ISFDB:Help desk/archives/archive 34

This is an archive page for the Help Desk. Please do not edit the contents. To start a new discussion, please click here.
This archive includes discussions from January - June 2021.

Archive Quick Links
Archives of old discussions from the Help desk.

---

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

---

Expanded archive listing

Tor Horror / Diana Tregarde / Lackey

While PVing some of the books in the Diana Tregarde series by Lackey I noticed the publisher indicated Tor Horror on the title page. However, this publisher is not currently used. Is there a reason? Too few publications? Or should I just edit to that value to create. There are currently no active verifiers for these books. [1] and [2] --GlennMcG 16:50, 8 January 2021 (EST)

These are very old records and the rules around standardization of publisher names had changed a lot of times - and if noone looked/worked on untangling these, chances are that they defaulted on the "main" publisher and that was it. If it is on the title page and is indeed shows as a publisher and not as a pub series, go ahead and change it. Talk to any active PV and so on first - it is not different from the Fantasy one you were untangling earlier. Annie 18:37, 8 January 2021 (EST)

It looks parallel to me, but these were the first I'd seen, while there are lots of Tor Fantasy. Looks like it was a short lived experiment, in that the 3rd book in the series uses the 'fantasy' variant. --GlennMcG 18:57, 8 January 2021 (EST)

Which explains why we already had Fantasy and not Horror - more books, more likely someone to decide to use it or a book to have ben touched in the last decade. :) Annie 19:40, 8 January 2021 (EST)

Upload cover scan

Trying to upload a cover scan for this publication. File uploaded is a JPG and 100k in size. Gives me this error message. Image does display here though. Help --Mavmaramis 09:53, 19 January 2021 (EST)

It is the other size component - the size in pixels: 600 × 737 pixels -- the library we are using supports up to 600 pixels on the longest side. (the upload screen has this text: "Cover images should be no more than 600 pixels along the largest dimension"). Unlike the space size, this restriction will not block you from uploading. Technically these images are visible everywhere but on their web page. I usually try to find a smaller one/shrink what I have when this happens... but as you noticed, it works on the work page. Annie 12:29, 19 January 2021 (EST)

Thanks Annie. I knew about the size limits. I was fairly sure I'd resized it appropriately but obviously not. --Mavmaramis 16:50, 19 January 2021 (EST)

Search by date.

Is this possible? I'm after a novel published on a specific date. Title unknown, publisher unknown. So, search criteria are Date, Novel (not short story or magazine), Country (UK). Any help welcome.

Sure! Use the advanced search, it's only that you seem only be able to break it down to month (use the YYYY-MM format, for example 2021-01) with the Advanced Search. :Country seems also difficult, but the language (presumably English) is there to choose. Stonecreek 11:26, 22 January 2021 (EST)

Country search should be doable if you're doing a publication search and do price containing £ , I'd have thought? (i.e. just the pound sterling sign, no value). I don't know what proportion of pubs don't have a price, but I'd have thought it's a fairly small minority.

This is assuming the publication is after 1970, anything before then is another story :-( ErsatzCulture 13:17, 22 January 2021 (EST)

ErsatzCulture's idea is for publication search. My proposal to search by language will only work for the title search (only those have languages attached), which won't be a problem if it's a first edition that you're looking for. Do you have any more information (idea for a publisher, format, or something)? Stonecreek 13:24, 22 January 2021 (EST)

JACK LONDON

Project Gutenberg's 1999 edition of his 1901 collection The God of His Fathers has a story, "Jan, the Unrepentant", which has a match to a 1934 French collection which calls it "Jan the Unrepentant", missing the comma. That Gutenberg edition gives the story as new along with 3 other stories, but the guy died 80+ years earlier. I can't change the French edition's title to the correct one because it's primary verified, plus it's classed as non-genre while the 1999 version is not. So someone needs to decide what to do here, whether to change the 1934 title or make it a variant and make both titles non-genre, and whether to find the dates for those other 3 stories and enter them so there isn't a listing for 4 1999 stories under Jack London's record.--Username 11:17, 22 January 2021 (EST)

I cautionary changed the 1999 dates to 1901 (the pieces might have been published before, but 1901 is the best we know so far). I also merged the "Jan, the Unrepentant" titles, which posed no problem, since it wasn't the English title that was PVed, only the French translated one. Stonecreek 13:32, 22 January 2021 (EST)

Paul Haines

"Cooking for the Heart" was in Lullaby Hearse. It was reprinted as "Slice of Life: Cooking for the Heart" in Doorways for the Dispossessed, and as "Slice of Life - Cooking for the Heart" in Slice of Life. ISFDB has a note under #1291233 saying it was first published in Lullaby Hearse but doesn't link the two different records because of the title difference, and there's no variant for the title with the colon. I'm great at most things when it comes to editing but I can't deal with this minutiae. If anyone wants to take this, feel free.--Username 00:19, 23 January 2021 (EST)

It is an extremely easy thing to do: You go to the title that is to become a parent (also known as the original except in special cases), get its ID, then go into the variant-to-be, go to "Make This Title a Variant" on the left and use the ID you found in option 1. I had done that now but please try on your own next time - this is one of the simplest operations in the DB and almost all new editors manage to do these very early on.

PS: It will be appreciated if you stop using all caps in the title of every post you post in Talk -- sentence case works as well and is a lot less annoying on a watch list. You may notice that you are the only one using this kind of titles in the Talk pages - which I fixed in this one. Thanks! :) Annie 00:35, 23 January 2021 (EST)

I've made variant titles literally hundreds of times since I became an editor barely a month ago, so telling me "please try on your own next time" is really sarcastic and unhelpful. I asked for help with this one because there was a note under the "Slice of Life" title mentioning the zine where the story was first published but apparently nobody bothered checking the record for that zine and seeing the original name of the story right there in the contents and making a variant. Plus you apparently didn't notice the part of my above message where I said there's no variant for the title WITH THE COLON. A quick check of Google Books would show you that the story was printed with a colon after the word "Life" in the Prime Books collection, and I assume the version with the dash is how it was printed in the other collections. One of these story collections was verified back in 2012 and I'm apparently the first person in nearly 9 years to notice any of this. So complaining about my capitalizing the titles of my posts is ridiculous. I've done an unbelievable amount of work over the last month or so adding story collections and anthologies to ISFDB that are not found on any other sites, fixing incorrect dates and titles and author names, merging and varianting titles, identifying variant names, adding book covers, author photos, links to pages on archive.org for fiction found nowhere on current webpages, etc. Sometimes I have more than half of all the pending edits on ISFDB. But one of the most time-consuming parts of my editing is having to fix info that was VERIFIED BY MODERATORS before I started here even though the info is clearly incorrect, or me asking a moderator to fill in some info I'm not sure how to do and them complaining about not being "slaves" and how they're not getting paid to do that, and when they do deign to do a little work often they make mistakes that I have to make another edit for in order to fix. I've already complained before about this hostility, so I'll just end this by saying that if this info was correct in the first place I wouldn't need to ask for your help. So in the future keep comments to yourselves unless they can help me add or fix something, or it's some praise which I certainly deserve for the ungodly amount of improvements I've made to ISFDB--Username 01:42, 23 January 2021 (EST)

Regardless if the title is correct or not, the variant had to be created. Which is now done. Chasing the correct title is a different process and something that we have a process on - which I am working on. If your point was to ask help for the title and not the variant, maybe write a bit more clearly what you need help on. Some of the old records are in a really bad shape because rules had changed and sometimes because people were not paying attention. We find them, we fix them. It takes time and effort.

Everyone here is a volunteer, all help is welcome. Let's not get insulting to people who may or may not have time to do things (or may be working on their own projects while also working the queue), shall we? Want some numbers? You have 1,111 edits in a month as of an hour ago, I have 258,911 in 4.5 years. So yes, I know how much work goes into fixing issues in this DB. Apologies for trying to help you here based on what you posted and not being able to read your mind on what you ask to be tackled from the multiple issues in this specific title. I will try to remember not to do that anymore.

Shall we calm down here? Annie 02:06, 23 January 2021 (EST)

And if you are done with the grumbling, this should now look correct now (with a note where needed - at least one of the books we have indeed has the "-" and not a ":"; the Prime ones are confirmed ":" so are now split; the verified one stays where it was as I cannot find an image anywhere. If you can find me an image of "The Mayne Press" edition somewhere, it will be helpful). It helps if you post links btw - not just titles. Implying that you are the only one doing any work is not a way to get people to work with you - in case you had not realized that yet. Anything else that needs fixing on this one? :) Annie 02:19, 23 January 2021 (EST)

Interzone

It seems odd to me all issues of this magazine up until #24 have no publisher credit on ISFDB except for #12, which has Interzone as the publisher(?). The only other publication by Interzone was a 1982 chapbook, so this may be an error (or maybe all those other issues should have the same publisher, too). Who knows?--Username 13:07, 24 January 2021 (EST)

Well, me: there was in fact no credit for a publisher in the first issues. I'll take a look into that no. 12. Thanks for the hint! Stonecreek 13:27, 24 January 2021 (EST)

The Homing

This, , shows the 1992 cover of the British reprint of this novel, which unlike the earlier editions reveals the real names of the authors. I want to add the image, but should names be changed?--Username 19:53, 24 January 2021 (EST)

Is that The Homing by John Saul, or The Homing by 'Jeffrey Campbell' you are referring to :) ? - I guess the latter as you're talking about authors, plural, but please do add links to the (ISFDB or other) records you are mentioning in your posts. As to your question, I haven't found any other pictures of the cover but the one available from Amazon here, which I always find suspicious and starts me thinking if this edition has actually been published at all? But if you're absolutely sure that the this edition really has been published, and that the cover really corresponds to the 1992 reprint edition, then you can update the existing record with the two separate names AND don't forget that you'd have to add a new Contents title with both names as well (it doesn't exist yet) - and remove the existing title record). MagicUnk 14:22, 26 January 2021 (EST)

Winston Churchill

So this, https://archive.org/details/1898manoverboardchurchhill, shows it was first published in Dec. 1898, unlike ISFDB saying Jan. 1899. Also, it says it was written by "Winston Spencer Churchill", but that variant name only shows up for a reprint in a 1969 anthology. Also, it's subtitled "An Episode of the Red Sea", but that doesn't show up at all on ISFDB. Don't want to F up a major author like this without knowing under which name I should put this link and whether I should change the date and add the subtitle (and delete notes from a couple of the variants saying it was first published in 1899). --Username 09:13, 25 January 2021 (EST)

I did a quick check, and the story has been published in Jan 1899, not in 1898 (as the scan title incorrectly suggest) - this link for example shows that the first volume has been published July 1898-January 1899. In addition, the last page of the scan of the story says With the present January number Six Numbers... ergo, the story has been published in Jan 1899.

