
−
== Technical Fiction ==
+
When adding contents to a collection which is authored using a variant name, if there is no indication to the contrary, should all the content titles be attributed to the variant author name and then be made a variant of the canonical author name titles if they do not exist? Example: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?804222 The Witching Hour]. The collection author is James Gunn. The copyright page shows the content copyrights as by James Gunn. The included content titles only exist as by the canonical name James E. Gunn. Should these be changed to being authored by James Gunn and then made into variants? [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 09:28, 5 March 2024 (EST)
 +
: Yes. Remove the three fiction titles, add the three new titles and variant to the canonicals. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 09:57, 5 March 2024 (EST)
 +
::Done. Thanks.[[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 11:05, 5 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?9372; I think those 3 chapbooks should be non-fiction, and that Trek Technical non-fiction should be a chapbook. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:40, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Hautala Covers ==
  
−
== Satan on the Loose! ==
+
I was entering edits for Rick Hautala books, found Jacobus signature on Moon Walker so Tim Jacobus was entered as the artist; Little Brothers, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?20465, has a name or initials on the lower right, can anyone find out who that is? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:45, 5 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
While entering page #'s for the '65 Consul of Derleth's anthology Night's Yawning Peal, I looked up the '74 Signet and while everything there seems to be covered, there's a picture online of the back cover with an ad for a book called Satan on the Loose. It seems not to be fiction but rather non-fiction from a Mex ex-gang member who turned his life over to Jesus and was the subject of that well-known book/movie The Cross and the Switchblade. I know this book (and others he wrote which have similar "horror" titles) probably don't belong on this site, but as can be seen here, [https://www.google.com/search?q=cruz+%22satan-on-the-loose%22&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiJnNfhrY_4AhVxGVkFHRIPBAAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=cruz+%22satan-on-the-loose%22&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQA1D6CFj6CGCEC2gAcAB4AIABygGIAZgCkgEFMS4wLjGYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=EPyYYonUKvGy5NoPkp4Q&bih=667&biw=1366&hl=en], many have sweet cover art more appropriate to 80's horror paperbacks. Only 2 copies of Satan are on Open Library and they share the same (uncredited) cover art, with 1 chapter about SATAN'S COMPUTER PROGRAMS (or PROGRAMMES in the British edition), and a stunning note on the British back cover that The Cross and the Switchblade was made into a comic book! So some of those covers may have been done by genre artists and, if so, that may be a way to get those editions on here. These old religious books (not the later Left Behind junk) are a huge void here with many having intros or art done by genre people (many probably hoping nobody would ever find out they were the ones responsible). --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:26, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== ISFDB Server downtime -- 2024-03-06 at 6pm ==
  
−
== Display of pseudonymous reviews fixed ==
+
The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance on 2024-03-06 between 6:00pm and 6:15pm EST. Both the database and the Wiki will be unavailable. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:13, 6 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
{{Bug|165}}, "Pseudonymous reviews do not display reviewer's canonical name", has been fixed. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 17:04, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: The server is back up. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:05, 6 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Fighting Fantasy Question ==
+
== Simulacrum ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?459101; I added a lot of info to this, accepted today, so now that it's in my note about the 2 sample adventures being included, is this really still a novel, non-fiction, collection, or what? --[[User:Username|Username]] 19:59, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
+
Tonight I accidentally ended up on the archived SpecFicWorld site which used to be a major hub of speculative fiction but seems to have entirely disappeared from the modern web (whatever you do, don't type specficworld.com on Google and click the link whose description is "Daftar Situs Agen Judi Slot Online Terpercaya Resmi 2023"; that will NOT lead you to what you're looking for). Only issue #9 of Simulacrum, edited and published by the guy who ran the site, Doyle Eldon Wilmoth, Jr., has an archived PDF link but while searching, as I usually do, for random text from an archived story on Google to try and find out if there are any modern sites that still include it I got one hit, the late Tanith Lee's site daughterofthenight.com, because that issue included a reprint of a story by her from Interzone Magazine. That led me to this, https://archive.org/details/@zatoichi01?query=simulacrum&sort=title, which, according to Galactic Central, is the entire 14-issue run. I rarely enter magazines but any self-moderators who don't have to wait for approval can probably do these quickly without much trouble since the contents are a mixture of reprints which will need importing and originals (or at least they're not on this site). There are many well-known authors and artists included. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:59, 7 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:I'll take a look at it and see what I can do. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:48, 8 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:I have through issue 10 entered. I'll finish up with the remaining four later. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 20:35, 8 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:I've entered all 14 issues now. You can see them [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?72797 here]. I did not combine the years into editor series because there are only 14 issues so leaving them all separate makes it easier to get to them (one less click-through). ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 18:32, 12 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
: It's a novel - provided it's over the 40,000 words threshold (but should be with this page count): since it seems to be entirely fictional it can't be nonfiction. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 06:47, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Neglected moderation ==
−
:: I had a copy of this as a kid; from ~30 year old memory it is a role playing game rulebook that has no narrative content.  The 2 adventures I believe are standard gamemaster + players RPG scenarios, as opposed to the choose-your-own-adventure style single player branching narrative found in the main Fighting Fantasy series.  As such, I suspect it is ineligible for inclusion here per [[ISFDB:Policy#Exclusions]]?
 
−
:: In a similar vein - but a book I've never actually seen a copy of, so will defer to others' opinion - I saw [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2045063 this a few days ago], which I believe is also a set of RPG rules in paperback form, and so probably shouldn't be listed here. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 12:31, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
::: I added Archive link in my recent edit, in case anyone wants to see it and decide. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:51, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
+
Last time I changed something in ISFDB it took days to get a single non-controversial change accepted with hundreds of pending changes. Now it takes weeks with thousands of pending changes. When looking a the recent changes I see lots of self acceptance and accepted automatic changes, but only little moderator activity.
  
−
::::Both these books are in Reginald3, so I'd hate to lose them.  Additionally one is in Locus1 and the other in Clute/Grant.  With the two chose your own adventure items, I definitely think the Jackson book should stay with those items as SHORTFICTION.  I do think Reginald got the it wrong (see the note) and it probably is better described as NONFICTION as noted in Clute/Grant.  For the other book, I'd still want to keep it by virtue of it's mention in two of our standard genre sources. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:47, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
+
Remembering that it takes at least 4 or 5 rounds to add all information for a translated book that amounts to waiting multiple months for a single book.
  
−
== Backslash searches fixed ==
+
If you don't want contributors anymore then say so clearly! ATM I'd wonder if you find people sticking with ISFDB for a longer time with that situation.
  
−
{{Bug|278}}, "Search on backslash characters fails", has been fixed. Please note that the database that we are using, MySQL, is configured to treat the backslash character (\), "Ä", "Æ", "ä" and "æ" as identical by default. We won't be able to correct it until we upgrade the whole database to Unicode. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 20:03, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
+
To give you an indication how this should go: I added a new word to Wiktionary, it took 4 minutes for first reaction and 1:15 to reach the final entry.
 +
--[[User:Stoecker|Stoecker]] ([[User talk:Stoecker|talk]]) 16:31, 8 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== The Elephant Talks to God ==
+
: Longer approval times have definitely been a problem lately. Currently we have 1976 pending submissions, 1137 of them by [[User:Username]] (many are straightforward additions of archive.org links to publication records), 124 by [[User:Fixer]] (a robot account) and the remaining 715 are by other editors.
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?862319; My edit for the '89 ed. was just accepted, then I just added/fixed stuff for the '06 TP (not approved yet), but that says on back cover that it includes most of the original stories plus new ones, except the '89 copy on Archive.org has no contents and is just one 60-page story, while the '06 copy on Archive.org has titles for individual stories. So not sure what's to be done; also, '06 TP says page count is 123 but it ends at 122 and only thing on next page is a photo of Dumbo derrière, so it maybe should be changed to 122. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:15, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: That said, the ISFDB editing process is very different from what Wikipedia and its offshoot projects use. The latter are much easier to edit, but the quality of the end product varies tremendously. I wrote/rewrote dozens of Wikipedia articles in the mid-2000s, but eventually concluded that trying to keep articles accurate and coherent was going to be prohibitively time-consuming. I occasionally peek to see what has happened to them and their current state is pretty bad. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensheviks is full of confused nonsense.
  
−
:The 1989 edition is not one long story, it too is made up of individual tales. There is no TOC and there are no titles, but the text is the same. For example:
+
: We added the ability to self-approve a few years ago and we are slowly expanding the number of editors who can do so. Hopefully it will help matters going forward. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:56, 8 March 2024 (EST)
−
:* The text beginning on page 7 (1989) is 'The Ant's Point of View' on page 106 (2006)
 
−
:* The text beginning on page 9 (1989) is 'A Woman from China' on page 11 (2006)
 
−
:* The text beginning on page 13 (1989) is 'Not Profound' on page 9 (2006)
 
−
:Perhaps making the named stories variants of disambiguated untitled stories? Plus, extensive notes. I'm interested to hear from others who have dealt with similar situations. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 13:33, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== German Verne ==
+
:: Well, my request to do so was simply ignored. --[[User:Stoecker|Stoecker]] ([[User talk:Stoecker|talk]]) 10:10, 16 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?428612; Typing title and publisher on Amazon led to this, https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Jules-Verne/dp/B0000BTYIL, which isn't the right book but is a title on ISFDB, so the 1 Verne title by the publisher on ISFDB is probably missing other Verne books. --[[User:Username|Username]] 15:42, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::: Nominations require support from other editors/moderators before they can be approved. If a nomination doesn't gain enough support, it is not approved. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:01, 16 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:Sure: there are lots of other titles by Verne in various translations and hundreds of German publications missing! If you'd like to add some, please do so (best for those olden days publications to rely on DNB, not Amazon). If there are questions, please don't hesitate to ping me. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 12:46, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:::: Which is an endless loop. Because moderators don't care I want self-moderation. But for that I need moderators to care which they don't. An unreachable goal. --[[User:Stoecker|Stoecker]] ([[User talk:Stoecker|talk]]) 10:05, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:: I'm barely fluent in English, much less other languages. After ~30,000 edits I can probably count on my fingers and toes how many foreign editions I've entered, so whenever I see an interesting topic concerning foreign editions I mention it in case anyone fluent in those languages wants to look at it, which has resulted in positive responses and new entries before; enge Bekanntschaften, do your best. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:07, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Heide Oberheide ==
  
−
::: I know there's a lot to do, but I'm barely achieving my self-afflicted to-dos; so, just keep on doing, and when a question pops up with those publications, you know where to tutn to :-). Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:41, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?127989; I left a PV a note telling them that a T. Canty credit for Parke Godwin's novel Beloved Exile was actually by Oberheide so that will need fixing but another problem I found is that her page at The Paperback Palette says she was born in Canada in 1957, both very different than what ISFDB says. So does anyone know what the real info is? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:48, 9 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:Found [https://www.heritage.nf.ca/articles/arts/heidi-oberheide.php this] and [https://www.arts.wa.gov/artist-collection/?request=record;id=2193;type=701 this], which both agree on 1943 and Germany and have enough differences that neither seems to be the source for the other.  They both strike me as fairly authoritative, especially that first one. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 11:23, 10 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:::: Jules Verne has been on my plate for a few years now. I started with all the first editions and then as many translations as I could. A 'quick' break doing some non-fiction Asimov has taken about a year now, but I do hope to get back to populating a few of the missing editions in English and other languages. There is a German [https://www.jules-verne-club.de/jvc/ site] I have my eye on. Christian, I may hold you to your offer, if you're still around when I get back to these. ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] 22:07, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Tales of Terror ==
  
−
== Millennium Macabre ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291626; I added a link to the back cover image on Bookscans in a PENDING edit and noticed there are some copies on eBay which show the first page, 5, with "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar" as a title, which means this shouldn't really be a novel but rather a collection of Poe stories adapted by Sudak. Does anyone own a copy who can verify the page numbers of the other stories so they can all be entered? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:13, 13 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=um+macab&type=All+Titles; I thought I'd found in that first entry a mostly empty record to enter stuff for until I realized the same item was entered in 2020 by someone else who apparently didn't notice it was already on ISFDB and filled in the details, but the review is with the empty one and also the American price. So empty one can probably be deleted if those things are moved over to the full record. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:04, 4 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Cover artist data entry rules updated ==
  
−
== Change "WatchDate" to "WatchPrePub"? ==
+
Please note that the "Artist" section of [[Template:PublicationFields:CoverArt]] has been updated to reflect current practices. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:02, 14 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
We have a "WatchDate" template and a [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/cleanup_report.cgi?295 linked cleanup report] which help keep track of pub records with publication dates from questionable pre-publication sources. The template is currently found in 20 publication records.
+
== The Message ==
  
−
Based on our experience with pre-publication data, it would be useful to have broadly similar functionality for questionable pre-publication covers. We could accomplish this goal by creating another template/cleanup report pair, but it's been suggested that creating a generic template/cleanup report pair for questionable pre-publication data would be a better long-term solution.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1471825; Obscure author and publisher but not obscure enough that it didn't get a Chinese translation, https://archive.org/search?query=brockman-robin&sort=-addeddate, in case anyone fluent wants to enter that; just don't title it The MASSAGE like the uploader did. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:37, 14 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Here is the current proposal:
+
== YouTube audiobooks in or out? ==
  
−
* Create a new template, "WatchPrePub", as a replacement for "WatchDate".
+
I've placed [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5852793 this submission] on hold because I'm unsure if YouTube audiobooks should be included here since they are generally not downloadable (instead being streamed). The [[ISFDB:Policy#Rules of Acquisition|rules]] include audiobooks, but also exclude "[w]orks published in a web-based publication and available exclusively as a Web page" (which is pretty much what a YouTube video is), and they say nothing about podcasts. Thoughts? Should this be a [[RS|Rules and standards]] discussion? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:42, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
−
* The new template will be used for all types of "questionable pre-publication data".
+
: They are out under the exclusion as they are not downloadable. However we need to extend the Audio-book section of the inclusion section to match the ebooks/electronic publication one above it a bit - especially around podcasts which are not considered magazines for example. So maybe starting a discussion to clarify what audio-materials we want to index is the best choice (while keeping that one on hold until we decide what we want to do) :). [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 15:09, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
−
* The new template will take a parameter indicating which field's (or multiple fields') data is questionable.
+
::Okay, moved it [[ISFDB:RS#Clarifying the Audiobooks entry|over there]]. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:33, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
−
* The new template will expand to something like ''The following data is based on questionable pre-publication information and may be incorrect: [parameter, e.g. "publication date" or "cover and publication date"]''.
 
−
* The [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/cleanup_report.cgi?295 linked cleanup report], which currently displays the publication title and the publication date, will have a "Questionable Field(s)" column added. It will also let editors re-sort the table by publication name, by publication date or by field name similar to the way the Publication Series page works.
 
  
−
What do you think? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:23, 4 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Barcodes with prices hiding in plain sight ==
  
−
: Hearing no objection, I have created {{FR|1506}}, "Generalize WatchDate to be WatchPrePub". [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 13:22, 9 June 2022 (EDT)
+
A lot of printed books have prices on their back covers hiding in plain sight. If you look at a barcode on the back cover, next to the ISBN, usually over the smaller barcode next to the ISBN one, there is a number sequence - for example 51595 or 51699. That means $15.95 / $16.99 (5 is the code for $, the rest is the price). The first example is from a book I pulled from my shelf (not genre), the second is from [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0982095031 an Amazon book]. As back covers are very often visible in Amazon (separately or as part of Look Inside), that may help with adding prices (with an appropriate note) even when Amazon and other retailer have their own ideas on what the price may be (or at the very least it can serve as a confirmation for the Amazon price). It is not there for all books (90000 is a very common code up there) but for the books that have it, it is as good as the old printed prices.
  
−
:: Thanks. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 17:34, 9 June 2022 (EDT)
+
I propose to add this tidbit of information to the [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:PublicationFields:Price Price field help]. Meanwhile, I am leaving it here for information :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 17:21, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Rites of Passage ==
+
:Good idea to add this to the Help. I have sometimes used this for prices. You might like to expand the note to explain other currencies. The smaller 5 digit barcode is the supplementary section of the barcode and contains a EAN-5 code. The first of the five digits is a currency code. If the first digit is 9, that means the supplementary section does not contain price information. It's explained in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EAN-5 this Wikipedia article]. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:28, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:: Yep - we should add all the codes when we are adding the note to the help page. Thanks for the link to the Wiki page - I knew it was there, I did not think to look it up earlier today :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 18:41, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Vault of Evil has a lot of small-press covers not on ISFDB including this Obelesk anthology, but after uploading it the .jpg, [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/images/c/c5/RTSFPSSG1994.jpg], which says "rites1" when downloading, includes that other unrelated cover. So before adding it to the record, how to go about editing it so only Rites cover shows? --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:19, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::: I agree that adding a section about EAN-5 codes to [[Template:PublicationFields:Price]] would be useful. We could list  the commonly used first digits:
 +
:::* 0 and 1 -- UK
 +
:::* 3 - Australia
 +
:::* 4 - New Zealand
 +
:::* 5 - US
 +
:::* 6 - Canada
 +
::: and explain special pseudo-price values, i.e. that "9999" means "100.00 or more" while "90000" means "no price given". We could then link to the Wikipedia article or an industry Web page for other scenarios. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 19:06, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:You can load it into an image editor (e.g., on Windows, you can use MS Paint) and crop it to contain just the half you want, save that, and upload it.  In the notes expand the "uploaded by" notes to document the original source and to state that it has been cropped to remove a second, irrelevant cover. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] 07:30, 6 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Webzines to include? ==
  
−
== Brazilian Galactica ==
+
Hello. I have two new pub submissions on hold as they pertain to new webzine entries. Do we want to include these?
 +
* Small World City: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5776649], [https://smallworldcity.com/ website].
 +
* Kalpabishwa: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5884972], [https://www.kalpabiswa.in/ website].
 +
Looking through the contents, I say we can include those. Not sure how long-lived these are going to be though... Comments/suggestions from other editors & moderators whether to include or not? (didn't look for past discussion where webzine inclusions were debated...) [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
: Both produce issues and both are genre -zines. So they are eligible under the "Webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues (note that online periodicals without distinct issues are not considered webzines)." rule. How long they survive is irrelevant - even if they produce a single issue, they are in. However, these records will need some massaging post approval :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 15:41, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:: Thought so. The help text says to post and query the editor community - we may want to update that and instead clarify that if a webzine has distinct issues, it is in by default? [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 16:09, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::: Probably an oversight (we forgot it was there?) after we changed the ROA awhile back to include these. Which of the help pages?
 +
::: PS: Note that awhile back we even dropped the requirement for the webzine to be genre allowing non-genre ones to be added as any other non-genre periodical (with only genre contents indexed). So yep - a webzine with issues is always in under the genre magazine rules or the non-genre periodical ones. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 16:22, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::: [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Help:Screen:NewPub#Format Here] - see '''webzine''' in that section. [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::: Ah, the one place I did not look at. :) Yep - that needs an update. I will start a discussion so we can get the language crafted. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::: [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Rules_and_standards_discussions#Formats_help_pages Here we go] - the proposed new language. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:26, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::: [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Policy#Rules_of_Acquisition Rules of Acquisition] has it as you mention above - we may want to add non-genre periodicals role there explicitly. [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::: We do not have them called out in the print periodicals section either but if you think we should clarify that across the board, I won't object. Let's finish the audio-formats discussion we are currently having about changes in the same section of the ROA over in R&S and then I will initiate a discussion about this. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::: As an aside, I must say that I couldn't find the ROA immediately - I think it is an important section of the rules. Shouldn't we be adding a link on the main help page? [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::: I know to look under Policy but you are right, it needs to be a lot more visible [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page here] - either as a sublink under the ISFDB Policy link or on its own in the same section. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::::I've added a specific link to it on [[Help:Contents]], which is found at the top of most help pages. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:18, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=guerra+dos+d&type=All+Titles; Brazilian title is a reprint of English-language Battlestar Galactica novelization, War of the Gods, but editor didn't link it to original novel or make it part of the B.G. series. Also, the cover credits another author than the one in the English edition; Resnick wrote a different Galactica novel. On a tangential note, that Van Vogt translation with the same title has a cover artist but no cover art; Amazon seems not to have it but Spanish-language sites have a lovely cover, which may be the right one for this edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:11, 5 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== ISFDB:Verification requests ==
  
