ISFDB:Community Portal/Archive/Archive54

< ISFDB:Community Portal‎ | Archive
Revision as of 12:17, 25 July 2023 by Nihonjoe (talk | contribs) (archive through March 2023)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page for the Community Portal. Please do not edit the contents. To start a new discussion, please click here.
This archive includes discussions from January - June 2023

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

Looking for one book.

Hello. I am Looking for one book. I only remember the beginning of the piece. Some guy found a derelict computer, sat down at it and started doing something, and then he saw a man with a gun walk up to the desk, they looked at each other in silence for a while, then the guy mechanically pressed the Enter button and the man shot him back. The work was read in the 1990s or very early 2000s. The piece appeared no later than the 1990s (probably earlier). I also remember that the guy was doing something enthusiastically on the computer: at first he typed without looking at the screen, but the message on the computer monitor made him do his work more slowly and carefully. The phrases went something like this. The message on the computer screen made him work more carefully. Behind the desk stood a man with a gun in his hand. The guy had never seen a real gun, except in the movies, but he knew immediately what it was. The guy's hand dropped mechanically to the Enter button, and the same second the black muzzle of the gun burst into flames, ending his life. Thank you in advance. --Strannik27 (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2023 (EST)

Nothing comes to mind, I am afraid. There are a couple of Reddit forums that may be worth a shot: Tip of My Tongue, which handles all types of media, and PrintSF, which specializes in printed speculative fiction. The Usenet group rec.arts.sf.written may be another place to check. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:49, 6 January 2023 (EST)
Sadly. Thank you. Wrote in the first and third place, in the second they require 2 days from the date of registration. --Strannik27 (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2023 (EST)
Another possible place to check is Book Sleuth on the AbeBooks site. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:09, 6 January 2023 (EST)
I've updated the ISFDB FAQ with a section containing the above links. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:14, 6 January 2023 (EST)
Thank you, I wrote. --Strannik27 (talk) 05:02, 7 January 2023 (EST)
I wrote: 1. Book Sleuth, tipofmytongue, printSF and rec.arts.sf.written. Where else to write? --Strannik27 (talk) 06:58, 8 January 2023 (EST)

Title Merge -- post-submission pages enhanced

Post-submission pages for Title Merge submissions have been enhanced. They now correctly display embedded HTML and properly link to third party Web sites. Displayed field names are now more meaningful. If you come across any issues, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2023 (EST)

Award Editor -- post-submission pages enhanced

Post-submission pages for Edit Award submissions have been enhanced. They now link to the main Award Type page for the award's type, correctly display embedded HTML and link to IMDB where applicable. If you come across any issues, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2023 (EST)

Request Currey check (print, 1979)

The Body Snatchers (1955) publication record 211333, primarily by User:Bluesman who is no longer with us, implies that Currey is the source for cover artist "Stuart Treslian". That reference should be to print Reference:Currey rather than the L. W. Currey website, which does not name Stuart T nor any cover artist in current descriptions of two copies (one at US$4500).

Spelling "Stuart Tresilian" may be expected. Stuart T at Wikipedia. --Pwendt|talk 14:04, 12 January 2023 (EST)

The entry for this book in Currey is not the source for the cover artist, and doesn't ordinarily provide the cover artist in the entries. I'm certain that the reference is what Bill was referring to in the note. However, I believe he was only indicating that Currey stated that there was no statement of printing. You may also find this chart helpful. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:15, 12 January 2023 (EST)
Thanks. Layout supports your interpretation.
That chart of ISFDB Verification Sources will be useful. --Pwendt|talk 09:03, 13 January 2023 (EST)

Fiction series(?): Body Snatchers, The; Invasion of, The

We have 1955 T437 and rewritten 1978 T186595 versions of this Jack Finney novel, as distinct parent titles with multiple variants (some under shared titles), presumably because the rewrite has been judged "great enough" (DO NOT MERGE, Mhhutchins, 2008-12-13).

Those need some linkage. (I will need to re-revise the former parent Title note, item 2.) I suggest a Series containing numbered versions 1 and 2. Is there any reason not to link them by a fiction series, rather than multiple cross-reference links? --Pwendt|talk 09:16, 13 January 2023 (EST)

New Publication -- post-submission page in the process of being updated

Post-submission pages for "New Publication" submissions are currently in the process of being updated. The first patch was installed a few minutes ago. It tweaked the way the "Title" section is displayed.

Upgrading the software behind this Web page is a delicate process because some of it is shared with other post-submission pages like "Clone Publication". It will take a few patches to get everything updated. In the meantime, if you come across any issues, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (EST)

It does look a little jarring without a label at the top of the first table but I will wait to see where that ends before complaining about it properly. Annie (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2023 (EST)
Oh, one thing - html in the Moderator notes is not resolving. See example Annie (talk) 17:31, 13 January 2023 (EST)
Investigating... Ahasuerus (talk) 18:05, 13 January 2023 (EST)
OK, the missing header ("Title Data") has been resurrected and "Note to Moderator" has been changed to display HTML correctly. All previously upgraded post-submission pages had the same HTML display issue, but it didn't become obvious until NewPub was upgraded since Fixer uses HTML in moderator notes. Thanks for reporting the problems! Ahasuerus (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2023 (EST)
Looks good now. Thanks! Annie (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2023 (EST)

(unindent) The "Title" section has been further enhanced for AddPub submissions. It now displays all field values for the title record that the new pub is about to be attached to. It doesn't include reviews, tags, a link to the parent title (if there is one), variants or other fancy things that the regular Title page displays, but it's a lot more data than what was displayed before the change. The new format also has a new section header, "Automerge title data", which hopefully makes it easier to tell that the submission is an AddPub and not a NewPub. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2023 (EST)

The "Publication Metadata" section has been updated to display embedded HTML tags correctly and to allow multiple warnings per field. A few yellow warnings have been tweaked and I plan another pass to upgrade the rest of them once I update ClonePub, Import/Export and EditPub to use the same software. If you come across any issues, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:32, 17 January 2023 (EST)
I suppose that "Post-submission pages" include "Approved ..." among others. Approved New Publication; Approved ClonePub; Approved Publication Update --all retain(?) link label "New record:" in the footer. Approval timestamp 2023-01-17 21:28:23 for the mildly offending PubUpdate. --Pwendt|talk 12:09, 19 January 2023 (EST)
Checking this recently created pub's Edit History, I see that the NewPub submission which created it links to the new record at the bottom of the page, which is as it should be. The subsequent PubUpdate submission also says "New record" and links to it even though it's no longer a new record.
It looks like it's an old bug introduced back when Edit History was implemented a couple of years ago. Bug 824 has been created -- thanks for identifying it! Ahasuerus (talk) 16:14, 19 January 2023 (EST)
It should be fixed now. Thanks again. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:36, 20 January 2023 (EST)

Looking for a sci-fi title

Hello everyone, I am looking for the title and author of a SF short story (or novel) in which a NASA-type company sends chronically unlucky people to unknown planets. Since these people are dogged by ill luck, the company figures they will encounter all the problems there are : monsters, eruptions, and so on. And that will be a good way to prepare for the planets’ exploration. Does anybody happen to know, by any chance, the title or/and author of this story ? Yves Lavandier —The preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Lavandier (talkcontribs) 07:15, January 18, 2023‎

I have no recollection of a plot like this. Can you perhaps give a line of time it might have been published in? (It sounds more like a classic plot: 1940s to 1950s, I'd say). Stonecreek (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2023 (EST)
You can try one of the resources listed here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:33, 18 January 2023 (EST)
Sounds like the plot of Robert Sheckley's The Minimum Man. --Willem (talk) 14:07, 18 January 2023 (EST)

Annals of Klepsis;; Active verifiers, look at this, it's got stuff crossed/whited out on front and back covers, a pasted string of numbers on copyright page, etc. Alternate edition or something, maybe, if anyone wants to enter it. It was added in Feb. 2021, just after the last PV. EDIT:; This was uploaded in April 2021; I made an attempt at entering it ("borrowing" the phrasing of the price info from other records on ISFDB) but I'm sure editors who enter French books regularly can add some stuff after my edit is approved. I notice someone named AlainLeBris did a lot of them; is he still editing? --Username (talk) 11:44, 18 January 2023 (EST)

AlainLeBris's last activity date is 2022-01-22, almost a year ago. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2023 (EST)

Robert Silverberg's "We, the Marauders" and "Invaders from Earth"

Silverberg's 1958 novella, We, the Marauders, came out a few months earlier than his 1958 novel Invaders from Earth, although they are basically the same story. As such, it has often been viewed (including in our records) that the novella came first, and was then expanded into the novel. In a post yesterday on the FictionMagsIndex mailing list, Silverberg corrects that impression, writing:
"After 65 years I don't have a clear recollection of how the changes in INVADERS FROM EARTH came about. I do recall that I wrote the book for Don Wollheim at Ace and then offered it to Bob Lowndes, whose pulp magazine SCIENCE FICTION QUARTERLY could handle long stories. The title "We, the Marauders" on the magazine version was Lowndes', though I liked it. I don't recall whether he or I did the cutting, or how the changes in plot came about. The Ace version was the original one, though."
I have updated the title notes to both the novella and the novel to reflect this information. Chavey (talk) 13:08, 18 January 2023 (EST)

(I reviewed those Title notes but don't know the story.) I submitted update, and noted "hold for User: Chavey", of the NOVEL note as "the same story" ==> "nearly the same story" ... "and the cuts create a different resolution to the main character's personal story." The latter information, from the novella Title note, seems too important to omit from either one. Also I showed strong approval of the paragraph break by replicating it here for the novel, which unfortunately creates a mass of text in the "Differences".
I would have named the "writer's blog" that is also the "FictionMagsIndex mailing list", if I understand correctly. I won't make the call that it belongs in the Notes but hope you will identify it here with a link. --Pwendt|talk 11:53, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Ohioana Book Award

Here's another award I found. It's not a specifically genre award, but there are genre winners regularly appearing in its list of winners. Main list, additional list, general info. They appear to be all juried awards, given out since the early 1940s.

List of categories:

  • Fiction
  • Nonfiction
  • Middle Grade & Young Adult Literature
  • Juvenile Literature
  • Poetry
  • About Ohio (not sure if there are any genre winners in this one as I haven't had time to look)
  • Walter Rumsey Marvin Grant (not sure if there are any genre winners in this one as I haven't had time to look)
  • Readers’ Choice Award (the only non-juried award)
  • Alice Louise Wood Award
  • Anniversary Award
  • Award of Merit
  • Career Award
  • Citation Award
  • Editorial Excellence
  • Head Award
  • Krout Poetry
  • Ohio Favorite Author (not sure if there are any genre winners in this one as I haven't had time to look)
  • Ohio Favorite Book (not sure if there are any genre winners in this one as I haven't had time to look)
  • Pegasus Award
  • Sesquicentennial Award
  • Ohioana Fellowship
  • Ohio Favorite Book
  • Ohio Favorite Author

I can enter them once they're created. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:13, 18 January 2023 (EST)

I am not sure how many of their categories have SF awards, but I have found at least a few genre authors: Andre Norton, Lois McMaster Bujold, Virginia Hamilton. If there are no objections, I can create a new award type, which will let moderators create categories as needed. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2023 (EST)
Yup, that's pretty much along the lines of what I found. Edward Eager is in there, too. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:00, 18 January 2023 (EST)
Done. It's our 100th Award Type! Ahasuerus (talk) 15:32, 21 January 2023 (EST)
An auspicious beginning, to be sure. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:12, 23 January 2023 (EST)
Took a while, but I think all of them are entered now. See here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:35, 3 March 2023 (EST)

S.E.P. SF;; Likely these 2 records are for the same book, but each contains info the other doesn't. --Username (talk) 08:39, 19 January 2023 (EST)

I agree. I've merged everything to this one. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:13, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Amazon cover images in publication records

[1] Given some stable image file.jpg under "images/I" at Amazon, do we have any reason to prefer one of the addresses and ? Is it valuable to change our URL from one to the other, upon noticing an address change at the Amazon product page?