That said, the January 1899 issue of the Hamsworth Magazine (Vol 1, No. 6) in which this story first appeared has not been entered into ISFDB (nor has the entire Vol I for that matter). So go ahead and add that missing magazine pub record and import "Man Overboard!" into its Contents section (or add and merge afterwards). Have fun! MagicUnk 14:01, 26 January 2021 (EST)

Childgrave

Note for this 1982 novel by Ken Greenhall says there was an earlier 1981 British edition under Greenhall's pseudonym Jessica Hamilton. I found the cover and created a new record and entered all the other info available, but after approval it sits alone instead of being under the Childgrave record. Can someone add this 1981 edition as a variant to the #858887 record? --Username 10:34, 26 January 2021 (EST)

You can do that yourself by varianting the Jessica Hamilton title record to the Ken Greenhall original title record. You do this in exactly the same way as any other varianting you would do.

As an aside, it has been requested before, it would be appreciated if you'd add links in your postings. Don't assume other editors or moderators will immediately find what you're talking about - lend them a hand by providing links, which you can easily do by just copying the URL in your message, or put it between [ ], or by using the {{t|xxxxx|title}} or {{p|xxxx||pub title}} templates. Thanks! MagicUnk 13:32, 26 January 2021 (EST)

Author Tanya Allan

Just curious, I created the page for Tanya Allan, but does anybody but me think that the author Tanya Allan-Johnson is probably the same person? The primary for the later seems to gone AWOL. MLB 22:36, 28 January 2021 (EST)

I tend to think the same, but I do think the probability for this is around 75%, and that'd not be enough to link them for sure, IMHO. But what would be possible is to add notes to both author entries, along the line that it's possible that the two are one and the same. Christian Stonecreek 07:05, 29 January 2021 (EST)

And I just did so for the supposed variant name. Christian Stonecreek 07:10, 29 January 2021 (EST)

Thanks. MLB 21:17, 30 January 2021 (EST)

Steranko artist in Swords Against Death

I added the cover artist [3] to [4], which shows as an alternative to [5]. However, the title doesn't show up in the list. What step did I miss? --GlennMcG 16:08, 29 January 2021 (EST)

You need to create a parent which brings it to the canonical page. When you have a title in a pseudonym/alternative author listing, you need to create a parent title to bring it to the main author page (or variant to an already existing title there). So open the title, use the second option in the "Make This Title a Variant" (this page for this one) and only change the author name from the alternative to the main one - that will create the needed parent and bring it to the canonical name page. Annie 16:42, 29 January 2021 (EST)

Peter Tremayne (Ants)

Hell-o. Tremayne's novel [6] was translated into Portuguese under the title As formigas vem ai!. This translates as The Ants are Coming! The original British edition is listed as just The Ants on ISFDB but has two smaller words under the title on the cover, Are Coming! I think this was the intended title, and there are several sites online that list it as such, but I hesitate to change it until hearing from someone else. --Username 19:49, 29 January 2021 (EST)

Well, there is a pved publication (though the verifier isn't active at the moment), so better leave it at that, since an 'intended' title or the title as printed on the cover is of no interest to ISFDB: only the title as printed on the title page is. Thanks, Stonecreek 08:25, 30 January 2021 (EST)

The title page didn't include the full title in the original edition [7], but clearly Tremayne restored his preferred title for reprints [8] --Username 09:36, 30 January 2021 (EST)

Understanding data in the CIP block of a book

I'm new to doing this and am not a librarian, just a long term collector.

Can someone help me interpret how to read some data on one line of the CIP block of a book? The book was printed in 1979 (or a little later). The CIP data contains a line reading: [PZ7.C7878Ov 1979] [Fic] 79-10489

I tried to find something in the Help Desk archives but I couldn't find a way to search through all the topics at one time.

Thanks Phil Freund 16:49, 2 February 2021 (EST)

PZ7 means juvenile and young adult literature. The last number on this line (79-10489) is supposed to be the LCCN number but older ones may not be available online. Fic and 1979 should be self-explanatory. Which book does it belong to and what else is on the surrounding lines?

The only part from the CIP data that we care about in the DB is the ISBN if it is there and the LCCN. You can note the rest or use some of it (we have a flag for juvenile) but most of the rest is more fro libraries than for here.

Do you need any more information or did that help enough? Annie 17:40, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Wikipedia has the full list of these codes. Annie 17:42, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Thanks! I think this helps enough. The book is [9] Over Sea, Under Stone by Susan Cooper. The following line is the ISBN. Just above the Printer's Key is a line that reads "First Voyager/HBJ edition 1979". Would that be enough to change the date entry to 1979-00-00? Phil Freund 22:39, 2 February 2021 (EST)

1979 will be the first printing. What you linked is the third - and the CIP data does not change between the printings - not often anyway - I’d expect all printings to carry the same details more often than not. So there are two options here:

• You are holding an edition with a printer key for the third printing. Then you have this book indeed. The date is not clear and cannot change.
• You are holding an edition with a complete printer key or a key A - aka first printing. In this case, you probably have this although it is a different ISBN so probably not. It is also possible that what we have is a second printing.

Unless there is a specific date for the printing itself or we can find external collaboration, the date will remain 0000 I am afraid. Hope this makes sense. You add a note with the CIP data so if someone can find additional data, it can be used as collaboration later on though. Annie 01:32, 3 February 2021 (EST)

Patreon edition ebooks

A number of authors are providing early releases of their new publications to people who have signed up for a subscription on Patreon. There’s a lot of inconsistency in how the individual Patreon programs are setup.

Let me use Glynn Stewart’s Patreon offering as an example. For $5.00 per title, subscribers are able to download a Patreon Edition of an about-to-be-released title. Each of the titles is typically released two weeks prior to the general availability of the title and can no longer be downloaded once the publication is generally available. Each has a cover that is the same as the initial release cover with the words “Patreon Edition” added to it. The title page includes the term “Patreon Edition” on it. The edition also serves as a final editing check before full publication since each subscriber is encouraged to report any typos, etc. In many ways, these titles can be considered final eARCs.

Should these title variations be added to the database and if yes, would they be handled any differently than we handle variations of other titles? A unique publication date can be obtained by looking at the availability posting date on the Patreon page for that Author’s subscription. A unique cover image is available. Would I just go with that? Phil 11:46, 5 February 2021 (EST)

It really comes down to how different they are. We don't list eARCS separately and with ebooks, we tend to lump versions a bit more than with we for for paper books (versions and ebooks are a complicated matter). You may look at existing Patreon editions and notes to see what had been done. But as a whole, unless it has an extra story or artwork or something, I will leave it just on the notes level... Annie 11:58, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Then I'll plan on adding the info to the Title notes. Thanks! Phil 14:37, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Having the notes will allows us to move them out into proper editions if we decide to do that at some point so... yeah. As always with the DB - the better notes we have, the easier it is to implement a change if we need to so... document, document, document :) Wait to see if anyone else chimes in with another idea/solution but that is what I would do :) Annie 14:54, 5 February 2021 (EST)

I don't have any ideas or solutions, but when I saw this item, it reminded me that I read a while ago that Baen make some sort of very rough/early e-ARCs available to purchase, and that would seem to be a reasonable precedent, if there's ever been any discussion of how to handle them? A quick Google returns this page of examples, and this discussion about their content. ErsatzCulture 15:15, 5 February 2021 (EST)

(unindent)I am afraid I missed this discussion back in February. To answer ErsatzCulture's question above, yes, we have been aware of the "e-ARCs" that Baen has been selling since 2008 -- here is the relevant discussion. As was pointed out at the time, these are -- arguably -- not ARCs at all:

• ... these "e-arcs" are actually being advertised and sold. The traditional ARC was only distributed to reviewers and buyers for bookstores and distributors, and indeed generally carried a large "NOT FOR SALE" notice. Fans only got these if they knew someone on the distribution list, or if someone on that list sold a copy in violation of agreement. But with Baen marketing these, arguably they aren't "really" ARCs at all, but separate editions. -DES ^Talk 12:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

"Patreon editions" are apparently similar in that they are only available for a limited time, have a different publication date and a separate price. I think they are more like "privately published" books, which were commonly sold to subscribers about a century ago, or more modern book club editions than traditional ARCs. I think they need separate publication records. I am going to copy-paste this discussion to the Rules and Standards page Ahasuerus 15:25, 11 July 2021 (EDT)

Add Publication Query

Hi.

I need to add an additional (earlier, probably original) publication to an existing title. The HelpScreen, "AddPublication", suggests that this can be done by using the "Add Publication to this Title" feature from the main title record in the left navigation bar.

I am attempting to add a publication to "No Me Dejes" by Mark Oshiro, Title Record # 2629625. This sure looks like the main title record to me. I am not finding anything that looks like "Add Publication to this Title".

I assume that either a) the HelpScreen is not correct, or b) I have not found the actual main title record.

Regardless, I would appreciate help or guidance. I will be doing more of these, so I would certainly like to get it right.

Thanks. Dave888 19:18, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Or c) you hit one of the two fiction text types that work differently :)

It is because it is a short story - it is a special case because it is not a container record. You need to add a chapbook to have it as a separate publication - which is different from novels/collections/anthologies which are both containers and text records. So if there was one already, you could clone that. As there is not one yet, you need to do New Chapbook and either add the story manually (and then merge them) or add it with no story (and a moderator note) and then import the story.