−
== Edit History Needs Editing ==
+
The [[ISFDB:Verification requests]] board is not used much anymore. It seems [[ISFDB:Help desk]] and this board have pretty much supplanted it. Do we want to discontinue it? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:17, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
: How about we can turn it into a broader board instead: "Assistance needed/Project Assistance Required/Something along these lines" for example - when an editor starts a project and notices other things that need adding/fixing or finds a source that may be useful and is unable/unwilling to work through it, they can request assistance there. Looking at CS, about half of the posts there in the last couple of years are from that nature and they choke the actual discussion threads and make it very hard for people to notice that something was posted in the discussions. It will be the counter-part of the Help Desk - come to the Help Desk if you want help getting the work done and learning how to do it; come to this board to post a project that needs work but you cannot/don't want to work on. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 14:59, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::I'd be fine with that. I agree this board has gotten rather full lately, making it hard to keep track of things. So maybe change the title to [[ISFDB:Assistance requests]] or something? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:11, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pub_history.cgi?312013; Just before I was going to see if anything needed fixing using Archive.org's copy of this zine, I noticed the first entry in "edit history" is missing a field and another field is in the wrong place. I guess someone knows what's up with that. --[[User:Username|Username]] 17:55, 6 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::: I like the idea. "Assistance requests" may be a bit too narrow for what we are trying to define, but it's the closest that I can think of at the moment. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:46, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::: I like "Assistance Requests". If we ever come up with a better name, we can rename and forward. And we have the text under it to add a sentence that describes the scope better. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 15:53, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::: "Help Wanted" ? ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] ([[User talk:Holmesd|talk]]) 09:47, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
: Checking the database, I see that this is one of 80 "approved" submissions which do not have the approver's name or the time of approval recorded. Based on the dates when they were created -- between 2010 and 2013 -- these submissions errored out half way through the approval process. At the time, we didn't have a mechanism for catching these types of errors and our submission display software doesn't display them correctly. I will create a new bug report and fix the issue once I am done with the bug that I am currently working on. Thanks for reporting the problem. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 21:55, 6 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:::::: I think that there is potential for confusion between "Help desk" and "Help Wanted". Ideally, whatever name we come up with should clearly differentiate between the two boards. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 10:08, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
EDIT: Also, I had a cover replacement for the Headline PB edition of Alone With the Horrors rejected earlier (it wasn't as clear as the earlier one, which I should have noticed) and another edit was just approved, but there's 2 of the same cover artists now. I don't know what the trail is but something went wrong, so if someone can trace and delete whichever's necessary; http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?36880. --[[User:Username|Username]] 17:55, 6 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:::::::Maybe "Research Requests" or "Research Assistance"? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:45, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:Done.[[User:Rudam|Rudam]] 01:51, 7 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:::::::: I like "Research Assistance". [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:13, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Proposal: change "AK Mulford" to "A. K. Mulford" ==
+
(unindent) Are there any objections to changing [[ISFDB:Verification requests]] to [[Research Assistance]]? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:12, 4 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
: I'm okay with that. [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 06:10, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
[http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?339363 AK Mulford] currently has a couple of self-published novels in the database.  The Amazon UK preview of the physical version of one of those novels confirms they use(d...) that form of their name, with no full stops after the initials.
+
:: If there are no objections, I will ask Nihonjoe to make the change tomorrow. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 16:50, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
[https://www.tor.com/2022/06/08/book-announcement-harper-voyager-the-rogue-crown-by-a-k-mulford/ Today it was announced] those novels plus a bunch of others had been picked up by a trad publisher, with the self-pub ebook versions already being replaced by versions from the new publisher. Per the Amazon preview, these have "A. K. Mulford" on the cover and title page, although the "AK Mulford" version of the name still appears on the copyright page, FWIW.
+
:::De we want it to be [[ISFDB:Research Assistance]] to [[Research Assistance]]? The other can be a redirect. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 17:54, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
[https://www.akmulford.com The author's site] also uses the "A. K." form (mostly - the value in the HTML title tag is AK"), but I suspect that may be a recent change to match the new editions.
+
:::: Probably [[ISFDB:Research Assistance]] in order to stay consistent with the majority of other "major" pages. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 18:05, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
My understanding of the rules is that we try to follow the author's preference regarding how their initials are recorded.  However, I don't ever recall seeing variant names to cover both "A. B. C." and "ABC" forms, so I assume the rules are just to standardize on one form or the other?  If that's correct, does anyone object to switching this author from "AK Mulford" to "A. K. Mulford", updating the titles and pubs accordingly, and adding appropriate notes to document when/where the older form was used?  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 18:16, 8 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::::: Since there are no objections, please feel free to go ahead and move [[ISFDB:Verification requests]] to [[ISFDB:Research Assistance]] when you get a chance. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 13:45, 6 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
: In the absence of any objections over the past ~2 weeks, I just went to update the author's name, but I'd forgotten that this is something that requires moderator privs :-(  I've added an author note re. the name variants, but could a moderator do the honours please?  Once the name has been updated, I'll go through all the old/existing pubs and add pub notes about the form of the name used on them, and then start on adding all the new ones.  Thanks [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 11:55, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::::::Moved! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 11:31, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::Once there's an entry for "A. K. Mulford", we can variant those under "AK Mulford" to the "A. K. Mulford" name. Right now, there are no entries for any books under "A. K. Mulford", so the name shouldn't be changed right now. The canonical name is always the one with the most entries. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:37, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
::: There are a couple of different but related issues here:
 
−
::: 1. There's nothing in the database for "A. K. Mulford" yet because I was waiting on any feedback here before entering them, to avoid unnecessary extra work.  The 2 "AK Mulford" titles currently in the database have already been reissued as tradpub ebooks under the "A. K. Mulford" name, and per the article I linked, there are another 6-8 titles contracted, all of which will presumably be under the latter name.  As such, right it's a "tie" which name is in wider use, but it won't be long before "A. K. Mulford" will be much more widely used.
 
−
::: 2. I ended up hacking up a quick-and-dirty report [*], and (bugs permitting) there are no author entries in the database where we have both "J Doe"/"J. Doe" or "ABC Doe"/"A. B. C. Doe" canonical and pseudonym entries for different forms of starting initials.  (There are a handful for the surname as just an initial, and one for a middle initial FWIW.)  Whether this lack of variant entries for starting initials is just a coincidence, or some rule/standard that I hadn't seen formally defined, was again something I was hoping to get feedback on here.  If it is indeed OK to have both "AK Mulford" and "A. K. Mulford" entries, then that makes this point moot, but given the lack of precedent, I'd prefer to have the nod that it is OK.
 
−
::: [* - which as is the way of things, has identified a few other unrelated author records in the database that needed cleaning up...] [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 19:06, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Haunters of the Dark ==
+
::::::: Thanks! I have updated the main Wiki page and everything looks good. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 11:37, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::::::: The Description up in the panel at the top of all the community boards still say "Help with bibliographic, image credit, and other questions which require a physical check of the work in question.". [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 11:49, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?67364; I made a minor edit for this, replacing Amazon "P" image with updated image, but that led to me noticing that while ISFDB says 11/2004, OL says 9/25/2007, goodreads.com says 12/1/2007, and Amazon says 12/1/2007 or 5/25/2008 depending on which country it's from. There doesn't seem to be any OCLC or LCCN for this, although there is a non-working OCLC link on the OL page, and I can't find any copies on eBay. I have a feeling it's vaporware, but can't be sure. So does anyone know more? EDIT: I just found this, https://www.philipjosefarmer.com/PJFnew-200710.htm, which complains about the multiple date changes. I'm almost positive this was never published now. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:44, 9 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::::::::: Updated, thanks! The new wording is "Help with bibliographic projects", which is a bit bland and non-specific, but I couldn't think of a better way to summarize the purpose of the new board. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:49, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
: Cover change was approved today, so just bumping this up so someone can chime in and this likely non-existent book can be deleted (which begs the question of why I was so dumb as to replace a cover for a book that probably will be gone soon, but whatever). EDIT: I just realized it won't be deleted, the date will just be changed to unpublished, so the image will remain. Go me. --[[User:Username|Username]] 14:33, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Jim/James Burns ==
  
−
::I've changed it to unpublished status. Thanks for digging into this one. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 17:29, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
I just added a link and did a few other things for the 33rd YBSF edition, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2012677, and searched for others with James Burns as cover artist; only 34th came up, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2209443, but as can be seen PV of TP and HC entered it differently. So maybe consensus about which is "better" should be reached and credits merged. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:45, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
::: OK. I think the notes you wrote didn't turn out the way you wanted, though. --[[User:Username|Username]] 17:55, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Lovecraft Collaborations Book ==
−
::::True, they did not. That's what I get for trying to use wiki markup instead of html. Fixed. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:42, 16 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Foundation's Edge ==
+
I was starting to add the audio book edition of {{T|2610309|this title}} and discovered that publisher has provided a copy of the pdf version of the book.  While we don't have a record for the pdf (it has a different ISBN than the eBook), there are several discrepancies between it and our records.  I also have questions other questions about how this title is reflected and while none of the publications are primarily verified, there have been several editors who have touched these records.  I thought I'd reach out for comments before proceeding with changes.
 +
# We have the title as an ANTHOLOGY and list both the editor and Lovecraft. All the stories are credited to Lovecraft with various co-authors.  Personally, I feel that these sorts of collection of collaborations are better typed as COLLECTION as was done with {{T|34634|this title}}.
 +
# The title page lists the credits as "By H.P. Lovecraft" over "Edited and Annotated by Finn J.D. John" in smaller type.  We have both names in the author field.  Since we have this as an ANTHOLOGY, this labels them both as "Editors".  Lovecraft clearly didn't edit this book.  As I feel this should be listed as a COLLECTION, I also feel that only Lovecraft should be listed in the author field.  If the consensus is that it's an ANTHOLOGY, then we only list John.
 +
# The stories are listed with both Lovecraft and his co-author on their title pages, whereas we have them all listed by the collaborating author alone.  So I intend to swap out which variant of these titles is included.  I don't thin this is controversial.
 +
# There is a short essay before each section giving biographical details of each co-author.  I intend to add these.  While not signed, I think we can safely attribute them to John by virtue of his annotation credit.
 +
#The PDF lists 5 different formats each with their own ISBN including the "Interactive PDF".  Should we add the PDF as a separate title record, or should the PDF ISBN be added in the notes for the {{P|765112|ebook}} edition?  I'll also note, that my understanding is that we do list page numbers for pdfs whereas we do not for ebooks.
 +
# I'm fairly comfortable that these changes should apply to the 2018 publications based on the 2018 pdf.  I'm less certain whether I should make changes to the 2017 edition, or the 2019 omnibus, i.e should we assume the story credits and biographical essays are present in the other editions not listed in the pdf?
 +
# I assume adding a note about the PDF being included with the audio book is sufficient rather than duplicating the contents showing the story exists twice (audio and text).
 +
I'd appreciate other's thoughts on these questions.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:29, 28 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5337513; There's already an OCLC link here, but I added another one which shows Whispers Press info at bottom while it's Doubleday up top. I have a feeling this will be rejected, so I'm mentioning it here so someone can look at it and accept or reject quickly. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:21, 9 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:My mild opinion is that both this and the example you cited should be ANTHOLOGY.  They are different from the case where most of the stories are written by Lovecraft alone, with one or two written by him and someone else.  While both are Locvecraft-centric, they are primarily showcasing the work of a wide variety of authors. I agree with everything else in your list. --[[User:MartyD|MartyD]] ([[User talk:MartyD|talk]]) 19:55, 31 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::I'm afraid I would still prefer these as COLLECTIONs. If we were to convert them to ANTHOLOGY, we would need to list the editor as the sole author which would move these collections out of Lovecraft's bibliography.  I had only cited one example, but there are many similar collections, many of which are verified.  For example, see which collections containing the story {{T|1035316|The Green Meadow}}.  It is contained in two true anthologies.  Aside from the 4 editions of the title we're discussing, there is but one other {{P|848648|publication} typed as a ANTHOLOGY. All other publications were entered as COLLECTION or OMNIBUS.  In some of these cases, we don't necessarily have the editor and would likely need to move these titles to the uncredited bibliography page instead of Lovecraft's.  {{P|280465|Beyond the Wall of Sleep}} is another interesting example.  There about 10 "collaborations" in this collection which is a minority, but it is more than one or two stories. If we decide to type these sorts of books as ANTHOLOGY, where would we draw that line?  My last point is that it appears to me that these books are published to appear as Lovecraft collections with his name listed more prominently than any editors (if they are listed at all).  If we are to reclassify these publication, I'd like to hear from some of the other verifiers.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:23, 1 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::Since there have been no further responses to this, and the one objection was "mild", I'm going to proceed with these changes.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 12:34, 13 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Blumlein ==
+
== "Publication Title-Reference Title Mismatches" enhanced ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?31280; I made an edit for something by Michael Blumlein recently, and I also found this, [https://pictures.abebooks.com/inventory/30913178304.jpg], which raises a few questions; the pub. date is later than what's on ISFDB, the page count is the same as the much later Dell edition, but not either Scream/Press edition, the artist is Timothy, not T.M. (although online photos suggest he's credited as T.M. in the book), and there's a Timothy Caldwell on ISFDB with 1 cover art credit a few years later and a Timothy M. Caldwell who wrote some poems around the same time as the artist was active, so they may all be the same person, although T.M. Caldwell's record includes a few much later short stories, so maybe that's a different Caldwell (EDIT: It was). Most odd, however, is the mention of Blumlein's forthcoming second novel, A Native Land; there is literally ZERO mention of him ever working on or publishing a book with that title online. I was never a fan of his even back 30-35 years ago when I read any and every horror book I could find, his work being much too intellectual for me, but I'm sure there are fans of his here who know more and may add or fix some stuff in his record. --[[User:Username|Username]] 10:55, 10 June 2022 (EDT)
+
As per the recent Rules and Standards discussion, the cleanup report "Publication Title-Reference Title Mismatches" has been enhanced to require an exact match between publication titles and their reference title records' titles. New data will become available tomorrow morning.
  
−
: I'd guess the date of publication (Sep. '90) was taken from Amazon, where it's still stated. But that's the trouble of not documenting in the notes where the date is from. I'd think it'd be safe to change the date of publication according to your found source. Anyone disagreeing?
+
We are looking at around 10,000 mismatches, so the cleanup effort will be significant, especially considering the fact that many affected publication records have been primary-verified. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:07, 4 April 2024 (EDT)
−
: On Caldwell: I also do think the three are one and the same: all publications seem to belong to the 'slipstream' scene. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:17, 10 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
:: I hope the date's changed, because it seems more likely a horror collection would be published close to Halloween. Also, I've found exactly one (1) other mention of A Native Land, https://archive.org/details/The_New_York_Review_Of_Science_Fiction_027_1990-11, where the review of The Brains of Rats notes that title as being mentioned in the author's note. So whether he scrapped it or one of his later novels is that work under a different title is a mystery. --[[User:Username|Username]] 13:43, 10 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Canonical name change Charles Eugene Anderson from Chuck Anderson ==
  
−
== Stac(e)y Jaine McIntosh 2020 story "Lunar" ==
+
Any objections to making [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?273059 Charles Eugene Anderson] the canonical name and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?108390 Chuck Anderson] the alternate?
 +
*17 titles credited to Charles Eugene Anderson.
 +
*09 titles credited to Chuck Anderson.
 +
*01 title has publications credited to each.
 +
Thanks, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 07:51, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
: Go ahead, obvious case where the switch can/need to happen [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 09:28, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:: Hearing no objections, done. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 18:45, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
[http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?346374 Stacy Jaine McIntosh] has a single story "Lunar" from 2020 to their name.  This is surely the same person as [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?253947 Stacey Jaine McIntosh], who has a story of the same name and year in their bibliography.  However, the first [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3040628 Lunar] story has no pubs listed for it, so I'm slightly perplexed how it exists.  I have a vague recollection of seeing and reporting something similar before, and being told it was due to being reviewed, but [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/adv_search_results.cgi?USE_1=title_ttype&O_1=exact&TERM_1=REVIEW&C=AND&USE_2=reviewee&O_2=exact&TERM_2=Stacy+Jaine+McIntosh&USE_3=title_title&O_3=exact&TERM_3=&USE_4=title_title&O_4=exact&TERM_4=&USE_5=title_title&O_5=exact&TERM_5=&USE_6=title_title&O_6=exact&TERM_6=&USE_7=title_title&O_7=exact&TERM_7=&USE_8=title_title&O_8=exact&TERM_8=&USE_9=title_title&O_9=exact&TERM_9=&USE_10=title_title&O_10=exact&TERM_10=&ORDERBY=title_title&ACTION=query&START=0&TYPE=Title I can't see that that is the case here?]  As such, I'm not sure if this is a case for merging/deleting or varianting the relevant records.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 08:38, 12 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== David (B.) Mattingly ==
  
−
:This usually does happen when you have or create a parent title and then relate the variant title to a different parent: the former parent has no publications anymore when there weren't any under it. So, it does seem the derelict title can be safely deleted. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:10, 12 June 2022 (EDT)
+
Looking through the works credited to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?37498 Mattingly], it seems to me that "David Mattingly" is the most common (by far), and has been for a long time. There are so many entries, though, this opinion is based only on quickly scanning through the list. Is there a way to get a count of each through database queries? I don't think any of the other aliases are used in a significant amount. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 17:58, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
: Just with search and a browser search: 510 with the name David Mattingly; 747 under the canonical; 198 of these 747 of them are "only as by David Mattingly". Just based on that, how we record the names from secondary sources for artists and the fact that the new ones are always without the B. when we get access to the book, I would say it is time to flip the names. I am not volunteering to do it though. :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 18:58, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
:: Thanks.  In the absence of any other responses, I've now deleted the title record that had no pubs, and it looks like the offending author record has also been removed, as hoped/expected.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 11:47, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
+
(after edit conflict)
  
−
== Sirius Confusion ==
+
: The easiest way that I can think of is to run a few Advanced Title Searches using "Author's Name is exactly David Mattingly". Make sure to click "Get Count" instead of "Get Results". Here are the results that I see:
 +
:* David B. Mattingly: 747
 +
:* David Mattingly: 510
 +
:* Dave Mattingly: 12
 +
:* D. B. Mattingly: 7
 +
:* Dave Maddingly: 1
 +
:* D. Matingly: 1
 +
:* Mattingly: 2
 +
:* David Burroughs Mattingly: 1
 +
: Since {{A|David B. Mattingly}} is the current canonical name, it's over-represented. Every "David Mattingly" COVERART/INTERIORART title has a "David B. Mattingly" parent title, but only some of the latter have actual publications associated with them. Firefox tells me that the Summary Bibliography page has:
 +
:* 79 instances of "also appeared"
 +
:* 8 instances of "also as"
 +
:* 132 instances of "only appeared"
 +
:* 207 instances of "only as"
 +
: What this means is that 339 canonical titles have only appeared under an alternate name. Another 87 have been credited at least 2 different ways. 339+87-12-7-1-1-2 is 403, which, unless I am missing something, gives us a rough count. I'd need to run database queries to get a better idea, but it looks like "David Mattingly" is slightly ahead of "David B. Mattingly".
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubs_not_in_series.cgi?28514; Do those recent zines really have any connection to the much earlier Sirius publisher? --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:41, 12 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: P.S. Perhaps what we need is a new menu options to generate this kind of data on demand. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 19:03, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== "Reviews" section of the Title page rewritten ==
+
::That would be cool. Another cool thing would be if we could figure out a way to programatically automate the process of changing canonical names (maybe have a side menu link that appears whenever viewing an author entry). The link would take you to a page where you'd enter the current author ID and the target author ID. We'd have to account for variants on the author name, title variants, and translations (and probably a lot of other things that I'm not thinking of off the top of my head). For situations like this, it would save tons of time in the long run. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:37, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
The software that displays the "Reviews" section on the Title page has been rewritten and upgraded to handle the 4 permutations that reviews can create:
+
::: This functionality has been requested a couple of times. Unfortunately, it would be very difficult to implement in a way that would guarantee completeness and accuracy. Not only would the software need to change the way VTs and Alternate Names are configured, but it would also need to change dates (for some titles) and Notes.
 +
::: Perhaps we could implement something less ambitious but still useful. For example, "Undo all Variants for This Author"? [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:22, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::Yeah, it's definitely very complex. I like the "Undo all Variants for This Author" idea, though. What about a "swap canonical authors" option on individual titles? That would be a lot less complex and allow for easier catching of potential issues.  ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:48, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
* reviews of the displayed title
+
::::: I don't see the benefit of an "Undo all Variants for This Author" tool. A variant title only needs to be broken if both the canonical title and the variant tiles have publications attributed. If all the publication(s) are associated with the variant title, a simple merge is the best option. Not only does it save a step by not having to delete the old canonical, but it saves all the information. Some data is only stored in the "parent title", plus any edit history. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:38, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
−
* reviews of the displayed title's VTs
 
−
* VTs of reviews of the displayed title
 
−
* VTs of reviews of VTs of the displayed title
 
  
−
The software has also been modified to display the alternate names of the authors of reprints and their languages. If you come across any issues, please post the affected URL(s) here. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 19:06, 12 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::I'm slowly working through all of them. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 19:42, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Edit History bug fixed; submissions-related column headers clarified ==
+
:::I have completed moving all the records to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?1814 David Mattingly]. I think someone else was moving them, too, so thanks to them, too. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 19:32, 22 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
The Edit History bug [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#Edit_History_Needs_Editing reported on June 6] has been fixed.
+
:::: Joe, thanks for sorting this out. I noticed [[User:Zapp|Zapp]] was helping you. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 19:38, 22 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
In addition, some column headers in submissions-related tables have been clarified. "Moderator" has been changed to "Reviewer" to account for self-approvers. "Time Reviewed" is now "Time Approved" or "Time Rejected" depending on the Web page. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 11:01, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Server downtime -- 2024-04-06 at 2pm ==
  
−
== C. Cole ? ==
+
The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance between 2:00pm and 2:10pm. Both the database side and the Wiki side will be unavailable. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 13:28, 6 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=c.+cole&type=Name; The 3 C. Cole (or Coles) Phillips (or Phllips) names probably need merging; same bio data is repeated between records. --[[User:Username|Username]] 11:59, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
: The server is back up. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:05, 6 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:Alternate names created. Thanks for finding. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 18:09, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== WatchDate changed to WatchPrePub ==
+
== The Prequel Trilogy ==
  
−
As per {{FR|1506}}, "Generalize WatchDate to be WatchPrePub", the ISFDB template "WatchDate" has been retired. All of its occurrences in publication notes have been replaced with "WatchPrePub|Publication date". [[Help:Using Templates and HTML in Note Fields]] has been updated.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934500; I have a question about the publisher of this 2007 Star Wars omnibus; there is no mention of Ballantine in the book so it should be similar to the last one on this list, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=del+rey&type=Publisher, but without the SFBC. Should I change publisher to LucasBooks / Del Rey? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:30, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934540; I changed publisher on this one since they were still with Ballantine in 2000. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:22, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934546; Another change from 2005 when they were still together. I don't see any cover artist credited that someone entered here or any sign of the excerpt mentioned on the book's copyright page. EDIT: One of the earlier editions has a note here saying they got artist from his site. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:31, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934585; Another one from 2006; this one actually has a PV so I'll leave them a message. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:12, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::And a final one, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934586, 2005 HC, PV is gone so no need for a note. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:18, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Please note that the associated cleanup report is currently empty. An updated list will become available on Sunday morning when the weekly reports run. Of course, you can always use Advanced Publication Search to look for "WatchPrePub" in the Notes field. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 15:59, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Semaphore ==
  