[2] Do we have any reason to prefer linking a cover image at Amazon or linking one at Open Library? If not in general, then a match with stated printing number, available via "Look inside" at Amazon or "Preview" at Open Library but not both, is one attractive criterion. Image quality is another. Most recently I chose to link rather than Open Library OL28305950M because the latter image looks "too dark" to me. (Only now I see that "Preview" reveals a 9th printing, and Amazon UK/US provide no "Look inside".)
--Pwendt|talk 12:56, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Amazon: Either works and points to the same place for EVERY image. If we discover that one of the spaces is discontinued, we can swap them programmatically but for the time being, either can be used (ebooks usually use the media one these days; paper books can use the images-na). As long as the ID at the end is the same, the two domains are identical for all intents and purposes and will always show the same image.
As for the OL/Amazon - both are stable (As long as it is an /I/ image in Amazon so use whichever looks better and is of better quality overall. Annie (talk) 17:37, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Clone/Export/Import -- post-submission page updated

The "Publication Data" section of the post-submission review page for Clone/Export/Import submissions has been updated. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:02, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Clive Barker Author Photo; I did some Clive Barker book edits recently and, as far as I can recall, his photo was broken because it was from one of those sites that don't display HTTP images correctly after our server move (or possibly it was just a bad photo and I decided to replace it), so I substituted a color photo from FantLab of Barker in his library that's very recent judging by his appearance, which is not very pleasant these days due to all his medical problems. Today I randomly came across his page again and saw that someone replaced that with a different photo that's not only in black-and-white but very old judging by his youthful appearance, plus it has one of those long WEBP URL's Amazon was using for a while recently. Is there any way to see a history of who edits author records? I'd like to know who changed it. I'm going to re-replace it with the FantLab photo and hopefully it will stay that way this time. --Username (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2023 (EST)

Author records do have Edit History information on file, but only moderators can access it. The reason is that our data deletion policy lets living authors request removal of biographical (as opposed to bibliographic) data from their author records. Making authors' Edit History publicly available would defeat the purpose of the policy.
In this case the change was made by User:Stonecreek in submission 5527111 on 2023-01-01. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:13, 22 January 2023 (EST)
Stonecreek, you say? What a shock. Anyway, my edit is pending to change it back. --Username (talk) 13:40, 22 January 2023 (EST)
In order to prevent a continuing edit war, I've put the further edit on hold. Could Username and Christian as well as any other editors with an opinion on which image should be used please come to an agreement here before we further churn the author image? Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:21, 23 January 2023 (EST)
My opinion is a recent image, like the one I added from FantLab seems to be (they have 2 others which are old and B&W), is better because he doesn't look anything like he did in his heyday when he was rather handsome. However, if someone feels like they really need to see an overly bright B&W photo from decades ago on his ISFDB page, so be it. Maybe after he's dead (which may be soon judging by his appearance these days) perhaps a recent photo will be more appropriate then. I doubt I'll be around to add it, but maybe someone else will. --Username (talk) 10:34, 23 January 2023 (EST)
There were two reasons for me to change the image: the first is the more handsome look (I do think that we should aim to have no images that would possibly intimidate an author or his/her readers), the second that Amazon seems to be more stable & is somewhat more official. I could live with the other image but do fear that it would lead towards users escaping Barker's summary page as fast as one could. Stonecreek (talk) 11:48, 23 January 2023 (EST)
Pending edit's been sitting in my list for a long time so I just cancelled it. I did, however, make another edit today (pending) replacing the ancient Ramsey Campbell B&W photo on ISFDB with a recent color one on Amazon of him in all his chubby glory, so one Brit horror writer falls, another rises. It's hard to say who looks more unhealthy these days, Barker or Campbell. --Username (talk) 14:39, 26 January 2023 (EST)

Australasian Horror; I was doing some edits for the first issue of Hub Magazine and 1 of the stories by Liam Rands was an honorable mention for this award (he won for another story the next year); there was discussion here recently about awards so this may be something someone would want to enter. Awards are still going as of 2022. --Username (talk) 13:39, 22 January 2023 (EST)

Interesting. It looks like the Australasian Horror Writers Association has two separate/parallel projects:
We already have the Australian Shadows Award listed, but we don't cover "The AHWA Robert N Stephenson Flash Fiction & Short Story Competition" at this time. One thing to note is that the latter is a true "competition" in the tradition of pulp magazines. To quote their rules page:
  • The winner in each category will receive an engraved plaque and the winning stories will appear in Midnight Echo, and receive the pay rate commensurate with that edition.
Runner-ups presumably benefit by being able to claim that their stories were "runner-ups" when they try to sell them to other markets.
This is a bit unusual, but we do have precedent for including awards given to unpublished texts -- see Prix Jean Ray, which is given to "Best unpublished fantasy text by a Belgian writer".
Thoughts? Ahasuerus (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2023 (EST)
I'd support adding it. Some of the more prestigious Japanese SF awards are contests where the winner(s) get publishing contracts (as do some of the runners up, often). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:11, 23 January 2023 (EST)
If there is no objection, I will create a new Award Type tomorrow. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:59, 27 January 2023 (EST)
A new award type and two award categories have been created. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2023 (EST)
Jusges?--Username (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2023 (EST)
Fixed, thanks. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:51, 28 January 2023 (EST)

Nick Fox/Bantock Cover; Nick Bantock's art book The Artful Dodger includes a Silverberg cover,, which is credited to a studio (and back cover seen online does credit it to that studio) but he says he did it under his Nick Fox name. So what to do? Also, Google Books copy seems to be a 2nd printing of the Chronicle Books edition on ISFDB and there's a Canadian edition from Raincoast on which isn't on ISFDB. --Username (talk) 09:49, 25 January 2023 (EST)

Inter-author collections of speculative drama

Good afternoon, everyone. Are there inter-author collections (Anthology, Almanac) of speculative drama? Thank you in advance. --Strannik27 (talk) 02:48, 27 January 2023 (EST)

--Zlogorek (talk) 11:01, 27 January 2023 (EST)
  • Thank you so much, are there more examples? --Strannik27 (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2023 (EST)

Edit Pub -- post-submission page updated

The Metadata (i.e. top) section of the post-submission review page for Edit Publication submissions has been updated. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:02, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Robert Bloch Book Duplicate;; I started to enter the HC edition, mentioned in the note by the PV, using FantLab's copy but decided to check further and it's already on ISFDB; Both HC and TP were entered many years earlier so I guess nobody checked first before approving PV submission. I've made a (pending) edit adding ID, full cover and cover design note to the HC, but there's a problem. PV did a lot of work entering the contents, which nobody did for the 2 records entered earlier, but he got the format wrong and entered it as a collection instead of non-fiction (it has both fiction and non-fiction, so who knows). So some more astute people here should decide what to do, which to keep, possible merges, etc. I'll leave a brief note on PV page about this; they're still active. --Username (talk) 19:48, 27 January 2023 (EST)

I still have the TP handy if you want to point me in the right direction. Still mostly a novice at this. I appreciate this resource and like to contribute how I can. Fenrix1958 (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2023 (EST)
Thanks for responding so quickly. I randomly came across the Bloch book you entered and thought I'd enter the HC edition you mentioned in your note since FantLab has many photos of it, but I found it hard to believe that nobody ever entered it, and after checking further I found both HC and TP editions which, judging by edit history, were entered in the very early days of public editing here. Yours was in 2015, so I'm not sure why a moderator approved it when it already existed and had the same ISBN, but the problem is that you actually did the hard work of entering the numerous contents, unlike the others, but didn't enter the month, made it a PB instead of a TP, made it a collection with Bloch as author instead of non-fiction with Matheson and Mainhardt as editors (I'm not even sure what's correct because it includes Bloch stories but also essays from many other people about Bloch, so anthology, maybe?). So I was wanting people who, unlike me, have been doing this for a very long time to chime in and suggest what should be done because your hard work shouldn't go to waste, but several different people made edits for the edition you didn't enter so it wouldn't be right to just delete that. I've been editing for just over 2 years but am rapidly losing interest due to a variety of reasons, so I won't be of much help to you, I'm afraid; I just do simple stuff these days. Someone else will respond shortly, I'm sure, and this will be resolved soon. --Username (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2023 (EST)
This is the most relevant section of the help:
NONFICTION. This type should be used for books that are predominantly or completely non-fiction. This includes book-length works of non-fiction or books containing essays by one or more authors. A publication that contains both non-fiction and fiction should be typed by that which is predominant. A single work of fiction in an Isaac Asimov essay collection does not make it a COLLECTION. A book of fiction (NOVEL, COLLECTION, or ANTHOLOGY) containing a generous, but not predominate, amount of non-fiction, such as introductions, essays, and other non-fiction works, should not be typed as NONFICTION. Mixtures of fiction and non-fiction are more usually found in magazines than they are in books, so the question does not often arise.
I'd wait a bit to see if there are any opposing viewpoints, but it looks to me like the book is predominantly the Bloch stories and poem, and most of the essays are introductions to those works. However, it also has more -- and a wider range of -- essays than we would normally see as supplemental material in a typical collection. So it strikes me as a book assembling Bloch works and a lot of other material, as opposed to a book about Bloch that happens to contain some of his works. If you have the book, you can make a more informed judgement that I can. If it's primarily a book of Bloch works, I would use ANTHOLOGY as the least bad fit, with Matheson and Mainhardt as the editors. If the book is primarily about Bloch, then NONFICTION would be more appropriate. --MartyD (talk) 07:45, 28 January 2023 (EST)
My edit for the HC was just approved after a long wait (I made a minor error in the note so that new edit still has to be approved), but I think I'm done and so someone should decide what to do with the 2 separate but equal paperback editions now. --Username (talk) 13:03, 14 February 2023 (EST)
HC copy just uploaded to, I added a link, now I'm really done with this and so someone may want to decide what to do re: the above. --Username (talk) 11:35, 31 March 2023 (EDT)

L. R. Giles/Lamar Giles - Canonical Name

Our canonical name for this author is currently L. R. Giles, presumably because that's how his first three SF stories credited the author back in 2004-2007. However, over the last 6 years he has published 4 SF novels and 2 stories as "Lamar Giles". A 2018 reprint of a 2006 story also used "Lamar Giles".

Are there any objections to changing the canonical name to "Lamar Giles"? Ahasuerus (talk) 13:41, 28 January 2023 (EST)

Done. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Page & Spine: Fiction Showcase - call for editors to assist

Hello everybody! As all webzines, including those with mainly non-genre content, are now being indexed following a policy change in October 2022 regarding the Rules of Acquisition (as per this discussion), I recently started indexing speculative contributions appearing in the last two-and-a-half years of Page & Spine: Fiction Showcase. This webzine began publication in 2012 and ceased on 6 May 2022. It will be taken offline permanently on or about 6 May 2023, i.e., in about three months or so. My focus on those issues published between January 2020 and May 2022 is mainly because of the addition of a speculative fiction and poetry section called 'Outta This World' from May of 2020. However, some speculative contributions continued to be published in different sections, such as 'Crumbs' (for drabbles, jokes and short-form poetry) and 'Kid Stuff' (stories and art by under-eighteens) and, prior to the establishment of the 'Outta This World' section, speculative stories and poems could be found in other sections across the site (e.g., in 'The Reading Lamp' and 'Stories').

It will be a challenge for me to complete the period from 2020 to 2022 in the three months available but there's no way I can cover the earlier years alone (if at all). Would anyone else be interested in covering the earlier (nine) years? It's possible that after May 2023, most - if not all - of the webzine could continue to be indexed using the Internet Archive but I suspect that lacunae would occasionally be found in the latter's coverage.

It may be the case that earlier issues contained only a small amount of speculative material so this might facilitate more rapid indexing, though of course the stories, poems and essays will still need to be read to determine their eligibility.

Note that 'issues' are distributed across different sections and have been archived in different ways (e.g. under a specific section or under a particular author). The final issue appears on the current home page with items shown listed under each section. Each item appearing in the same issue will bear the issue date in brackets after the title. They can be found grouped according to month under most sections, e.g. 'The Reading Lamp' section is indexed for the period December 2013 to May 2020 here while that for 'Crumbs' is indexed for the period December 2012 to April 2022 here.--Explorer1000 (talk) 12:34, 29 January 2023 (EST)

Oh, and the series page on ISFDB is here.--Explorer1000 (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2023 (EST)

Rozic/Rosick; I was adding a few links to stories from that are on ISFDB and this dude's name is a mess. He had a story in Pulphouse which was reprinted many years later in a horror anthology under a different name; his story on Blood Rose,, spells his name differently at top and bottom. I did an edit (pending) making Rozic an alternate name of Rosick, but I'm not touching anything else. --Username (talk) 14:24, 29 January 2023 (EST)

Ongoing cleanup of post-submission pages

I am in the process of removing obsolete code which was previously used to display post-submission pages and was deactivated last week. I am also making minor improvements to yellow warnings as I go along, e.g. I am currently working on making the "Price" field support multiple yellow warnings. If you come across any issues, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2023 (EST)

Catalog ID- and ISBN-specific yellow warnings have been upgraded to support multiple warnings per entered value. Pre-1970 pubs with an ISBN now generate yellow warnings. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:42, 29 January 2023 (EST)
Price-specific yellow warnings for prices now support multiple warnings per entered value. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:04, 29 January 2023 (EST)
Yellow warnings for image URLs now support multiple warnings per entered value. Certain odd Amazon URLs may generate more than one warning because they break more than one of our rules. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2023 (EST)
Yellow warnings about alternate and/or disambiguated names are no longer displayed for submissions which do not change them. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:17, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Broken Galactic Central image links

Can anything be done about this? —Rosab618 (talk) 13:45, 30 January 2023 (EST)

See this post for an explanation. John Scifibones 14:04, 30 January 2023 (EST)
Rats! Thanks for the info. Is there a way I can make Google Chrome show the images, by allowing insecure images? I tried allowing both and to show insecure content, but it didn't seem to do anything. —Rosab618 (talk) 16:33, 30 January 2023 (EST)
I would tell you to switch to a less arrogant browser, but I did a little research and found you can actually convince Chrome to do what you want in this case:
  1. Click on the lock icon to the left of in the address bar.
  2. Click on Site settings in the drop-down menu that appears.
  3. If Privacy and security is not already selected in the list at the left, select it.
  4. You should see a list at the right with "" at the top.
  5. Scroll way down through the "Permissions" and look for Insecure content with a danger triangle to the left and "Block (default)" to the right.
  6. Click on the little down-arrow next to "Blocked (default)" and switch to "Allow".
That's it. Now if you refresh (or go back to) the ISFDB page with the blocked image, you will see the image.
I hope that helps. --MartyD (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2023 (EST)
HOORAY! It works! Thank you so much! —Rosab618 (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Biffignandi;;; Biff apparently did a ton of art but ISFDB, oddly, only has 2 German krimi covers and an American cover for an Anne McCaffrey book (?!?) Anyway, I have a feeling the books linked above may be of use to those who enter all those obscure foreign covers. Be warned, however; there is much, MUCH nudity, including some pretty racy stuff. I do like the cover near the end of the 2nd book, however, where a weird-looking shark is chasing a woman swimming with a BABY in her arms. Is that an Italian thing? --Username (talk) 23:33, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Drew S.