Same will happen for a poem for example :) Chapbooks are... special. Annie 19:26, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Well, I was thinking the other option was something I just had no idea about, and there you are. Especially after reading (only once, and I may re-read it a few times) the "Help:How to convert a novel to a chapbook" page, I can see that this is starting to get into some serious DB matters. I know just enough about databases to get into a lot of trouble. My thanks on the specific directions. I'll be back in touch if I still don't get it, and I'm sure you'll see my submittals here. I'll probably do one like this, and then wait for approval to ensure I have actually gotten it. Thanks!

Dave888 10:26, 6 February 2021 (EST)

Martha Brown, M.P.

Should this record, [10], be deleted? It has wrong first name, wrong publisher name, wrong title, etc. There's already a record, [11], with correct info. --Username 00:04, 16 February 2021 (EST)

Looks like the entry is per an appearance in this reference. There are several people who have copies of it (as well as one who has a copy of the variant). You should ask them to check. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:19, 16 February 2021 (EST)

Fur and Fangs

I would like to add the chapterbooks one through ten of Fur and Fangs by Rae D. Magdon, which can be found on Amazon. They have also been collected into one book Fur and Fangs: Volume 1-10. I think the chapterbooks should be listed as a serial, and the final "collection" as a novel. What does anybody think? MLB 21:26, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Yep - definitely look like a serialization and not like a collection. That's exactly why we allowed serials inside of chapbooks :) Annie 23:07, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Chapbooks in series

Can chapbooks be in series or have I missed something. Castle of Horror http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2238991 is a sequel to Bride of the Rat God http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2316. I created a series but when I go to edit the Title data on Castle of Horror I can't edit the Series field. Dana Carson 23:14, 18 February 2021 (EST)

Some time back the outcome of a discussion was to not allow chapbooks in a series. I don't know if it is that good: IMHO some chapbooks should belong to a title series. They can dominate an author's summary page. Stonecreek 23:45, 18 February 2021 (EST)

OK will add a note to the chapbook that it is a sequel. Dana Carson 00:07, 19 February 2021 (EST)

You put the stories into the series - the chapbooks are just containers. When the stories get reprinted into a collection, they remain part of the series. :) If it is a real chapbook series, then make it a publication one. While the chapbooks can dominate a page, we can figure out how to deal with it - adding both the story and the chapbook to a series will pad the series pages badly. :) Annie 00:32, 19 February 2021 (EST)

And Done. Annie 00:34, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Maybe it'd be possible to actively choose if one wants to have CHAPBOOK title series displayed (like with languages displayed); obviously that would mean to have title series reserved for CHAPBOOKs (but we already have a few that are devoted to OMNIBUSES; they were entered as subseries - as would be the CHAPBOOK title series)? Anybody wants to spend a thought on that? Stonecreek 03:34, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Re. "the chapbooks are just containers. When the stories get reprinted into a collection" - aren't collections and omnibuses (and anthologies too, although probably not that often in the context of series) "just containers" too? AFAIK those should be marked as part of a series when applicable - but as a relative newbie here, it's not particularly obvious to me why the latter should be treated as part of a series, but not chapbooks.

(Apologies in the likely event I'm just repeating an argument someone else already made, one which evidently didn't "win" last time ;-) ErsatzCulture 09:00, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Chapbooks contain single stories. Collections and so on contain multiples. So if we add the chapbooks, you have 1 on 1 duplication inside of the series. Adding collections adds a bigger entity and these can be legitimately numbered entities (different from their stories). Chapbooks series will always duplicate their story’s number and series. This is the same reason why we can import a collection in an omnibus but importing a chapbook is meaningless. Chapbooks are essentially an ISFDB construction allowing us to catalog single stories/poems/serials. Annie 10:15, 19 February 2021 (EST)

I'm going to be a devil's advocate/irritating pedant (delete as applicable) here, and point out there was a 2020-05-09 rule change that says a chapbook can have more than one fiction title (but only one fiction title) - I would link directly, but the link on the rules changelog doesn't work, and I couldn't see the discussion in the rules archive to fix the link to point to the right place. ErsatzCulture 10:42, 19 February 2021 (EST)

I have updated the links to Archive 18 of the Rules and Standards page. Thanks for catching it! Ahasuerus 12:54, 19 February 2021 (EST)

I imagine the number of chapbooks that contain more than one piece of fiction from the same series is somewhere between very few and zero, but I could certainly imagine that you might have a chapbook containing both an "n" and "n.m" entry in a series, so the chapbook itself could have a different series number?

Anyway, that's a relatively trivial thing. My personal concern - and again, I imagine I'll be reiterating old ground - is that whilst the current practice avoids duplicating series data in the database, it leads to (IMHO) confusing pages e.g. at first glance, I don't think it's at all obvious to someone who doesn't have a pretty good understanding of the DB, why this bibliography page has 3 chapbooks that aren't displayed under the series they are part of. (The underlying SHORTFICTION/novella records are indeed under the series, but they aren't as visible as the separate chapbook section.) If the chapbooks were tagged as part of the series, that would at least have them in the (again IMHO) correct section, even if that means we'd have both the CHAPBOOK and SHORTFICTION showing next to each other.

This particular issue might be solvable in the display code, assuming that my preference for having them all under the series is shared by the rest of the ISFDB gestalt - but I'd definitely want to hear any opinions yay or nay before spending time looking into that. ErsatzCulture 10:42, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Open an R&S discussion if you feel strongly about that. I still prefer not to double series just so that a UI looks nicer. Get enough people to agree, rules will get changed. I proposed once to send the chapbooks at the very bottom of the page. That will clear the author pages and make the chapbooks less visible. Adding them to series will just bulk up the series, leaving all of those high on the pages. Annie 10:56, 19 February 2021 (EST)

The hypothetical code change I am talking about would not require any change to the rules or current practices - basically something that would look at the (fiction) titles within the pubs of a CHAPBOOK, and if they're all part of the same series, then consider that CHAPBOOK to also be part of that series. Probably this would require an extra DB lookup; I don't know what that page is currently doing, possibly it might already have enough info to make that determination? But as I say, I wouldn't want to spend time on looking into that unless it was something that was already agreed would be preferable to implement. ErsatzCulture 11:13, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Combined here -- this will add chapbooks in series which is now not allowed both under the rules and in the code. We need to change both - get people to agree that it is a good change, then look at whatever you want :) As is obvious, I do not think it is a good change - I will live with it if the majority prefers it but a code change/FRs are discussed first. In all cases, the discussion does not really belong in the Help Desk thread of someone who came to ask how to add a chapbook to a series and all they needed was to be reminded that the series goes on the story - which for some reason the first responder failed to do and instead went on a tangent how we need to change the rules. Not that threads here do not get all kinds of weird. So if you have a proposal, write it up, post in R&S and/or Community and see what support you will muster. :) Annie 11:21, 19 February 2021 (EST)

Help correcting a mistake I made

I added the table of contents to the trade paperback edition (the one I own) of Neil Clarke's The Best Science Fiction of the Year: Volume 5. That was blessed by a moderator and went live. Except I've discovered that I created new copies of all the stories so they (almost) all have duplicates now; my copies show up as only published in that publication. Another moderator mentioned the need to merge each of the duplicates; I would try it myself, but I'd probably break something else and my merges would just have to wait in moderation queue anyway.

After that, I'll have a question about adding the TOC to the other editions (HC and ebook). I followed a moderator's step-by-step instructions in doing that, but apparently something (I don't know what) happened to one of the stories and my additions got force rejected. Do I just start over or do something else? Sfmvnterry 19:36, 20 February 2021 (EST)

All the merges are done. Now that we have the contents in one format, you can use import. Go to the book that has the contents already and get the is from the top right corner. In this case it is 794324. Go to one of the other formats - for example. Look at the left menu and locate “Import Contents”. In Option 1 use the ID we started with. On the next page adjust any page numbers if needed. This will ensure that instead of creating new records, the existing ones are used. Repeat for the other format. :)

What happened to a story or the anthology title was the same that I did here - there two of them, they got merged, one ID got dropped.

Let me know if you have any questions about the Import process. Annie 02:09, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Thanks! I'll learn more as I go along, but I have one question now, because I see that Jonathan Strahan's new annual doesn't have its TOC either. How do I ensure I'm not creating duplicate stories? Sfmvnterry 11:45, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Find the IDs of each story and then use import again - but using Option 2 and using the IDs of the stories and not the whole book - one per line. Annie 12:44, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Does the moderator UI include a field for IDs when importing? I get to the page titled "Import/Export Contents" and there are no fields for ID numbers for individual stories, just page number, author, title and other details. Sfmvnterry 19:26, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Then you are on the edit page - not on the import page or you went with the wrong option. Click on the Import link on the book level and look at option 2 on the screen - Option 1 is to import from another book, option 2 is to import individual titles. This is where you list the IDs, one per line. Then you press submit and it gets you to where you cans specify the page numbers for the stories you are importing. This first page also has a help page linked at the top. Annie 21:17, 21 February 2021 (EST)

PS: If you are just now adding the book, it needs to be added before you can import into it (unlike adding new stories which can be added while adding a book) (in case that case comes up). But it sounds like you are in an existing book - so make sure you list the IDs on that first import page, before you go into the next one. You get the stories IDs the same way we got the Publication one - except you get it from the story page and not from the page of a book that contains it. Annie 21:36, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Fur and Fangs

I’m missing a step. How do I make Fur and Fangs the novel, part of Fur and Fangs the serial starting here. MLB 07:52, 21 February 2021 (EST)

The novel becomes the parent. Variant All the serials to the novel and you are all set. Annie 12:45, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Ola!!! It worked! Still so much to learn about this editing stuff. MLB 20:41, 21 February 2021 (EST)

Doctor Who Target novelizations - series or pub series?

Anyone familiar with the current state of play on these? (I haven't bought or read one for about 30 years...)