−
: Thanks. I've tagged [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?895648 a pub] which still has a placeholder cover, so I'll check the report at the weekend to verify it shows up. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 17:55, 13 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.lulu.com/fr/search?contributor=Marie+Hodgkinson; While adding PDF story links from Tartarus Press at their old freepages.pavilion.net site the last one I linked was a story by Rebecca Lloyd that was entered here as original to her 2014 collection but was actually published in 2007 in a magazine called Semaphore, no issues of which are on ISFDB, but I found that Lulu page above so anyone who likes entering magazines can add a lot from that. The editor has a page here, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?143960. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:41, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::I've updated that one with the final cover per the distributor. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:25, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/semaphoremagazine.com; PDF of some (all?) issues at this site. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:50, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::Looks like it has archived PDFs of all but the last issue (issue 15) from June 2011. I'll work on these. The first issue is now [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?1002803 here]. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:32, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::Okay, I think they're [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?73131 all entered] (15 issues in total). I also found a [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?73148 couple anthologies] collecting the stories and poems voted best by readers of the magazine. I don't know if there were more than the two anthologies. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 13:33, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::Excellent. Only thing I think you forgot is June 2008's cover artist. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 14:07, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::::Fixed! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 14:11, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Magazine Search bug fixed ==
+
== David Ireland ==
  
−
{{Bug|637}}, "Magazine Search", has been fixed. If you come across unexpected behavior, please post your findings here. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 20:31, 14 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?3106; I just made edits adding the Allen Lane HC of City of Women and adding a link to Mortal Fire where the 1982 short story is from and noticed that the Wiki page makes no mention of any art so I think the famed Australian novelist and the artist are 2 different people. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:28, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Macauley ==
+
== Canonical name change Jody A. Lee from Jody Lee ==
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=macauley&type=Publisher; 12 in one, 26 in the other, none PV, same website linked in both. --[[User:Username|Username]] 20:00, 15 June 2022 (EDT)
+
The [https://www.jodylee.org/ artist's website] and [https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/lee_jody_a SFE] use Jody A. Lee. While the majority of her early work was credited to 'Jody Lee', the shift to 'Jody A. Lee' is clear. Here are the current statistics.
 +
*111 titles credited to Jody A. Lee.
 +
*73 titles credited to Jody Lee.
 +
*26 titles hasve publications credited to each.
 +
Are there any objections to making [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?25820 Jody A. Lee] the canonical name and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?25602 Jody Lee] the alternate? [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 14:24, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Sounds good to me. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:41, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Cover art attributions, and Bob Haberfield ==
+
:: No objections here. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:47, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Surveying the cover art attributed on ISFDB to [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?69881 Bob Haberfield], I found the following anomalies:
+
::: Hearing no objections, done. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 17:47, 15 April 2024 (EDT)
−
Seven attributions (for different art) based on bing.com searches. Three were based on Flickr, and one on a bookseller's opinion at abebooks.com.<br>
+
::::https://ixgallery.com/artists/jodylee/; Here's her photo in case someone wants to upload it to the wiki. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:58, 15 April 2024 (EDT)
−
Though I think that all of these covers are actually Haberfield's work, I think we should be a bit more critical. Guesses should not be presented as facts.<br>
+
:::::{{done}}Done! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:28, 17 April 2024 (EDT)
−
On the other hand, there are good sources for attributing most of these covers to Haberfield:<br>
 
−
1) Michael Moorcock writes at the [https://www.multiverse.org/forum/q-a/q-a-%E2%97%A6-questions-for-mike-news/2070-early-mayflower-paperback-covers#post63542 multiverse.org] forum:
 
−
"Actually I picked Bob Haberfield for the first Mayflower covers and he did my covers for quite a long time until he joined an asram and stopped doing commercial work."<br>
 
−
Q: "The currently burning question remains, for me: who did the first few Mayflower photocollage covers; the original Stealer of Souls (red & green eye), Stormbringer (gritted teeth in stormy sky), and the first covers of the Runestaff series?"<br>
 
−
Moorcock: "All those covers, Guy, were done by Haberfield. You'll find some of his photomontages in New Worlds, as well."<br>
 
−
I'm going to interpret Moorcock's answers as a statement that all Moorcock's [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubs_not_in_series.cgi?122 Mayflower] covers for the period 1968-1976 are by Bob Haberfield. Stylistically, it also makes sense. With one exception, [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?290330 The Black Corridor] had a gadget photo cover. And then in 1977, there appeared a Rodney Matthews cover, ending Haberfield's reign.<br>
 
−
2) Haberfield showed 32 images of (mostly) cover art on a site which disappeared years ago, but can partly still be found at [https://web.archive.org/web/20120615202238/http://www.firefrogproductions.co.uk/bobs%20book%20covers/index.html archive.org]. Alas, the next two pages have no images. But I've made a reconstruction using saved images and uploaded the second page [http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/images/1/13/Haberfield_16-30b.jpg here]. The third page had only two currently irrelevant images.<br>
 
−
I intend to refer to this statement for quite a few cover art credit changes and/or note modifications, so add your comments here please. [[User:Horzel|Horzel]] 05:36, 17 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Changing Canonical name to Ishmael A. Soledad from Ishmael Soledad ==
+
== ISBN hyphenation changed ==
  
−
Any objections to making [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?273993 Ishmael A. Soledad] the canonical name and [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?267298 Ishmael Soledad] the alternate? Even his [https://twitter.com/ishmael_soledad twitter] page uses the middle initial. Thanks, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 11:47, 17 June 2022 (EDT)
+
As I am sure most of you know, different publishers' ISBNs are hyphenated differently. Possible permutations include:
−
: None noted; Done [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 11:42, 22 June 2022 (EDT)
+
* 978-1-64973-127-2
 +
* 978-1-9821-9317-1
 +
* 979-8-200-29585-2
 +
* 979-10-281-0150-3
 +
* 979-8-9856919-6-2
  
−
== Weinkauf ==
+
"The International ISBN Agency" maintains [https://www.isbn-international.org/range_file_generation a list of rules] which determine in which positions hyphens are supposed to appear. Almost all publishers follow them, although there have been some exceptions, notably Tor prior to 2007.
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=weinkauf&type=Name; Same person? --[[User:Username|Username]] 15:56, 17 June 2022 (EDT)
+
When ISFDB 2.0 was developed in 2004-2006, the rules -- as they existed back then -- were manually incorporated in the ISFDB software. What we didn't realize at the time was how complex the rules would become over the course of the following 20 years. As the number of publishers (and self-publishers) exploded, the International ISBN Agency had to create more and more rules to accommodate the growth and the ISBN handling part of the ISFDB software, which was last updated in 2010, fell hopelessly behind. The result was that many ISBNs were hyphenated incorrectly when displayed on ISFDB pages.
  
−
== Tombs of Gold ==
+
Earlier today I deployed a fairly big patch which changed the way the ISFDB software determines where hyphens are displayed. We now follow the International ISBN Agency's current rules to the letter. There is also a way to update our rules programmatically whenever the Agency rolls out new rules. I expect that we will be doing it a few times a year, which will let us stay more or less in sync with the Agency. (We also have special exceptions for Tor and the other 2 publishers which didn't follow the rules prior to 2007.)
  
−
https://archive.org/details/DonSturdyInTheTombsOfGold/appleton-v-don-1925-BK000556/; All of the Tarzan books published by Grosset and Dunlap's division, Madison Square, have no covers here, but I found one on Amazon, then found another on Archive.org, Golden Lion, from an account devoted to JEWELRY. While doing so I saw another book, Don Sturdy in the Tombs of Gold, which looks like it belongs here, but there's only 2 Don Sturdy books here and that isn't one of them. So maybe someone knows why that is; maybe the mummies are fake like in Scooby-Doo? Or maybe it's just that nobody ever decided to enter it. --[[User:Username|Username]] 09:36, 18 June 2022 (EDT)
+
As always, if you come across any issues with this software change, please let me know. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 14:07, 16 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Thanks for all your hard work behind the scenes on stuff like this. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 15:03, 16 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Queefrotica ==
+
:: To quote Damon Knight, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_(The_Twilight_Zone) I am here to serve man!] :-) {{unsigned|Ahasuerus}}
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?452132; 3 Germans PV this, and today I came across a highly embarrassing book here which includes words like "Whispering Gash"; the point is that the cover is credited to Elena Helfreicht (I added that info plus the cover image), not Helfrecht as in the book above, which seems to have no Amazon Look Inside but typing artist's name and book's ISBN on Google got exactly 1 hit from one of those highly suspect sites where they dump e-books; however, it does seem to prove that it is actually Helfrecht in Chiang's book, and her website also says Helfrecht. Judging by her name I assume she's German, so maybe PV will know whether she worked on any other books. Also, does Chiang's book have an English-language edition not entered here or was it German-only? --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:02, 18 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Publication Title Without a Related Title Record ==
  
−
== The Illustrated Dracula ==
+
I am about to create a new pub record under [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1034 That Hideous Strength] by C. S. Lewis.  There is a subtitle on the title page so the full, correct publication title is: <i>That Hideous Strength: A Modern Fairy-Tale for Grown-Ups</i>. Looking at the title record I see there are five publications (three of which have been PVd) with this subtitle. However, they do not have a related title record "That Hideous Strength: A Modern Fairy-Tale for Grown-Ups" and consequently there is no varianting. Is this correct and if so why? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:42, 17 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
: It is not correct. The publication title should match the reference title. [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/cleanup_report.cgi?93 This report] highlights 1000 exceptions each day (I don't know the selection algorithm). First determine, subtitle or no subtitle, which should be the canonical? It's also a good idea to review the publications and make sure they are recorded correctly. Whichever you determine, it will be a multi-step edit. Ask if you have questions.  If I'm online, ping me and I'll approve as you submit. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 20:14, 17 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::You have confirmed my suspicions. The cleanup report to which you refer does not include "That Hideous Strength" so I guess it's because it is limited to 1000 records. I'm happy to clean up this title. I'm satisfied that "That Hideous Strength" (without subtitle) is the more appropriate canonical title. I have inspected the five pub records with the subtitle and each looks internally consistent. Three of these have PVs. Do I need to consult with PVs or can this sort of housekeeping be performed without PVs' consent? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 12:42, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::: It's not necessary to contact the PV's. You're merely correcting the reference title. I know you intend to perform all the steps and will indicate such in the note to moderator. I noticed this title wasn't on the report. Perhaps [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] will chime in and explain the algorithm determining which titles to report. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:45, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::First step submitted: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5944215 Unmerge titles]. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 16:26, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::::Approved, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 16:33, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::::Step 2 submitted: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5944273 merge the 5 reference titles of the subtitled version]. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 17:12, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Approved, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 17:17, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Step 3 submitted: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5944284 make subtitled version a variant of canonical title].
 +
::::::::Think that's it for the pubs but I can see there's more work to do:
 +
::::::::A) These two pubs: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?900677 Macmillan 1966] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?262760 Macmillan 1977] have the variant title but the same canonical coverart title records. So I'm pretty sure these need to be changed. The only way I can see to do this involves five more edits:
 +
::::::::Step 4) edit one of the pubs (1966, say) and create a second coverart record under the variant title
 +
::::::::Step 5) variant the coverart record
 +
::::::::Step 6) import the variant coverart record to the 1977 pub
 +
::::::::Step 7) remove the canonical coverart record from the 1966 pub
 +
::::::::Step 8) remove the canonical coverart record from the 1977 pub
 +
::::::::Is there a more efficient way to do this?
 +
::::::::B) Those same two pubs contain an essay [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?965984 Preface (That Hideous Strength)] which has a disambiguator under the canonical title. Does the disambiguator have to be changed to the variant title. I'm unsure about this because the phrase is only a disambiguator; it's not actually part of the title of the essay. Can you please advise.
 +
::::::::My goodness, this is long-winded! [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:11, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1739936; This review points to a 30-years-later book with the same title, but the book it's supposed to be linked to, from Manor Books with an intro by C. Lee, just had a cover uploaded to the Wiki, so that might need looking at to get everything connected where they should be. --[[User:Username|Username]] 08:38, 19 June 2022 (EDT)
+
(unindent)<br>
 +
Submit two edits for each pub. (All four at once)
 +
*Submission 1 - Add the new variant titles, COVERART and preface.
 +
*Submission 2 - Remove the canonicals.
 +
Since these submissions will generate change notices, reference this conversation in the note to moderator.
 +
After I approve all four, I'll perform the two merges. You will just need to link the variants. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 18:48, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Burroughs Length ==
+
::Yes, I see where you're going with this. About the same number of edits but fewer Wait For Approval stages. Four edits submitted. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 07:12, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::Approved, [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 07:22, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?184537; I'm afraid to ask about this, knowing how angry people can get about determining lengths, but none of the page counts for the 3 novels in this book are long enough for a novel. Abridged, or some other explanation? The original 1924 edition is nearly 200 pages longer. No Archive copy of this edition that I can see, and all 3 PV are long-gone. --[[User:Username|Username]] 12:41, 19 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::::Two Make Variants submitted. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 07:52, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:The [https://www.worldcat.org/title/land-that-time-forgot-a-trilogy/oclc/1447687 OCLC entry] lists 141 copies in the United States (and 1 in Australia). Maybe someone has access to one of these libraries. (P.S. none in Canada or near me) ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] 15:34, 19 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Entering Correct Short Stories by Luigi Pirandello ==
+
:::::I've checked all the affected records and everything looks good to me apart from one error that must have been present before we started the cleanup: the date of the canonical title of the Preface ([https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5944959 correction submitted]). So I think we've finally reached the end. If there's anything I've missed, let me know. Many thanks for all your assistance with this John. Much appreciated. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 16:34, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Dirk_P_Broer#Pirandello.27s_Short_Stories; As it says, I stumbled on the fact that the edition entered here was another one entirely. Judging by the response he ain't gonna fix what he broke, so if anyone wants to bother, go ahead. I don't enter translated stories, having enough trouble dealing with English. --[[User:Username|Username]] 19:58, 19 June 2022 (EDT)
+
::::::Fortunately, there is a scan of the first edition in the internet archive. I added the preface and a link to the scan [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?87759 here]. As you know, the canonical is dated to the first appearance, even if it is as a variant. I put your submission on hold, assuming you would rather cancel than have me reject it. I enjoyed working on this with you. Ping me anytime. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 18:43, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Irving Heine - (possibly) questioned pseudonym ==
+
:::::::Oh, that's interesting. It hadn't occurred to me to look for an archive of the first ed because I had looked in Currey who states the following regarding the first Pan pb (1955): 'adds new author's "preface"'. So it's possible that there are two different prefaces. This requires more research which I don't have time to do now and may not have the resources anyway. But it's fine to leave the ISFDb records as they are for now; they are all self consistent. I have cancelled my submission. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 04:46, 20 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
SFE have just added [https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/heine_irving a page for "Irving Heine"] and state "Unidentified and perhaps pseudonymous author (probably UK), long thought to be one of the many Pseudonyms of Denis Hughes..."  [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?6970 The entry here] is an alternate name for Denis Hughes.  Given that SFE don't seem to be 100% convinced this is a pseudonym, how should this be reflected here - is adding an author note sufficient to cover this?  I've had a quick skim of the the help pages for alternate authors, and don't see anything that covers "believed to be" scenarios.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] 16:24, 20 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Trademark markings in titles ==
−
:I would use an author note and not create an alternate name. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 18:21, 20 June 2022 (EDT)
 
−
:: The question about "believed to be" pseudonyms may be open.
 
−
:: But Irving Heine is a "believed to be" that SFE4 has retracted. See my AuthorUpdate [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5349912 submission 5349912].
 
−
:: Somehow I achieved four consecutive submissions to the point, 5349912–15. --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 18:34, 26 June 2022 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Abortion Stories ==
+
My understanding is that we generally don't include symbols like ® and <sup>TM</sup> in titles because they usually indicate information ''about'' the title but are not usually ''part'' of the title. As JLaTondre [[ISFDB:Community Portal/Archive/Archive28#Shadowkeep|wrote in 2012]], "There is distinction between a title that has a '®' or 'TM' as part of the title and a title that adds the '®' or 'TM' for legal reasons." I'm asking because I ran across [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2720942 this title] that has one as part of the title, and I don't think it's actually part of the title itself, but rather added for legal reasons. This might be something we should clarify on [[Help:Screen:Title]]. This was discussed [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Rules_and_standards_discussions/Archive/Archive03#One_for_the_.22EXACT_title.2C_including_all_punctuation_and_special_characters.22_crowd way back in 2007], but I haven't yet found any more recent discussions (outside of the 2012 one I mentioned above). Thoughts? ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 12:51, 23 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:I'm the editor with the sole PV for that ebook pub. I have no objection to removing it since the trademark symbol really only applies to the "Liaden Universe" portion of the title. It is on the title page and cover that way. Clarification of the rule would be a good idea. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 13:44, 23 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?307797; Copy uploaded to Archive.org last month; rare book, WorldCat has only 2 University copies and 1 Library of Congress copy, so this is very welcome. I assume the upload was made to capitalize on the recent pro-life ruling. Anyway, that "Order of the Virgin Mothers" is a story but was reprinted in a book of plays, and looking at Google's copy it is a play. So I think they need separating. --[[User:Username|Username]] 18:34, 20 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Supermonsters ==
  
−
== Display of cover images on submission review pages tweaked ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2600565; I added Supermonsters as a variant (and subbed a better cover image) but it's from 1986 like the German parent so if anyone can find a copyright page scan which verifies the month is earlier the American cover would become the parent; I couldn't find one, but I do see on eBay that Archway released a much earlier PB in Sep. '78 with a photo of the cool American-added demon from the 1950s film Night/Curse of the Demon on the cover but the 2 sellers that showed the copyright page have editions that say 1 2 9 8 below the printing info; whether that's a number line or what I don't know but if anyone owns a copy you may want to enter yours. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:47, 24 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
The software that displays cover images on submission review pages -- New Publication, Edit Publication, Merge COVERART Titles, Variant COVERART Title, etc -- has been fixed to produce valid HTML. For cover images associated with existing publication records, you can still go to the pub record by clicking the image. If you notice anything unusual, please post your findings here. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 15:01, 23 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== Ray Daley possible death ==
  
−
== "Adult" Fantastic Fiction ==
+
It's possible [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?235688 Ray Daley] has died, though I haven't found an obituary or any other official report. He was in the hospital since the end of March due to a heart attack, and a number of people are posting condolences on an open call group on Facebook as well as on [https://www.facebook.com/raymond.daley.10/ his profile there]. I'll try to keep an eye on it and keep looking for an obituary or other official report. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 11:01, 24 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.ffadultsonly.com/; Part of fantasticfiction.com, but when I tried to replace cover here, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?875156, I got yellow warning about non-ISFDB site. Did anyone ever ask about whether this sister site could be made ISFDB-friendly like its parent? Also, while cancelling my edit, I noticed that the note about Levinson possibly being the author seems to be wrong, since it was reprinted as part of the Gardner Francis Fox Library, https://www.gardnerfrancisfoxlibrary.com/cherry-delight-27-man-who-was-god-glen-chase-gardner-f-fox. --[[User:Username|Username]] 09:43, 24 June 2022 (EDT)
+
== 日本SFファンドム賞 (Japan SF Fandom Award) entry completed ==
  
−
== They Return At Evening ==
+
It took me almost a year to do it (due to various things distracting me from it), but [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/awardtype.cgi?105 it's done]. Please let me know if anyone has any questions. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 19:51, 24 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.etsy.com/listing/771875662/first-edition-they-return-at-evening; I couldn't find a clear photo of contents page so I could enter page #'s but that Etsy link shows it's H.R., not H. Russell. His record here is a mess, with many title and name variants, some like these probably a mistake, so someone with access to most or all of his collections in their various editions could probably do a major clean-up. I left a note on the page of the editor who entered these under the wrong name, but I don't hold out much hope for him doing anything about it. EDIT: He did something about it. --[[User:Username|Username]] 21:35, 25 June 2022 (EDT)
+
:And related, I've completed entering the recipients of the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/awardtype.cgi?107 Takumi Shibano Award]. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</font>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<font color="blue">投稿</font>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</small> 20:42, 24 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Chris Curry / Tamara Thorne ==
+
== Shadow People ==
  
−
https://www.thehorrorzine.com/Fiction/July2022/TamaraThorne/TamaraThorne.html; The Horror Zine publishes online monthly and includes a story from a genre veteran but doesn't usually mention when they're reprints, which is most of the time. "The Lady Who Lost Her Head" is on ISFDB from Grue Magazine in 1987 as by Chris Curry. There's no mention that they're the same person, and so that story and those other Curry works all need variants now, right? EDIT: Thorne says 1957 but Curry says 1954; another problem. --[[User:Username|Username]] 17:29, 28 June 2022 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3356; Long-gone PV of C$ Dell ed. entered just "Jones" as artist here, one or the other should be decided on and the 2 merged. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:43, 26 April 2024 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 09:43, 26 April 2024


ISFDB Discussion Pages and Noticeboards
Before posting to this page, consider whether one of the other discussion pages or noticeboards might suit your needs better.
If you're looking for help remembering a book title, check out the resources in our FAQ.
Please also see our Help pages.
Help desk
Questions about doing a specific task, or how to correct information when the solution is not immediately obvious.
• New post • Archives 		Research Assistance
Help with bibliographic projects.
• New post • Archives 		Rules and standards
Discussions about the rules and standards, as well as questions about interpretation and application of those rules.
• New post • Rules changelog • Archives 		Community Portal
General discussion about anything not covered by the more specialized noticeboards to the left.
• New post • Archives 		Moderator noticeboard
Get the attention of moderators regarding submission questions.
 
• New post • Archives • Cancel submission
Roadmap: For the original discussion of Roadmap 2017 see this archived section. For the current implementation status, see What's New#Roadmap 2017.