Drew Struzan is a well-known artist, today I added a link to an copy of a novel he did the cover for, credit was to Drew Struzman, searching for that name only hit on that book, I asked PV who entered it as Struzan to check but SFJuggler doesn't always respond, so if anyone else has a copy of the 1991 Bantam Falcon edition of Indiana Jones and the Seven Veils you may want to check the copyright page. Struzan has no alternate names on ISFDB, so this may be the first. --Username (talk) 23:43, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Creative Guy From Canada; I did some editing for Lucy A. Snyder book, publisher is Canadian, my price fix adding the "C" is the only one, should all be "C"? There's also 1 price missing and 1 where editor entered British price for some reason. --Username (talk) 11:15, 31 January 2023 (EST)

Riley Art; Is this,, actually by David A. Riley, He has 2 cover art credits, both discovered by me some time ago, and I think this may be another piece of art by him. --Username (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2023 (EST)

French Bardin and Dick; I added link to Tor TP of P.K. Dick's The Man Whose Teeth Were All Exactly Alike and added another link to the Paladin edition I did an edit for a long time ago, but there's another edition, a French one, and while searching for other books by the publisher I found they did an edition of Bardin's Deadly Percheron, although the French title is Big Clogs or something similar. So if anyone who regularly enters French editions wants to enter those. Oddly, there are publishers with the same name on ISFDB,, but one published LONG before these 2 books came out and the other I'm not sure about, having published only an art book and a French novel, with no translations of American books. --Username (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2023 (EST)

The Big O; I added a D. Wheatley edition from this publisher and noticed the series, Plus, spells the publisher with a capital O. So should the publisher be spelled with a capital O, too? Also for the other series with A.C. Doyle books? Because on the Wheatley book it does look like they made the O big, since it stands for Oswald and so it makes sense that a person's initial would be capitalized. --Username (talk) 10:00, 1 February 2023 (EST)

That seems appropriate. I found this scan where the cover and title page have a stylized "NéO" logo (where it's hard to tell whether the "O" is capitalized), but title page says "Nouvelles éditions Oswald" and the copyright page says "© Nouvelles éditions Oswald (NéO) 1981". So it seems they used the big "O". Two more scans corroborating that: [1] and [2]. --MartyD (talk) 10:38, 1 February 2023 (EST)
Based on that title page, the publisher should be "Nouvelles éditions Oswald" rather than "Néo" or "NéO". ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:56, 1 February 2023 (EST)
All three of those scans have: "NéO" [in stylized form] (over) "Nouvelles éditions Oswald" on the title page. The copyrights use "Nouvelles éditions Oswald (NéO)". Dates are 1981, 1982, and 1986. In the 1986 book on the page facing the title page is "Voir liste des libraries NéO en fin de volume." and "Maquette: Studios Knack/NéO" (referring to the cover illustration). The 1982 book's copyright page's list of other books by the same author has a citation that uses "Nouvelles éditions Oswald/NéO". Whether it should be "NéO" or spelled out doesn't seem clear-cut to me. But if the short form is what should be used, then I think it's clear the capitalization should be "NéO", not "Néo". --MartyD (talk) 14:53, 1 February 2023 (EST)
Yes, the stylized "NéO" is the logo, and the name of the publisher is "Nouvelles éditions Oswald". If the publisher information is on the title page, we always go with that over anything on the copyright page or elsewhere. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:43, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Frankenstein Glut; PV is very gone, as can be seen there's a bunch of messy details I've tried to note/fix, LCCN ID on OL leads to a record which mentions a collector ed. and a paperback but there's only one edition on ISFDB, copyright page also mentions the 1977 Mews edition was shorter and substantially different and so wouldn't it be considered a separate book? Anyway, I noticed somebody made an edit for a Glut book today so they or someone may want to look at this after it's approved and see if they can do anything more with it. Donald N. will need to be made a variant of his real name, anyway. --Username (talk) 12:53, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Making of ROTJ; $4.25 edition has been here for years, I added $3.50 edition recently, I moved 2 ID over, $4.25 either is Canadian with higher price, later printing, whatever, but both PV are gone, so if anyone here knows what's up a C should be added to price or date should be changed to 0000, etc. --Username (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Alien Sex; Several PV, some active, nobody added Roman numerals to page count, one of the PV should do that. --Username (talk) 12:32, 3 February 2023 (EST)

Self-nomination for self-approver - Pwendt

Happy New Year (or Groundhog Day)! I nominate myself for self-approver. --Pwendt|talk 16:20, 3 February 2023 (EST)

Support. Kraang (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2023 (EST)
Support. Does a good job. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:46, 8 February 2023 (EST)
Support (and changing the title of the thread so it is clear what this is for :) ) Annie (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2023 (EST)
Support -- Apologies for missing this earlier and not responding sooner. --MartyD (talk) 12:45, 9 February 2023 (EST)
Comment. I haven't worked on Pwendt's submissions lately, so I'll abstain. One issue that I encountered in the past was lack of clarity in Notes. My recommendation would be using shorter complete sentences with a subject, a predicate and an optional object. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:54, 9 February 2023 (EST)


Self-approver flag set on the account as per the consensus above. Congratulations! Ahasuerus (talk) 11:40, 11 February 2023 (EST)

Disch Ruins; I added links to 2 club editions recently, today a link to Arrow edition, Hutchinson edition has no price or cover artist, SFE says Chris Yates, this STAINED eBay copy has a flap photo which is blurry but a 2 seems to be the start of the price,, so if anyone can find somewhere that shows better photos or owns a copy then price can be entered and cover artist (on back flap, I assume, although it may just be design) can be entered if warranted. --Username (talk) 18:43, 3 February 2023 (EST)

The Turner Diaries; I came across a copy, uploaded to a little over a year ago, and while making an edit remembered I had done an edit previously, which turned out to be not long before the copy was uploaded (I hate when that happens). Anyway, after my new edit is approved, there's 2 questions: name's spelled Macdonald, not MacDonald, but when changing that it still looks like MacDonald even though it's in a new column so it sees it as a change even though it doesn't look that way. Is that a quirk of ISFDB? More importantly, there's an essay by someone with the same name who I highly doubt is the same guy who wrote this notoriously violent and racist novel, and none of his 5 wives mentioned on his Wikipedia page were named Gina (I suppose it could be a relative), so I'm sure the essay writer, assuming they're still alive (it's been 40 years), would like their name moved to a separate record if they're not that other guy. --Username (talk) 22:11, 4 February 2023 (EST)

When you enter or edit an author name, a publisher name, a series name or a publication series name, the ISFDB software first checks the database to see if we already have it on file. The check is not case-sensitive, so "ace books" will find "Ace Books", "george orwell" will find "George Orwell", etc. Once a matching name has been found, the software uses it instead of the form of the name that was actually entered. The process ensures that we don't end up with multiple separate records for the same author/series/publisher/etc due to capitalization mistakes during the data entry process. If we determine that the capitalization of the canonical name/series name/etc is incorrect, as is apparently the case with Andrew MacDonald, we can edit the main record directly.
That said, the fact that this submission shows "Andrew MacDonald" in the "Proposed Changes" column may be a bug. I'll take a closer look tomorrow. Thanks for reporting the issue. Ahasuerus (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2023 (EST)
I have confirmed that this problem affects both Edit Title and Edit Publication. Bug 826, "Edit Title and Edit Pub do not check for author case properly", has been created. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2023 (EST)
Coincidentally, famous artist LeRoy Neiman has all 4 of his credits on ISFDB as Leroy. Fixing the first one,, I subbed R but pending edit says r. So I assume it takes a while for your bug fix to start working? --Username (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2023 (EST)
Bug 826 is just a document describing the reported bug and how to recreate it. I am currently working on a software patch which should fix the problem. Ahasuerus (talk) 21:39, 5 February 2023 (EST)

Red Skelton Book; I asked about this last July 4 on this board, MartyD agreed with adding the "e", neither of us ever fixed it, I came across this randomly today and am finally fixing it. I trust nobody has any objection? PV is gone. --Username (talk) 21:34, 5 February 2023 (EST)

Price Of Three Women

This is a bit complicated. A stray mention of Anne McCaffrey on this site spurred me to see if I could enter anything interesting by her, skipping over her endless Pern books, and I decided to start with her non-genre works. That was a mistake. She published 3 gothic novels in the 70's which were collected by Tor as Three Women and published in either Dec. 1991 or Jan. 1992. So searching ISBN on OL found a record with no book but it did find a copy on; searching for their URL, threewomen00mcca, on OL found a record with a link to the copy, so why ISBN doesn't is unknown because it's there on the page. Anyway, the copy is ancient, having been uploaded in 2010, but is missing the copyright page. Noticing the price was higher I created a new record with an "unknown" date and a note about it, The problem is that I can't find a single photo online of a cover with the $4.99 price on it; I suspect there is none and the real original price was $5.99. Locus has much incorrect info, and searching ISBN in contents found these,; ignoring the 4 unrelated books, that Brown/Contento book is Locus with the same info found on their site, but that YA guide says $5.99. I find it very strange that multiple copies with extensive photos can't be found since most of her books were big sellers with large print runs and many were reprinted. I was going to cancel my edit and just add the copy link and the page numbers to the existing record, but decided not to because there's still a slim possibility it was originally $4.99. So check your shelves or the dark corners of the web, readers, and let me know if you can find a copy with that price. EDIT: My edit was rejected for some reason over my head so if anyone else wants to enter it, go ahead. --Username (talk) 18:22, 6 February 2023 (EST)

If you were confused as to why it was rejected, you could have asked. I rejected it because it was creating an new OMNIBUS record without any content. Nor was there a moderator note stating that you intended to add the content in a subsequent edit. There are three ways you could have added this publication record. You could use the add publication tool, and manually add the contained novels in one edit. Then you would need to merge each novel separately. You could also use the add publication and in a subsequent edit import the three novel titles. If this was your intent, it's a good idea to note this in the Moderator notes, so that we'll know that you intend to finish the edit. However, the most efficient way to add this publication is with the Clone this Pub tool. That way, all the contained novels will automatically be copied and it will all be accomplished in a single edit rather than 2 or 4 edits. Hope that helps. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:22, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Stockholders in Death; copy of #7 since 2010 that nobody ever entered here so I just did in a (pending) edit, but publisher is Warner PL; several entries omit the Warner on ISFDB, so should all of them, including this one, be made Warner PL, too? Did PL, no Warner, publish any of them? --Username (talk) 10:47, 7 February 2023 (EST)

Author name validation enhancements

The way the ISFDB software handles author names in Edit Title, New Pub, Add Pub, Clone Pub, and Edit Pub has been enhanced. The following scenarios are now processed correctly:

  • The same author name is entered using different capitalization, e.g. "David Weber" is changed to "david weber"
  • The order of co-author, co-artist, co-interviewee, co-interviewer, co-reviewer or co-reviewee names is changed
  • The same author name is entered two or more times (for the same title) using different capitalization, e.g. "David Weber" and then again "david weber"

In all of these cases the software now ignores the submitted "change".

Hopefully every permutation has been addressed/fixed. If you come across anything unexpected, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:53, 7 February 2023 (EST)

Great SF About Doctors; I added a link to original edition, fourth printing is on ISFDB with correct date but wrong printing and date in note, I added a link and fixed the note, cover artist is Don Ivan just like the fifth printing, so there's a lot of confusion, especially since the 2nd printing has no PV and nobody's entered the 3rd. So maybe someone can look into that and unmerge/un-variant; I have a feeling all the editions with that cover have Don Ivan on the back. --Username (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2023 (EST)

C. Alexander London canonical name

Are there any objections to swapping the canonical name here to Alex London. The longer name had not been used for a long time and all new books use the shorter name. SFE also has the record under Alex London. Annie (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2023 (EST)

It's a slightly unusual case in that his first series appeared as by "Alex London", the second one came out as by "C. Alexander London" and the last two went back to "Alex London". Be that as it may, "Alex London" is currently leading 8:3, so I think it should be the canonical name. Ahasuerus (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2023 (EST)

Series with non-fiction and short-fiction only

When a series has only non-fiction and short-fiction in it, it shows up in an author list as a "Nonfiction Series" (As the only container title is non-fiction, it kinda makes sense). However, it is factually wrong and we are a fiction DB after all. As novellas/novelettes are popular (both as "juvenile novels under 40K" and as self-published or e-only non-juveniles), this is happening more and more often. As soon as a collection of more than one of the stories show up, the collection title bumps the series into the Fiction category. But in the meantime, it lags under Non-fiction.