The reason I ask is that:

• "Doctor Who Target novelizations" is currently set up as a series i.e. at the title level
• There are a couple of Eric Saward novelizations (here and here) that first came out years after most (all?) of the others, and weren't packaged as Target-branded novelizations (AFAIK), so they are just in the overall Doctor Who Universe series
• However, there are new pubs of these two novelizations coming out in a couple of weeks, and these are branded as Target novelizations
• Strictly speaking, they seem to be branded as "Target Collection", perhaps there's some subtle distinction here (vs "Target novelizations" that someone else understands better than I do?
• There are other titles coming out soon that are branded "Target Collection", but have been recorded here as "Target Novelizations" though.

Any thoughts on how best to handle these new Eric Saward pubs? (Bearing in mind that "DW Target novelizations" has approaching 200 entries, so any change to that might be a big job...) ErsatzCulture 12:36, 23 February 2021 (EST)

You had to go there, didn't you? Some of the Target Collection ones are novelizations and belong to the old title series, some are not (or not clearly). These are one of the series I am pondering on - they used to be a clear title series but then things changed. So I had been parking the novelizations in there until I have some time to sit down with the full lists and see what needs to be moved and how. If it is a novelization, stick it in there for now so we do not lose track... There are a few of those series in the Doctor Who Universe that do not make sense in the way they are setup now - but that will need an overhaul which will need discussion and a plan before we start changing (and we have a ton of verifiers so... we will need consensus - which is not easy). If you have a full idea on the needed overhaul, please feel free to share as well. But let's not rush into "fixing" without a complete plan or we will end up with a disaster (just look at the Marvel/DC universes where some editors decided to start changing on their own... and now the whole sets are somewhere in the middle of a flux that had not been touched in years). Annie 12:48, 23 February 2021 (EST)

OK, do you know if there's been a prior Wiki discussion about this that I should read to bring myself up to speed? (I did do a search for "target", but couldn't see anything relevant on the first page of results - not that that's a great search term, of course.)

Based on what you've said, I propose to:

- Mark the two existing Saward Daleks titles as part of the DW Target novelizations series, so at least they are all in the novelization series

- Add the new pb pubs of them

If I see any other titles that strike me as being in the same boat, I'll update this wiki item to make others aware before doing any submissions. ErsatzCulture 13:09, 23 February 2021 (EST)

For Dr Who? Not yet - or not lately. :) Which is why I am saying that we need a plan and a discussion before an editor goes headlong into changing things radically - which we may need to... I know of the state of these because of the pre-publication titles I had been dealing it for the last year+ - had to track down where a lot of them need to go.

Yeah - add the Saward's into it for now so we do not lose them. The whole Doctor Who canon is all over the place - I keep finding stories and novels with no series set at all. :) Annie 13:24, 23 February 2021 (EST)

Baen vs Baen Books publishers

I just noticed the split between Baen and Baen Books. The notes indicate that the they exist in different time frames, and with 3 different logos, but don't give guidance on the specifics of how to choose between them.

It appears that Baen Books came earlier, and had a logo that contained the words 'Baen' and 'Books' in a squashed hexagon. However, it looks like lots of publication records don't honor these differences, in that the year ranges overlap quite a bit.

So what criteria should be used to distinguish these separate imprint/publishers? --GlennMcG 19:18, 23 February 2021 (EST)

I could ask Toni Weisskopf about it. She's the publisher at Baen, and has been with them since the beginning (or very close to it). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:21, 23 February 2021 (EST)

Some of the overlaps are because of reprints, some are simply mistakes (a lot of them I suspect...) and some may be because of already printed stock... The logos were very different:

• This one (or this one is Baen Books - the logo literary says Baen Books in a funky font on all of the ones that should be under the older Baen Books.
• this one (looks like a star) and later ones which were all kinds of circles (this one for example although the design changed a few times is Baen.

That's the theory anyway - there are some that seem to be in Baen and still carry a Baen Books logos so should be kicked out. I am not sure why we even want to keep these separate - it IS the same publisher after all, despite the different times... Annie 19:38, 23 February 2021 (EST)

Robert Bloch

His collection, [12], has a few issues. A couple of story titles are slightly different than the contents page of the book, [13], and someone entered 1 of the stories twice under 2 different names. So 1 of those has to go and someone with this book should check to see if titles at head of other stories are same as contents. --Username 16:43, 25 February 2021 (EST)

As can be seen at the publication page, the book has been verified and the verifier is active (last activity date being yesterday). When there is an active verifier, please just post the question at the verifier's user talk page. That will ensure they see the question vs. hoping the see it here. I have pinged Dirk for you. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:44, 25 February 2021 (EST)

I am afraid that The House of the Hatchet -2nd Tandem Books edition needs at least some of the same changes I made to The House of the Hatchet -1st Tandem Books edition.--Dirk P Broer 17:07, 26 February 2021 (EST)

Thomas F. Monteleone's Dragonstar

Monteleone's Dragonstar series lists four titles, including Dragonstar itself, seemingly only ever published in English as a serial. It seems highly likely (and his Wikipedia entry appears to back this up) that 'book 2', Day of the Dragonstar, is simply the first paperback publication of Dragonstar, in which case the two titles should be merged. Thoughts? Mellotronman 06:51, 27 February 2021 (EST)

It is very likely BUT... weirder things had happened before so let's try to verify :) There is an active PV here (GlennMcG) so I would say to start by posting on his page to see if there is something in the book itself that may confirm this first. If there isn't, some of the PVs of the original Analog issue are around - so a check between GlennMcG and one of them on actual text may solve this. If all else fails, we will need to look for evidence elsewhere (libraries for example). Let me know if you want to try to send the questions to the relevant people or if you want me to. :) Annie 22:45, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Thanks, Annie - please could you ask the relevant people? Thanks! :-) Mellotronman 06:26, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

A pigeon had been sent to start the process ;) Annie 12:31, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

I'll compare them. I should have that issue of Analog as well. --GlennMcG 15:11, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

The paperback is a revision/expansion of the serialization. Minor differences near the beginning, but the chapters diverge after a while. --GlennMcG 16:19, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

So different enough not to become variants. We allow for some changes but sounds like they are substantial? Are you willing to write some notes in both of them explaining the difference (not in the plot but textually).

Which probably means that the whole series 2-4 should be shifted as 1-3 and the now 1 should be sent into ) with a note explaining that it is an early version of 1. Thoughts? Annie 18:17, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

I don't think we ever defined just how much the book version has to diverge from the original serialized version before we break the "variant title" connection and call it a separate work. In this particular case I recall doing a fair amount of digging back in 2006 and determining that the differences were too significant to link the two versions.

The next question then is whether the German translation (Drachengestirn) was based on the serialization or on the book version. Ahasuerus 18:53, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

We have a PV and the pigeon had been sent with a formal invitation to the party. :) Let's see if the German book will help us figure that out. Annie 19:11, 12 April 2021 (EDT)

I have checked the book and the stated original title is just given as 'Dragonstar', which would point to the serialization, but it's seems still possible that the text was translated from the manuscript for the book publication. Christian Stonecreek 00:55, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

Having said that and spent some time to get the feeling of the novel it does appear to be the English novel proper translated: also, the note of thanks is for help on creating the book. Are there those notes, the dedication and a prologue with the magazine version? Christian Stonecreek 08:40, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

The paperback book has an acknowledgements page thanking Stanley Schmidt, Victoria Schochet, Melissa Anne Singer, and Dr. Charles Sheffield. The Analog serialization does not. --GlennMcG 17:26, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

Thanks! Based on that I varianted the translation to 'Day of the Dragonstar' instead. Shall the series be shifted to encompass now only three parent titles? Christian Stonecreek 05:36, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

Well, we still have 4 titles which are distinct and IN series - we just need to figure out how to record that. I think that a 0, 1-3 numbering will be better than the current 1-4 one. Plus adding notes to the serial, the book publication and the series. Any objections? Annie 12:18, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

Based on my somewhat vague recollection of my 2006 investigation, 0 and then 1-3 would work best. I remember comparing the magazine version and the book version and finding significant differences, but I can no longer recall the details :( Ahasuerus 12:27, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

Glenn has both and confirmed above that they indeed diverge -- so we are all set. I will fix the numbering and add notes. Thanks everyone for the responses here! Annie 12:38, 14 April 2021 (EDT)

I looked a bit deeper, and most of the my noted divergence is the addition of chapter 10 to the paperback version. So last chapter == last chapter, but are numbered 21 vs 22. My sampling technique was to look at the beginning and end of each chapter and comparing text. It's not clear how different they need to be, but I'd guess that well more than half the text is shared between the versions. --GlennMcG 15:18, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

More than half sounds like at least 20-30-40% difference. That’s way too high to consider it the same text. Minor revisions are fine; that’s sounds like a major one. So we are all good I think. :) Annie 15:27, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Forced?

I just had a whole lot of work dumped on multiple issues of Beneath Ceaseless Skies because they were forced. I know that I've asked this before, but what does this mean for my submissions? MLB 18:18, 3 March 2021 (EST)

Your submission contained a title ID somewhere in its contents that does not exist anymore - either it got merged (so the ID you used does not exist anymore) or deleted (so it does not exist anymore). When that happens, the original submission is not salvageable. Someone may decide to assist and recreate it manually so you do not need to but other from this.