Archive Quick Links
Archives of old discussions from the Community Portal.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55

Shortcuts
ISFDB:COMMPORTAL
ISFDB:CP
COMMPORTAL

Through the Budgerigar

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?925198; While adding LCCN to Jones novel Transplant I noticed this book was added not long ago and while SFE mentions it and even a cover artist there seems to be no evidence of a cover online; can anyone find one? --Username (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2024 (EST)

To the Sound of Freedom II

https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal/Archive/Archive53#To_the_Sound_of_Freedom; I came across this record again today; should it get an all-8's date? --Username (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2024 (EST)

HG Wells and His Critics

https://archive.org/search?query=wells-and-his-critics; Anyone know a way to tell which of the 3 publishers these copies are from so I can add links? The USA one has no record; maybe it was never actually published by them. --Username (talk) 22:38, 5 January 2024 (EST)

Top Science Fiction

https://archive.org/search?query=pachter-josh+top&sort=-addeddate; Someone added intros to this anthology recently, I added archived link long ago, just noticed a Spanish-language edition, La crema de la ciencia ficción, was upped to Archive.org in 2013 in case anyone fluent wants to enter that. EDIT: From the same publisher is La Crema del crimen, https://archive.org/search?query=crema-del-crimen, which includes a few stories from ISFDB judging by back cover. --Username (talk) 09:40, 6 January 2024 (EST)

I will add the Spanish one. What the heck. --MartyD (talk) 13:12, 6 January 2024 (EST)

Pachter

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1914279; Josh Pachter is credited as "with" on title page of 2015 English edition on Archive.org. Should he be added as co-author? --Username (talk) 10:21, 6 January 2024 (EST)

I didn't check the Archive.org copy, but the Look Inside on Amazon shows that "with" citation, but then on the copyright page it says the English translation is copyright 2015 Dhooge and Pachter. There is also a copyright 2014 for Dhooge and the original publisher. I interpret that to mean Pachter's role was (co-?)translator. I found Pachter's bibliography page, and this listed in the "Translations" section. But just to avoid having anything be too clear, he also has this, where he talks about previously translating another Dhooge work and being asked to "collaborate on an American version" of this one. So does that mean this isn't a translation but is actually a major revision? Dunno. Given that Pachter only takes credit for translating it, I think noting him as translator and documenting the "with" citation and the copyright statements (could throw in the Pachter site references as a bonus) should be sufficient. --MartyD (talk) 13:30, 6 January 2024 (EST)

Star Gors

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5851689; I was adding links and adding/fixing other stuff in some Gor editions, mostly UK Star PB, when I noticed an artist's signature for Players of Gor, Star edition, is on the cover but ISFDB had no credit. I tried several names I thought it could be and finally got Tony Masero who, as far as I can tell, is credited exactly once on the entire net for doing this cover, an AbeBooks/Biblio seller's description, but AbeBooks show the wrong (Daw Books) cover and Biblio's scan of the right cover is much too small to see the signature clearly. So I think I got a rare one. As can be seen here, [1], there are 5 other Star editions with no cover credit; if anyone can find a signature on any of them, beat me to it and enter them yourselves. --Username (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2024 (EST)

Night Mayor Cover Art

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?474; I noticed that the cover art for the original UK HC and the US C&G HC, which is the same, is credited to 2 different artists here. It's easy to find photos of the back flap of US online which does say design by Roy Colmer but of the several eBay sellers who offer the UK none thought to show the back flap. There are many C&G Colmer design credits online so I'm thinking Kemp did the art and US just didn't credit him, only their designer. So should we make C&G artist Jon Kemp with a note about him not being credited? --Username (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2024 (EST)

I have the UK hc of Kim Newman / The Night Mayor. The rear flap of the dust jacket states: "Jacket Illustration: Jon Kemp" and "Jacket Design: Bostock & Pollitt Ltd." Teallach (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2024 (EST)

Darrah Chavey's Passing

I was saddened to read this morning of Chavey's passing in File 770 (Number 7 in the Pixel Scroll). It was always a pleasure to work with him here and he will be missed. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:49, 11 January 2024 (EST)

I replaced link on his page with an updated one; also, while adding a link to the issue of the zine, Aurora, where his Walton essays appeared I discovered that most issues of Aurora and its predecessor Janus are on Archive.org, he PV most (all?) of them, but some have full contents while others have nothing. I imported a few poems from Robert Frazier, Steven M. Tymon, etc. but there's a ton of other book reviews and articles and stuff for anyone who's interested. --Username (talk) 19:15, 11 January 2024 (EST)
Sad news indeed. He had a heart attack a few years ago and has been less active since then, but he was only 69, so it was unexpected. Thanks for updating his User and Talk pages. I have updated user rights on his account. Ahasuerus (talk) 23:11, 12 January 2024 (EST)
Rtrace, thanks for letting us all know. I echo your sentiments. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:47, 13 January 2024 (EST)

Barn Owl

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?4296; I made an edit for City of Hermits long ago and today added some more stuff; I think this Barn Owl is not the same as the other that published much later. Ann Jungman who wrote a few of the later ones has a Wiki page where it says she founded Barn Owl in 1999 so I think the 1983 one should get a USA or California or something added to it. Whoever wrote the note about Frances Lincoln here seems to have conflated the 2 publishers; the England location probably belongs with the later publisher. --Username (talk) 08:27, 11 January 2024 (EST)

I separated out Barn Owl Books (UK) and Barn Owl Books (USA) based on the ISBN's. I also updated the notes for Barn Owl Books (UK) based on this article. When untangling publishers, the Global Register of Publishers can be of help. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:11, 13 January 2024 (EST)

Pat Frank Title

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5856366; I added cover image long ago; just came across archived copy which was there years before my edit so I'm not sure why I didn't add it back then but I did now and also added dash in title, H-Bomb, but I noticed there's another part of the title that people can't decide on. Mhhutchins entered it with 3 dots but title page has one GIANT dot while facing page has long dash and LOC/WorldCat has comma. So what's the consensus? --Username (talk) 11:44, 11 January 2024 (EST)

Sue Robinson

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?16675; I added archived link and a few other things to the HC of Amendment; author is a respected American newsperson. She should be differed from the Australian author. 1992 story in Weird Tales may be by either of them or another person since there's no bio in that issue. Also, does anyone own Amendment PB? It has nice cover art but there's no back cover photo online where I assume the artist would be credited. I see some weird blocks in the lower right, P and another letter, maybe initials or maybe just part of the art. --Username (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2024 (EST)

I separated out The Amendment to Sue Robinson (I). The author blurb for The Amendment does not align with the bio for the more prominent newspaper reporter of the same name, nor does that person list The Amendment as one of their works on their personal or faculty website. So probably two different reporters with same name. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:55, 13 January 2024 (EST)

Peter Goodfellow

http://petergoodfellow.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/18-misc2; I added a few credits for this artist but the last one has me stumped because the 1992 edition had the same cover as the last image here, http://petergoodfellow.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/18-misc2, but that was wrong because archived copy has the same Posen cover as the later printing on ISFDB. Goodfellow cover has an M for Mammoth so was it an earlier or later edition and why can't I find the original Methuen cover anywhere? --Username (talk) 12:54, 12 January 2024 (EST)

French Swastika

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5857839; French speakers, I made my usual shaky attempt at entering a foreign-language edition but I felt a book of such fame probably deserved it; after approval if anyone cares to look it over I'm sure it can be improved. I also made a follow-up edit changing date of French variant to a year earlier to match the date of this book. Also, those Feminist Press editions, https://archive.org/search?query=swastika-night&sort=-addeddate&and%5B%5D=mediatype%3A%22texts%22, are a mess, the one with the white cover matches the UK Lawrence & Wishart edition's cover but has the info of the '85 Feminist edition, while the other 2 with the face on the cover either a) have no price on the back and totally different back cover text but copyright page is the same or b) are a 4th printing from 2003, I think, with cover info on copyright page the '85 edition doesn't have and a missing back cover so no way to tell what was on there. If anyone cares to figure all that out. For some reason the French edition I mentioned above is in English according to Archive.org which is obviously wrong. --Username (talk) 18:59, 12 January 2024 (EST)

UK Omni

https://fantlab.ru/edition356174; I added archived links to the 6 volumes of Best of Omni and noticed FantLab has a photo of #6 with a UK price on it in case anyone knows more about that; maybe all 6 were published there but, if so, none are on ISFDB. --Username (talk) 10:23, 14 January 2024 (EST)

Tiret-Bognet

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=bognet&type=Name; same Verne illustrator, same book in different languages, one should be parent and maybe some of the art needs merging, Holmesd worked on many of these Verne books so he'd probably know. --Username (talk) 19:48, 14 January 2024 (EST)

Server maintenance 2024-01-15 at 3pm EST

The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance on 2024-01-15 (today) between 3pm and 3:10pm EST. The database and the Wiki will be unavailable. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2024 (EST)

The server is back up. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:06, 15 January 2024 (EST)

N. Katerli

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=katerli&type=Name; I found a huge (380+ pages) thread on FantLab's message boards with people who have died, many of which were never entered on ISFDB (not all genre, though, some footballers and other non-genre people are included, too) and while adding many dates and photos I came across Katerli; I added Wiki link, day of death, and photo to Nina's record but is that other spelling the same person? If so, some variant would probably be needed. --Username (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2024 (EST)

It's very possible, given how things get romanized from Eastern European languages. Perhaps one of our Eastern European language people can do a little digging? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:30, 17 January 2024 (EST)
Looking into it a bit myself, I'm 100% sure they are the same person. Working on connecting them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:57, 17 January 2024 (EST)
Okay, everything is here, now. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:27, 17 January 2024 (EST)
Thanks for working on her stories. I have added dates and updated the author record. Ahasuerus (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2024 (EST)

Terry Venables

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5861442; Is this the famous footballer (or soccer, as we Yanks call it)? There seem to be a lot of photos of him but some of them look like a different person so just making sure this is the right guy (he wrote some novels including Bornless Keeper which is on ISFDB but online info seems to suggest he didn't actually write any of it, Gordon Williams did). --Username (talk) 12:44, 17 January 2024 (EST)

Yes, things like that do happen: there are several titles in the database for which it is doubtful if the featured prominent author did actually write them; and so, jugig from the photo and the theme of the listed title it is the Terry Venables. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 07:38, 18 January 2024 (EST)
I can confirm that the photo in your submission is indeed of the English footballer Terry Venables. Teallach (talk) 18:42, 18 January 2024 (EST)

Alchemy Magazine

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/seriesgrid.cgi?35135; Luminist.org has a lot of magazines not on Archive.org and while replacing cover and adding link to Alchemy #2 I noticed all 3 issues have a different format, TP/unknown/pulp. Those who know about such things may want to adjust those since I'm assuming they all should be the same format. --Username (talk) 01:11, 18 January 2024 (EST)

Dinotopia Digest Novels

I just made about 20 edits for this series (https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5862661 through https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5862859) and as usual with series books it's a nightmare; I think I did as much as I could with what's available (oddly, only 1 book, Survive!, didn't have its original Random House edition entered on ISFDB so I had to scrounge up a copy on Google Books to enter info from). I think only one thing may raise questions and that's this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2230051, where an editor here in 2017 entered James Gurney as cover artist but even though he's mentioned on all copyright pages because he's the creator/owner of Dinotopia it was actually Michael Welply who did all the covers. Problem is after I removed cover credit (I didn't enter Welply because while it does say that in archived 3rd printing copy there are some 1st printings of books in the series that misspelled it as Welpley and then corrected that in later printings) I noticed the nomination for best cover in the art record. So I don't know what to make of that; was Gurney nominated because he's the creator or did someone make a mistake and not nominate the real artist, Welply? --Username (talk) 12:58, 18 January 2024 (EST)

Pratchett's Eric - converting into novella?

I did a word count on a digital version of Eric, and it's around 35000 words, i.e. clearly a novella. Comments on the title and various publication records point out how unusually short it is. Locus calls the first edition a novella, but later editions a novel. I think the novella classification is correct, but am hesitant in converting such a high-profile title. Any opinions? TerokNor (talk) 08:01, 19 January 2024 (EST)

My electronic copy contains 34.2K words, so it's a novella. That said, I wonder about Locus changing its classification after the first edition. Is there any indication that later editions may have been longer? Ahasuerus (talk) 11:43, 19 January 2024 (EST)
I can find no indication of there being different editions of the text. I noticed however that after the original illustrated edition (which was billed "A Discworld Story"), it usually says "A Discworld Novel" on the covers, so Locus might have just gone with that. TerokNor (talk) 13:59, 19 January 2024 (EST)
It sounds like it's a novella whose subtitle (but not the word count) was changed in later editions. I suggest we wait for other editors to share their thoughts before we change the type from NOVEL to SHORTFICTION. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2024 (EST)
I added an Archive.org link in a PENDING edit to The Illustrated Eric, 2010 Gollancz HC, so that may help with the counting; page count said 144 but it is actually 131. --Username (talk) 12:26, 19 January 2024 (EST)
I have approved the submission that corrected the page count and updated the Note field to indicate where the corrected page count comes from. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2024 (EST)
(Chime) Not surprised, don't care, go ahead. ../Doug H (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2024 (EST)

(unindent) Hearing no objection, I have left a message on TerokNor's Talk page asking him to proceed with the proposed changes. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:38, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Thank you. I have submitted the first edit to begin the process. TerokNor (talk) 05:19, 2 February 2024 (EST)

Late Mods

I had a thought while adding FantLab ID to a PV Brian Lumley book today; is there a way to remove the necessity of adding a note to the mod about what changes you made if the mod is deceased? There have been several mod losses recently, most of whom PV countless books, so it would save time to not have to write anything if the only PV's are ones who are not going to read those notes. --Username (talk) 12:23, 19 January 2024 (EST)

I think there are two sides to this issue.
The first one is technical, i.e. whether it would be possible to modify the software to check each primary verifier's Talk page to see if it starts with the "Deceased user" template. The short answer is "Yes, it would be possible, although it would also make our core software more closely intertwined with the Wiki software, which may become a minor nuisance during the next Wiki upgrade".
The second one is functional, i.e. whether making this kind of change would be desirable. I am not sure it would. It would save some keystrokes, but there is value to having more detailed Edit History for primary verified publications even if their verifiers are no longer available. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2024 (EST)

Moll/Head Virgin Planet

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5864268; I added cover and prices but I think publisher should be changed to Wyndham, either Star or Tandem or Target which are all on ISFDB related to Wyndham, since their logo is on front and back covers, https://www.ebay.com/itm/143869122299. The other issue is the cover is the same Charles Moll art as earlier US paperbacks; Michael Head was a designer with 1 other ISFDB credit that notes say is just a photo and a Mike Head I noted in an edit earlier today as the designer for Piatkus edition of M. Bingley's Waiting Darkness did a cover which is just a photo of a fist. So where Head credit came from for Virgin Planet I don't know but I think Moll credit should replace it. --Username (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2024 (EST)

One Hundred Years of Science Fiction

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5864915; I'm guessing this Gollancz edition is rare judging by the fact there's almost no photos of the cover online. As can be seen in my edit, notes about year (probably very old and entered by the long-gone Bluesman) are obsolete now because the year is on the title page. Also, the price was entered by Mellotronman from his copy but for a 1969 UK book the pre-decimal price should be entered so that's what I did; problem is in his note to mod in edit history he says other price is 32s, not 30. So if he's still around he may want to PV and add a note about the alternate price (I'm assuming the archived copy's flap is badly framed which is why the other price is not visible) and delete year notes and add a new one saying the date is on the title page. --Username (talk) 12:31, 20 January 2024 (EST)

It doesn't help that two different printings share the same ISBN. Mine says 1970 on the front of the title page and 'second impression 1970' on the back of the same page. The price is most definitely listed on the dust jacket as '32s', an unusual way of writing 'shillings'. The more usual way would be '32/-'. Perhaps the first impression was 30s and the second 32? Mellotronman (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2024 (EST)
OK, I think it makes sense now, copy on Archive.org is '69 1st pr. with just s-price while your 1970 2nd pr. has both s-price and pounds. So after my edit is approved you may want to clone it and enter yours with new date and prices and PV it, too. --Username (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2024 (EST)

Tom Palmer

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?98449; 2 or 3 different Palmers here; novels are by the guy pictured but the art credits are by the recently deceased (2022) famous comic artist who had a still-online site, tompalmerillustration, and a Wiki page as Tom Palmer (comics); the poem, judging by the bio at the archived Aphelion link, is by another likely American Palmer. --Username (talk) 21:58, 20 January 2024 (EST)

Lone Star Law

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?80404; Anyone think this should be deleted? --Username (talk) 17:34, 21 January 2024 (EST)

The Note field says:
  • Western story anthology. It may have some spec-fic stories, but otherwise, there's no reason for it to be in the database.
Have we been able to find this anthology's table of contents and determine whether any of the stories are SF? Ahasuerus (talk) 15:23, 24 January 2024 (EST)
I was able to look at the ToC via the Amazon Look Inside feature for the pb edition (ISBN 978-1982153069) and I don't see anything there that looks like SF. Phil (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2024 (EST)
Reading the editor's introductions to each story I noticed that two stories were called "eerie". After reading them, I can confirm that one is an unambiguous ghost story while the other one is an ambiguous "curse" story. I have added them to the publication record and updated Notes. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Recording plagiarized work

A couple of days ago File 770 reported (item 5) that "After the Flood" by John Kucera was plagiarised from another author. I've added a note to that title record, but I'm wondering whether anything else should be done, e.g. making it a variant? ErsatzCulture (talk) 01:36, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Unless the poem uses the same wording I'd think the only thing we can do is to add notes to the title (and likely the publications the plagiat was published in). Christian Stonecreek (talk) 01:32, 22 January 2024 (EST)
All three of the works "by" this author that are listed on ISFDB appear to have been plagiarized. I've added notes to the title entries as well as the publication entries. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:59, 22 January 2024 (EST)
Thanks all! ErsatzCulture (talk) 15:22, 22 January 2024 (EST)
At some point, we should probably make them variants since (in all the reports I've read) only the title were changed by the plagiarizer. Similar to this one. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:34, 22 January 2024 (EST)
I've added the variants for the two I could figure out. Still unsure who originally wrote "Summer 1993" and what the original title was. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:15, 22 January 2024 (EST)
How about this one, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2951283? --Username (talk) 16:29, 22 January 2024 (EST)
Looks like it's the same guy per a Google search that brought up this (archive), which is the same thing but under his Kucera name. Now to try to figure out who really wrote it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:06, 22 January 2024 (EST)
Some additional archive links to help us figure out all of this: Wild Word, Lothlorien Poetry Journal (archive), One Art Poetry on X, One Art Poetry, The Fictional Cafe, Sparks of Calliope (see also this page), New Reader Magazine (archive), Wendy N. Wagner loves pie on BlueSky, and I'll add more later. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:31, 22 January 2024 (EST)

(unindent) I suspect that the issue of plagiarized works is going to become harder to deal with in the near future. In the past we had to deal with two types of scenarios:

  • word-for-word reprints with the title/credits changed, usually by shady publishers or self-publishers
  • more elaborate schemes whose perpetrators plagiarized sections of other authors' works

The first type is fairly straightforward, but the second type is hard to catch. For example, volumes 29 and 33 in the Casca series were retroactively removed from the series over allegations of plagiarism in April-June 2013. It happened 3-5 years after their original publication even though the Casca fandom is very active. It's not something that we, bibliographers, can realistically identify on our own.

Over the last few months I have seen a number of reports of plagiarists using software to scrape Web-published stories, massage them using ChatGPT and put them on Amazon, e.g. this episode over the Christmas holidays. I suspect it's going to be a pain to deal with. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Bard II

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291859; Wrong cover, it has price and ISBN of earlier printing, I can't find right cover, if anyone else can, can you upload it and replace this one? --Username (talk) 10:47, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Also, The First Long Ship (or Longship on some sites) which has no cover online I can find so if it exists and someone can find it that needs uploading, too. --Username (talk) 11:03, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Galactic Central Images

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5867682; The only other site I can find that has this cover is Camelot Books; I was going to upload it when I thought of checking Philsp and found it hiding there. Is the owner(s) of that site ever going to upgrade to HTTPS? Right-click and "open image in new tab" does show the image but it still would be better if that didn't have to be done. --Username (talk) 12:43, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Last I heard, the owner said that he had no plans to upgrade to HTTPS. That said, browser vendors have been making it harder to access HTTP sites, which puts pressure on site owners to upgrade. It remains to be seen how it may affect Galactic Central in the future. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2024 (EST)

German Playboy

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubseries.cgi?757; While replacing sideways Amazon cover with better straight cover for one of these books I noticed there are 8 or 9 that don't have cover credits (last book was unpublished so likely no cover exists); since most covers in the series were originally on English-language books it's likely the missing ones were, too, so if anyone can recognize the art then artists can be entered and variants can be made. --Username (talk) 09:08, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Brian Ames Title

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?119003; I added a link to a MOTA anthology over a year ago and there's a 2002 story by Brian Ames which editors before me seemed to have trouble deciding how to enter (see extensive title edit history), eventually settling on a symbol; however, in his collection someone entered the title as "grey blob", which is what it actually looks like in the anthology. So the 2 stories are the same and should be merged but what should the title be entered as? This reminds me of that David J. Schow horror story where nobody can ever decide how to enter it and eventually settled on "scribbled graffiti" or this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?76213, but at least Oates can get away with that because most of her work is pretentious "literary" stuff, anyway. --Username (talk) 12:22, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Merged here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:39, 24 January 2024 (EST)

Duplicate finder -- NOVEL/CHAPBOOK?

The "Duplicate Finder" program, which exists in three incarnations -- one for Author pages, one for Title pages and one for Publication pages -- searches for potential duplicate titles and then lets you merge them. Its default mode of operations is "exact", which means that two (or more) titles need to have the exact same spelling as well as the same authors in order to be considered potential duplicates.