Any chance to have these shown up in the Fiction series list? Example: this series. See where it shows on the author page. Thanks!

PS: Another related case is a series with only short-fiction. Now these show all the way at the bottom, with the short fiction until they get a collection and then they sail up under Fiction series. Maybe we can solve both usecases together and just treat short fiction entries as the fiction containers and just list all fiction series under the normal series heading. Annie (talk) 13:45, 9 February 2023 (EST)

I am looking at the code that drives the Summary Bibliography page and here is what I am seeing.
First, the software organizes all titles by series. Then it builds "series hierarchies" so that embedded series appear under the top series -- note how "Star Wars: The Clone Wars (animated)" appears under "Star Wars: Clone Wars", which appears under "Star Wars Universe" on Tracey West's page. Then it checks the title type of each parent title in each "series hierarchy" to determine which section of the Summary page the hierarchy belongs under. The current logic is as follows:
  • If a "series hierarchy" contains at least one NOVEL, COLLECTION, or SERIAL title, it is displayed in the "Fiction Series" section.
    • If it contains at least one ANTHOLOGY title, it is displayed in the "Anthology Series" section.
      • If it contains at least one NONFICTION title, it is displayed in the "Nonfiction Series" section.
      • OTHERWISE:
        • If it contains at least one OMNIBUS title, it is displayed in the "Fiction Series" section. (This check is performed after the ANTHOLOGY and NONFICTION checks so that OMNIBUSES with only ANTHOLOGY/NONFICTION titles would appear in their respective Anthology/Nonfiction series sections.)
        • OTHERWISE:
          • If it contains at least one SHORTFICTION title, it is displayed in the "Short Fiction Series" section.
          • OTHERWISE:
            • If it contains at least one POEM title, it is displayed in the "Poem Series" section.
            • OTHERWISE:
              • If it contains at least one ESSAY title, it is displayed in the "Essay Series" section.
              • OTHERWISE:
                • If it contains at least one COVERART title, it is displayed in the "Cover Art Series" section.
                • OTHERWISE:
                  • If it contains at least one INTERIORART title, it is displayed in the "Interior Art Series" section.
                  • OTHERWISE:
                    • If it contains at least one REVIEW title, it is displayed in the "Review Series" section.
                    • OTHERWISE:
                      • If it contains at least one INTERVIEW title, it is displayed in the "Interview Series" section.
                      • OTHERWISE:
                        • If it contains at least one title of some other type, it is displayed in the "Other Series" section. (This should never happen because CHAPBOOKs cannot be added to series.)
Once all eligible titles have been placed into series, the displayed order of sections is as follows:
  • Fiction Series
  • Standalone novels
  • Standalone collections
  • Standalone omnibuses
  • Standalone serials (should never happen because SERIAL titles are supposed to be turned into variants)
  • EDITOR series
  • Anthology Series
  • Standalone anthologies
  • Standalone chapbooks
  • Nonfiction series
  • Standalone nonfiction
  • Short Fiction series
  • Standalone short fiction
  • Poem series
  • Standalone poems
  • Cover art series
  • Standalone cover art
  • Interior art series
  • Standalone interior art
  • Review series
  • Standalone reviews
  • Interview series
  • Standalone interviews
If we decide that we want to fold the "Short Fiction Series" section into the "Fiction Series" section, it would be easy to add "SHORTFICTION" to the list of title types which trigger placement in the "Fiction Series" series, then delete the "Short Fiction Series" section. It would also take care of the NONFICTION issue since series with a mix of NONFICTION and SHORTFICTION titles would appear in the "Fiction Series" section.
As to whether combining "Fiction Series" and "Shortfiction" would be a desirable change, I'll have to think about it. Annie's example is a good argument in favor of making the change, but then non-series short fiction, which appears below magazines, anthologies, chapbooks and non-fiction, would be treated differently than the other title types which drive inclusion in the "Fiction Series" section. I guess we could move the "[standalone] Short Fiction" section up the page, but then it would be above book-length works like magazines and anthologies. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:43, 9 February 2023 (EST)
What a blast from the past! I remember working on that code.... The organizational thought behind that evaluation chain was that "books" should be the primary driver of the series type. But perhaps that's a mistake when it comes to NONFICTION. It seems reasonable to suppose there might be a NONFICTION work about any series of works, and if we want to put that NONFICTION work into the series, it shouldn't affect the series type, whatever that may be. So maybe it would be best to move NONFICTION to the bottom of the chain. just before the "Other Series" catch-all. Then Nonfiction Series would only contain NONFICTION. --MartyD (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2023 (EST)
Currently, a series with a mix of NONFICTION, ESSAY, COVERART, INTERIORART, REVIEW and INTERVIEW titles is displayed in the "Nonfiction Series" section. Would you say that it should be displayed in the "Essay Series" section instead? Ahasuerus (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2023 (EST)
The one gotcha I see with that is a nonfiction series that happens to contain an OMNIBUS as well (do we allow that?); we wouldn't want that to end up in Fiction Series. So that evaluation might need a tweak of some sort. --MartyD (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2023 (EST)
The official rule is: "A publication may be classified as an omnibus if it contains multiple works that have previously been published independently, and at least one of them is a NOVEL, ANTHOLOGY, COLLECTION, or NONFICTION." So technically - yes, an omnibus can contain 3 NONFICTION items. In practice it is rare but it happens. Annie (talk) 19:10, 10 February 2023 (EST)
H. P. Lovecraft's Collected Essays: Complete, which collects HPL's essays originally published as 5 NONFICTION volumes, would be one example. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:45, 13 February 2023 (EST)
Maybe the easiest way will be in the omnibus line to have a secondary check if there is at least one SHORTFICTION or POEM title - everything else on the fiction side is before the Omnibus so we will only reach that case when there are no novels and collections/anthologies.
I won't insist on moving short fiction series higher but... I still think that having fiction series in two different places on the screen is confusing, especially for authors who write on the border between novella and novel and that end up with their series split in weird ways. :) Annie (talk) 19:10, 10 February 2023 (EST)


I have changed the software to display series with a mix of NONFICTION and SHORTFICTION/POEM titles in the "Fiction Series" section. We may want to start another discussion about merging the two "Fiction Series" sections. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:35, 13 February 2023 (EST)

Embedded HTML is now displayed correctly

After close to a hundred patches over the course of many months, embedded HTML is now displayed correctly on all ISFDB pages. If you come across any irregularities or bugs, please let me know. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:51, 9 February 2023 (EST)

What does embedded HTML mean? --Username (talk) 19:01, 9 February 2023 (EST)
Consider this record whose title is "<sarcasm>Adventures in Gaming</sarcasm>". It could just as easily be "<b>Adventures in Gaming</b>". Angle brackets like "<" and ">" are the building blocks of HTML tags, so browsers interpret them as HTML commands to use bold, italics, underlining, etc. Or, in the case of "<sarcasm>" just stand around looking very confused :-) That's what "embedded HTML" is.
In order to prevent browser confusion, the ISFDB software needs to do something special to tell the browser that these particular angle brackets should be simply displayed "as is" instead of being interpreted as HTML commands. It took me a while to get everything updated, but I think I am finally done. I think I'll go have a tankard of non-alcoholic Klingon ale to celebrate :-) Ahasuerus (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2023 (EST)
<clanks tankard/> For the Empire! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:29, 10 February 2023 (EST)

MV of SK; It says 19.95 on back, librarian typed 21.95 on first page like ISFDB says, Locusmag says 19.95 but also says 1989 is the date yet they didn't see it until Aug. '90 for some reason, after this is approved someone more hip to these tangled Starmont/Borgo things may know more about if this is a 2nd printing, if they suddenly decided to raise the price before the 1st printing, etc. --Username (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2023 (EST)

HELP! A Bear Is Eating Me!; English edition just uploaded to, I added a link, but French version uploaded back in 2021 in case anyone wants to enter that. --Username (talk) 11:13, 12 February 2023 (EST)

SFE Clute; Why is this happening now? Did they change again? --Username (talk) 13:09, 12 February 2023 (EST)

This is the first "clute_uk" URL that I have seen. I am going to ask the SFE administrator whether it's a typo or a new part of their URL structure. Thanks for reporting the issue. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:31, 12 February 2023 (EST)
It turns out that "clute_uk" is a new publicly "linkable" subdirectory. I have updated the software to recognize it as legitimate. Thanks. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2023 (EST)

Bradbury's Twice Twenty-Two; Search on only brings up 1 copy but as can be seen at the OL link,, there's 1 of those weird "preview" copies; it doesn't really have the cover art like the thumbnail shows, just red cloth binding like the other copy, but it's a different copy. So if anybody knows which edition they belong in, if it's one of those later ones mentioned in the ISFDB notes, etc., then link(s) can be added; note also that OL mentions a 1994 Buccaneer edition. Also, Mugnaini's cover art was missing the month and his frontispiece was only included and dated based on the book club edition,, so I've fixed all that in (pending) edits; note also the last entry with a month that matches neither edition and is from a Virgil Finlay book. What's that about? --Username (talk) 10:47, 14 February 2023 (EST)

Tainaron;; The original Finnish edition is not on ISFDB but it is on the Library of Congress site in case anyone fluent wants to enter it. I just added an link to the Prime Books edition. --Username (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2023 (EST)

Grindhouse; Would the inclusion of the entire screenplay for Planet Terror qualify this for entry here? I've been wanting to find something with Tarantino's name on it so I can add his bio and find the most unflattering photo of him possible. --Username (talk) 11:57, 15 February 2023 (EST)

Richard Morris; Interview is with this guy,, not the guy from the 1800's, but does that interview about a movie really belong here? If it does, some addition to interviewee's name is needed to differ him from the dead guy. --Username (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2023 (EST)

I'll differentiate the name: thanks for finding this. The interview does belong here because it was published in a genre magazine. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 01:36, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Whimper of Whipped Dogs; Today is the anniversary of 911 calls here in America, starting in 1968 and prompted by the murder of Kitty Genovese a few years earlier which was the inspiration for this story by Harlan Ellison. I was looking for an online PDF and found this, I'm going to add the link but I'm curious where that drawing came from. Anyone recognize it? also, at the link above, the 2 essays seem like the same thing but there's no variant. Are they the same? --Username (talk) 13:24, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Lester Dent Bibliography;; 1996 date doesn't match either version on ISFDB and it seems to have been published as an e-book or something. Lots of Doc Savage work done recently here so maybe somebody wants to enter this or at least knows where it originally came from. --Username (talk) 13:52, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Squires Knight;; I added an link to the Leisure edition by Knight and checked his real name and found that he originally published What Rough Beast under that name. What's the variant rules here? Who's the parent? --Username (talk) 00:45, 17 February 2023 (EST)

Where it's only one title under each name, it doesn't matter much. But I found an archived copy of his website in the Wayback Machine, and in a 2012 version there is: "Now writing horror as H.R. Knight, Harry...". So it seems he deliberately changed his horror-writing identity from Squires to Knight. So I'd make Knight the canonical (which also works well because the publications under that name are more recent and more plentiful). --MartyD (talk) 10:01, 17 February 2023 (EST)

Post-submission display of Contents sections improved

The way Contents sections are displayed on post-submission pages is in the process of being changed. At this point NewPub and AddPub submissions have been upgraded. Their Contents sections now properly display multiple yellow warnings when warranted. They also indicate which submitted author name is new, which one is an alternate name or which one is a disambiguated name. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2023 (EST)

Filaria; A copy was uploaded a few months ago on; it revealed that the page count and the price here were wrong, I fixed those and added the link, but the review at Strange Horizons calls this the first book from Chizine and says 2008, as do all copyrights in the book itself. Why it has a late 2009 date here I don't know, and I also don't know why there's such a big gap between the first Chizine book here, January 2009, and the rest of their 2009 books. So real date is needed for this book and probably others from this publisher. Also, while researching this I saw an expired eBay sale for a 100-copy HC, which I believe Chizine did for many of their books, often including extra material, but very few seem to have been entered here, so there's that, too. --Username (talk) 09:42, 20 February 2023 (EST)

Earthman, Come Home; I noticed a M. Ayme Mayflower edition said Dell on cover and Google Books had it with Mayflower-Dell on copyright page so I fixed that but this isn't on Google. It says Dell on cover, both PV haven't been around for years, but knowing these old paperbacks I hesitate to fix it without someone seeing a copyright page. So if anyone owns this edition can you check and see what it says inside the book. --Username (talk) 16:17, 20 February 2023 (EST)