Looking at one of these rejections, most likely the EDITOR record got merged somewhere before your Clone was processed (if it was a title lower, parts of the submission will be visible). Looking at the XML of the submission tells you that 2839142 (the ID that is now invalid) used to be the parent - so yep, this is your EDITOR record getting itself merged into its yearly record after you submitted the clone but before it was approved. Annie 22:40, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Sorry to you so late, my computer had a technical fart, then went on strike for about two days. Now, can I recreate the clones? MLB 18:27, 5 March 2021 (EST)

Absolutely. Once the merge was done, that is the best/only thing you can do. Annie 19:23, 5 March 2021 (EST)

Goya

Just imported contents into this collection, [14], and it's another one with a cover using that familiar painting but there's lots of variants of Goya's name and that painting on ISFDB so I don't know where to put it. If anyone has a copy they can see how it's credited and add it. --Username 19:53, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Oh my, here's a good one. I searched on picclick.com and found this, [15], which shows cover for Hazardous edition of this book (according to ISFDB) but says PARALLEL UNIVERSE on the back. Maybe Goya cover was a placeholder and the old cover was just reused instead. Figure this one out! --Username 20:04, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Macdonald's Haggard editions

I was adding as many Hookway Cowles covers for Rider Haggard books as I could find and only chose ones that said "Macdonald Illustrated Edition" on the bottom of the cover. Now I see that 1 book I didn't find a cover for, [16], uses "Macdonald Illustrated Edition" as a Publication Series on ISFDB. So my question is, should that really be considered a series, and if so, should all the others be part of it, too? --Username 18:31, 5 March 2021 (EST)

Thoughts on eBay as a source?

I haven't seen any prior discussion on this, feel free to redirect me if there is some. While researching completing my own collections I've come across detailed eBay listings of books with images that have the ISBN, copyright date, etc, all the info needed to fill in a pub here. In my opinion it's almost like a transient verification, so having it in front of you then gone later. How do you think this might work here? Kapotun 11:03, 6 March 2021 (EST)Kapotun

Transient is more than that - it needs the complete book - so not even close. It is closer to using a publisher site for example. But eBay and auctions and other online stores had always been a good source for additional data - just do not include links to them in the Notes themselves (“scanned pages in online stores/eBay listing/auction listing” is a good way for example). Add the link to the moderator notes so whoever approves can see your source. I often need to use them when working on Central European books. Annie 12:47, 6 March 2021 (EST)

Thanks for the reply, makes sense. Kapotun 14:35, 6 March 2021 (EST)Kapotun

Coverart inside of magazines/art books

What's the correct process for entering book covers as interiorart? Do I add them when I enter the magazine or do I need to create the variant first? Do we handle art which covers are based on differently than a picture of the cover (with titles, price, etc.)? Thanks, TAWeiss 11:12, 14 March 2021 (EDT)

You can enter them when you enter the publication. Once the publication is accepted, you would variant the interior art record to the cover art record. The existence / nonexistence of titles, prices, etc. on the image doesn't matter. We treat them as all the same image and variant them to the canonical title. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2021 (EDT)

Thanks! TAWeiss 21:36, 14 March 2021 (EDT)

Email notifications for watchlist

I am not likely to log into this on a frequent basis. Is there a way to get email notifications of changes that are in my watchlist? --Jktrigg 00:06, 15 March 2021 (EDT)

Unfortunately no. You can leave a message on your Talk page for people to use the Send Mail to user functionality to notify you when they post there (so you get notified) but it is manual and only for your Talk page -- not for all you are watching... Annie 11:31, 15 March 2021 (EDT)

Tor Fantasy

In the process of PVing my collection I've updated a fair number of books from Tor to Tor Fantasy. But I've only done it on the specific printing/format I own. I'm now second-guessing myself on whether I should have also done it to printings or formats (pb,tp,hc). At least in the cases where I have multiple copies, the publisher matches, but I can't prove it in all cases. Leave things alone, or update to match? --GlennMcG 17:41, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Considering the history of the Tor publisher versions, I would not update unless there is at least one indicator besides "the other formats came out from it" - as they usually come a few months/years apart, things change. But if you can find a secondary source/scanned pages somewhere that show you the publisher as you expect to see it, sure, update them - with a note explaining based on what exactly you are updating. Annie 17:45, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Same for printings? Seems even more likely to be the same. --GlennMcG 17:57, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

More likely still does not make it the same as having a book in hand - we had seen weirder things (including later printings from a new publisher...). :)

For printings with active PVs - they will need to concur before the change - or at least I won't be comfortable approving the change of the data without positive approval.

For ones with verifiers who are inactive, with only secondary verifications and even with no verifications at all (most of those have at least a source which probably says Tor), using something like

• "Publisher changed to "Tor Fantasy" on (date) based on the XXX printing of this edition. The YYY printing (this edition) had not been inspected" works for me (or words to this effect).

What we need is to make clear that the change was done post inactive primary and any secondary verifications and what it is based on. Unless you have OCLC or another secondary source concurring - then base it on that and not on the other printing if you prefer. :)

If you want, wait for another opinion as well. I am sure that if someone strongly disagrees with me, they will stop by and comment. :) Annie 18:39, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

One thing to keep in mind is that the choice of the imprint can be influenced by marketing considerations. For example, the marketing department may decide that having "Tor Fantasy" on the spine would likely boost mass market paperback sales. At the same time their research may indicate that "Tor" may be a better choice for hardcovers because the people who buy books in hardcover have a different profile. In this particular case, it's hypothetical, but I have seen similar arguments made by industry insiders, so it's possible. From our perspective, it means that we can't be sure that the imprint will stay consistent across bindings and printings. Ahasuerus 18:51, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

Preferred procedure for questioning the inclusion of a tile in a given series

What is the preferred procedure for removing a title from a series. Do all the PV's of every format need to be contacted for their concurrence? The Law of Nines by Terry Goodkind is is an example. It is included in the Sword of Truth series, but, it is a totally unrelated standalone novel. I have come across other examples and usually refrain from editing or verifying. No longer wish to pass these by. Thanks in advance Scifibones 19:09, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

I wouldn't say it's totally unrelated. You can read the Wikipedia article for a list of things that show a relation, and this review makes that connection, too. Our listing also mentions that it is "Only indirectly related to the Sword of Truth universe." ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:50, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

You're welcome to make a list of the others you've found, too, so they can be discussed. We try to be careful, but errors occasionally creep into the database despite our best efforts. Please include links to each of them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:52, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

I accept your explanation. Perhaps "totally" unrelated was a bit strong. I think of the references in the wiki article, cited above, as author devices. In this case, a reward to a loyal reader, "I know who or what he's referring to". As far as the narrative, any name could be used and still make the point. Many authors name characters after characters in another author's work. This can be a shorthand method of invoking an emotional response. Many have used the same name for an invention, think "ansible". Perhaps a token of admiration for Ursula K. Le Guin(the first I ever saw use this word). We can all think of many similar examples. I won't submit this change, However, I would still like an answer regarding notification when there are many editions and with multiple PV's. Scifibones 21:11, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

We do not have a "kinda connected but not part of the universe/series" - if we want to show connection we either need to add it, or we need to just leave the connection in the notes. Also - note that it is in "Sword of Truth Universe" and not in the main series. That's how we solve these "kinda in but not really in" cases - we throw a parent or child "universe" series (child or parent depends on what else is going on with this series) and put them there. And if/when someone knows the exact relationship, they are welcome (encouraged really) to write a note explaining said relationship - so the next time everyone knows why it belongs :) Annie 21:19, 17 March 2021 (EDT)

For multiple PVs, just pick one place to have the main discussion, and then post a link to it on each of the PV's talk pages. Something like, "We're discussing this issue over here (insert a link), so please come share your thoughts." Something like that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:02, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

Thanks Joe Scifibones 15:02, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

No problem. Feel free to post any other questions you have here and we'll be happy to help you out. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:40, 18 March 2021 (EDT)

"Ansible Universe" series. Very large. gzuckier 00:01, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

Gray Matter / Grey Matter

[17] reveals Stephen King's story "Gray Matter" was published as "Grey Matter". ISFDB only has 1 out of countless reprints of this story with that variant title, a 2012 Hodder tp of Night Shift, [18]. So does this need changing? Pan Books of Horror and Stephen King stories are 2 of the most detailed and verified areas on ISFDB so I wonder why nobody noticed this. Do they always spell Gray as Grey in British books? If so, how many others with this story may have the same variant title? --Username 19:32, 19 March 2021 (EDT)

Sometimes UK publishers change the spelling to conform to the UK standard and sometimes they don't. The same thing happens in the US when UK books are reprinted. There is no way of telling short of asking the primary verifiers to re-check their copies. Ahasuerus 19:43, 19 March 2021 (EDT)

Title series fine tuning

Hi! Would it take a great amount of work to install the use of decimal numbers for sub title series, like it's possible for single titles? I think there are a considerable number of series that could be ordered chronologically, the major franchises among them. I am especially asking for the Perry Rhodan universe, which has many mini series that are determinable in the overall time line. Christian Stonecreek 07:41, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

Let me make sure that I understand correctly. You would like to be able to enter values like "3.5" in the "Series Parent Position" field, right? That way Perry Rhodan (3. Ausg.) and Perry Rhodan (3. Aufl.) could be entered as sub-series "3" and "3.5" respectively instead of "3" and "4", which is what we currently have and which messes up the rest of the sub-series numbering within Perry Rhodan Heftserie.

Does this sound about right? Any other scenarios which would benefit from adding support for decimal numbers in the "Series Parent Position" field? Ahasuerus 11:15, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

It's more about the fiction series proper (rather than the magazines): for example this series appeared in 2008, but the time dealt with fits chronologically in between this and that one, initially published 1963-1965.

And, well, all title series that have sub-series may possibly benefit; this should at least include the universes of "Star Trek" (like here), "Star Wars" and the various comic metaverses, but likely much more (the examples were the ones that sprang to my mind).