The "exact" mode also ignores unlikely title type mismatches. For example, if one title record is SHORTFICTION and another one is NOVEL, they won't be flagged as potential duplicates. However, the "exact" mode currently flags NOVEL and CHAPBOOK titles with identical titles and authors as potential duplicates. I am thinking that this is likely more harmful than useful and would like to propose that we change the behavior of the "exact" mode to skip identical NOVEL/CHAPBOOK pairs. Ideas? Ahasuerus (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2024 (EST)

I agree. As it is currently, we could accidentally merge titles incorrectly. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:40, 24 January 2024 (EST)
I also agree. --MartyD (talk) 13:21, 25 January 2024 (EST)
I use that one a lot especially when adding juvenile chapbooks to prolific authors (mainly Fixer's) - because of how Amazon has these, they rarely make it to addPubs and not having the duplicate finder highlight the previously entered novel (a lot of these are stored as novels and need conversion) makes it more likely not to see the other version on the page. So I would rather not lose it... Annie (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2024 (EST)
Let me clarify that the Duplicate Finder's "similar" mode would continue to flag NOVEL, SHORTFICTION and CHAPBOOK titles as potential duplicates after the proposed change. Would it be sufficient for Fixer-originated use cases? Ahasuerus (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2024 (EST)
But we do not have a similar mode in the pubs/titles Duplicate finder. The one I use is the one that triggers when you click on "Check for Duplicate Titles" after a Pub/Title Edit. Which I believe is "exact". If I need to go to the author page every time to run a separate similar mode check, it will add steps. Plus in some of these authors, it will highlight a lot of things which is different from the current case where it is a quick check that finds usually a single match when it does. I can make it work - but it will add to the workflow. One option may be to allow the similar as an option on pub/title duplicate finder - keep the exact as a default but allow a similar to be run with a click how we do it on author page's find duplicates? A separate click which is right there will help.
And this is not just for Fixer usecases - I've needed it when moderating as well often enough in a similar usecase - we have chapbook/novel and a new(ish) member adds the same as the other.
If the proposal is to remove it from the 'Author' exact duplicate finder only with no change for the pub/title duplicate finder, then I am fine with removing it there. But the way the proposal reads, it sounds like we are not going to show it in the default mode in either :) Annie (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2024 (EST)
Thanks for the clarification. I forgot about the fact that the versions of the Duplicate Finder software used on Publication and Title pages do not support "similar" and "aggressive" modes. If memory serves, the reason was performance -- there can be thousands of titles with "similar" spellings where "similar" is defined as an 85% overlap, the current threshold value.
It sounds like what we may need is a new Duplicate Finder mode. Something that would be the same as the "exact" mode except that it would also flag identical CHAPBOOK/NOVEL title pairs. It would be made available on all three Duplicate Finder pages.
If it sounds workable, I can look into what it would take to implement it. I suspect that it should be a fairly straightforward change, but I am not 100% sure. We'll also need to come up with an intuitive name for the new mode. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:11, 26 January 2024 (EST)
That will work for me. And if you are going to do it, we may think about throwing an anthology/collection/omnibus format mix in the same mode (same usecase essentially - especially around juveniles and novellas previously added as novels). And even poem/shortfiction? Maybe simply pull all the format discrepancy matches out from Exact (requiring a format match in it) and move them to their own type of duplicate finder mode. That will also make it less likely for someone to merge by mistake based on the standard duplicate find.Annie (talk) 12:27, 26 January 2024 (EST)
You could have "type" be an independent modifier applied to any of the three modes. Something like "Match identical types only", on by default. That would also be easy to extend to other criteria (e.g., language) in the future without having a cross product of mode choices. --MartyD (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2024 (EST)
Good point! Ahasuerus (talk) 14:43, 26 January 2024 (EST)

(unindent) After experimenting on the development server and paying closer attention when working on the Clean Authors cleanup, I think I have a better appreciation for Annie's concerns. At this point clicking "Check for Duplicate Titles" post-approval is second nature for moderators and self-approvers. When a submission adds a NOVEL publication, it's very helpful to know that a CHAPBOOK pub with the same title already exists in the database, especially if the submitter is a robot. Requiring the approving moderator to click yet another link/button would mess with the workflow.

I suppose we could change the Duplicate Finder logic to ignore CHAPBOOK/NOVEL duplicates by default, but display a yellow warning -- and a link to the more relaxed version of the Duplicate Finder -- if they exist. I am not sure it would be ideal, though. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2024 (EST)

As long as it is a link and not a need to go elsewhere or to go to the author level, that will work for me.
I'd also want to ask for the anthology/collection/omnibus and the poem/short fiction checks to be added to the chapbook/novel both for the yellow warning and the more relaxed one - both of these happen often enough to be annoying if we lose the ability to see them on the duplicate finder. Unless the plan is to leave these into the default one - in which case, we are fine. Annie (talk) 11:45, 31 January 2024 (EST)
After thinking some more about this issue, it occurs to me that there may be another way to approach this issue. Currently, most post-approval Web pages display links that let you view/edit the updated/added record or, for some submission types like Make Variant, multiple records. A few post-submission pages also link to the Duplicate Finder or other pages.
However, there is nothing preventing the post-approval software from quietly checking the status of the added/updated record(s) and displaying appropriate warnings. For example, the post-approval page for NewPubs could run the Duplicate Finder behind the scenes and then display a message like:
  • The added publication record includes a title record with the same title and authors as another title record. Use the Duplicate Finder link above to see the details.
This warning message would be easy to implement and moderators would no longer have to worry about forgetting to click "Duplicate Finder" after approving NewPub submissions. Does this sound useful?
If we choose to add this warning message, we could still decide to tweak the Duplicate Finder logic later, but I think the message should be implemented first since it changes the workflow. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:53, 2 February 2024 (EST)
That will be useful -- I am not sure how many false alerts will show up and how they will be treated (especially from the less experienced moderating users - usually the self-approvers) but other from that, any checks the software can do for me are always welcome. Annie (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2024 (EST)
OK, FR 1592, "Warning after approving NewPub submissions which create potential duplicates", has been created. We'll see how useful it will be. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2024 (EST)

Duplicate Finder enhancements -- Outcome

FR 1592 has been implemented. After approving NewPub/AddPub/ClonePub/EditPub submissions, moderators and self-approvers will now see a yellow warning and a link to the Duplicate Finder if the created/affected publication record contains one (or more) title records which have the same title(s) and author(s) as other title records in the database. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2024 (EST)

Moondust

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?22737; I added a whole bunch of edits for Rosemary Harris books and also found a PDF link for her early uncollected story "Hamlin" at Galactic Journey. Looking through their list of PDF's I noticed a Swann link and, thinking it would be a short story, I clicked it and it turned out to be the full original edition of his novel Moondust which has no copies at the usual places like Internet Archive or Luminist. I'm guessing there's more novels hiding in that list but for now I'll just ask if anyone owns the book and wouldn't mind transcribing the text on the last 2 pages and adding it to the record because those are missing in the PDF. I'm not sure what copyright rules are for a 50+-year-old book but I think a page or two would count as an excerpt and wouldn't bother anyone, right? --Username (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2024 (EST)

That can get complicated. Since this was first published in 1968 in the United States, and if it was published with a copyright notice, the copyright expires at the end of 2063 (meaning it becomes public domain on January 1, 2064). If it was published without a copyright notice, since it was published between 1964 and 1977, it is now in the public domain. See here for more details. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:27, 25 January 2024 (EST)
Looking at the PDF copy from the link you submitted, the copyright notice is very clear on the back of the title page. This means the copyright doesn't expire until 2064, so we shouldn't be linking to a pirated PDF copy. I rejected the link addition. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:30, 25 January 2024 (EST)
So does that mean that all the 330 or so Luminist.org PDF's currently linked on ISFDB are pirated, too? Because I don't think most of those are public domain; I would know because I'm the one who added most of the links. Has any mod in the history of this site ever gotten a request from anyone to remove a Luminist PDF? I'd be curious to know. When someone pirates something and uploads it, they love to add their name, fake as it may be, to the upload, similar to how computer game crackers decades ago loved to add their names to the crack, usually with some animation and music (which were sometimes better than those in the game itself); believe me, I could easily add hundreds of Internet Archive links to rare books right now except for the fact that the uploaders converted them to crap e-editions with removed page numbers. I don't see anything like that in Moondust so it's likely someone's personal copy they converted to a PDF; it's clearly the original paperback with page numbers and a bookstore sticker on the cover and everything. Since Swann died in 1976 and the last reprint as far as ISFDB (and WorldCat) say was in 1977 I doubt anyone would care if a PDF was linked to here; any serious collector would want a physical copy. My suggestion would be to un-reject it. Barring that, I'll just go ahead and make a note with the address of the PDF but not hot-linked so people know where it is but actually have to paste the URL into the address bar themselves in order to get it. --Username (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2024 (EST)
This guy, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?286234, runs the site. Looks legit to me; he even published a magazine of the same title. --Username (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2024 (EST)
The question about the status of Luminist-hosted PDF files is an interesting one. I should first note that I became aware of the Luminist Web site back in 2010 when we were given permission to link to Luminist-hosted images. I was under the impression that the files that they host were similar to Gutenberg-hosted "copyright-cleared" files, which is why I have been approving their addition for the last few years.
However, reading the copyright statement on the main Luminist page:
  • This collection may contain copyrighted material which has not been specifically authorized for our use. The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) provides for making “fair use” copies of copyrighted materials under certain conditions, including that that the reproduction is not to be used commercially or “for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” By accessing files linked to this site you are agreeing to abide by these restrictions. If you do not agree, do not download. If any copyright owner objects to our inclusion of their material on this web site, please do not harass our hosting providers; just contact us with the pertinent information. We will remove contested content promptly upon receipt of legitimate requests. Readers who wish to obtain a permanent copy of any item are encouraged to acquire one from a bookseller of their choice. Readers may contact us for assistance in locating copies for purchase.
I see that they expect their users to download PDF files for "private study, scholarship, or research" purposes and, apparently, not for permanent use. This relies on an interpretation of the "fair use" doctrine which seems a bit too stretchy to me, but I am not an expert in the field. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2024 (EST)
OK, sounds good to me, "private study" clearly can mean reading the book and since they're being linked at ISFDB that covers the scholarship/research part. Also, what I took to be a Galactic Journey magazine is just a few random pages from the webzine with a couple of essay links, 1 of which is movie-related and probably doesn't qualify, but there's some Hugo Award nomination so I guess they count; the first entry is totally blank and was actually entered by user "galacticjourney" himself with mods questioning on his page why he entered it since it's a webzine. The site is still running currently and has hundreds of essays, many of which would be suitable for entry here, I'm sure. --Username (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2024 (EST)
Let me clarify what I meant by "a bit too stretchy". The part of the Copyright Law that they cite -- "for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research" -- doesn't come from the "fair use" clause (Section 107 of the Copyright Act.) Instead it comes from Section 108, "Reproduction by libraries and archives". Section 108 is a lengthy section with a set of provisions that are completely different from the "fair use" provisions in Section 107. It's odd that the Luminist Web site cites Section 108 ("libraries and archives") language to support what they state is a Section 107 ("fair use") exception.
I should add that both Section 107 and Section 108 lawsuits can get complex and technical as we saw during Hachette v. Internet Archive in 2020-2023. My knowledge of these topics is very limited, but hopefully other editors may have more in-depth knowledge and/or relevant experience in this field. Ahasuerus (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2024 (EST)
I have started a Rules and Standards discussion to see if we can come up with unambiguous rules for linking to third party-hosted texts. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:50, 26 January 2024 (EST)

Reactor?!?

I was at my awful local public library printing out various articles and short stories for free which is the only positive thing about libraries these days and after my hour was up I realized I forgot to check Tor.com to see if they published any new fiction (horror only, please, no SF or fantasy) so I checked when I got home and got a scary-looking page which made me think a computer virus had finally taken hold of my laptop after not having one for many years but it turns out that Tor apparently has re-named themselves Reactor. Is anyone else aware of this? --Username (talk) 17:08, 26 January 2024 (EST)

Yes, they announced it a few weeks ago. New site, new name (to differentiate them from the Tor.com publisher), same team, same contents. All the old links to their old site should be forwarding cleanly to the new one. Annie (talk) 17:30, 26 January 2024 (EST)
And the announcement and Q&A about it. Annie (talk) 17:31, 26 January 2024 (EST)
I suspect that the part of the FAQ that is most likely to affect us is this:
  • SFF literature is still the heart of what we do, and that’s our priority. We’ll just also be open to related subjects of interest, from nonfic to romantasy, pirates to gardening, and so on.
So it looks like they will have more non-genre content going forward, but they expect to remain primarily SF-oriented for the foreseeable future. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:23, 26 January 2024 (EST)

Chinese Godzilla?

https://archive.org/search?query=%E6%80%AA%E7%8D%A3%E3%82%B4%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A9&and%5B%5D=mediatype%3A%22texts%22; If anyone knows what this is about and decides it warrants entering, thanks. --Username (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2024 (EST)

Magic German Cats

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?33710; There was a 1999 German edition under a new title, https://archive.org/details/katmagie13katten0000unse, in case anyone fluent wants to enter that. --Username (talk) 10:02, 30 January 2024 (EST)

ZOLTAR

[2]; Polish primary verifier seemed to be very active in 2012 and then nothing, they left a lot of their 300+ PV unfinished with missing info, mentioning this in case anyone fluent in Polish wants to follow up on any of them and add or fix anything. I thought of this before but remembered it today after finding a photo for Jerzy Sosnowski on FantLab and an archived copy of the anthology PL +50 which his story on ISFDB appears in. --Username (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2024 (EST)

verification email

I have tried several times to elicit a verification email but nothing has arrived. I've checked junk & trash as well. Is this simply not working? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Starman99 (talk • contribs) .

I am afraid this is a common occurrence, which we discuss in the ISFDB FAQ:
  • Different email servers have different automated rules which may block email coming from certain Web sites, which makes it hard to tell what's preventing ISFDB confirmation email from being delivered to your mailbox.
  • Note, however, that confirmation emails are optional as far as ISFDB is concerned. As long as you can log in, you have full access to all ISFDB features including Advanced Search, display preferences, submission creation etc.
Since you were able to post the message above, you should be all set :-) Ahasuerus (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2024 (EST)

Ace Dates

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5872024; Can someone on the long list of editors find out where someone got month from? Whoever entered many of these old PB long ago was very random about noting where they got the month, but I remember it was a checklist or something so that's likely where this one came from, too. I thought it would be obvious why I added the month since it's there throughout the contents but I guess not. --Username (talk) 23:27, 30 January 2024 (EST)

Berthon

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=theodore+le&type=Name; Space in first entry separates same essay from its appearances elsewhere; no essay title page I can find but I did see a contents page of Frankenstein File that says, um, Ted Le Berthon, https://www.ebay.com/itm/334647759422. So, if anyone can verify, a merge or variant will be needed. --Username (talk) 00:08, 31 January 2024 (EST)

I'm looking for a book title

Hello everyone, I'm looking for a book title. I read the book years ago probably in the 80s. A quick summary the world is divided by a massive mountain range. I think that the protagonist must climb the mountain range in order to become the ruler. They climb the mountain only to find a deep valley on the other side with an even higher mountain range behind it. The protagonist ultimately climbs the second mountain range where they find another land on the far side with another intelligent species. This has been driving me batty and I would appreciate it if anyone knows what this books title is and who wrote it. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment added by Firefighterbgrg (talk • contribs) 19:21, February 1, 2024‎

If no one here is able to help you, we have a section in our FAQ that gives several places where you can ask for help finding the book. Good luck! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:15, 2 February 2024 (EST)

Darrah Chavey

I learn via Ansible today that Darrah Chavey left this mortal coil on 6 January. He was always a learned and consistent editor to work alongside at the ISFDB... Happy trails Darrah, Rest In Peace. :( PeteYoung (talk) 10:39, 2 February 2024 (EST)

Yes, indeed. There was a brief Community Portal discussion on 2024-01-11 and Darrah's database record was updated. RIP. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:01, 2 February 2024 (EST)

Gardner F. Fox's text story in "Strange Adventures"

Earlier today a Usenet poster pointed out that Gardner F. Fox published "The Magic Maker of Rann", a text story, in the comic Strange Adventures #226. The story is lavishly illustrated, but the text works just fine even if you were to reprint it without illustrations, which is how we determine whether a story is "graphic".

The whole thing is available online, illustrations included. Should we treat Strange Adventures as a non-genre periodical and list this story? Ahasuerus (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2024 (EST)

I've entered a number of Eando Binder stories from the Lieutenant Jon Jarl of the Space Patrol series that originally appeared in Captain Marvel Adventures comic, and I entered them in exactly the manner you suggest. I believe some of these stories have been reprinted as text alone, so I felt I was on pretty safe ground. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 16:43, 2 February 2024 (EST)

Lost Ark Storybook

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5880702; ISBN belongs to Scholastic edition judging by a back cover I saw online. There's a later (3rd) trade printing on Archive.org with trade and library ISBN on the copyright page so either this record should be made Scholastic or a new record created for Random House edition(s). I've been adding dozens of Wikipedia links to novelizations recently and I've come across some other issues like this (only one I can remember is Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade by Anne Digby which has pub. series as Hippo Books but that actually belongs to the UK edition which I made a new record for) so when these are approved a check and some fixing/adding is probably needed for at least a few of them. --Username (talk) 12:50, 3 February 2024 (EST)

Rise of the Silver Surfer

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?346021; I made an edit fixing typo "udpated" to "updated", surprisingly the only such error on all of ISFDB, and realized that this edition was likely never published with AbeBooks having a weird "cover to be unveiled" photo. So unless someone can find evidence of a copy I think this should get the unpublished date. --Username (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2024 (EST)

Parnassus Wizard of Earthsea

https://archive.org/details/wizardofearthsea00ursu; I added a link to a Parnassus edition based on someone's extensive notes here (no number line or smudge on title page) but there are some editions of this book only linked from Open Library including the one above which has a price much higher than any other book from the publisher on ISFDB but copyright page has same info as 1969 2nd printing so if anyone knows a way to determine the date a new edition can be added. There's an ancient ISFDB bibliography from 2006 by Ahasuerus, https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Author:Ursula_K._Le_Guin, which could probably use some updating unless it's been updated somewhere else. --Username (talk) 20:08, 4 February 2024 (EST)

Pranks

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?17626; I've made edits for all editions before, original 1983 Amazon cover seems to have disappeared leading to a broken image so I replaced it, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5882029, then I replaced OL/Archive cover which is too dark with an Amazon cover, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5882020, that isn't great but is brighter and still retains the sparkly stuff on the title that Leisure used to attract people to buy their books which then led to disappointment when the buyers realized the novels themselves were usually crap, the latest edition is fine as is, so now I think the 1983 edition with the wrong price and ISBN should be deleted and the image uploaded by Chris J. should be removed from the Wiki since it seems to be the badly creased cover that's still on Amazon with unnecessary back cover included. --Username (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2024 (EST)

Felix Kelly

I entered new records for Faber anthologies Best Murder Stories and Best Murder Stories 2 which are mostly genre or by genre authors; I also looked at Best Tales of Terror, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?4213, and even though I know I've seen that cover many times I never noticed until seeing it full-sized on FantLab that there's a very clear signature lower right, FELIX KELLY. I entered that in an edit but the problem is that the record for him, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?255975, might be the same artist who did the 1956 art but can't be the guy from 1879. So there may be 2 Felix Kellys in case anyone can find out more and separate them into 2 records; it's also possible that the 1956 art was not new but taken from something drawn by the older Kelly. --Username (talk) 10:09, 6 February 2024 (EST)

Also added Margaret Wolpe as cover artist for Best Tales of Terror 2; no signature I can see but FantLab credits her + there's a copy on Dalby's site whose front flap says she did "jacket design" and the art does look like many of her other Faber covers. Also greatly updated her record with lots of bio info and noted she was married to Berthold, also an artist, and updated his record as well. Dalby's copy has a pounds price sticker covering another pound price so I'm getting the impression Faber reprinted their anthologies many times with no way to tell except the prices kept getting higher; lots of printings are probably missing so if anyone has any not on ISFDB it would be good to enter them. --Username (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2024 (EST)

The Adventure of the Peerless Peer

Are there any objections to converting this to a novella? The recent ebook reprint is marked as 27k words by Kobo USA and looking at the page numbers and some of the other editions, it does feel too small to be a novel. Thanks! Annie (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2024 (EST)

It's definitely a novella. The Titan Books edition (2011) is well over 200 pages and looks like a bona fide novel, but its apparent length is due to the addition of a very long promotional excerpt from Kim Newman's Moriarty: The Hound of the D'Urbervilles. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:16, 7 February 2024 (EST)

Termush - convert to novella

Another recent reprint shows this one as 25k words in English (Kobo USA count) which will leave it well short of 40K in its original Danish as well. Any objections to converting this to a novella? Annie (talk) 18:27, 6 February 2024 (EST)

John Stanley

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5883789; See my note about artist, that Little Lulu credit in the original Stanley record belongs with I's record because, as my note in the original says, he was born in '39 or '40 so he would only have been 9 or 10 if he did that art which is unlikely; this is the right Stanley, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stanley_(cartoonist). The Melvin Monster credits belong with I, too. I have to assume the Fengriffen Stanley is not the same as I because it's a UK edition and he's American plus it's a photograph, not drawn. --Username (talk) 00:10, 7 February 2024 (EST)

Doolin

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?431777; Late PV entered James Doolin based on signature but there is none, FantLab photo has initials JPD, it's actually Joseph Doolin, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?27894, and he has an entry for the same art, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1590968. --Username (talk) 10:48, 7 February 2024 (EST)

Uncorrected Proofs

I'm holding this submission to update this record. I noticed that the record states that it was unpublished (8888-00-00), yet there appears to be a cover that was just added. More importantly it also describes this as an "uncorrected proof" and I had thought that proofs were outside of our scope. The policy specifically excludes Advance Reading Copies unless available for sale to the public. Do uncorrected proofs differ from ARCs in terms of determining scope? This seems straightforward to me and I believe the publication should be deleted. If others disagree and this requires a full discussion, we can move this the the Rules and Standards board. Thoughts? Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:59, 7 February 2024 (EST)