Come Softly, Come Sweetly...; I added info to the only issue of D. Sutton's British Shadow fanzine, from 1971, that's on ISFDB and Eddy C. Bertin has a story, "Come Softly, Come Sweetly", in it which isn't on ISFDB but his 1971 Dutch collection, linked above, has a title which translates to the English title, just with added words, so any Dutch people who are familiar with his extensive bibliography will probably know which came first and can variant as needed. --Username (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2023 (EST)

Mark; Does that seem right? It should be other people named Mark Williams, shouldn't it? --Username (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2023 (EST)

Two things: (1) That "Mark (Wills) Williams" is matched up with forms of "Mark" is a bug. I would bet the issue is the "(". The ambiguity matching logic probably isn't paying attention to whether the parenthesized expression is at the end or is embedded in the middle. (2) That "Mark (Wills) Williams" is not matched up with forms of "Mark Williams" is a limitation/feature of the current matching, which doesn't consider names containing middle names (or initials, etc.) to be ambiguous vis-a-vis the same combination of first and last name without any middle name. I don't think we'd want "Mark XYZ Williams" to be shown as ambiguous with "Mark Williams", but I guess I could see showing "Mark Williams" as ambiguous with "Mark ABC Williams" and "Mark XYZ Williams". You'd have to lobby Ahasuerus on that one. --MartyD (talk) 09:41, 22 February 2023 (EST)
Good catch. Bug 827, "'Same name' logic fails for records with embedded parentheses", has been created. Ahasuerus (talk) 09:50, 22 February 2023 (EST)
It should be fixed now. Thanks for reporting the problem.
Re: showing "Mark Williams" as ambiguous with "Mark ABC Williams" and "Mark XYZ Williams", that's a whole different can of worms. If you do a name search on "John%Smith", you'll get a list of a dozen names, including:
  • John Claude Smith
  • John D. Smith
  • John Hirschhorn-Smith
  • John Smith
First we'd have to decide which ones are considered ambiguous. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2023 (EST)

Created By Matheson; The advance reading copy,, says 352 pages on the first page, it's actually 344, ISFDB says 324. Anyone own a copy who can verify what the actual page count is? There are also Roman numerals at the front; no editions here have them. --Username (talk) 08:30, 21 February 2023 (EST)

Brutarian; Heads up that someone, after uploading 3 random issues years ago, started uploading more issues recently. This was not strictly a genre magazine but included some genre fiction/non-fiction, especially in later issues, some of it by big names. ISFDB only has a few late issues entered; I distinctly remember seeing issues on the newsstand at some store in New York City back in the 1990's or maybe a bit later, so it got some distribution, I guess. I got an R. Crumb vibe from it, though, probably due to the type of cover art they used, and didn't really peruse it. Crumb's art always made me nervous for some reason. --Username (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2023 (EST)

Bonus fiction in novels

Why is a 'bonus' short fiction title allowed in a novel, but a serial installment is specifically excluded? There are a number of publications, example 1, example 2, example 3, where we're forced to misclassify what is clearly a serial installment. I don't see a downside to lifting the exclusion. John Scifibones 19:05, 22 February 2023 (EST)

Because allowing SERIALs in books at all is a relatively new development. It used to be magazines and fanzines only. Then we allowed chapbooks. I think we should allow it in anthologies, novels and collections as well - especially because Magazines reprints are added as anthologies/collections AND because in our digital world, serials are used as bonus almost anywhere. Post over on R&S and we can hash it out and change the rules for serials. One thing to make sure we clearly separate - excerpts vs serials (it is intent that separates them essentially) :) Annie (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2023 (EST)

Moonchasers TP

I've done a lot of Ed Gorman edits recently and this,, is a problem because the HC is & on the title page but no photos of the TP title page can be found. Does anyone own the TP? I've got a half-dozen edits on hold because mod won't change unless I show that it's & in the TP title, too. --Username (talk) 19:09, 23 February 2023 (EST)

Sword & Fantasy; Some weeks-old edit of mine was finally approved, fixing an artist's name in one of these issues, but now that I look at the series page something's not right. Why do only the last 2 issues have a comma after the issue #? Also, is the # really supposed to be in any of them instead of in the notes? Isn't that magazine policy there? --Username (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2023 (EST)

The title records reflected the individual publication titles since they hadn't been 'rolled up' by year. I took care of that.
Regarding the comma:
  • The placement of the comma, in a periodical title, controls what is displayed in the issue grid. Basically, everything after the first comma appears in the grid except the year as long as it matches the date field. If the year differs, it will also be displayed. Notice how the issue number doesn't appear in the two titles you question.
  • Yes, current policy is to show the issue number in the publication notes. 21:57, 23 February 2023 (EST)

Flashing Swords! Help; I've just added links in (pending) edits to #1 (2 Doubleday), #2 (Mayflower), #3 (2 Dell), #4 (2 1977 Doubleday), and #5 (Doubleday). Now there are some issues. Some people unnecessarily entered the series title in the book title, others didn't; some people entered Roman numerals in the page count, others didn't; some people entered the book title as it appears on the title page, others didn't. Also, #3 doesn't have the Doubleday book club edition entered; #'s 1, 2, and 4 have the book club dates as earlier than the Dell PB dates but #5 has both as the same date, so it's possible that the story dates for #3 are wrong because the book club edition was probably published earlier. There are many PV for all volumes so if any of them would like to add/fix anything it would help. EDIT: The only thing I fixed was importing Carter's essay in #1, "A Last Word", to the Doubleday edition; it was only entered here in the Dell edition. --Username (talk) 11:30, 25 February 2023 (EST)

Backward(s); I just stumbled across a copy of Mitchell's Crystal Man which was uploaded in June of 2022 so I added a link and the missing page numbers to the many stories included in that book, but I noticed 1 story, "The Clock That Went Backwards", is actually "Backward". According to ISFDB the only instances of the singular title are the original, uncredited appearance in a newspaper and reprints in various books starting in 2013. So when my edit is approved that story needs merging with the singular or removing/adding the singular or whatever needs doing; the question now is if it really was the plural in the many books it appeared in between the above collection in 1973 and 2013. --Username (talk) 13:16, 25 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks, Pwendt. --Username (talk) 22:23, 10 March 2023 (EST)

Secret Asia's Blackest Heart; Something in the recent edits accidentally led me to this and some of those titles are already on ISFDB, specifically the Webb which was published in 2014 as "U-PAO. The Black Sutra", the Blackmore which is in 3 separate books on ISFDB starting in 2007, not 2009, and the Carter/Cornford story which is under the same title in 3 merged publications but its appearance in this book wasn't merged even though the editor did at least date it correctly as 1997. Person who entered it hasn't responded to anything for a long time so if anyone owns a copy a lot of re-dating/re-titling/merging is probably in order. --Username (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2023 (EST)

Borgo Question; One of those annoying situations where they include both editions but don't specify which it is. Was it Borgo's style to print the correct barcode in red as it appears on the back cover in the copy or is that totally unrelated and somebody just felt like coloring it? --Username (talk) 20:40, 25 February 2023 (EST)

O.J.'s Nightmare; Willem and Bob PV separate editions, pretty sure it should be David, also could be related to other artists named Bowers, first name starts with D, here. --Username (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2023 (EST)

Maelstrom; A challenge to anyone who can find a bigger cover image and replace mine. This anthology has been on ISFDB for years and there are a few online mentions of it including Locus where the contents came from but, as can be seen in the notes, it seems to have either been barely published or not at all. While on an archived author's site I was trying to get info from there was an image in her bibliography of this book so I uploaded the .jpg, but it was very tiny and after blowing it up as big as allowable here the author names are illegible. The title and cover art still come through nicely, though. Maybe someone here actually owns a copy (HA!)? --Username (talk) 20:56, 26 February 2023 (EST)

Further Adventures of Batman Printing Dates;; There's a bit of confusion here. The original printing was July, PV Vasha77 did the 2nd printing but made an error by entering the month based on an ad on the last page which says 10/87 when the book was obviously published in '89, Archive copy above is a 3rd printing not on ISFDB with that same ad but 2 pages before it is an ad for G.R.R. Martin's Wild Cards with 7/89 on it. So since PV is gone and it was transient anyway I suggest we change month of 2nd to July also and then enter the 3rd with that month, too. --Username (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2023 (EST)

Goldstrom; My edit making R. Goldstrom an alternate of Robert was just approved but I see there's 2 separate credits for Skeleton-in-Waiting. I think they need merging or something. --Username (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2023 (EST)

Merged, as you correctly pointed out. John Scifibones 11:05, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Davis Grubb Stories; I've done a few edits for his rare 1978 collection Siege of 318 and recently stumbled on the fact that the title story was a retitled reprint of "Cry Havoc", which is why both have a 1976 date here. I've made a variant but I am suspicious that "The Idiots" from the 1976 horror anthology Frights and "The Idiot" are the same, too. Does anyone own a copy who can compare the 2 stories? Frights has an link so story is readable. --Username (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2023 (EST)

Content sections of Clone/Import/Export upgraded

The Content sections of Clone/Import/Export Publication post-submission pages have been upgraded. Rows can now display multiple yellow warnings per row. Yellow warnings are now more specific, telling you which authors they refer to. Auto-merge rows no longer warn you about disambiguated/alternate author/artist names. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:44, 28 February 2023 (EST)

The Changing; I added LCCN ID and noticed 244 pages which is a lot different than 320. No online copies I can see so if anyone owns this can you check page count and fix if needed. --Username (talk) 08:52, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Derek Neville;; I suspected the short story was not by the old Neville; there's a guy with the same name who self-published Ghost Box, which isn't on ISFDB but should be, but the only mentions of that name and the short story's title are our site and this, So story author should probably get a (I) after their name or something to differ them but unsure whether the same Neville wrote Ghost Box, although it seems likely. --Username (talk) 10:56, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Done. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:57, 1 March 2023 (EST)
Needs space after 1st period of artist to make it the same as artist already on ISFDB. --Username (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2023 (EST)
Looks like that was handled as I can't see what you mean. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:41, 2 March 2023 (EST)
Scifibones fixed it today. --Username (talk) 11:46, 2 March 2023 (EST)

1995 SPGA Showcase; The Goldman story has the right original date on ISFDB but no mention of where it came from so I entered the info that it originally came from this anthology; the Everson story has the wrong date (2007), a different title ("Warming the Women"), and no mention of where it came from, so I added where it came from but didn't change date or title because it may have the same title in the anthology and should be merged or it really is different in which case it would be a variant; the Jacob story already has a note here about where it first came from. The Danley work being a story is suspicious because all his works (as Robert C. Danley) on ISFDB are poems; it's also weird that Locus listed all the poems after the stories instead of listing everything in order. So on the very slim chance that anyone owns the anthology some fixes would probably be needed after entering it. --Username (talk) 13:27, 1 March 2023 (EST)

I've added that anthology here. If it turns out the Danley work is actually a poem, we can easily change it. In the meantime, it's listed now. I also varianted the Everson story. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:37, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Phantom Fango Edit; I'm confused about something. I haven't looked at any Fangoria issues for a long time, while doing Drake Douglas edits I noticed he had 1 review for a book by himself, I knew he probably wouldn't review his own book and found it was just an entry mistake and it was actually Stanley Wiater, who did the other reviews in that issue; I asked PV about it and they responded but didn't indicate they were going to fix it themselves, but now I see that it was changed to the correct reviewer but I don't see where that was done by anyone in the review record or issue record. Am I missing something? I assume I can just cancel my edit now, right? --Username (talk) 19:43, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Look at the last edit to the publication containing the review. Yes, go ahead and cancel your submission. John Scifibones 20:11, 1 March 2023 (EST)

Anthony Izzo Titles; I'm not sure what's going on here. I thought this novel was not on ISFDB because the title was not in the author's record but after entering a new record the ISBN is a duplicate of this, Izzo mentions the title change here, So the existing record seems to have been entered from pre-release info on Amazon, maybe, before the title was changed. So what's to be done? Delete Unforgiven? It has a "P" cover image, wrong format, old ISBN-10 instead of ISBN-13 for a 2007 book, etc. (also see my note in Evil Harvest about confusion with ISBN-13, too). Or leave it and make the 2 titles alternates? --Username (talk) 09:06, 3 March 2023 (EST)

Evil Harvest edit was just approved; still awaiting reply on what should be done here. Anyone? --Username (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2023 (EST)

Beehive Book Award

The Beehive Book Award given out by the Children's Literature Association of Utah in the following categories:

  • Children's Fiction (chapter books)
  • Picture Books
  • Informational Books
  • Poetry
  • Graphic Novels
  • Young Adult Fiction

The books nominated and awarded are not limited to those by Utahns, though. It's voted on by children in the state of Utah from a list of nominees submitted by volunteers. It covers more than just speculative fiction works, but there are quite a few speculative fiction authors whose works have been nominated and/or won over the years. See the lists here. I'll be happy to populate the award if it's added. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:54, 3 March 2023 (EST)

I see all the usual suspects: Le Guin, Lloyd Alexander, Jane Yolen, Ursula Vernon, Brandon Mull, etc. Looks legitimate to me. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:31, 3 March 2023 (EST)
Done. Sorry, I forgot all about it. Ahasuerus (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