All of these may and/or have been eventually coming back to events which were published earlier, and would take a considerable amount of renumbering the given order (which would only be valid until the next prequel or in-between sub-series gets published). Stonecreek 14:36, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

Second prequel series in a big Universe - now the only way to sort this is to pull all prequel series in their own master prequel series or renumber all existing ones. Allow 0.2 and 0.4 for example and we are in a better shape. Prequel series for subseries 5 and 6 in a long seriesb, written later so the numbering is established (now these go inside of series 5 but if we can use 4.5, that makes the page clearer). Same for “another author wrote a sub series that need to slide between series 3 and 4” scenarios (some of the small presses do that a lot). I might have even asked for that way back when - or asked why it is different from the order of books. There are a lot of cases where can use the same flexibility as we have with titles if we had it. :) Annie 14:54, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

PS: However Not all series should be ordered chronologically based on internal fictional universe dates. In some cases they need to be read in order of publication. Unless we allow the two orders to be shown somehow, the request for the decimals is only for series that make sense, not for reordering all series (which is what Stonecreek seems to imply so just clarifying). Especially the major franchises - ordering by chronology there will be mostly a disaster and if we go there, it will require a lot of discussion and agreement of majority of editors working in them. Annie 14:59, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

Yes, it'd be only possibly meaningful when there's a distinct line of time throughout the Universe, which seems not to be the case in the various comic metaverses (with alternate character incarnations for example). However, a series published much later than the initial works of fiction, for example on youth adentures of Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne, or set during another certain period, would still be possible to fit into the order for a given character incarnation. But my doing for the foreseeable future would be working on the Perry Rhodan Universe. Stonecreek 08:52, 21 March 2021 (EDT)

OK, I can see how it can be useful -- FR 1403 "Allow decimal numbers as Series Parent Position values" has been created. Unfortunately, experience suggests that it will take a fair amount of time to implement. When I added the ability to enter values like "3.5" in the Series Number field, it took a couple of weeks to get it to work correctly. Ahasuerus 12:29, 21 March 2021 (EDT)

Limited Edition 30th Anniversary DAW Science Fiction / Fantasy Boxed Set

Rookie Question. How do I create an entry for the above named item. Then I would like to clone each of the HC records into this entry making all the necessary changes and notes. Am I on the right track? Scifibones 16:08, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

You enter it as an Omnibus, adding in the notes that it is a box set, and then you import the contents of the separate books that make it up (for collections/anthologies you import the collection title itself AND the contents separately). If the books inside of the box set are different from the books we have already, you clone them separately as well. So for a box set of 6 books, you will have 6 separate publication records + 1 for the boxset - and you can use the notes to link them together. Meanwhile their contents will be linked because they will be imported in both the book that contains them and the omnibus that contains the book. :) Annie 17:48, 20 March 2021 (EDT)

Annie, I've submitted step one Scifibones 15:00, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

The box set has been approved. Now you can import the contents. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:48, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Once the titles are approved, I then import the detailed contents? Scifibones 16:59, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Since it's an omnibus, I'm assuming the contents are already in the database somewhere. If you follow the instructions Annie gave above, you can import them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:03, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

If you are still unsure, post the ID/link to the book you are not sure about and step by step based on it can be provided :) Annie 17:18, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Hi Annie, I have submission 4942863 pending to merge the two titles in. If I understand your directions I will have one more step to go. Scifibones 17:33, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Approved. Two of them actually - one to import the Fantasy book contents and one the SF book. I added page markers so the anthologies stay in place. When you import from the Fantasy book, leave the pages as they are in the hardcover. When you import from the SF one, leave them in place during the import but before submitting, change all of the (1 becomes 1|1001, 23 becomes 23|1023 and so on - the first number will be shown, the second will be used for sorting). This will sort the two books separately and one under another on the box set record instead of mixing them. Let me know if you have any questions/concerns. Annie 17:50, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Approved. There was one small thing I forgot to mention - the roman numerals from the first book needed piped numbers to go after the anthology as it was sitting at 0 so they preceded it (non-numbers are at the top of any contents page). Fixed that and we are all set. Please do not hesitate to ask any questions if anything of what was done here is unclear :) Annie 19:07, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

I knew that, I have used pipes many times. Just missed it. You also caught my typo in the sci/fi intro. Last question on this entry. Should I include the DAW collectors numbers, obviously they are the same as the regular hc. Maybe this thread will help someone else —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scifibones (talk • contribs) .

No worries - I just fixed it - part of why we have the system set the way it is - second set of eyes are useful. The DAW number: In the notes? Yes. In the usual field - only if it belongs to the set as a whole. Annie 20:32, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

writers conversing

How would one classify an article which is a couple (or more) of writers conversing? It's not exactly and interview, unless each is interviewing the other. Include it as an essay?

Thanks. gzuckier 23:58, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Yes. If no specific interviewer or interviewee(s) are identifiable, this is the way of denominating. A note for the title (and with the publication) would be welcome. Stonecreek 00:09, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

OK thanks gzuckier 23:31, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

Oops!

I accidently variated The Mound with The Curse of Yig, how do I change this? MLB 18:06, 24 March 2021 (EDT)

You can undo it by going the variant title and using the Make This Title a Variant tool. You can then enter 0 to remove the relationship, of the id of the actual parent title that you want. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 18:22, 24 March 2021 (EDT)

John Russo

I’m updating the page on John Russo, and I would like to know if this author has passed the threshold to add this book. Somebody please say no. MLB 23:31, 24 March 2021 (EDT)

Based on Amazon's Look Inside, there seems to be at least some genre content in it, so it looks like it would be a nonfiction inclusion. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 12:23, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

You all hate me, don't you? :) MLB 13:01, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

How could we hate you? You're so lovable! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:24, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

And good with ketchup! :-) Ahasuerus 17:08, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

"Adult" reprint

This, [19], is apparently from 1931. See here: http://www.philsp.com/homeville/KRJ/SF_Porn_Marginal.pdf. I have no idea how to enter this properly, who to attribute it to or whether that other edition in the PDF belongs here, too, so I'll leave it here in case anyone else knows (or cares) about anonymous porn. --Username 00:44, 2 April 2021 (EDT)

If The Sex Club is a non-genre story, it should be marked NON-GENRE and a note added that it is only listed because it is part of the collection. MLB 06:31, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

I read your note and looked into it, but it turns out moderator RTrace must have seen my note because he did a good job of entering the original 1931 edition and linking everything together plus added some info he found. He didn't mark Sex Club as non-genre but there's no proof it's not so we'll let it be unless someone finds a copy and wants to read it (both unlikely). So all's well. I've been doing a lot of stuff for these awful "adult" books and he must be, too, because he just added a gay porn title, Satan's Stud, with one of the worst/best covers ever. Take a look: [20] --Username 11:49, 13 April 2021 (EDT)

Did the devil break that guy's legs, or what?! LOL! :) MagicUnk 13:23, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Checking Kenneth R. Johnson's "Pornography Index", I see the following comment in the "Exclusions" section:

• Harrington, Len
  • Satan’s Stud.
    • TROJAN CLASSIC TC 230, (GX, Inc.), Chatsworth, CA , n.d., (nov,orig), 185pp.
    • “It was rumored that the studio had sent out extras, making David Hendricks’ funeral one of the most lavish in Hollywood history.”
    • Listed in Reginald. Actor David Hendricks falls in with a witch coven. No real magic.

It looks like it's non-genre even though it was listed by Reginald. Ahasuerus 13:42, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Whitman confusion

I was adding a lot of info to Whitman children's books, including catalog ID's; many said ID was already on file but most of those were for completely unrelated books by different publishers that happened to have the same ID. However, the very last Whitman book I entered info for, [21], had the same ID as a Tarzan book by Whitman, [22]. There seems to be some confusion in the note for the Tarzan book, so something needs to be cleared up here. --Username 17:01, 3 April 2021 (EDT)

The yellow warning for catalog ID is there to make you look to make sure you do not create duplicates you do not want. In most cases these matching values are from different publishers or different printings and can be ignored but once in awhile, it will show you that we already have the book you just entered/edited.

I am not sure what you expect to be able to cleanup. The note explains clearly where the number comes from and what else we know - until someone finds the book and look at it, I do not see anything else we can clear up. Annie 13:52, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

No big deal; children's books are usually a confusing mess with reused ID's and much else. Honestly, I wrote this less than 2 weeks ago and can barely remember what I did for this book, anyway; hundreds of other things have taken its place. Maybe in my travels I'll arrive at it again someday and fix whatever needs fixing. --Username 14:19, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

My best guess is that our source mistyped an ID (or something else got mixed up). But without another source, the notes is the best we can do. Once another source or the book is found, we may be able to clean that all up. In the meantime we document what we see and we make it as clear as possible. :) Annie 14:24, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

"To Clear Away the Shadows" RCN 13 ?

I bought this last fall and finally got around to reading it. Yes, it's in the RCN 'universe', but the characters in the last 12 volumes in the series don't appear. I kept waiting for Lt. Leary and Lady Mundy to show up. Instead, the book introduces an entirely new character, who is charming, and I'd anticipate reading more about, but it's not exactly the same 'series'. How do you know when to start a new series? Who puts names on them? Do we have to wait until Drake writes another book about Lord Harry? Jack Sjmathis 14:54, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

The author and/or a publisher usually. We can split if it makes sense but until the next one is out, we would not know if this is a “standalone in the series” or a sub series or there will alternative books. Leave it as 13 for now, add some notes if you want explaining the characters shift and let’s see what happens next. Annie 15:30, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Thanks. I'll stick a note in it. JackSjmathis 09:36, 17 April 2021 (EDT)

I wrote a note to Dave Drake via his website, and he simply replied that he was regretting calling it an RCN novel, and that he probably wouldn't use the character again. Also, Biomass Bob declared my attempt to enter a note into the pub notes as not relevant, which is fine, since it looks like the issue is moot. Perhaps the RCN series has come to an end. Jack Sjmathis 22:01, 19 April 2021 (EDT)

I added a note on the title level. This will help sort out the numbering when/if there are more stories (when this one may need to be ejected from the 13th place) :) Annie 22:48, 19 April 2021 (EDT)

Webzines

Who should verify webzines? In general, who should verify any pub that's only on the web? Maybe I missed something, but recently I've seen a number of webzines submitted and I don't know how verification should be treated. As primary? As transient? If publisher's website is checked, does that mean no verification? Bob 15:42, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Transient unless you have a backup copy in your possession (or ensure that there is one on archive.org I guess) I would think. If you want to verify that is - I don’t verify webzines as I don’t think it adds value. Think of what verifications signify - transient means you worked off a copy of the publication but don’t have it anymore. That kinda defines a webzine being checked against its site. Permanent requires actually being able to get to it again eventually - to the same version you checked before (even if their site dies or things get changed there). Annie 15:48, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

That was kind of what I have assumed in the past, but wanted at least one other opinion. Thanks, Annie. Bob 21:53, 15 April 2021 (EDT)

Probable Pseudonym

I was verifying my C.C. MacApp (http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?603) magazine collection vs ISFDB and one story I have wasn't listed. Instead, there is a separate listing for Carrol J. Clem (http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?13074) with only that one story.