I read the rules the same way you do - ARCs and uncorrected proofs are out. However, we do keep records of unpublished but announced books (these are in scope under the announced but never published (entered as "unpublished") part of ROA) so I would not delete this one as it is under that category. So ARC/uncorrected proof of a book that comes out will not be eligible but if the book never makes it out, adding the notes about it into the 8888 book are fine I think. Annie (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2024 (EST)
Comparing this publication record with other, published, editions of the book, I note that it has a different ISBN in addition to a different publisher name. I typically enter announced-then-canceled ISBNs as 8888-00-00 publication records under the rule referenced by Annie. Their presence in our database helps answer a common question: "Whatever happened to this apparent first edition? Why can't I find any copies for sale?" We all know how obsessed collectors can get when it comes to first editions and our database is frequently the only readily accessible place that explains what happened to a "disappeared" ISBN. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:51, 7 February 2024 (EST)
I've no argument with a publication record for an announced, but unpublished book. However, an unpublished book and an uncorrected proof are two different things. The notes on this record confuse the issue as to what the record represents. The addition of a cover scan and artist further confuses things. How are we able to display a cover of a book that was never published? I would suggest that the notes be reworked to indicate that a proof was done as evidence of the planned publication. We could replace the first two sentences with "The Bluejay Books imprint was dissolved late in 1986 just after an uncorrected proof for this planned edition was printed in September of that year." I would also recommend deleting the cover of the proof and rejecting the addition of an artist. I do worry that if we were to make an exception and allow a record specifically for an uncorrected proof when the book is never published, it would encourage the addition of other proofs and ARCs especially by those editors who surmise rules by examples of what is already in the database. If others think this should be a valid exception to allow records for proofs, then we should document it in the scope page as is done with ARCs offered for sale. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:00, 7 February 2024 (EST)
That sounds like a plan and the proposed change in the notes sounds fine to me - that will make it clear that the record is here because the book was announced and not because it had an ARC/uncorrected proofs done. I am at two minds about the cover - if it was announced with the book, recording it makes sense as it may help trace it to an artist later on and as it is part of the record after all. But other from that - I agree that we need to be careful not to confuse ARCs and unpublished books per se - although when a publication fails through often varies so there are ARCs out there for books that do not make it - that one being an example. Maybe all we need is to strengthen the language to specify that the exclusion is for books that end up being published - thus allowing the usecase we have here without a concern. Annie (talk) 19:06, 7 February 2024 (EST)
I agree that the pub record should stay because it falls under "announced but never published" and agree with Ron that the problem with it as it stands is that the pub note gives the impression that the record has been created for the proof, not the unpublished book. Ron's tweak to the pub note solves this problem.
Further notes and suggestions:
1) I agree that mentioning the proof in the pub note is a good idea. It is evidence that the book was announced.
2) I definitely think the cover image should be deleted. It should either be omitted or of the final cover. The latter assumes the publisher reached that stage and that we could find the image. All very unlikely. The cover image is more than just the artwork; it's also the colouring, wording, layout and typography and those aspects of the proof cover clearly wouldn't reflect the final version.
3) I would delete the OCLC/WorldCat External ID and just mention it in the pub note because it refers specifically to the uncorrected proof and not the unpublished final work.
4) I'm ambivalent about importing the coverart record. It's clear from the cover of the proof that Ron Walotsky was the intended artist so this falls under "announced but never published" but it would need a pub note explaining the source and why there's no image.
5) I'm broadly against making an exception for including ARC's / proofs when the book was unpublished although I do see Annie's point of view. But I think it's an unnecessary complication and veers back towards Ron's point about "encourage the addition of other proofs and ARC's especially by those editors who surmise rules by examples of what is already in the database" which is something I strongly agree we want to avoid. Also, if we do permit this exception, how do we implement it? Does it mean we would have two pub records: one for the unpublished work and one for the proof? Teallach (talk) 07:46, 8 February 2024 (EST)
I've gone ahead and change the notes as discussed above. I've also moved the Worldcat number and the cover into the notes so that it's clear the record is for the unpublished work and not for the proof. I'll reject the held edit. Let me know if someone disagrees with these changes. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:47, 12 February 2024 (EST)

N. Carroll

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?165703; The stories belong with the other Carroll but that ndp thing doesn't look right to me so maybe some other differing addition should replace it. --Username (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2024 (EST)

Author attribution on the three stories, initially credited to Noël Carrol, has been corrected. John Scifibones 07:57, 8 February 2024 (EST)
Thanks. I still think it's weird about that (ndp) because there's thousands of nom de plumes on ISFDB but this is the only one that has that added on the end of the name. --Username (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2024 (EST)
Well, we have some with (pseudonym) attached, and I'd think that'd be more meaningful (ndp isn't a colloquial abbreviation), or just a (I) attached. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2024 (EST)
I don't think we should use any parentheticals if we can avoid it. Since we have the (I) thing we already use extensively, I think that would be the best option for any that are currently using "(pseudonym)" as a disambiguator. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:20, 8 February 2024 (EST)
There are reasons why I chose to set the author up as Noel Carroll (ndp). However, it's not worth our time to debate. I have changed it to Noel Carroll. Not sure that the standards imply that Roman numerals are the preferred dismbiguator. Here is the applicable help section. Thanks for your interest, John Scifibones 14:06, 8 February 2024 (EST)

Karen Simmons

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1117998; She's the wife of Dan Simmons, credited for author photograph in the HC which can be seen on eBay, [3], art is likely by one of the regular Headline cover artists, Chris Moore maybe, but I don't see a signature. So her credit should be removed. I noticed a 2nd printing of the Headline PB on Archive.org which has that same art (and price) but different blurbs on top and bottom so I'm going to enter that now. --Username (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2024 (EST)

Hi! There's a primary verification by Faustus. It'd be meaningful if you contact him to shed some light on the actual credit. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 11:49, 8 February 2024 (EST)
Hi! There's no credit on the PB because there's no author photo like there is on the back of the HC. 2nd printing PB I just entered has no art credit. I'm sure someone here familiar with UK PB artists will identify it in some artist's book sooner or later but it's certainly not by Dan's wife. --Username (talk) 12:08, 8 February 2024 (EST)

Wesso

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5885644; Wiki says 1893. Anyone here who can find proof it's really 1894? I looked for a headstone but couldn't find one. --Username (talk) 13:49, 8 February 2024 (EST)

Story about the Premiere of Rite of Spring

I'm looking for the short story (probably from 1970s) about recreating the experience of the premiere of The Rite of Spring by giving all of the audience members a new drug. I believe this was in one of the better short story annuals of the era.

Most of my book collection is in storage, alas, so I can't find this by leafing through my old pulp. —The preceding unsigned comment added by Martycohen36 (talk • contribs) 17:38, February 8, 2024‎

Black Christmas

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?878255; While entering Wikipedia links for tons of novelizations I came across this rare 1976 one for the classic 1974 horror film. The original edition is apparently very rare because I've looked everywhere and can't find a copyright page that doesn't have the word FANGORIA on it because apparently Fangoria Magazine reprinted it in 2008 (although there is very little mention of this online). It does include the original info so I was able to enter the month (February, which is odd because you'd think it would be late in the year to capitalize on the holiday) but if anyone has a 1976 copy can you verify what it says on it? The film was Canadian and book says "Printed in Canada" so possibly it was only published there in which case the price will need a C added to it. --Username (talk) 09:18, 9 February 2024 (EST)

Riddle of the Exodus

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?185298; Not fiction, religious history book, https://openlibrary.org/works/OL8166080W/The_Riddle_of_the_Exodus?edition=key%3A/books/OL8566162M, probably should be deleted. --Username (talk) 11:30, 9 February 2024 (EST)

Deleted. I question if the author of the religious book is the same author as of the BattleTech books. I couldn't find anything on the religious author's sites that connect him to the BattleTech books. I will ping the active verifier for the BattleTech book to see if there is an author blurb. If not (or it indicates it is a different author), I will remove the the current author info from James D. Long. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:31, 10 February 2024 (EST)
Philfreund has confirmed the BattleTech book provides no biographical information on the author. I have removed the author info from James D. Long as it is more than likely a different person. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:28, 11 February 2024 (EST)

Mutant Chronicles

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?250352; I replaced the cover; if anyone knows about the old one, whether it was an early one that was rejected or if it belongs to a different edition, a note about early art or a new record for the other edition if it exists would be good. --Username (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2024 (EST)

Lieutenant Teasdale R.O.N.

I need to make several changes to the pub records for Lieutenant Teasdale R.O.N.. The tp edition has a sole PV by the late Biomassbob but he somehow missed showing that Paula Goodlett is the co-author of the work. Amazon also shows the pub date for that edition as 2023-12-07, not 2023-12-02 as currently shown in the pub record. The 12-07 date makes more sense since all of the other self-published books by Gorg Hoff and Paula Goodlett have the ebook edition published the day prior to the tp edition. Any objection to my making changes? Phil (talk) 12:21, 12 February 2024 (EST)

Mistakes happen :) Go ahead - make sure the notes clarify where the date is coming from. And while you are there, we do not use "Independently published" as a publisher - so can you also fix that (author names are used when there is no publisher). I will sort out the other 2 we have under that publisher later today. Thanks for finding this one! :) Annie (talk) 13:44, 12 February 2024 (EST)
Done. I also corrected the title for the Interiorart maps record to match current standards. Phil (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2024 (EST)

Locus1 Secondary Verifications

Occasionally I come across pubs that have been SVd to Locus1 solely on the basis of their mention as the first edition of a later publication. The first one I encountered, as a very rookie editor, was this one: David Brin / Sundiver. I asked the SVer, Rtrace, about it and received this explanation. For the purposes of this thread I shall refer to these as "indirect listings".
The most recent one I have encountered is David Gerrold / Chess with a Dragon and it is this pub record that has prompted this thread because there is a clear contradiction between the SV to Locus1 and the pub note "Locus1 fails to list this pub (as of 2010-06-21)."
So my question is: should these indirect listings be allowed as SVs to Locus1? If I ruled the world I would not permit them because I don't think they conform to a general user's expectation of a Locus1 listing and they can cause confusion and inconsistencies as demonstrated by the Gerrold record. However, I do not feel strongly about this. I accept Ron's point that these indirect listings provide at least as much information as Clute/Nicholls and if the consensus is that they should be allowed then I can live quite happily with this.
However, if we do allow them then this Help page: Reference:Verification_Sources needs amendment. The matrix currently states that Locus1 provides "All" the information for fields such as Pages, Price and others but this is not true for the indirect listings. So either:
a) The relevant fields for Locus1 should be changed from "All" to "Some" (or maybe "Most").
or
b) A note should be added to the page explaining Locus1 indirect listings and clarifying that the values in the matrix for Locus1 only apply to full listings.
I prefer solution b).
Opinions please. Teallach (talk) 18:38, 15 February 2024 (EST)

An interesting point. So basically Locus1 has two types of records. One type covers editions published between 1984 and 2007 and includes publication details. The other type covers first editions (including editions published before 1984) and only lists their year and publisher. In an ideal world, we may want to create a separate Secondary Verification type for the latter and call it something like "Locus1-First Edition". Unfortunately, I am not sure it would be feasible since we have over 50,000 Locus1 verifications and separating them would be a very time-consuming project. If we decide not to do it, then I agree that we should update Reference:Verification_Sources to reflect the fact that not all Locus1-verified publication records can be expected to have publication level data.
As far as cases like David Gerrold's Chess with a Dragon go, I would reword Notes. Instead of saying "Locus1 fails to list this pub (as of 2010-06-21)", I would say something like "Locus1 doesn't have a detailed record for this edition, but multiple records for reprint editions refer to it as the first edition." Ahasuerus (talk) 12:48, 16 February 2024 (EST)
Yes, I realised when I started the thread that if we disallow the Locus1 indirect listings there could be a legacy issue of past records SVd to Locus1 that would be difficult to amend. This is often a problem when rules and standards are changed. So although in theory I would vote to disallow these cases, I accept it is not practical to do so. Consequently I am happy with leaving them as they are and updating Reference:Verification_Sources to reflect the fact that not all Locus1-verified publication records can be expected to have publication level data, which we both agree with.
I am working on David Gerrold / Chess with a Dragon and so will incorporate the change to the Locus1 pub note as you suggest. Teallach (talk) 17:08, 16 February 2024 (EST)
Hearing no objection, I have clarified the "Locus1" row of Reference:Verification Sources. Thanks for identifying this issue. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:12, 26 February 2024 (EST)
Thank you. Teallach (talk) 16:27, 2 March 2024 (EST)

Necronomicon in Sweden

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=d+bergho&type=Name; First name likely misspelled by PV (or magazine it appeared in) and essay is in second name's record with a much earlier date. --Username (talk) 23:47, 15 February 2024 (EST)

Garland Library of SF

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pubseries.cgi?8067; I made a couple of edits adding archived link, LCCN and cover image to Past Master when I noticed that there is 1 book in the series with a UK price and 1 without any price. So if anyone can fill in the missing one and add US one (moving UK to notes) for the other then everything will be uniform. --Username (talk) 09:44, 16 February 2024 (EST)

Lou J. Berger

The author has requested we change his canonical name from Lou J. Berger to "Lou J Berger" (no period after the "J"). See mod note here. Any objections? John Scifibones 15:32, 16 February 2024 (EST)

Checking Amazon.com's Look Inside, I see that the name was spelled "Lou J. Berger" in 2013-2014 and changed to "Lou J Berger" in 2015/2016. By now the majority of the stories use the "Lou J Berger" form of the name, so it should be our canonical name. We just need to make sure that we use the right form for the transitional (2015-2016) period. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2024 (EST)
Author attributions were reviewed and corrected resulting in compliance with the author's request. John Scifibones 15:16, 17 February 2024 (EST)

Locus on Microfilm

I recently added links to the handful of random print issues of Locus that are on Archive.org, one a very early issue and the others more recent, but I just stumbled on a huge cache of microfilmed 1973-2015 issues uploaded by MicrofilmIssueGenerator so I added a link, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5893289. Not sure if this is known about already but if not I'm sure it will come in handy here for research. --Username (talk) 19:39, 16 February 2024 (EST)

Server maintenance 2024-02-18 at 11am EST

The server will be down for maintenance later today (2024-02-18) between 11am and 11:10am EST. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:20, 18 February 2024 (EST)

The server is back up. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (EST)

Sword of the Samurai

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5894874; I have owned a copy since the 1980s and PV it here in 2022, copy uploaded to Archive.org last summer but not added until a few days ago, I think I got the right page count but if anyone disagrees feel free to tweak it a bit, you don't have to ask me. --Username (talk) 11:41, 18 February 2024 (EST)

I see a note in the UK edition's record here says [236] so I think they counted the illustration between the first 19 pages and the start of the novel itself. Should that count? --Username (talk) 11:44, 18 February 2024 (EST)
I would count it one way or the other, either as part of the introductory material (so, technically on [20]) or as part of the main material. A page number on that first page of main text would have been a useful guide.... I found an eBay listing of the Puffin edition that has some interior photographs. Not of the page in question, but the TOC and other leading material looks identical to what Archive.org shows for the edition you have. Extrapolating that to content that follows it suggests Reginald did count that illustration as part of the main material. Given the [236] there, what I will do is tweak your count to [236] and add a note about the illustration's appearance relative to the text on the surrounding pages. Just trying to save you an edit cycle; feel free to adjust it to be however you prefer -- I do not mean to insist on anything. --MartyD (talk) 12:07, 18 February 2024 (EST)
Sounds good, thanks. --Username (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2024 (EST)

Bibliographic impact of the 2023 Hugo Awards

The current pre-release cover of Samantha Mills's debut novel The Wings Upon Her Back says "Nebula and Hugo Award Winner". On 2024-02-17 Mills disavowed the award and announced that she would have "Hugo winner" removed from future editions of the book:

  • “Rabbit Test” unwins the Hugo: ... on Tuesday I’ll send a very awkward email to my agent and editor summarizing the situation ... and figure out the logistics of removing “Hugo winner” from the ebook and future printings. The first print run will be a limited edition novelty, I suppose? Jeez.

This may not be an isolated occurrence since, as Samantha Mills wrote (among other things):

  • On February 14, a report written by Jason Sanford and Chris M. Barkley was simultaneously released on the Genre Grapevine and File770. ... we also got a look at the validation list itself, aka the tables of frontrunner nominees being vetted for the final ballot, and a horrible pattern emerged, especially in the fiction categories: there were a whole lot of Chinese nominees in frontrunner positions who just… vanished, and never made it onto the final ballot. There were so many, in fact, that if I am reading this document correctly: not a single fiction winner (short story, novelette, novella, novel, or series) would have even been a finalist if those nominees hadn’t been taken off.
  • There’s an indicator of why in the apology letter from the admin who leaked the emails and validation tables: “We were told there was collusion in a Chinese publication that had published a nominations list, a slate as it were, and so those ballots were identified and eliminated.”

From our perspective, this means that we will need to:

  • Update the “Rabbit Test” Award record to indicate that the author disavowed the award, similar to how this award record explains that Judy-Lynn del Rey's posthumous "Best Professional Editor" award was refused by her husband Lester del Rey.
  • Keep an eye on The Wings Upon Her Back to make sure that the correct covers are used for the first and any subsequent editions of the novel.
  • Be on the lookout for possible other announcements of authors disavowing 2023 Hugo awards.
  • Occasionally check "Worldcon Intellectual Property" announcements. On January 30, 2024 they issued a statement censuring multiple people "for actions of the Hugo Administration Committee of the Chengdu Worldcon" and said that "There may be other actions taken or to be taken that are not in this announcement." If and when they make additional statements about the Hugos awarded at the 2023 Worldcon, we may need to update our records.

Ahasuerus (talk) 12:55, 19 February 2024 (EST)

Earlier today Adrian Tchaikovsky disavowed his 2023 Hugo award for Best Series on his Web site. The award record has been updated. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2024 (EST)
These notes are exactly the correct action for us, I think. If we had notes for an award year, it would probably be desirable to add something for the 2023 Hugos. Although, getting a properly neutral description of the controversy free of personal biases (and I have many in this instance), would be tricky. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
One of the challenges that the 2023 Hugos present is that it's still a developing story. What we knew 10 days ago is very different from what we know today. Perhaps we'll learn more in the future.
For example, back in late January I came across a re-post/translation of a Chinese fan's comments about the Hugos. The post stated that the fan had been involved in the Hugo process (committee member?) and that he or she had a conflict with Chinese members of the Hugo committee with various accusations flying back and forth. At the time I had trouble parsing the post, in part due to lacking context and in part due to the quality of the translation. In retrospect it may have been related to the following email sent by Dave McCarthy on June 7, 2023 at 6:18pm (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_QqmsxQkACoYcxSx2LVqbxD39-DJI_gS/view), which says:
  • Tomorrow I have a 4 hour meeting with my chinese counterparts to look at ballot detail and determine if any ballots are to be voided
Perhaps either this fan or other members of the 2023 Hugo committee may clarify matters at some point. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2024 (EST)
It would especially be useful to note that the nomination totals and the EPH points appear to be completely unreliable, since those are noted in each nomination award record. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
One thing that comes to mind is that we could change the way opening sentences are phrased. Instead of the current "1674 valid ballots cast, 944 valid ballots cast in category" we could say something like "According to the voting statistics released on 2024-01-20, there were 1674 valid ballots cast, 944 valid ballots cast in category". It's not much, but it would at least clarify which version of the stats our records use. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2024 (EST)
I've added your suggested text to the records in the Best Novel category. In addition to the ballot count at the head, I've also added it to the nomination numbers at the foot. I think it's more important there as that is where there is evidence of shenanigans. In any case, let me know if it looks good and I can update the remaining records or we tweak it if desired. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:26, 27 February 2024 (EST)
Everything looks good, thanks. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:40, 27 February 2024 (EST)
I recall that award year notes has been suggested before and there may be a feature request, though I suspect that how the award tables are structured may make this difficult. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
Yes, indeed. FR 1086, "Change the award year field to a drop-down list", says "Create a new record type for award years. We can call it something like "award year" or "award ceremony". Once we have it, we will be able to add notes to award years. Notes can be used to specify when the awards were announced, when and where they were given, eligibility rules changes, etc." Unfortunately, as you said, it would be fairly time-consuming to implement. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2024 (EST)
In any case, I do have one suggestion for the del Rey award record. We currently have the explanation of the non-acceptance of the award noted in the title field of what should be an untitled award. Perhaps we didn't have award level notes at the point that award was added. I feel that the verbiage in the title should be moved to notes and replaced with "untitled". --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 22 February 2024 (EST)
I agree. It's exactly as you said -- award records didn't have a Notes field back then. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2024 (EST)
I've updated this and expanded the comment as a note taking my queue from Judy-Lynn's Wikipedia article. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:26, 27 February 2024 (EST)
Thanks. I have hyper-linked Lester del Rey's name and clarified that he was Judy-Lynn's husband. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:40, 27 February 2024 (EST)

Kater-Bound

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?22308; On all of the web there seems to be only 1 mention of Borgo Press and Kater-Bound together, https://www.lawrenceperson.com/?p=22429, although it does get a handful of hits in a text search, https://archive.org/search?query=%22kater-bound%22+%22borgo%22&sin=TXT&sort=-addeddate. This Archive.org page, https://archive.org/search?query=compton+farewell+bliss&sort=-addeddate, shows 2 editions with one being Borgo but with price on front covered and Kater-Bound sticker on back. Could this be the mysterious Borgo HC mentioned in the book's record? Also, the note about artist is wrong because he's credited on copyright page and back cover, the latter of which can be seen in the cover image. TP PV doesn't respond much so I'm asking on this board. --Username (talk) 13:09, 19 February 2024 (EST)

The Archive.org copy is a library book, and Kater-Craft does library bindings. I believe it is not uncommon to have a retail hardcover edition and a library-binding hardcover edition of the same book. --MartyD (talk) 17:44, 19 February 2024 (EST)
Believe it or not, I have library hardcover versions of Ace Doubles. All should be listed in my opinion. MLB (talk) 01:00, 20 February 2024 (EST)

Miriam Allen de Ford

Per the Spaces in Names subsection of Template:PublicationFields:Author, Miriam Allen de Ford should be standardized as Miriam Allen deFord. However, we have a Miriam Allen de Ford alternate name which was recently edited so the notes copy the rules saying it should be standardized. Instead, I propose we merge the alternate name to the canonical name in accordance with the rules. As there are a number of verified pubs, I will point the verifiers to the this discussion, If there are any objections, then we should probably have a Rules and standards discussions. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2024 (EST)

I guess it would be like calling somebody named MacIntosh being called Mac Intosh. Still, I'll go with the majority. MLB (talk) 00:58, 20 February 2024 (EST)
No objection to merging, but I think the actual spelling of the name should be made clear in the notes. Linguist (talk) 04:06, 20 February 2024 (EST).
No objection, I had three pubs, two in Croatian language I already corrected, but I have also one in Serbian language. In Serbian language names are written as they are pronounced, in this case same as written. Should I change this one as well? This is publication in question: https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2277217 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Debolestis (talk • contribs) .