Roofworld Arrow Edition; In tribute to Christopher Fowler, who just died, I started to add as much info as I could to his books and almost immediately ran into trouble. I added an link to the original Ballantine edition but there's also an Arrow edition; however, there's 2 records here with one being entered in the very early days of this site and PV by a long-gone person while the other is much more fleshed out but not PV. Which should be kept and given the link? --Username (talk) 17:21, 3 March 2023 (EST)

They look like they are probably duplicates of each other. Anyone else have any different thoughts? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:51, 3 March 2023 (EST)
The "September 1989" pub was verified against the Locus Index, which says:
  • Roofworld (Legend 0-09-962340-4, Sep ’89 [Aug ’89], £3.99, 396pp, pb) Reprint (Ballantine/Legend 1988) sf novel.
It would appear that "September 1989" comes from Locus. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:45, 3 March 2023 (EST)

What The F; Unusual situation here where one would assume the second name is wrong but that's actually her name; the first name only has 1 credit and searching Amazon Look Inside it does say Jennifer on contents page but typing Jenniffer gets 1 hit, so possibly it's spelled correctly at the head of the story in case anyone who has an Amazon account can verify and fix/variant. --Username (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2023 (EST)

In Dreamless, it's "Jenniffer Wardell" on the cover, on the copyright page and on the title page. The "Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data" section says that she was born in 1981. Ahasuerus (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2023 (EST)
A full view on Amazon inside the book in which her name was entered here as Jennifer is needed because her real name per online info is Jenniffer and while contents page of that book says Jennifer a search inside gets a hit for Jenniffer, so I don't want a false variant name created (there's already way too many of those here) if it really should just have an "f" added to it. --Username (talk) 18:53, 4 March 2023 (EST)
Searching the Amazon Look Inside for 100 Worlds shows that the "Object Lesson" title page uses "Jennifer Wardell". The "About the Author" does list her as "Jenniffer", but we enter per the title page. I have created an alternate name and varianted the story. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:10, 5 March 2023 (EST)

Baen vs. Baen Books

We have separate publisher listings for Baen and Baen Books. The top of both these records has "Do NOT merge this with [other version], there are two completely different timeframes and three different logos". However,

  • Baen has books from 1984 - 2023
  • Baen Books has books from 1985 - 1992, 1995 - 1996, 2004 - 2006, 2022 - 2023

So we are not separating them out as per the note. I don't see the need to have separate versions as we already normalize minor changes in publisher names and that information can easily be handled in a note. However, if we are going to have separate versions, then the time ranges should be added to the notes and the relevant books updated appropriately. The editor who added the note is no longer active so cannot ask them about it. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:22, 5 March 2023 (EST)

I would draw a parallel to Ace Books, with multiple addresses and ownership detailed in a separate ISFDB wiki page. I also see no reason beyond whether they care credited differently in the books (Baen vs. Baen Books) ../Doug H (talk) 13:00, 5 March 2023 (EST)
A couple of thoughts. First, spot-checking some recently published Baen books, I see that they apparently use "Baen Books" and "Baen" interchangeable. For example, the copyright page of Dead Man Walking, which was published on 2023-02-07, says:
  • A Baen Book
  • Baen Publishing Enterprises
  • First Baen Printing
  • Electronic version by Baen Books
The copyright page of What Price Victory?, which was published on the same day, says:
  • A Baen Books Original
  • Baen Publishing Enterprises
  • Electronic version by Baen Books
Note the use of "A Baen Book" in the first case and "A Baen Books Original" in the second case. The lack of the word "Original" in Dead Man Walking is due to the fact that it's a US reprint of a UK book, but otherwise "Baen" and "Baen Books" are used interchangeably.
Second, in an ideal world, we would capture two separate values: "publisher name as stated in the publication" and "canonical name of the publisher"; it would be similar to the way we treat variant titles and canonical names. Since we don't have this functionality implemented, I think it would be best to merge the two publisher records. Updating Notes would be nice, but, given the mixed use of the two names (as seen above), it may be more hassle that it's worth. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2023 (EST)
What does it state on the title page, though? We generally go with that over what it states on the copyright page. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:31, 6 March 2023 (EST)
Unfortunately,'s Look Inside tends to use e-books' data for paper editions and e-books don't always have clearly defined title pages. I have many older Baen books in my paper collection, but nothing recent, so I can't check. For what it's worth, Look Inside shows that the two pubs linked above do not mentions the publisher in the "title page" sections. The sections immediately below them say "BAEN BOOKS by [author name]: [list of titles]", but that doesn't clarify things. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:13, 6 March 2023 (EST)
All of the recent ones I have just have the Baen logo at the bottom of the title page, so I'd go with "Baen". ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:35, 16 March 2023 (EDT)

Post-submission pages for AddPub and ClonePub submissions tweaked

Post-submission pages for AddPub and ClonePub submissions have been adjusted to display more information about the title record that the new publication will be merged with. The "auto-merge" line now displays the same title information, including variant/translation data, that is displayed in the Contents sections of Publication pages. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:19, 5 March 2023 (EST)

Dash or 00; Re: this discussion, do any experts here know of a way to automatically change all LCCN entered on this site, pre-whatever the date was when they changed from using a dash to zeros, from zeros to dash? I just enter them as they are on their site but, even though it makes no real difference because links lead to the records whether they have dashes or zeros, it would be better, I suppose, to have them as they appear in the books. Now all this is assuming that all pre-change LCCN had dashes and all post-change LCCN have zeroes, which I'm sure isn't true, but anyway I thought I'd ask. --Username (talk) 19:33, 5 March 2023 (EST)

Vuk; Vuk Kostic and Vukkostic are the same, I assume, 1 says Serbian and the other English, in case anyone wants to decide which should be the parent and which the variant. --Username (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2023 (EST)

Day Khrus(h)chev Panicked; Did some edits a long time ago, came across it again today and added cover images and LCCN ID to both HC, Brits spelled name in title without a middle H, Yanks with a middle H. I fixed that for Cassell (title page seen on Cracabond Books, a site I don't think I've ever heard of before), Random House title page on Google confirms the middle H, Macfadden in Google Images confirms the middle H, if Digit title page can be seen then we'll know all and main title can be changed and American editions' title can be a variant (there's also a UK Ensign edition on AbeBooks without the middle H on the cover, so I think it's safe to say American H, British no H). --Username (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2023 (EST)

Stained-Glass World; I added a bunch of Kenneth Bulmer edits yesterday, and this, the last one, was just adding an link, but then I noticed the month doesn't match the one in the note. I asked RTrace since I saw his name at the top of the edit history but he was no help, and of the PV the first guy's dead, the next 3 are gone (probably), and the last guy is still around but doesn't seem interested much in this site these days, so maybe Glenn is the only one who may respond helpfully; why is the month, which does say July in the book, April on this site? Fix needed IMO. --Username (talk) 09:42, 7 March 2023 (EST)

AddPub/NewPub/ClonePub post-submission pages enhanced

Post-submission pages for AddPub/NewPub/ClonePub submissions have been enhanced.

AddPub/ClonePubs pages now display a yellow warning if the title type of the associated title record has been changed since the submission was created. The "Title Data" section of NewPub/AddPub pages has been standardized to use the same fields, field names and field order as EditTitles' post-submission pages. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:08, 7 March 2023 (EST)

"Disambiguated author" yellow warnings upgraded

Post-submission yellow warnings for disambiguated authors have been upgraded. They now use the same algorithm as "There are other authors with the same name" displayed at the top of Summary pages.

This means that "A" will no longer be erroneously reported as a disambiguated name based on the existence of "A (W) Hendry". It also means that "Stephen King (I)" or "G. S. (artist)" will generate yellow warnings informing the reviewing moderator that they are disambiguated names. Ahasuerus (talk) 13:00, 7 March 2023 (EST)

Self-Moderation Request


with around 10.000 changes to ISFDB since 2013 and also lots of source-code contributions I did really a lot for ISFDB and very seldom my edits have been rejected. As nowadays it takes extremely long to moderate submissions I'd like to have Self-Approver state. Hopefully that also leads to me adding a lot of my own books which I skipped until now.

As is probably known I'm not 100% happy with the way ISFDB works but adhere to the given rules. Thus I'll not use any additional rights I get to do more than now, but restrict my Self-Approver privilege to situations which I think consensus exists (misjudgment in individual cases included :-). For changes which could be troublesome I'd leave these submissions for other moderators to review (I assume that's still possible?).

--Stoecker (talk) 07:33, 8 March 2023 (EST)

Hi, Dirk! Alas, I do have some reservation about that privilege: while you did quite a lot of valuable source-code contributions, I have the feeling that many (if not all) of your publication additions to the database lack the quality we usually try to achieve, especially in sourcing the data (that is: giving the sources for the date of publication and the art credit; I personally think that also statements for the edition - first [language, tp, pb, hc, ...] would be welcome).
Here is a quite recent example (this one also has a seemingly wrong format, since the vast majority of publications by this publisher with the same format are defined as pb). Many of your added / verified publications have stub notes or none at all, like this one. (Also, many verified pub.s have missing or erroneous publication series, like this or this, the first example being again a stub record).
On the whole, most seem somewhat hastily added, and I'd like to see some more quality in added and especially PV'd publications. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 09:42, 11 March 2023 (EST)
Yes. I usually only add the minimum amount, because it's simply to much hassle to get it correct with a turnaround of multiple days for a change. It takes weeks to enter a single book correctly, especially as there is no preview feature yet and I have to redo everything when I make an error. Thus I only add the information which is required and important, nothing else. I certainly don't add all the information which it seems you find is necessary in the notes, but I add all the relevant information and I don't add wrong information. In the examples you showed there is no error: The example books you choose are tp and not pb. The publication series for Bastei is still a somewhat strange thing and not really visible in the books. The older books I added thus wont have them right simply because this "right" changed over the years. For new entries I try to follow whatever seems currently used in ISFDB. P.S. As already said multiple times - ISFDB has a large amount of errors in non-verified and verified publications (also errors which have been introduced to my verified books which have been correct when I entered the information). When the threshold to participate is too high that also wont change. I tried to help fix the software for this but the attempt didn't work out. I see that a small part of my ideas have be implemented in the last years, but nothing game-changing. Maybe to give you a note what I actually talk about: I own ~2300 SF and F books, 825 of these I verified in ISDFB, 787 more exist in ISFDB often with missing information or missing the exact copy I have. 685 are missing totally. I simply did not add them yet and instead do my own database. BTW Some errors also come from different moderators of the time: One moderator forced me to do one thing, the next exactly the opposite. And I always complied even if it did not make sense. --Stoecker (talk) 10:28, 11 March 2023 (EST)
Comment: I haven't done much work on the submission queue lately, so I'll abstain. To answer the question raised in the last sentence, if a self-approver leaves a submission in the queue, it can be reviewed and approved/rejected by a moderator. However, submissions by self-approvers are color-coded and moderators tend to leave them alone because the presumption is that the self-approver is taking a break and will be back later. Of course, a self-approver can create a submission, leave it in the queue and then ask about it on the Moderator Noticeboard. Ahasuerus (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2023 (EST)
Maybe there should be a flag "please review" to turn off the color code? I actually appreciate in other environments when you have the chance to let somebody else review your stuff even when you yourself could approve it. For the easy cases you approve directly wheres for others you seek per-review. It's a concept which I e.g. are very happy with in software update submissions for openSUSE Linux distribution. --Stoecker (talk) 10:33, 11 March 2023 (EST)
You have my vote, user Stonecreek, who was demoted for entering incorrect data has no right to criticize you.--Wolfram.winkler (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2023 (EDT)
Wolfram: While you're free to share you opinion on whether Stoecker should receive this ability, please refrain from attacking other editors here. Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:46, 5 April 2023 (EDT)
It's just facts and you have no right to criticize it.--Wolfram.winkler (talk) 17:11, 5 April 2023 (EDT)

Fixed Story Titles; Maybe I'm not being clear or something, but I'm not getting the answer I'm looking for so maybe someone else can help me. I did a bunch of edits for Bruce Publishing books and this one required more work, using the copy on Google Books, because story titles, I assume taken from Locus, were wrong in 6 cases (and 1 was missing entirely), from missing articles to completely wrong. I fixed them but now that it's been approved the 6 parent stories still have the wrong titles. That can't be right, most of the author's obscure religious stories didn't appear in any genre works and the 2 that did had the right titles (although 1 of them, "The Hound of Cullen", isn't in this collection so now I'm suspicious because it has a 1951 date on ISFDB but appeared in F&SF in 1953, so I wonder if the missing story I entered, "The End of Coo-Cullen", is that story retitled) so there's no variant, so how can I get both author names to show the correct titles? --Username (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2023 (EST)

You would have received the answer you were looking for had you told the reviewer; "The titles were only published under an alternate name so there is no reason the canonical name titles should differ." To correct, simply edit the canonical name titles and make the same corrections. However, I question whether William Bernard Ready should even be the canonical name. I don't see a single title published using that name. I would make W. B. Ready the canonical name with William Ready an alternate. This would obviate the need for the above edits. John Scifibones 13:39, 8 March 2023 (EST)