There is no mention of Clem being a pseudonym of MacApp in Clute or McGhan, nor was it mentioned in a letter I received from Frederick Pohl in response to an inquiry about MacApp. I know have other resources but, sadly, my SF collection is in disarray and I can't locate them.

I don't believe I would have added that story on my own. I'm pretty certain I sourced that pseudonym somewhere (possibly from a fanzine?).

Is there some way to add that unverified information and, if so, would someone be willing to do so? Editing ISFDB looks like a huge can of worms to me and I'm reluctant to learn just to make one tiny contribution. I would appreciate it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DrMemory (talk • contribs) .

Several sources cite C. C. MacApp as a pseudonym for Carroll M(ather) Capps, notably Wikipedia and LibraryThing. I wasn't able to locate anything suggesting that "The Historian" is by anyone other than Carrol J. Clem or that Clem is another pseudonym for Capps. If you are verifying magazines, you should work from the publications, not from the author bibliographies. For example, If, May 1996. If the story should have been credited to MacApp instead of to Clem, the capture of that publication's information would be where the discrepancy lies. I don't understand what you are asking, but I hope that helps. You can record additional information in Notes ("Edit This Pub" for a specific publication, "Edit Title Data" for a title, or possibly "Edit Author Data" for an author (but we wouldn't record information about specific titles or publications in an author record's notes)), depending on what it is you want to capture. It is safe to do that -- submissions are moderated, so a moderator will see whatever you do and will be able to help with it if it should be done differently. --MartyD 08:32, 17 April 2021 (EDT)

page #

Where there is another title page on page n, then typically a blank page, then the text starts on page n+2, which page number do we list? In anthologies as well. Thanks. gzuckier 17:07, 16 April 2021 (EDT)

Can you derive the page number from another page? Which publication are we discussing? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:24, 16 April 2021 (EDT)

I think the question is "if there is a separate title page which is not the book title page and has only the title but NO text, do we count that as the starting page for the story/novel or do we count the first page of text?". I am looking for an old discussion we had about that. Annie 19:27, 16 April 2021 (EDT)

Ah, that's the half title page (that's what it's called in the business). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:06, 19 April 2021 (EDT)

The governing page is this one. I remember we had a slight disagreement on what "the content begins" means (and/or about which work are governed by the "for works which have illustrations preceding their title pages" rule - magazines only or all books - or I am conflating discussions). I am still looking for the old threads :) Annie 19:32, 16 April 2021 (EDT)

Here is a hypothetical scenario based on my reading of the question:

• Story #1 ends on page 19
• The next page is unnumbered and empty except for the title of Story #2
• The following page is unnumbered and empty
• The following page is where the text of Story #2 starts; its page number is 22

Assuming that my understanding is correct, then I think the first sentence of Template:PubContentFields:Page -- "The number of the page on which the content begins" -- applies and "22" should be entered in the page number field for Story #2. Ahasuerus 20:36, 16 April 2021 (EDT)

OK, thanks. gzuckier 03:34, 18 April 2021 (EDT)

Ebook differences -- one record or more?

I'm sort of embarrassed to have to ask this, but.... I am dealing with a case where an ebook has been issued, and if bought from the publisher (on the publisher's site) costs $7.00 and is delivered in Apple's format, with an equivalent page count of 292. Amazon also has this ebook, but has a list price of $6.99 (vs. $7.00) and delivers in Kindle format, with an equivalent page count of 214. The format/page count differences could be handled in the pub notes, but what about the price? Should we make two records, just for the different prices at the different sources, or should this be handled in some other way? --MartyD 07:49, 22 April 2021 (EDT)

I don't know if this is official "best practice", but I've only ever submitted multiple ebooks if they have different ISBNs (e.g. for MOBI vs EPUB - I was going to provide this as an example, but it seems I never got round to submitting the "other" ISBN - oops)

For UK ebooks, just about every major publisher (HarperCollins I think is the exception) that lists a price on their site, has a different price from what's listed on Amazon or Kobo. For these I enter the publisher's stated price in the price field, and add a note that the vendor price is different example. I *think* this might be different from what happens (by default?) from Fixer submissions though.

(Less often, there are some ebooks that don't have a price on the publisher's site, and have different prices at different stores. In these cases, I just enter whichever price looks most like it was decided by a human and/or least just a USD->GBP conversion, and again make a note about the different values example.)

I'm not going to claim that my way is the right way - you could argue that using a price that doesn't seem to exist anywhere outside of the publisher's website doesn't make sense - but that's what I've been doing for the past couple of years... ErsatzCulture 08:06, 22 April 2021 (EDT)

Unless the books carry different ISBNs or covers or contents (or other indications that they are different books), I note all the differences in the notes (different prices, formats and sources) and leave it as one record. And especially with ebooks, the publisher, Kobo, Apple and Amazon often have different prices even within the same price region. I’d use the publisher site price in the price field usually. Audiobooks have similar issues. Welcome to the digital world :) Annie 08:55, 22 April 2021 (EDT)

Novel or Non-fiction?

This book, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?126802, is here as both novel and non-fiction. It's non-fiction so the novel record should probably be deleted. Person who created the record in 2019 disappeared from ISFDB soon after, but moderator shouldn't have approved it because it says "compiled and edited" on the cover and the non-fiction editions have been on ISFDB since 2012. --Username 22:37, 22 April 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for finding this! I have deleted the doublette. Stonecreek 00:57, 23 April 2021 (EDT)

Audio Author Confusion

This, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?185705, is odd because the cover clearly has a different author than the one on ISFDB. I imported Gillian Roberts' short story into it, added cover, and removed Crowther's novel credit. If anyone knows what, if any, his contribution to this is (maybe he did the reading of Roberts' story), reply here. --Username 18:11, 26 April 2021 (EDT)

Do you have a link to the cover? I'm not seeing one at the link you provided. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 10:45, 27 April 2021 (EDT)

Okay, I found the submissions. You can see the result here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 10:56, 27 April 2021 (EDT)

Optimal way to clean up duplicate pubs?

I inadvertently created 2 copies of the same pub here. (These are identical, except that one had a later edit to add the ASIN I missed in the original submission.)

These have consecutive pub IDs, so I'm guessing either I hit the submit button twice and/or there was some site availability issue at the time that caused me to resubmit, and I wasn't paying enough attention to notice the dupes.

Anyway, what's the preferred way to clean this up? I was assuming the advanced search link above would give me a merge option, but I guess that's only for titles? Is deleting one of the pub records the way to go, or is there a better option? Thanks ErsatzCulture 17:11, 28 April 2021 (EDT)

The only way is to delete one. I have taken care of it. You are correct that merging is only for title records. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:52, 28 April 2021 (EDT)

Thanks. ErsatzCulture 06:37, 29 April 2021 (EDT)

Genre Book?

This, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2063212, has a note by another editor unsure whether it's a ghost story. I found this, https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/149933639/, which gives a description about id and ego and other stuff which doesn't sound supernatural. Does this book belong here? Book seems rare so it's unlikely anyone's read it recently, but you never know. --Username 19:47, 30 April 2021 (EDT)

I don't think it's a ghost story, but your https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/149933639/ reference says:

"The Strange Bedfellows of Montague Ames" by Norton Parker is the amazing adventure of a worried man whose Super Ego and Id materialized one night in a taxi on Fifth Avenue, and came to live with him. Montague Ames, left only with his Ego to support him, found his Freudian other selves entertaining at first, but finally had to fight desperately to subline them.

and a reader review on Amazon says:

...and awakes one day to discover that he has been separated into his Ego, Super Ego, and Id--the three parts of a human psychologically. ...

If those mean physical manifestation of separate people (vs. his imagining their appearance), I believe that would qualify as "supernatural" and make it eligible for inclusion. --MartyD 10:03, 1 May 2021 (EDT)

Multiple names for the same author?

I recently had to look something up, and now I would like to know if Chaz Brenchley, Charles Brenchley, and Mr and Mrs Brenchley are the same person. I also think the last has been entered wrongly into the databank. MLB 20:49, 2 May 2021 (EDT)

The Gift of Fire and On the Head of a Pin

I'm in the process of PVing my copy of [[23]] and have a question. This book (and I assume the other formats by the same publisher) is a little odd, in that it's almost in dos format, with two separate titles. (two title pages, two covers, one copyright page).