Ruben De Anda

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1476655; https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2552505; Can anyone find proof that these are the same artists? --Username (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2024 (EST)

I don't know. But The Galaxy Primes (Ace 1976) appears also to be signed by R. De Anda. Horzel (talk) 08:52, 23 February 2024 (EST)
Probably is but since last name is mostly covered it's hard to tell. PV Willem H. noted that it may be Rafael M. De Soto but I doubt it because he has no original cover credits on ISFDB after 1964 and this book is from 1976. There's a copy on Archive.org which I've added a link to in a PENDING edit. --Username (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2024 (EST)

Steve Miller: RIP

For those who may not have seen an announcement, Steve Miller, co-author of the Liaden Universe, et al., died on February 20, 2024 at his home in Maine. His wife, author Sharon Lee, posted this obituary. Phil (talk) 07:41, 22 February 2024 (EST)

I added photo from FantLab which is a little bigger and shows his face better than Fantastic Fiction's photo. --Username (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2024 (EST)

Last User Activity

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?895338; What does this mean exactly? There was a question of contacting this PV RedDragonBooks about something related to a mod note I made and checking their page the last answer they gave or contribution they made was in spring of 2022 but the activity at the bottom of the record linked above says a few days ago. --Username (talk) 09:03, 22 February 2024 (EST)

There are two databases: The wiki and the bibliographic database. What you see for User Contributions on their user/talk page is just their Wiki edits. What you see for Last User Activity in the verifiers' list is the date of their last activity in the bibliographic side -- the Wiki software does not know about that, only about the Wiki. That user did some verifications on 2024-02-18 but hasn't posted anything to the wiki in the past couple of years. --MartyD (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2024 (EST)
Just a quick note to clarify that the software that displays the Last User Activity date checks both the Wiki side and the database side. It then displays the latest date that it finds. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2024 (EST)

Ermengarde Fisk = Evelyn E. Smith?

One of my friends pointed me at issue #10 of the 'zine Oopsla, specifically page 13. The "SHORT STORIES" section says: 

 Third goes to another brand-new author, Evelyn E. Smith ... is better known to fandom as the pseudonymous authoress of the "New York Letter" column in Slant--yeah, that's right, she's Ermengarde Fiske.

As I don't know what the accuracy of fan writing was like nearly two decades before I was born, I don't know how reliable this info might be. Any objections to varianting these author records? ErsatzCulture (talk) 13:49, 23 February 2024 (EST)

We already have a pseudonym there: Evelyn Smythe (intentional corruption of Evelyn Smyth E.?) which I think is based exactly on the note you cited above. I am not sure if we have enough evidence to connect the two Evelyn E. Smith's though - while very very likely, the name is not very uncommon. Maybe add some notes to both accounts until we find a better proof that the two are one and the same? Annie (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2024 (EST)
Never mind, I looked at the fanzine itself now - you actually missed the smoking gun while quoting - that award over there is for a story that belongs to Evelyn E. Smith (Tea Tray in the Sky) - so yes, they are the same person. Connect them away. Annie (talk) 14:54, 23 February 2024 (EST)
This is now done. Had a bit of a headscratcher with Ermengarde Fiske having its own alternate names, but I think everything is now correct, with all the authors pointing at Evelyn E. Smith as the canonical, and all of the title records having parent titles with that author record. However I wouldn't say no if someone wants to double check that everything is now as it should be. Thanks! ErsatzCulture (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2024 (EST)

J. Watson

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?224483; What do you suggest is best to add to differ 1966 Thunderbirds artist from Leading Edge writer/artist? He's on Wikipedia so I'll add that link (as Jim Watson). --Username (talk) 19:48, 24 February 2024 (EST)

See Help:How_to_separate_two_authors_with_the_same_name for ideas. Looks like "James Watson (1960s)" would work here and might be more helpful than "(I)". The situation is quite similar to the Jame Cooper examples given in that bullet. In light of the disparity in volume between their bibliographies, I think you could treat the James Watson from the 1980s as "more prominent/widely known in the Spec-Fic world" and leave it with no embedded disambiguation. --MartyD (talk) 12:04, 25 February 2024 (EST)
OK, thanks. --Username (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2024 (EST)

Tem Title

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?67830; Archived link to recently uploaded Chrysalis 9 HC just added by me in a PENDING edit, PV doesn't respond much, PB has one or two active PV so if they can verify it's Hit-and-Run there, too, not Hit-and-Miss, title should be changed. I vaguely remember asking about this long ago after noticing title was different in Tem's online bibliography. --Username (talk) 15:32, 25 February 2024 (EST)

The Hole of the Pit

https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal/Archive/Archive53#Uncanny_Banquet_and_Leisure; Exactly a year-and-a-half ago I asked about Uncanny Banquet and noted the rare novel contained in it; a copy of the Oleander Press edition including the novel with a short story and a poem was recently added to Archive.org so I've added a link in a PENDING edit. Still waiting for a copy of that anthology to show up somewhere...anywhere. --Username (talk) 18:55, 25 February 2024 (EST)

Series sort order?

I was looking at a page for a series and couldn't figure out the basis for the order of the sub-series. First come the numbered sub-series, in numerical order. Then the 'loose' items in chronological order. Then come the unnumbered sub-series, which are neither alphabetical or chronological by any of their contained titles. Is there a particular order to them? ../Doug H (talk) 09:04, 28 February 2024 (EST)

The only order that the display software enforces is as you described above: all numbered sub-series are displayed first and the rest are displayed randomly. I think it would be fairly easy to display unnumbered sub-series alphabetically. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
(after edit conflict) A more thorough review discovered that Summary pages were already sorting unnumbered sub-series alphabetically. I have adjusted the software to do the same on Series pages. Thanks for identifying the problem! Ahasuerus (talk) 18:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
Since series tend to be written in order, displaying the unnumbered titles in chronological order may make more sense. Although, sub-series wouldn't have a date and extrapolating the date from the earliest contained title would be more complex. Perhaps, numbered items followed by unnumbered sub-series followed by everything else in chronological order. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:34, 28 February 2024 (EST)
Could you please clarify what you mean by "items" in this case? Series may contain both title records and sub-series records. They use different, unrelated, numbering systems. For example, a series may contain 3 titles numbered "0.5", "1" and "2", as well as two sub-series numbered "1" and "2". Ahasuerus (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2024 (EST)
I intended items to mean both title records amd sub-series records, either of which may be numbered. What I was suggesting is that within a series (parent), each numbered item would display based on the numbering. In your example, there would be a conflict as there are both titles numbered "1" and "2" and sub-series numbered "1" and "2". Ideally, we would never assert that both a title and a sub-series should occur first in the parent series. Clearly, numbering only applies within the parent series. I believe that for numbered "items", I am not suggesting any changes to how things currently work. I had suggested a chronological sort for the remaining items based on your now corrected statement that they were displayed randomly. Given that we're already sorting alphabetically, it's probably fine to leave things as they are, unless others think a chronological sort would be preferable. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:13, 28 February 2024 (EST)

BattleTech Universe

The BattleTech Universe series and it's sub-series all list having an Issue Grid, which suggests they are Serials / Magazines. They look like books to me. Is it a mistake in the software or entry? Might the existence of one Serial in the series propagate? ../Doug H (talk) 09:12, 29 February 2024 (EST)

Yep - if there is one magazine series somewhere in the sub series inside of a bigger series, the whole set and any sunsets of it shows the grid links. It is how the software is built. Annie (talk) 10:00, 29 February 2024 (EST)
Good catch. Bug 842, "Extraneous 'View Issue Grid' links on series pages", has been created. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:15, 29 February 2024 (EST)

Database Backup

Can you please save the database with InnoDB utf8mb4 so accented and Chinese characters will show up correctly? As it now with MyISAM utf8, Иван Константинович Айвазовский shows up as ИванКонстантинович Айвазовский. It makes it hard to work with the database and makes it a lot larger than it has to be. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Catpoolfan (talk • contribs) .

For historical reasons -- the ISFDB project started in 1995 -- ISFDB tables use "latin1_swedish_ci". You can see it if you run "SELECT TABLE_CATALOG, TABLE_SCHEMA, TABLE_NAME, TABLE_COLLATION FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES" in MySQL. Non-Latin-1 Unicode characters are stored in the database as HTML entities. When you see "й" (i.e. "&#1081") displayed, that's because that's what's stored in the database.
There are plans to migrate from HTML entities to native Unicode, but it will be a major project with a number of dependencies. There is no ETA at this time. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:42, 1 March 2024 (EST)

I Stole You

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisheryear.cgi?60942+2017; A copy of Tripping... was recently uploaded so I added a link and the stories' numbers, there's also supposedly a copy of Ringman's collection but when I saw the red hardcover I knew that couldn't be right and it wasn't; it's a copy of some old romance novel by Jane Aiken Hodge. I checked all the usual sites but can't get contents page of TP so if anyone can or owns a copy fill in the page numbers if you wish. --Username (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2024 (EST)

Mandarin

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5905095; Is anyone familiar with Mandarin paperbacks who can say why ISBN on back cover doesn't match any other Mandarin PB on ISFDB which (almost) all start with 0-7493? This book's ISBN, 0-09, seems to have been used by Cresset per online searching but there is no mention of them anywhere in it; a couple of Cresset Editions books on ISFDB do have an ISBN which starts with that. --Username (talk) 13:14, 2 March 2024 (EST)

Donkerste Dag

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5905146; Nico Richter has 1 credit on ISFDB for a German Neil Gaiman edition but here he's credited for design. Sheila Metzner is a famed artist and I don't know what Ortikol is so if anyone thinks any of them should be entered as cover artist they can do that. --Username (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2024 (EST)

Shadow Regions

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?295434; The woman who ran the publisher whose imprint put out this anthology, Tammy Perron, apparently was a crook who didn't pay most of the authors or even give some of them copies which is detailed in the link from Absolute Write that I added some time ago. In September 2023 some mysterious person uploaded a copy on Archive.org and it was finally added a few weeks ago (I stumbled on it completely by accident) so I've added a link in a PENDING edit along with the price and the stories' numbers. Maybe it was one of the authors using their own copy because this seems a very rare book with WorldCat not finding any copies; there's only 1 sad review on Goodreads where one of the authors crows about having a story in it...little did he know. According to ISFDB only 3 of the 20 stories have been reprinted since it came out nearly two decades ago so if anyone was interested in reading it you should do so because you never know if old Tammy may crawl out of the woodwork to have it taken down. --Username (talk) 18:55, 2 March 2024 (EST)

Adam L. G. Nevill canonical name

I think it is time to swap the canonical name here to Adam L. G. Nevill. Any objections? Annie (talk) 15:18, 4 March 2024 (EST)

We have 8 book-length works as by Adam Nevill and 8 book titles as by Adam L. G. Nevill. All books published over the last 5 years have appeared exclusively as by "Adam L. G. Nevill". SHORTFICTION: 8 as by "Adam Nevill" and 27 as by "Adam L. G. Nevill".
Given the numbers and the timeline, I think it's fair to say that "Adam L. G. Nevill" is the most recognizable form of his name within the genre as of 2024. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:19, 4 March 2024 (EST)

The Under-People

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3046564; https://archive.org/search?query=the-under-people&sort=-addeddate; No reason for this to be here, it's one of dozens of junk science "non-fiction" books by Norman/Steiger published back in the day. I think it should be deleted. --Username (talk) 23:52, 4 March 2024 (EST)

Collection contents question

When adding contents to a collection which is authored using a variant name, if there is no indication to the contrary, should all the content titles be attributed to the variant author name and then be made a variant of the canonical author name titles if they do not exist? Example: The Witching Hour. The collection author is James Gunn. The copyright page shows the content copyrights as by James Gunn. The included content titles only exist as by the canonical name James E. Gunn. Should these be changed to being authored by James Gunn and then made into variants? Phil (talk) 09:28, 5 March 2024 (EST)

Yes. Remove the three fiction titles, add the three new titles and variant to the canonicals. John Scifibones 09:57, 5 March 2024 (EST)
Done. Thanks.Phil (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2024 (EST)

Hautala Covers

I was entering edits for Rick Hautala books, found Jacobus signature on Moon Walker so Tim Jacobus was entered as the artist; Little Brothers, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?20465, has a name or initials on the lower right, can anyone find out who that is? --Username (talk) 10:45, 5 March 2024 (EST)

ISFDB Server downtime -- 2024-03-06 at 6pm

The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance on 2024-03-06 between 6:00pm and 6:15pm EST. Both the database and the Wiki will be unavailable. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:13, 6 March 2024 (EST)

The server is back up. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:05, 6 March 2024 (EST)

Simulacrum

Tonight I accidentally ended up on the archived SpecFicWorld site which used to be a major hub of speculative fiction but seems to have entirely disappeared from the modern web (whatever you do, don't type specficworld.com on Google and click the link whose description is "Daftar Situs Agen Judi Slot Online Terpercaya Resmi 2023"; that will NOT lead you to what you're looking for). Only issue #9 of Simulacrum, edited and published by the guy who ran the site, Doyle Eldon Wilmoth, Jr., has an archived PDF link but while searching, as I usually do, for random text from an archived story on Google to try and find out if there are any modern sites that still include it I got one hit, the late Tanith Lee's site daughterofthenight.com, because that issue included a reprint of a story by her from Interzone Magazine. That led me to this, https://archive.org/details/@zatoichi01?query=simulacrum&sort=title, which, according to Galactic Central, is the entire 14-issue run. I rarely enter magazines but any self-moderators who don't have to wait for approval can probably do these quickly without much trouble since the contents are a mixture of reprints which will need importing and originals (or at least they're not on this site). There are many well-known authors and artists included. --Username (talk) 23:59, 7 March 2024 (EST)

I'll take a look at it and see what I can do. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:48, 8 March 2024 (EST)
I have through issue 10 entered. I'll finish up with the remaining four later. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:35, 8 March 2024 (EST)
I've entered all 14 issues now. You can see them here. I did not combine the years into editor series because there are only 14 issues so leaving them all separate makes it easier to get to them (one less click-through). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:32, 12 March 2024 (EDT)

Neglected moderation

Last time I changed something in ISFDB it took days to get a single non-controversial change accepted with hundreds of pending changes. Now it takes weeks with thousands of pending changes. When looking a the recent changes I see lots of self acceptance and accepted automatic changes, but only little moderator activity.

Remembering that it takes at least 4 or 5 rounds to add all information for a translated book that amounts to waiting multiple months for a single book.

If you don't want contributors anymore then say so clearly! ATM I'd wonder if you find people sticking with ISFDB for a longer time with that situation.

To give you an indication how this should go: I added a new word to Wiktionary, it took 4 minutes for first reaction and 1:15 to reach the final entry. --Stoecker (talk) 16:31, 8 March 2024 (EST)

Longer approval times have definitely been a problem lately. Currently we have 1976 pending submissions, 1137 of them by User:Username (many are straightforward additions of archive.org links to publication records), 124 by User:Fixer (a robot account) and the remaining 715 are by other editors.
That said, the ISFDB editing process is very different from what Wikipedia and its offshoot projects use. The latter are much easier to edit, but the quality of the end product varies tremendously. I wrote/rewrote dozens of Wikipedia articles in the mid-2000s, but eventually concluded that trying to keep articles accurate and coherent was going to be prohibitively time-consuming. I occasionally peek to see what has happened to them and their current state is pretty bad. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensheviks is full of confused nonsense.
We added the ability to self-approve a few years ago and we are slowly expanding the number of editors who can do so. Hopefully it will help matters going forward. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2024 (EST)
Well, my request to do so was simply ignored. --Stoecker (talk) 10:10, 16 March 2024 (EDT)
Nominations require support from other editors/moderators before they can be approved. If a nomination doesn't gain enough support, it is not approved. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:01, 16 March 2024 (EDT)
Which is an endless loop. Because moderators don't care I want self-moderation. But for that I need moderators to care which they don't. An unreachable goal. --Stoecker (talk) 10:05, 23 March 2024 (EDT)

Heide Oberheide

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?127989; I left a PV a note telling them that a T. Canty credit for Parke Godwin's novel Beloved Exile was actually by Oberheide so that will need fixing but another problem I found is that her page at The Paperback Palette says she was born in Canada in 1957, both very different than what ISFDB says. So does anyone know what the real info is? --Username (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2024 (EST)

Found this and this, which both agree on 1943 and Germany and have enough differences that neither seems to be the source for the other. They both strike me as fairly authoritative, especially that first one. --MartyD (talk) 11:23, 10 March 2024 (EDT)

Tales of Terror

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291626; I added a link to the back cover image on Bookscans in a PENDING edit and noticed there are some copies on eBay which show the first page, 5, with "The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar" as a title, which means this shouldn't really be a novel but rather a collection of Poe stories adapted by Sudak. Does anyone own a copy who can verify the page numbers of the other stories so they can all be entered? --Username (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2024 (EDT)

Cover artist data entry rules updated

Please note that the "Artist" section of Template:PublicationFields:CoverArt has been updated to reflect current practices. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:02, 14 March 2024 (EDT)

The Message

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1471825; Obscure author and publisher but not obscure enough that it didn't get a Chinese translation, https://archive.org/search?query=brockman-robin&sort=-addeddate, in case anyone fluent wants to enter that; just don't title it The MASSAGE like the uploader did. --Username (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2024 (EDT)

YouTube audiobooks in or out?

I've placed this submission on hold because I'm unsure if YouTube audiobooks should be included here since they are generally not downloadable (instead being streamed). The rules include audiobooks, but also exclude "[w]orks published in a web-based publication and available exclusively as a Web page" (which is pretty much what a YouTube video is), and they say nothing about podcasts. Thoughts? Should this be a Rules and standards discussion? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:42, 20 March 2024 (EDT)

They are out under the exclusion as they are not downloadable. However we need to extend the Audio-book section of the inclusion section to match the ebooks/electronic publication one above it a bit - especially around podcasts which are not considered magazines for example. So maybe starting a discussion to clarify what audio-materials we want to index is the best choice (while keeping that one on hold until we decide what we want to do) :). Annie (talk) 15:09, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
Okay, moved it over there. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:33, 20 March 2024 (EDT)

Barcodes with prices hiding in plain sight

A lot of printed books have prices on their back covers hiding in plain sight. If you look at a barcode on the back cover, next to the ISBN, usually over the smaller barcode next to the ISBN one, there is a number sequence - for example 51595 or 51699. That means $15.95 / $16.99 (5 is the code for $, the rest is the price). The first example is from a book I pulled from my shelf (not genre), the second is from an Amazon book. As back covers are very often visible in Amazon (separately or as part of Look Inside), that may help with adding prices (with an appropriate note) even when Amazon and other retailer have their own ideas on what the price may be (or at the very least it can serve as a confirmation for the Amazon price). It is not there for all books (90000 is a very common code up there) but for the books that have it, it is as good as the old printed prices.

I propose to add this tidbit of information to the Price field help. Meanwhile, I am leaving it here for information :) Annie (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2024 (EDT)

Good idea to add this to the Help. I have sometimes used this for prices. You might like to expand the note to explain other currencies. The smaller 5 digit barcode is the supplementary section of the barcode and contains a EAN-5 code. The first of the five digits is a currency code. If the first digit is 9, that means the supplementary section does not contain price information. It's explained in this Wikipedia article. Teallach (talk) 18:28, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
Yep - we should add all the codes when we are adding the note to the help page. Thanks for the link to the Wiki page - I knew it was there, I did not think to look it up earlier today :) Annie (talk) 18:41, 20 March 2024 (EDT)
I agree that adding a section about EAN-5 codes to Template:PublicationFields:Price would be useful. We could list the commonly used first digits:
  • 0 and 1 -- UK
  • 3 - Australia
  • 4 - New Zealand
  • 5 - US
  • 6 - Canada
and explain special pseudo-price values, i.e. that "9999" means "100.00 or more" while "90000" means "no price given". We could then link to the Wikipedia article or an industry Web page for other scenarios. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2024 (EDT)

Webzines to include?

Hello. I have two new pub submissions on hold as they pertain to new webzine entries. Do we want to include these?

Looking through the contents, I say we can include those. Not sure how long-lived these are going to be though... Comments/suggestions from other editors & moderators whether to include or not? (didn't look for past discussion where webzine inclusions were debated...) MagicUnk (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (EDT)

Both produce issues and both are genre -zines. So they are eligible under the "Webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues (note that online periodicals without distinct issues are not considered webzines)." rule. How long they survive is irrelevant - even if they produce a single issue, they are in. However, these records will need some massaging post approval :) Annie (talk) 15:41, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
Thought so. The help text says to post and query the editor community - we may want to update that and instead clarify that if a webzine has distinct issues, it is in by default? MagicUnk (talk) 16:09, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
Probably an oversight (we forgot it was there?) after we changed the ROA awhile back to include these. Which of the help pages?
PS: Note that awhile back we even dropped the requirement for the webzine to be genre allowing non-genre ones to be added as any other non-genre periodical (with only genre contents indexed). So yep - a webzine with issues is always in under the genre magazine rules or the non-genre periodical ones. Annie (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2024 (EDT)
Here - see webzine in that section. MagicUnk (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
Ah, the one place I did not look at. :) Yep - that needs an update. I will start a discussion so we can get the language crafted. Annie (talk) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
Here we go - the proposed new language. Annie (talk) 11:26, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
Rules of Acquisition has it as you mention above - we may want to add non-genre periodicals role there explicitly. MagicUnk (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
We do not have them called out in the print periodicals section either but if you think we should clarify that across the board, I won't object. Let's finish the audio-formats discussion we are currently having about changes in the same section of the ROA over in R&S and then I will initiate a discussion about this. Annie (talk) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
As an aside, I must say that I couldn't find the ROA immediately - I think it is an important section of the rules. Shouldn't we be adding a link on the main help page? MagicUnk (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
I know to look under Policy but you are right, it needs to be a lot more visible here - either as a sublink under the ISFDB Policy link or on its own in the same section. Annie (talk) 11:08, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
I've added a specific link to it on Help:Contents, which is found at the top of most help pages. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:18, 22 March 2024 (EDT)

ISFDB:Verification requests

The ISFDB:Verification requests board is not used much anymore. It seems ISFDB:Help desk and this board have pretty much supplanted it. Do we want to discontinue it? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:17, 22 March 2024 (EDT)

How about we can turn it into a broader board instead: "Assistance needed/Project Assistance Required/Something along these lines" for example - when an editor starts a project and notices other things that need adding/fixing or finds a source that may be useful and is unable/unwilling to work through it, they can request assistance there. Looking at CS, about half of the posts there in the last couple of years are from that nature and they choke the actual discussion threads and make it very hard for people to notice that something was posted in the discussions. It will be the counter-part of the Help Desk - come to the Help Desk if you want help getting the work done and learning how to do it; come to this board to post a project that needs work but you cannot/don't want to work on. Annie (talk) 14:59, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
I'd be fine with that. I agree this board has gotten rather full lately, making it hard to keep track of things. So maybe change the title to ISFDB:Assistance requests or something? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:11, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
I like the idea. "Assistance requests" may be a bit too narrow for what we are trying to define, but it's the closest that I can think of at the moment. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
I like "Assistance Requests". If we ever come up with a better name, we can rename and forward. And we have the text under it to add a sentence that describes the scope better. Annie (talk) 15:53, 22 March 2024 (EDT)
"Help Wanted" ? ../Doug H (talk) 09:47, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
I think that there is potential for confusion between "Help desk" and "Help Wanted". Ideally, whatever name we come up with should clearly differentiate between the two boards. Ahasuerus (talk) 10:08, 23 March 2024 (EDT)
Maybe "Research Requests" or "Research Assistance"? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:45, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
I like "Research Assistance". Ahasuerus (talk) 15:13, 24 March 2024 (EDT)

(unindent) Are there any objections to changing ISFDB:Verification requests to Research Assistance? Ahasuerus (talk) 17:12, 4 April 2024 (EDT)

I'm okay with that. MagicUnk (talk) 06:10, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
If there are no objections, I will ask Nihonjoe to make the change tomorrow. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
De we want it to be ISFDB:Research Assistance to Research Assistance? The other can be a redirect. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:54, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
Probably ISFDB:Research Assistance in order to stay consistent with the majority of other "major" pages. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
Since there are no objections, please feel free to go ahead and move ISFDB:Verification requests to ISFDB:Research Assistance when you get a chance. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2024 (EDT)
Moved! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:31, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
Thanks! I have updated the main Wiki page and everything looks good. Ahasuerus (talk) 11:37, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
The Description up in the panel at the top of all the community boards still say "Help with bibliographic, image credit, and other questions which require a physical check of the work in question.". Annie (talk) 11:49, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
Updated, thanks! The new wording is "Help with bibliographic projects", which is a bit bland and non-specific, but I couldn't think of a better way to summarize the purpose of the new board. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:49, 8 April 2024 (EDT)

Jim/James Burns

I just added a link and did a few other things for the 33rd YBSF edition, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2012677, and searched for others with James Burns as cover artist; only 34th came up, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2209443, but as can be seen PV of TP and HC entered it differently. So maybe consensus about which is "better" should be reached and credits merged. --Username (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2024 (EDT)

Lovecraft Collaborations Book

I was starting to add the audio book edition of this title and discovered that publisher has provided a copy of the pdf version of the book. While we don't have a record for the pdf (it has a different ISBN than the eBook), there are several discrepancies between it and our records. I also have questions other questions about how this title is reflected and while none of the publications are primarily verified, there have been several editors who have touched these records. I thought I'd reach out for comments before proceeding with changes.