Which Henry Holt?;; This is the 2nd time recently that this moderator has rejected edit(s) of mine while telling me to ask PV first when I clearly did that in both cases. This one,, was asked about here,, but I just decided to cancel it because trying to fix the countless verified editions of books that are clearly book club editions but not identified as such by the PV is too much for me to handle so I've decided to not do those kinds of edits anymore, but as for the 2 edits at the top of this message there's no reason for them to be rejected because as I explained here,, this publisher on ISFDB,, only has a few entries including those 1990's books entered recently by the same PV, while this publisher,, has almost all their books including pretty much everything published between 1986 and 2023, as is clearly explained in the note at the top of the page where it says they reverted back to that name in 1986. The 2 PV books say Henry Holt and Company on the title page so if we're going by what they actually say it wouldn't match any publisher currently on ISFDB. Standardization, right? Isn't that what mods are always saying, don't enter multiple publisher names? I think those 2 should be un-rejected. If not, I'd hate to see how many of the hundreds of "Henry Holt" books currently on ISFDB would need to be changed to "Henry Holt and Company". --Username (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2023 (EST)

You're mischaracterizing this a bit. In both cases, you submitted the edit before receiving a response from the primary verifier. Changing the name of the publisher is a major change to a publication record and should not be done without the prior assent of all active verifiers. Worse, this submission would have replaced the record for the trade edition with one for a book club edition, effectively deleting the record for the trade edition from the database. I explained this in the rejection note, and again when you objected on my talk page and I am explaining it for a third time here. I also explained in all these places that you need to get a response from the verifiers before submitting the original edit. Now, whether a title page stating "Henry Holt and Company" should be reflected as Henry Holt, Henry Holt & Co. or a new publisher is an open question. However, it is still necessary to have a dialog with the verifiers before changing those records. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:58, 8 March 2023 (EST)

FOCUS; I believe we have 4 separate publishers here: A German one, a British one (reprint of HC de la Mare book), an imprint based in Massachusetts who did Shakespeare, and a kid's book which maybe should have a different publisher, Tyndale, because it says "Focus on the Family" on the cover so Focus is more likely to be a series. In case anyone cares to differ them in some way. --Username (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2023 (EST)

Amazon UK

In this case,, is it OK to replace the price and enter a link to this,, since there's no UK price and editor just entered the price from Amazon? This happens a lot. --Username (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2023 (EST)

For those interested in Lovecraft and Winnie the Pooh

I ran across this Kickstarter which combines the two. The anthology won't be out for about a year, but it's something to look forward to (I backed it). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:24, 10 March 2023 (EST)

R. Dickerson; Russell has many interviews, Russ has 1 which has an alternate because of a language note or something. So 1 of those should be a variant of Russell. --Username (talk) 09:47, 11 March 2023 (EST)

Karloff the Editor; A copy of Avon was just uploaded on so I added a link, also added C to the price for the other (Canadian) Avon, added the month to the regular title since Avon was first edition, added other countries' prices to Corgi from back cover seen on FantLab, but most significantly added introduction to Souvenir based on photo on FantLab. It's not in Avon so it seems they added it for British editions; however, the only evidence here is in that Portugal edition where it says Introdução. So when my edits are approved that probably should be made a variant of Introduction and if anyone owns the British paperbacks the introduction is probably in those, too, and should be imported. --Username (talk) 09:16, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

De Grote Horror Omnibus; Just uploaded is this,, which seems to be a German edition of the Signet omnibus, in case any German/German-fluent person wants to enter it. --Username (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

C. Anderson

[3]; I added OL ID to Science Fiction Films of the Seventies some time ago and today came across it again and added link; I noticed cover artist might be the same as the author and there's another similar name, all linked above, in case anyone knows if they're all the same. --Username (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

Maureen F. McHugh's The Cost to Be Wise - novelette or novella?

This is categorized as a novelette, but it was nominated for 3 different awards in the novella category. If I look at the page counts in The Mammoth Book of Best Short SF Novels, it shows as 45 pages, which is the same as the following story - Greg Egan's Oceanic - which is categorized as a novella. (The rest of those "short novels" are all categorized as novellas, but they have longer page counts.) Google search results for 'mchugh "the cost to be wise"' followed by "novella" or "novelette" also indicate it is considered to be the former.

There are over a dozen verified pubs containing this story (which distill down to the 1996 Starlight anthology it appeared in, the 1997 Dozois Year's Best, a 2005 author collection, a Lightspeed mag special issue, and the aforementioned Dozois "short novel" anthology), so I'm wary of changing the type without some sort of discussion or second opinion. ErsatzCulture (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

I happen to have one of the anthologies as an ebook. After converting it to TXT and removing the other stories, the table of contents, etc, I see that the text contains 19,500 words if you count the title. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:45, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
Thanks. If there are no dissenting voices here, I propose to make the novelette->novella switch in a couple of days. ErsatzCulture (talk) 15:11, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
With a confirmed length, noone can object :) Add a note on the approximate length and change it. Annie (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
Just to close this off, the switch to novella has now been done. ErsatzCulture (talk) 18:31, 17 March 2023 (EDT)

Derleth's Sleeping; Almost missed this rare one uploaded on because they're doing something weird where the upload date is different than the added date which is causing a lot of confusion; anyway, PV is a bit...testy judging by my last contact with them, so I'm dry-running this here before letting them know of my changes. Does anyone see anything wrong with my edit? Title as it is on title page, spurious subtitle moved to notes, FantLab ID because it shows cover that coverless copy doesn't, etc. Also, I checked the Four Square abridgement on Dalby's site and it says "AND", not "&", on title page, so variants needed? EDIT:; I see I added copy link and FantLab ID recently but now I've added LCCN ID, while noticing intro is dated with signed date instead of book date, something I've seen many times before, probably done by a specific editor who thought that's how it was supposed to be, so if it's not right one of the PV should fix the date. EDIT:; More title fixing; PB edition was recently uploaded so I made an edit adding link for that and title is "AND", not "&", on title page, so more variants needed? --Username (talk) 12:29, 13 March 2023 (EDT)

EditPub yellow warnings upgraded

All yellow warnings displayed in New Cover Art, New Regular Titles, New Reviews and New Interviews tables within the "Content" section of EditPub post-submission pages have been upgraded. They now use the same enhanced functionality already available on other post-submission pages.

At this point the only tables still using the old functionality and table layout are the 4 "Modified Cover/Regular Titles/Reviews/Interviews" tables in EditPub. As always, if you come across anything unexpected or erroneous, please post your findings here. Ahasuerus (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2023 (EDT)

There was a flaw in the last patch. The 4 "New" tables no longer display a yellow warning if the publication date hasn't been changed and the new title date is after the publication date. I am working on a fix. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:39, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
It should be fixed now. Ahasuerus (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
When you get a moment, please take a look at this submission. Thanks, John Scifibones 08:07, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
Thanks for reporting the problem. It happens when magazine pubs are cloned. Working on it... Ahasuerus (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
It should be fixed now. Ahasuerus (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2023 (EDT)

Hauck; I came across this,, and since many of these foreign editions have page counts off by a page or two on ISFDB because of unnumbered final page(s) I checked this one; page count was correct but the note about names on back cover was not. Heading off to ask the editor who entered the book I see that he's totally done with this site judging by the big red message on his board. So does anyone else own a copy? I think I'll do an advanced search and see what other books they PV; since they're not going to answer any questions maybe I can improve things a bit myself, add some links, etc. I'm sure some people here know what went wrong, so if anyone would like to give any details I'd be curious to know what caused Hauck to leave. --Username (talk) 18:23, 14 March 2023 (EDT)

User:Hauck left the project in June 2018 after this discussion. Ahasuerus (talk) 20:00, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
Wow. The comparisons to Nazi Germany may have been a bit much. I asked because he responded to 3 messages from 2 editors last June to tell them not to bother because he's un-verifying his PV's. --Username (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2023 (EDT)
"the note about names on back cover was not", perhaps should yo try a bit harder... ([4]). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hauck (talkcontribs) .
I think you meant "you should", not "should yo". If you look at the back cover of the copy you'll see no names, so it's likely tight framing on the right side that cut them off rather than it being some variant without the names. Also, I put brackets around your image link because the giant image was taking too much space. --Username (talk) 09:22, 15 March 2023 (EDT)
Hauck was the best moderator ever and ended his job based on what I believe due to false allegations.--Wolfram.winkler (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2023 (EDT)

Skeleton Crew Editions; There is the original hardcover at the top and at the bottom there's another by Putnam (should probably be G. P. Putnam's Sons like the original) which says it's from the Stephen King Library. The PV of that edition, AnimeBill, entered it in the very early days here and has been gone for many years, so no use asking them about this, I thought it might be PV edition but now I'm thinking it may actually be a book club edition of the original since there's no number line. Is anyone here familiar with these editions who knows if there's some way to identify which edition the copy is so it can be entered? --Username (talk) 12:21, 16 March 2023 (EDT)

Dawn of the Dead; I recently added the original Sphere edition with no A. in author's name but looking further I see it wasn't there in the original, either. Also, the price was wrong, and the title date is 4 months earlier than the book date while Open Library says December. I thought I had trouble fixing all the later editions some time ago but this is ridiculous. So let's try to find out which, if any, editions use A. on the title page and what the real month of publication was so that can be fixed. --Username (talk) 13:34, 16 March 2023 (EDT)

H(elmut) Wenske

FantLab has a page for this artist and they say he did cover art for Night Chills,, but besides a Flickr page nobody else credits him online and there's no credit in the book or signature on the cover that I can see. Another 1975 Avon book, Harvest of Fear, does have a Wenske cover which is a variant of an older cover for something else, so either FantLab confused the 2 books or the Night Chills cover is another variant of some older cover. Anyone recognize it? --Username (talk) 18:41, 16 March 2023 (EDT)

New Infinities;; One of the few from this publisher with no PV, I changed publisher to what it says in the book, this was discussed long ago but I think now would be a good time to decide on standard names, there are some books published just by New Infinities with BSM on cover (Berkley), who were just the distributor, while later ones have the Ace symbol on the cover and they're also mentioned on the copyright page. So, assuming all books say New Infinities Productions on title page and not just New Infinities, I think older ones should be New Infinities Productions (like the 3 Swycaffer books already are) and later ones should be New Infinities Productions / Ace. What do you think? EDIT:; Some of their books didn't even have the publisher on the title page. Also,, which has some ID number on the upper left; British edition or something else? --Username (talk) 11:08 and 11:28, 17 March 2023 (EDT)

This section divided in two, by reference to Differences between revisions 11:28 and 11:33 (personally unfamiliar with these coverart archives). --Pwendt|talk 14:08, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

SFE-hosted images at /nicholls/; Is it possible to get "nicholls" images supported at SFE? Peter Nicholls passed away a few years ago. --Username (talk) 11:33, 17 March 2023 (EDT)

It's my understanding that the reason that SFE-hosted images are stored in different subdirectories like "nicholls" is that they were donated to SFE with different stipulations and caveats attached. Some of the stipulations may persist after the death of the person after whom the subdirectory was originally named. Last time I checked with the SF administrator, which was just a month or two ago, "nicholls"-hosted images were still off-limits. Ahasuerus (talk) 15:21, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

Link for uploading author picture

Publications have a handy link that allows uploading of a new cover image. Can we have one of those for people, too, and have it preload the fair use author image template? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:33, 17 March 2023 (EDT)

I can't think of a reason not to add one. Ahasuerus (talk) 08:41, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
Can we make it an official feature request? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:24, 5 April 2023 (EDT)
Done -- FR 1563. Sorry, I forgot all about this conversation :-( Ahasuerus (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2023 (EDT)
Thanks! There've been a lot of things going on, so no worries. I forgot about it, too, until I saw this section when scrolling through looking for something else. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:16, 6 April 2023 (EDT)

Contents Question; Should those 2 collection titles in the contents be removed after approval? --Username (talk) 12:18, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

No, they belong. Pipes will be needed to ensure they remain in the proper positions. John Scifibones 12:24, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
Oops. Sorry, pipes. --Username (talk) 12:41, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

Chapbook: Non-genre, juvenile, etc

Replying to my userspace inquiry last fortnight, Rtrace observed that the Non-Genre flag for CHAPBOOK title records has an important function governing layout. All chapbooks flagged "Non-Genre" are listed below the line at the bottom of an author's Summary Bibliography. Juvenile, Novelization, and Graphic Format probably have no such function.

There is a cleanup report "CHAPBOOK/SHORTFICTION Juvenile Flag Mismatches", maintained at length near zero; by inference I have flagged a few chapbooks Juvenile, and probably missed a few. This feels like a good time to ask about all four flags {Non-Genre, Juvenile, Novelization, Graphic Format}. Should all four be aligned for chapbook and its shortfiction content? And, anyway, does the guideline do what we think it should?