I'd expect that the titles would be separated by a '/', rather than 'and'. Each title page has just the single title. Each cover has 'and other title' after its own. And the copyright page has the two titles separated by a '/'. Is there a reason that the records use an 'and' that I'm missing? Submit an edit or edits, or leave well enough alone? --GlennMcG 01:57, 3 May 2021 (EDT)

I've ended up deciding to submit a few edits. --GlennMcG 14:52, 8 May 2021 (EDT)

The Voyage of the Princess Ark serial

The Voyage of the Princess Ark was a 36 entry serial in Dragon Magazine. It was only partially reprinted as part of the rules for Champions of Mystara. The box set has an ISBN of 1-56076-615-8, and one of three rule books contains a summary of the first 15 episodes and the full text of the remainder. Do I simply create a new entry for this ISBN as a collection , and include this detail in the description? Do I create a separate title for the full story and a collection for the subset in the rule books? Would this still be a collection since the speculative content is by a single author even though others contributed to the non-genre content. TAWeiss 11:42, 3 May 2021 (EDT)

James Herbert

http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?481061; listed as nonfiction on ISFDB, but Fantlab has a copy which revealed that Herbert's few short stories were also included, so I entered them here. Should this still be nonfiction or is there a type that encompasses both fiction and nonfiction, or should a note be added? --Username 10:51, 8 May 2021 (EDT)

Replacing Covers

I had a cover image from bookscans.com rejected recently because someone else had uploaded a scan of the cover so I needed to replace it; http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?355910. I remembered another book that I left a message about on the boards months ago, http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?436395, requesting anyone who could provide the full cover image at joehill.nl to do so. Now that I learned recently editors can add an image from anywhere online as long as you upload the scan to the wiki, I did that with Four for Fantasy but it kept showing the 2-author image that was already there instead of the 4-author cover I uploaded, and Devil's Mistress showed the cover with the big X on it instead of the clean cover with text visible at the bottom. So by the time I figured out this wasn't working I'd made a mess of those 2 image pages, so I'd like to request that someone delete my repeated attempts at uploading an image to Four for Fantasy (and maybe adding the full cover to the record if possible) and adding the Bookscans cover to Devil's Mistress if possible. Also, a note about whether I did something wrong or if there's a problem going on with replacing images on ISFDB would be good, and I'd like to know if I feel the need to delete any uploaded images in future whether there's a way for me to do it myself; there are a few others where the dimensions were too big and it didn't display the cover on the upload page so I didn't end up using them, so I'd like to delete those, too, and keep only the ones that actually ended up being accepted and added to the records. --Username 12:37, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

Your uploads worked. I reverted to the versions you added. The old wiki software the ISFDB uses has a bug in that when a replacement image is uploaded, it doesn't tell the browser a new version is present and so the browser continues to use the cached version (if the image has already been viewed). You need to force the new image to be displayed (Ctl + F5 on most browsers). Any other user see the image will see the new one. Deleting images is limited to moderators. If there is one you need deleted, you can post on the moderator page or add {{Deletion candidate|reason}} on the page (which will tag it for deletion). -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:13, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

Removing invalid Cover Artist info

How do you remove the Cover Artist references from a publication record? I have found a number of ebooks where the cover associated with a publication record doesn't match the cover as published in the ebook. I've replaced the cover images with the correct ones but need to have the now incorrect cover artist info removed from the pub record. Phil 08:09, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

There's a featured link on the left side (tool bar) to remove titles from a given publication record. Hope that helps. Stonecreek 08:37, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

Thanks. Looks like just what I needed. Phil 09:37, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

Cartoon Strip

I tried to delete a cartoon strip from the database since its cartoon strip from a non-genre magazine by an artist with only one other entry. A moderator pointed out perhaps this should be converted to an interiorart record. He rejected my request since I has not indicated if the cartoon was a genre entry. It's clearly a genre cartoon, so that causes some level of confusion on my part. Would we retain a cartoon strip by an author/artist already in the database? There are artists in the database {e.g. Elmore and Foglio ) who've written cartoon strip series in Dragon ( which is a non-genre magazine). Do those strip series qualify as cartoons for inclusion? TAWeiss 11:17, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

Per Help:Entering non-genre periodicals:

Interior art specifically associated with a speculative fiction story may be entered, if the data is available. Otherwise do not enter any interior art. Normally no editorials, letters, or essays will be entered. Reviews of SF works may be entered, but this will be rare. Significant essays specifically connected with SF works may optionally be entered, but this also will be rare.

This would imply cartoon strips wouldn't be included. We primarily focus on written works and art secondary. However, Dragon is such a borderline case (it's all the larger definition of genre, just not the more tightly defined definition ISFDB uses) that I don't care one way or the other myself. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

Makes sense to me. I’ll resubmit the deletion request with more detail. ThanksTAWeiss

Adding a joint pseudonym for one known and one unknown author

D. K. Fields is a pseudonym for David Towsey and Katherine Stansfield. The latter doesn't appear to have any speculative works published under their own name, and so isn't in the database. However, the alternate name edit screen requires the parent author to exist.

Is there some way of creating an author record that has no titles/pubs, or should I just add the alternate name for the author that does exist in the database, and just add a note for the other one? This scenario doesn't seem to be covered on Help:Screen:MakeAlternateName.

(I guess I could add one of their novels, and mark it as non-genre, in order to create the author record, but that seems a bit of a cheat?) ErsatzCulture 11:52, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Create the variant first (using option 2 on the variant screen). That will create the author record which you can then use to make the pseudonym. Variants can be made without a pseudonym relationship being created first. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:28, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Thanks - I assume when you say "the variant screen", you're referring to the title variant? I've submitted an edit for that - if I've misunderstood, whoever picks that up from the moderation queue, please reject it. ErsatzCulture 12:36, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

That was correct. Edit approved. You can now create the pseudonym. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:46, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Adding own work

Hello all! I published a book, Fantamatematica, of (really) short SF stories. May I add it to the database? If so, which is the correct section to add it? TIA, --.mau. 14:34, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Yes, if it is published and genre, it can be added. It would be a collection based on your description. See Help:Screen:NewPub for instructions on how to add a pub. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:11, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Thank you! I am looking at that page, and indeed my book should be filed as a collection. --.mau. 16:38, 16 May 2021 (EDT)

Here's the title: Fantamatematica. Please let us know if the contents were added correctly for each publication. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:43, 21 May 2021 (EDT)

Help remembering the name of two books

Hello all,

I would like to inquire if anyone here can help me remember the names of two SciFi books and their authors, please? I was given the name of this and a few other sites in reply to a query I posted in a Flipboard article.

The first book starts off with a description in italics of farming and potatoes and I seem to recall (red) weevils mentioned in the first few pages. It had flying (hovering?) robots in it with tentacles and with eyes around their bodies. In one scene a character is walking up a hill and is followed by a rolling ball of light that travels on its arms (tentacles). I may be mistaken, but I seem to recall a battle which also takes place in this book. I know this is not much but I hope someone can help.

In the second book I am trying to identify, the crew of a ship wakes up to find that the ship is infested with aliens/monsters and at the end of the book we find out that the ship was damaged by a meteor (I think) and that the crew are lost in space due to the accident with the meteor and are using virtual reality to pass the years away. I think some of the crew members were asleep during the story, but am not sure. The book has a green cover with an alien creature on it I seem to recall.

These were among the first few science fiction books I ever read and hence my memory is very hazy. It has to be over 20+ years ago.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Best regards,

Lee —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lefeu (talk • contribs) . 02:15, 19 May 2021 (EDT)

Cover artist problem for Moonsinger omnibus

All of the publication records for Andre Norton's Moonsinger omnibus show the cover artist to be Alan Pollack. Locus1 shows the cover artist as Alan Pollack. The base cover art is the same for all of the publications. The problem is that both the copyright page on the 2013 ebook that I have in hand and the cover artist credit for that title on the Baen website indicate that the cover art was done by Bob Eggleton. The notes for the 2006 ebook mention that a signature on the cover appears to be that of Alan Pollack but a close look at the cover art doesn't seem to show any signature. The cover art help template indicates that the printed credit should be used if there's both a signature and a printed credit. Would I be wrong to change the artist credit for all the pubs to Bob Eggleton? Phil 13:15, 19 May 2021 (EDT)

It's definitely a Pollack cover. Eggleton's style is nothing like that (at least none that I've seen). I suspect it's simply a mistake when copying over the content for the copyright page and whatnot. It's easy to miss one or two things when you do that.

Digging a little deeper, you can see Pollack credited here and here. Pollack also did the Baen covers for the other books in the series, so that lends itself to Pollack being the artist on this one. I've also sent a note to an editor at Baen to see about getting this page corrected. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:37, 19 May 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for keeping me from making a mistake. I'll go back to updating and PVing! Phil 13:45, 19 May 2021 (EDT)

Query on eligibility for Stupefying Stories blogspot publication.

Recently, both myself and various other authors have had stories published on the Stupefying Stories blogspot website. I wanted to ask, as we were paid for these & published, do these qualify for a listing on ISFDB? If so, how and where (which category?), as I like to keep my credits as up to date as possible.

Link to mine and another author's stories as an example:- https://stupefyingstories.blogspot.com/2021/05/the-last-dangerous-would-you-like-fries.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RayDaleyWriterUK (talk • contribs) .

Per policy, these will only be eligible if they can fit either under the

• "Speculative fiction webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues (note: online periodicals without distinct issues are not considered webzines)"

or

• "Online publications available exclusively as a Web page, but only if:

• published by a market which makes the author eligible for SFWA membership (listed here), OR
• shortlisted for a major award"

clauses.

Unless I am missing something, that does not fit under any of those. So... we have two choices:

• Shoehorn it under the first condition (using the date of the story as an "issue" date). While we had done that for a few major markets, it is essentially circumventing the reason for the wording of this specific rule (aka exclude blogs and author sites and so on) and depending on who handles it, it may get rejected (because technically speaking it is against the policy).
• Reopen the discussion on online content being added - I think we are overdue (the first rule was added a few years ago - before that even these were not allowed) and I think that the sites of existing magazines/publishers should be eligible.

I know - not the answer you wanted but... this is where we are :) Annie 15:07, 28 May 2021 (EDT)

RayDaleyWriterUK If I'm allowed to argue our case, here goes. Stupefying Stories has a listing. Rampant Loon Publishing has a listing.

We were paid by Rampant Loon & published by Stupefying Stories. Admittedly, not in their magazine.

Bruce Bethke had this to say on the matter:- "Having no knowledge of the internet speculative fiction database, I have no idea what terminology to use. They're published. The authors were paid for them. There was some competition to the selection, as stories were submitted that we did *not* publish. In terms of length, they appear to meet the definition of "drabble" or "microflash" stories."

These stories aren't going the be the last such material coming under these circumstances. I'm not asking for a loophole. If ISFDB were looking at revising old rules such as online content being added, now seems to be the ideal time to have such a conversation. Stupefying are currently undergoing integration of all their various web based publication, it would be a shame to lose out on having material added when logic seems to say we could have a credit for these. I didn't want to just go ahead and add these, then have them rejected. I asked here, because I wanted it to be done correctly and by the book.

If there is an option to have sites of existing magazines & publishers added, could that be looked into?