  1. We have the title as an ANTHOLOGY and list both the editor and Lovecraft. All the stories are credited to Lovecraft with various co-authors. Personally, I feel that these sorts of collection of collaborations are better typed as COLLECTION as was done with this title.
  2. The title page lists the credits as "By H.P. Lovecraft" over "Edited and Annotated by Finn J.D. John" in smaller type. We have both names in the author field. Since we have this as an ANTHOLOGY, this labels them both as "Editors". Lovecraft clearly didn't edit this book. As I feel this should be listed as a COLLECTION, I also feel that only Lovecraft should be listed in the author field. If the consensus is that it's an ANTHOLOGY, then we only list John.
  3. The stories are listed with both Lovecraft and his co-author on their title pages, whereas we have them all listed by the collaborating author alone. So I intend to swap out which variant of these titles is included. I don't thin this is controversial.
  4. There is a short essay before each section giving biographical details of each co-author. I intend to add these. While not signed, I think we can safely attribute them to John by virtue of his annotation credit.
  5. The PDF lists 5 different formats each with their own ISBN including the "Interactive PDF". Should we add the PDF as a separate title record, or should the PDF ISBN be added in the notes for the ebook edition? I'll also note, that my understanding is that we do list page numbers for pdfs whereas we do not for ebooks.
  6. I'm fairly comfortable that these changes should apply to the 2018 publications based on the 2018 pdf. I'm less certain whether I should make changes to the 2017 edition, or the 2019 omnibus, i.e should we assume the story credits and biographical essays are present in the other editions not listed in the pdf?
  7. I assume adding a note about the PDF being included with the audio book is sufficient rather than duplicating the contents showing the story exists twice (audio and text).

I'd appreciate other's thoughts on these questions. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:29, 28 March 2024 (EDT)

My mild opinion is that both this and the example you cited should be ANTHOLOGY. They are different from the case where most of the stories are written by Lovecraft alone, with one or two written by him and someone else. While both are Locvecraft-centric, they are primarily showcasing the work of a wide variety of authors. I agree with everything else in your list. --MartyD (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2024 (EDT)
I'm afraid I would still prefer these as COLLECTIONs. If we were to convert them to ANTHOLOGY, we would need to list the editor as the sole author which would move these collections out of Lovecraft's bibliography. I had only cited one example, but there are many similar collections, many of which are verified. For example, see which collections containing the story The Green Meadow. It is contained in two true anthologies. Aside from the 4 editions of the title we're discussing, there is but one other {{P|848648|publication} typed as a ANTHOLOGY. All other publications were entered as COLLECTION or OMNIBUS. In some of these cases, we don't necessarily have the editor and would likely need to move these titles to the uncredited bibliography page instead of Lovecraft's. Beyond the Wall of Sleep is another interesting example. There about 10 "collaborations" in this collection which is a minority, but it is more than one or two stories. If we decide to type these sorts of books as ANTHOLOGY, where would we draw that line? My last point is that it appears to me that these books are published to appear as Lovecraft collections with his name listed more prominently than any editors (if they are listed at all). If we are to reclassify these publication, I'd like to hear from some of the other verifiers. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:23, 1 April 2024 (EDT)
Since there have been no further responses to this, and the one objection was "mild", I'm going to proceed with these changes. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:34, 13 April 2024 (EDT)

"Publication Title-Reference Title Mismatches" enhanced

As per the recent Rules and Standards discussion, the cleanup report "Publication Title-Reference Title Mismatches" has been enhanced to require an exact match between publication titles and their reference title records' titles. New data will become available tomorrow morning.

We are looking at around 10,000 mismatches, so the cleanup effort will be significant, especially considering the fact that many affected publication records have been primary-verified. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2024 (EDT)

Canonical name change Charles Eugene Anderson from Chuck Anderson

Any objections to making Charles Eugene Anderson the canonical name and Chuck Anderson the alternate?

  • 17 titles credited to Charles Eugene Anderson.
  • 09 titles credited to Chuck Anderson.
  • 01 title has publications credited to each.

Thanks, John Scifibones 07:51, 5 April 2024 (EDT)

Go ahead, obvious case where the switch can/need to happen MagicUnk (talk) 09:28, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
Hearing no objections, done. John Scifibones 18:45, 9 April 2024 (EDT)

David (B.) Mattingly

Looking through the works credited to Mattingly, it seems to me that "David Mattingly" is the most common (by far), and has been for a long time. There are so many entries, though, this opinion is based only on quickly scanning through the list. Is there a way to get a count of each through database queries? I don't think any of the other aliases are used in a significant amount. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:58, 5 April 2024 (EDT)

Just with search and a browser search: 510 with the name David Mattingly; 747 under the canonical; 198 of these 747 of them are "only as by David Mattingly". Just based on that, how we record the names from secondary sources for artists and the fact that the new ones are always without the B. when we get access to the book, I would say it is time to flip the names. I am not volunteering to do it though. :) Annie (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2024 (EDT)

(after edit conflict)

The easiest way that I can think of is to run a few Advanced Title Searches using "Author's Name is exactly David Mattingly". Make sure to click "Get Count" instead of "Get Results". Here are the results that I see:
  • David B. Mattingly: 747
  • David Mattingly: 510
  • Dave Mattingly: 12
  • D. B. Mattingly: 7
  • Dave Maddingly: 1
  • D. Matingly: 1
  • Mattingly: 2
  • David Burroughs Mattingly: 1
Since David B. Mattingly is the current canonical name, it's over-represented. Every "David Mattingly" COVERART/INTERIORART title has a "David B. Mattingly" parent title, but only some of the latter have actual publications associated with them. Firefox tells me that the Summary Bibliography page has:
  • 79 instances of "also appeared"
  • 8 instances of "also as"
  • 132 instances of "only appeared"
  • 207 instances of "only as"
What this means is that 339 canonical titles have only appeared under an alternate name. Another 87 have been credited at least 2 different ways. 339+87-12-7-1-1-2 is 403, which, unless I am missing something, gives us a rough count. I'd need to run database queries to get a better idea, but it looks like "David Mattingly" is slightly ahead of "David B. Mattingly".
P.S. Perhaps what we need is a new menu options to generate this kind of data on demand. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:03, 5 April 2024 (EDT)
That would be cool. Another cool thing would be if we could figure out a way to programatically automate the process of changing canonical names (maybe have a side menu link that appears whenever viewing an author entry). The link would take you to a page where you'd enter the current author ID and the target author ID. We'd have to account for variants on the author name, title variants, and translations (and probably a lot of other things that I'm not thinking of off the top of my head). For situations like this, it would save tons of time in the long run. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:37, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
This functionality has been requested a couple of times. Unfortunately, it would be very difficult to implement in a way that would guarantee completeness and accuracy. Not only would the software need to change the way VTs and Alternate Names are configured, but it would also need to change dates (for some titles) and Notes.
Perhaps we could implement something less ambitious but still useful. For example, "Undo all Variants for This Author"? Ahasuerus (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
Yeah, it's definitely very complex. I like the "Undo all Variants for This Author" idea, though. What about a "swap canonical authors" option on individual titles? That would be a lot less complex and allow for easier catching of potential issues. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:48, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
I don't see the benefit of an "Undo all Variants for This Author" tool. A variant title only needs to be broken if both the canonical title and the variant tiles have publications attributed. If all the publication(s) are associated with the variant title, a simple merge is the best option. Not only does it save a step by not having to delete the old canonical, but it saves all the information. Some data is only stored in the "parent title", plus any edit history. John Scifibones 15:38, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
I'm slowly working through all of them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:42, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
I have completed moving all the records to David Mattingly. I think someone else was moving them, too, so thanks to them, too. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:32, 22 April 2024 (EDT)
Joe, thanks for sorting this out. I noticed Zapp was helping you. John Scifibones 19:38, 22 April 2024 (EDT)

Server downtime -- 2024-04-06 at 2pm

The ISFDB server will be down for maintenance between 2:00pm and 2:10pm. Both the database side and the Wiki side will be unavailable. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:28, 6 April 2024 (EDT)

The server is back up. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:05, 6 April 2024 (EDT)

The Prequel Trilogy

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934500; I have a question about the publisher of this 2007 Star Wars omnibus; there is no mention of Ballantine in the book so it should be similar to the last one on this list, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=del+rey&type=Publisher, but without the SFBC. Should I change publisher to LucasBooks / Del Rey? --Username (talk) 11:30, 7 April 2024 (EDT)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934540; I changed publisher on this one since they were still with Ballantine in 2000. --Username (talk) 12:22, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934546; Another change from 2005 when they were still together. I don't see any cover artist credited that someone entered here or any sign of the excerpt mentioned on the book's copyright page. EDIT: One of the earlier editions has a note here saying they got artist from his site. --Username (talk) 12:31, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934585; Another one from 2006; this one actually has a PV so I'll leave them a message. --Username (talk) 13:12, 7 April 2024 (EDT)
And a final one, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5934586, 2005 HC, PV is gone so no need for a note. --Username (talk) 13:18, 7 April 2024 (EDT)

Semaphore

https://www.lulu.com/fr/search?contributor=Marie+Hodgkinson; While adding PDF story links from Tartarus Press at their old freepages.pavilion.net site the last one I linked was a story by Rebecca Lloyd that was entered here as original to her 2014 collection but was actually published in 2007 in a magazine called Semaphore, no issues of which are on ISFDB, but I found that Lulu page above so anyone who likes entering magazines can add a lot from that. The editor has a page here, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?143960. --Username (talk) 13:41, 9 April 2024 (EDT)

https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/semaphoremagazine.com; PDF of some (all?) issues at this site. --Username (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
Looks like it has archived PDFs of all but the last issue (issue 15) from June 2011. I'll work on these. The first issue is now here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:32, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
Okay, I think they're all entered (15 issues in total). I also found a couple anthologies collecting the stories and poems voted best by readers of the magazine. I don't know if there were more than the two anthologies. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:33, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
Excellent. Only thing I think you forgot is June 2008's cover artist. --Username (talk) 14:07, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
Fixed! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:11, 10 April 2024 (EDT)

David Ireland

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?3106; I just made edits adding the Allen Lane HC of City of Women and adding a link to Mortal Fire where the 1982 short story is from and noticed that the Wiki page makes no mention of any art so I think the famed Australian novelist and the artist are 2 different people. --Username (talk) 10:28, 11 April 2024 (EDT)

Canonical name change Jody A. Lee from Jody Lee

The artist's website and SFE use Jody A. Lee. While the majority of her early work was credited to 'Jody Lee', the shift to 'Jody A. Lee' is clear. Here are the current statistics.

  • 111 titles credited to Jody A. Lee.
  • 73 titles credited to Jody Lee.
  • 26 titles hasve publications credited to each.

Are there any objections to making Jody A. Lee the canonical name and Jody Lee the alternate? John Scifibones 14:24, 11 April 2024 (EDT)

Sounds good to me. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:41, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
No objections here. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
Hearing no objections, done. John Scifibones 17:47, 15 April 2024 (EDT)
https://ixgallery.com/artists/jodylee/; Here's her photo in case someone wants to upload it to the wiki. --Username (talk) 17:58, 15 April 2024 (EDT)
✓Done! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:28, 17 April 2024 (EDT)

ISBN hyphenation changed

As I am sure most of you know, different publishers' ISBNs are hyphenated differently. Possible permutations include:

  • 978-1-64973-127-2
  • 978-1-9821-9317-1
  • 979-8-200-29585-2
  • 979-10-281-0150-3
  • 979-8-9856919-6-2

"The International ISBN Agency" maintains a list of rules which determine in which positions hyphens are supposed to appear. Almost all publishers follow them, although there have been some exceptions, notably Tor prior to 2007.

When ISFDB 2.0 was developed in 2004-2006, the rules -- as they existed back then -- were manually incorporated in the ISFDB software. What we didn't realize at the time was how complex the rules would become over the course of the following 20 years. As the number of publishers (and self-publishers) exploded, the International ISBN Agency had to create more and more rules to accommodate the growth and the ISBN handling part of the ISFDB software, which was last updated in 2010, fell hopelessly behind. The result was that many ISBNs were hyphenated incorrectly when displayed on ISFDB pages.

Earlier today I deployed a fairly big patch which changed the way the ISFDB software determines where hyphens are displayed. We now follow the International ISBN Agency's current rules to the letter. There is also a way to update our rules programmatically whenever the Agency rolls out new rules. I expect that we will be doing it a few times a year, which will let us stay more or less in sync with the Agency. (We also have special exceptions for Tor and the other 2 publishers which didn't follow the rules prior to 2007.)

As always, if you come across any issues with this software change, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:07, 16 April 2024 (EDT)

Thanks for all your hard work behind the scenes on stuff like this. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:03, 16 April 2024 (EDT)
To quote Damon Knight, I am here to serve man! :-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ahasuerus (talk • contribs) .

Publication Title Without a Related Title Record

I am about to create a new pub record under That Hideous Strength by C. S. Lewis. There is a subtitle on the title page so the full, correct publication title is: That Hideous Strength: A Modern Fairy-Tale for Grown-Ups. Looking at the title record I see there are five publications (three of which have been PVd) with this subtitle. However, they do not have a related title record "That Hideous Strength: A Modern Fairy-Tale for Grown-Ups" and consequently there is no varianting. Is this correct and if so why? Teallach (talk) 18:42, 17 April 2024 (EDT)

It is not correct. The publication title should match the reference title. This report highlights 1000 exceptions each day (I don't know the selection algorithm). First determine, subtitle or no subtitle, which should be the canonical? It's also a good idea to review the publications and make sure they are recorded correctly. Whichever you determine, it will be a multi-step edit. Ask if you have questions. If I'm online, ping me and I'll approve as you submit. John Scifibones 20:14, 17 April 2024 (EDT)
You have confirmed my suspicions. The cleanup report to which you refer does not include "That Hideous Strength" so I guess it's because it is limited to 1000 records. I'm happy to clean up this title. I'm satisfied that "That Hideous Strength" (without subtitle) is the more appropriate canonical title. I have inspected the five pub records with the subtitle and each looks internally consistent. Three of these have PVs. Do I need to consult with PVs or can this sort of housekeeping be performed without PVs' consent? Teallach (talk) 12:42, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
It's not necessary to contact the PV's. You're merely correcting the reference title. I know you intend to perform all the steps and will indicate such in the note to moderator. I noticed this title wasn't on the report. Perhaps Ahasuerus will chime in and explain the algorithm determining which titles to report. John Scifibones 15:45, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
First step submitted: Unmerge titles. Teallach (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
Approved, John Scifibones 16:33, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
Step 2 submitted: merge the 5 reference titles of the subtitled version. Teallach (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
Approved, John Scifibones 17:17, 18 April 2024 (EDT)
Step 3 submitted: make subtitled version a variant of canonical title.
Think that's it for the pubs but I can see there's more work to do:
A) These two pubs: Macmillan 1966 and Macmillan 1977 have the variant title but the same canonical coverart title records. So I'm pretty sure these need to be changed. The only way I can see to do this involves five more edits:
Step 4) edit one of the pubs (1966, say) and create a second coverart record under the variant title
Step 5) variant the coverart record
Step 6) import the variant coverart record to the 1977 pub
Step 7) remove the canonical coverart record from the 1966 pub
Step 8) remove the canonical coverart record from the 1977 pub
Is there a more efficient way to do this?
B) Those same two pubs contain an essay Preface (That Hideous Strength) which has a disambiguator under the canonical title. Does the disambiguator have to be changed to the variant title. I'm unsure about this because the phrase is only a disambiguator; it's not actually part of the title of the essay. Can you please advise.
My goodness, this is long-winded! Teallach (talk) 18:11, 18 April 2024 (EDT)

(unindent)
Submit two edits for each pub. (All four at once)

  • Submission 1 - Add the new variant titles, COVERART and preface.
  • Submission 2 - Remove the canonicals.

Since these submissions will generate change notices, reference this conversation in the note to moderator. After I approve all four, I'll perform the two merges. You will just need to link the variants. John Scifibones 18:48, 18 April 2024 (EDT)

Yes, I see where you're going with this. About the same number of edits but fewer Wait For Approval stages. Four edits submitted. Teallach (talk) 07:12, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
Approved, John Scifibones 07:22, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
Two Make Variants submitted. Teallach (talk) 07:52, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
I've checked all the affected records and everything looks good to me apart from one error that must have been present before we started the cleanup: the date of the canonical title of the Preface (correction submitted). So I think we've finally reached the end. If there's anything I've missed, let me know. Many thanks for all your assistance with this John. Much appreciated. Teallach (talk) 16:34, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
Fortunately, there is a scan of the first edition in the internet archive. I added the preface and a link to the scan here. As you know, the canonical is dated to the first appearance, even if it is as a variant. I put your submission on hold, assuming you would rather cancel than have me reject it. I enjoyed working on this with you. Ping me anytime. John Scifibones 18:43, 19 April 2024 (EDT)
Oh, that's interesting. It hadn't occurred to me to look for an archive of the first ed because I had looked in Currey who states the following regarding the first Pan pb (1955): 'adds new author's "preface"'. So it's possible that there are two different prefaces. This requires more research which I don't have time to do now and may not have the resources anyway. But it's fine to leave the ISFDb records as they are for now; they are all self consistent. I have cancelled my submission. Teallach (talk) 04:46, 20 April 2024 (EDT)

Trademark markings in titles

My understanding is that we generally don't include symbols like ® and TM in titles because they usually indicate information about the title but are not usually part of the title. As JLaTondre wrote in 2012, "There is distinction between a title that has a '®' or 'TM' as part of the title and a title that adds the '®' or 'TM' for legal reasons." I'm asking because I ran across this title that has one as part of the title, and I don't think it's actually part of the title itself, but rather added for legal reasons. This might be something we should clarify on Help:Screen:Title. This was discussed way back in 2007, but I haven't yet found any more recent discussions (outside of the 2012 one I mentioned above). Thoughts? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:51, 23 April 2024 (EDT)

I'm the editor with the sole PV for that ebook pub. I have no objection to removing it since the trademark symbol really only applies to the "Liaden Universe" portion of the title. It is on the title page and cover that way. Clarification of the rule would be a good idea. Phil (talk) 13:44, 23 April 2024 (EDT)

Supermonsters

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2600565; I added Supermonsters as a variant (and subbed a better cover image) but it's from 1986 like the German parent so if anyone can find a copyright page scan which verifies the month is earlier the American cover would become the parent; I couldn't find one, but I do see on eBay that Archway released a much earlier PB in Sep. '78 with a photo of the cool American-added demon from the 1950s film Night/Curse of the Demon on the cover but the 2 sellers that showed the copyright page have editions that say 1 2 9 8 below the printing info; whether that's a number line or what I don't know but if anyone owns a copy you may want to enter yours. --Username (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2024 (EDT)

Ray Daley possible death

It's possible Ray Daley has died, though I haven't found an obituary or any other official report. He was in the hospital since the end of March due to a heart attack, and a number of people are posting condolences on an open call group on Facebook as well as on his profile there. I'll try to keep an eye on it and keep looking for an obituary or other official report. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:01, 24 April 2024 (EDT)

日本SFファンドム賞 (Japan SF Fandom Award) entry completed

It took me almost a year to do it (due to various things distracting me from it), but it's done. Please let me know if anyone has any questions. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:51, 24 April 2024 (EDT)

And related, I've completed entering the recipients of the Takumi Shibano Award. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:42, 24 April 2024 (EDT)

Shadow People

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3356; Long-gone PV of C$ Dell ed. entered just "Jones" as artist here, one or the other should be decided on and the 2 merged. --Username (talk) 09:43, 26 April 2024 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=ISFDB:Community_Portal&oldid=685022"