Advanced Title Search shows that we do not currently set chapbook length. We have more than 100 chapbooks, but less than 200, for each of Non-Genre, Novelization, Graphic. --Pwendt|talk 15:30, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

The numbers are not unexpected-- non-genre and graphic chapbooks will be here ONLY if they are from above threshold authors and even for them, we don't really go out of our way to find and add them. Same applies for noveliazations - most are either novels or not published on their own - most of the ones we have as chapbooks are the current "juvenile" ones of various movies.
I tend to align them completely when I am adding them - a new (and sometimes not so new) user of the system don't necessarily understand that they need to scroll down to the short stories section OR click on the short story in the search results so not setting these on the chapbook is counterproductive. So having both entries carry the flags makes it easier for a user to find what they are looking for. Annie (talk) 11:48, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
As I recall, we had this discussion on the Rules and Standards page a few years ago. The consensus seemed to be that our "chapbooks" are basically single-story collections, so the same rules should be applied. Since we would flag a collection as "juvenile", "novelization", etc as appropriate, we should do the same to chapbook titles. We also discussed creating additional cleanup reports to reconcile the flags between chapbook containers and their short fiction titles.
Re: "Advanced Title Search shows that we do not currently set chapbook length", that is because the ISFDB software won't let you specify a "length" value for anything other than SHORTFICTION titles. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:18, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

Grant Allen, Backslider; I just imported 15 stories into 100 Menacing Little Murder Stories, one of those reprint Barnes & Noble anthologies, and while doing that noticed something else. The uncredited "Backslider" (issue's on Google Books) and the story by Grant Allen are the same story! So what's the procedure, which I'm never clear about: Make the uncredited a variant of Allen and make both the same date? --Username (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2023 (EDT)

Yes, variant the uncredited version to the Allen version and give the parent the date of first printing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:49, 19 March 2023 (EDT)

Davies Reborn; I did a bunch of edits for books in F. Paul Wilson's Adversary Cycle, and while Reprisal and Nightworld used the same art for HC and PB Brit editions the first book's Brit HC used the same art as the American Jove PB which was published first according to ISFDB, but that doesn't make sense because Davies was a Brit illustrator (and nobody's credited in the Jove, anyway), so I suspect Brit HC was published first, in case anyone can figure this out. --Username (talk) 10:07, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

An Account Above Burnside Park; Someone entered Farah as Farrah incorrectly, as a check of the TP on Amazon reveals it's Farah, but a search of the title on ISFDB also reveals that the author published the story originally under another name in a magazine she edits. So if anyone wants to decide what to do with all this. --Username (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

Bookscans HTTP, HTTPS; I thought the recently uploaded copy would just be the original of the fully-readable one uploaded some time ago but no, it's 2 distinct copies, so I added a link and while doing so noticed the cover image had the old "Fatcow" URL which Bookscans used to use, of which there are 8 still on ISFDB (7 when my edit is approved), and also the fact that the old URL is https while the new one is http but new cover shows just fine unlike, say, Galactic Central where all their http images are broken. What's the difference? --Username (talk) 12:12, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

Unlike Galactic Central, Bookscans has a valid HTTPS certificate. This is why you can connect to, but if you try to connect to your browser will display an error like "Secure Connection Failed".
That said, once a Web site has a valid HTTPS certificate, it still needs to be configured to support HTTPS. Ideally, it will transparently redirect HTTP URLs to their matching HTTPS counterparts the way we do. Bookscans' HTTPS configuration appears to be incomplete, but I don't know what's going on behind the scenes. Sometimes a Web site's data is spread across multiple computers and/or multiple domains, which makes it harder to get everything to work transparently. Ahasuerus (talk) 18:06, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

LAF; The first one has a couple of active PV so I'm going to ask about this; I recently added cover artist in a pending edit to Without Warning by Fern Michaels,, with the same initials on the cover. So the King monkey art was also done by Lisa Falkenstern. EDIT: A copy of Fantasy Annual III was just uploaded and while adding a link in an edit I noticed she did the cover for that, too, but signed it L. Falkenstern. Also, #5 has no art credit so I wonder if she did that, too. --Username (talk) 12:25, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

Star SF Stories #3; 6 PV, 5 active, none noticed the cover is wrong and is actually from a later edition, any objection if I replace it with the right cover, 96, here, --Username (talk) 12:47, 20 March 2023 (EDT)

Talk to the 5 active PVs. If you submit a replacement, it will be held until you talk to them or it will be rejected with an advice to talk to them. If you want, point them to this topic but don't expect people to monitor CP about their verified books. Annie (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
You can talk to them individually if you want. I don't plan on fixing anything until at least 1 of them responds; if it was 2 I probably would do it on their boards but not for 5. Most don't respond to anything or have the same answer about going to hospital/coming out of hospital, I can't check because I'm about to move/just finished moving, or some variant of "how dare you imply that I did something wrong". So if 1 or more of them see it here, the board most people check, great, if not, who cares, the book's been here for years and years and nobody besides me noticed the very obvious fact that the cover isn't for this edition because it has a totally different price and ID, most are too busy working on ephemeral e-books and don't care about the old print books anymore (besides me and a few others) judging by how much info here is wrong that I've had to fix over the last 2+ years. Try responding to one of my many questions on these boards with something useful that I can use to fix or add info with instead of coming out of the woodwork once in a blue moon so you can complain about something trivial. --Username (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
It would have taken you less time to post to the PVs pages and point them here than to write this. But everyone chooses how to spend their own time on the project.
You asked about objections, I posted an objection, explaining clearly that such a change cannot be approved and a recommendation on how that objection can be overcome so a submission can be approved. It may not be useful to you because it does not agree with your thinking but it is how the project works. Annie (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
I'm not here often, but I try to respond to whatever's on my page. I did not notice the cover was off when verifying, but can upload a fresh scan of my edition now when it's been pointed out. --Spacecow (talk) 05:33, 22 March 2023 (EDT)
Done. Waiting for approval. --Spacecow (talk) 05:55, 22 March 2023 (EDT)
Approved. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 10:31, 22 March 2023 (EDT)

Song of the Earth; It's Royo as cover artist in both, Luis is wrong, in case anyone wants to fix that. --Username (talk) 14:24, 23 March 2023 (EDT)

McBride Cover Artists Of Thorne Smith; [5]; SFE just upped cover of 1926 edition of Topper, I added artist C. V. Farrow, this is the other McBride Thorne Smith book, signature in the grass on right corner that looks like F. Rogers, can't nail it down anywhere, someone here may know who it is. --Username (talk) 15:17, 23 March 2023 (EDT)

Tomato Cain

I was just about to sign off for the night when I saw a new edition of Nigel Kneale's collection Tomato Cain on SFE,, but OL only has this,, by Gratis Kneale (?!?) Was this ever published? --Username (talk) 22:08, 23 March 2023 (EDT)

Marcy/Dean; I've been adding lots of author photos and other stuff from the old Cosmos Books site and this one is a bit tricky, because he used to be she, Whatever the rules are for that here; I vaguely recall some discussion about this months ago. --Username (talk) 13:44, 24 March 2023 (EDT)

Self-Moderation Request - Welo


i'm asking for self-moderation privileges. Actually i wouldn't need it, i'm usually happy with the mods work and timing. But edits often need a follow up (cover, variants, merges etc.) and lately approvals take some time and that's hard to track for an editor. As my edits are mostly fairly basic, self-mod privileges would be very helpful. Werner Welo (talk) 11:05, 25 March 2023 (EDT)

Support work I've seen looks goodKraang (talk) 00:00, 2 April 2023 (EDT)
You have my vote--Wolfram.winkler (talk) 18:04, 4 April 2023 (EDT)

Peter Cartur/Roger Flint Young/Peter Grainger/Forrest J. Ackerman

I recently submitted this note to the entry on Peter Grainger:

"I don't know how properly to comment on this. Forrest J. Ackerman was "Peter Cartur's" (or Peter Grainger's) agent. That's why he gave permission. There is NO WAY that Ackerman could have written that story, and no reason to suppose he did. As for the copyright, at that time, the magazines that originally published the story often bought the copyright, and only paid the authors for reprints out of the goodness of their heart (or perhaps if the contract specified such a payment.) So Fantasy House (publishers of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction) held the copyright. Gordon van Gelder, now the owner/publisher of F&SF, states that the contract for the story "The Mist" was signed by Peter Granger (no "i".) I would wonder about the source for the spelling "Grainger", given that he apparently never published under his own name. Incidentally, in the Redd Boggs Science Fiction Newsletter for July 1950, Ackerman reports on some of the "up and coming" writers he is representing, mentioning Roger Flint Young separately from Peter Cartur. However, that doesn't mean much, as he also mentioned both Kris Neville and "Henderson Starke" as new writers in his fold, and there is no question that "Starke" was a pseudonym for Neville."

My objection was to the existing note on the author Peter Grainger, who is not credited with any stories under his own name, but with stories as by Peter Cartur, Roger Flint Young, and Max Dancey. This note reads:

"Pseudonym sources: Roger Robinson (his source: McGhan), Contento/Locus.

Note that ISFDB lists Peter Cartur as a pseudonym for Peter Grainger. However, the copyright/acknowledgments for Fifty Short Science Fiction Tales includes: Peter Cartur The Mist. Copyright 1952 by Fantasy House, Inc. Reprinted by permission of Forrest J. Ackerman. Usually something like this would indicate that Peter Cartur is a pseudonym as copyrights need to be filed under the author's real name. It's not known if Forrest J. Ackerman bought the rights to this story or if Peter Cartur is one of Forrest J. Ackerman's pseudonyms."

My "edit" -- not really an edit but a comment on the note, though I probably should have suggested an edit -- objects to the (pardon me, but I must say, preposterous) suggestion that perhaps Forrest J. Ackerman wrote the "Peter Cartur" stories. The rational given -- that Ackerman gave "permission" to reprint the story, so therefore he must have been the real author, is ludicrous. The copyright was actually held by "Fantasy House" (which is to say, the publishers of F&SF) -- a common practice in that era. Ackerman was the agent. The Redd Boggs Science Fiction Newsletter citation I made supports this claim. Also this long list of Ackerman's clients, which includes Cartur, Young, and Dancey:

The statement that "copyrights need to be filed under the author's real name" may be true NOW (I don't know) but it was manifestly not true in 1952, when the copyright was held by "Fantasy House".

What I think should be done is to cut the note off after the credit to Roger Robinson's pseudonym list. The whole thing about Ackerman is meaningless -- he was the agent, so authorize to give permission for the reprint.

Also, the credit to "Grainger" is in question, though I don't know how to resolve it, as Gordon van Gelder, in correspondence, tells me the original contract for F&SF publication was signed by "Peter Granger". There is a British author, much later, named "Peter Grainger". Could he be the source of the confusion? - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hortonwho13 (talkcontribs) .

Yes, the later author is possibly the source of the confusion - we use differentiation and they need to be done manually when needed - and some of them may be missed occasionally. Let me look through these pages later today and see what I can untangle. Annie (talk) 12:57, 2 April 2023 (EDT)

Dawn Burdett vs. D. M. Burdett

I think that Dawn Burdett and D. M. Burdett are the same person as mentioned on this site. What does anyone think? MLB (talk) 00:18, 27 March 2023 (EDT)

Possibly, but the publisher page you linked doesn't mention anything about her doing art. Since all of them under "Dawn Burdett" are cover art, and because the author bio doesn't mention doing cover art (or any art), there's not enough evidence to suggest they are indeed the same person, at least to me. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:50, 27 March 2023 (EDT)
Fine, but it does mention D. M. Burdett's first name is Dawn. But, until further evidence turns up, I guess I'll leave the matter alone. MLB (talk) 00:51, 29 March 2023 (EDT)

J. E. Thomas; "Doom in the Room" actually by famed author Jeffrey (Edwin) Thomas, very early story so maybe he used that name at the start of his career, but that other story in the Valancourt anthology is likely by some old-time author. --Username (talk) 12:15, 27 March 2023 (EDT)

Post Mortem Print Vs. E; An old message of mine finally becomes relevant as this,, was just uploaded. Editor has a middle initial, 1 story title is different, dates are obviously wrong, etc. Amazon links to reprint e-book are dead, so if anyone can find a preview copy of it we can compare it to the original print edition and fix a bunch of stuff. --Username (talk) 19:14, 28 March 2023 (EDT)

Bauman CaCE Cover; FantLab shows Bauman did Dark Harvest cover, she signed it on lower right, copyright page of Tor credits her, too, she also signed it on lower right, but covers are totally different, art should probably be unmerged and made 2 distinct credits, she signed it differently between editions, Dark Harvest is name on left, date over copyright on right, Tor is name over date on left, copyright on right. --Username (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2023 (EDT)

Dillon LANBSM; I just added a link to the PB and noticed those covers are different. Why are both under the same cover art record? --Username (talk) 10:04, 29 March 2023 (EDT)

Terratoo; Hard to say what should be done with these, title pages would need to be seen to determine correct author names, if anyone can find out then maybe a merge or variant will be in order. --Username (talk) 12:43, 29 March 2023 (EDT)

Star Short Novels Covers; I added an OL-only non-preview link to the '54 PB and fixed the month in all dates to 10 in a pending edit, but I think the HC credit for Powers is wrong; art on PB is in his usual trippy style, art on HC is just random lines. I think PV of HC or someone else just trusted the info they got, as mentioned in their note. I think Powers credit should be removed from HC. --Username (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2023 (EDT)