ISFDB:Moderator noticeboard/Archive 27

This is an archive page for the Moderator noticeboard. Please do not edit the contents. To start a new discussion, please click here.
This archive includes discussions from January - June 2020.

Archive Quick Links
Archives of old discussions from the Moderator noticeboard.

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

Expanded archive listing

Delete/fix wrong author picture

Image:Josef Čapek.jpg is the canonical visage of Karel. Josef is actually the one cropped out from the original pair pic: the elder graying gentleman with staid suit, incipient baldness, round face and eyeglasses. So please

Stop the image from displaying at Josef Čapek
I guess purge it altogether from the system as of no real use (the current Image:Karel Capek.jpg is rather better)
Ideally, assign Josef with a real face of his own: there are several solo photos available at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Josef_%C4%8Capek with little chance of confusion.

--JV jr 15:44, 7 January 2020 (EST)

I can easily remove the picture but as we know who uploaded it, let me ping Linguist for an opinion as well. Other from that, I agree with you. Annie 16:53, 7 January 2020 (EST)

I just don't remember doing that, but since my name appears, it must be me (which weirdly reminds me of « But I must have said it before, since I say it now » in Luciano Berio's Sinfonia) ! Please do whatever you think fit. Linguist 04:51, 8 January 2020 (EST).

OK. Image is removed from the author and deleted from the server :) If someone wants to add a new picture, please go ahead and do that and submit an EditAuthor submission to add it. Annie 12:20, 8 January 2020 (EST)

I have uploaded the picture of the aforesaid elder graying gentleman, in the hope it will meet less disapproval :o). Linguist 08:34, 9 January 2020 (EST).

Uhm - this is still the younger brother - the one you just uploaded is the same one I deleted. Did you mean to upload another one maybe? Annie 22:24, 9 January 2020 (EST)

Annie, this might be the old problem we encounter: you have to refresh your browsed sitepage: after I had done this, Josef appeared. Christian Stonecreek 02:57, 10 January 2020 (EST)

Ah, I see. I thought I never opened the old one from this browser but apparently I had. Thanks! Annie 11:06, 10 January 2020 (EST)

The Death of Ahasuerus

Should this book be added to the works of Pär Lagerkvist? It claims to be the third novel in a series that began with Barabbas and The Sibyl. We have the latter but not the former. ../Doug H 22:20, 9 January 2020 (EST) (P.S. I'm mostly asking for the shock value of the subject line).

Reading the description on Amazon, it doesn't sound like it meets the inclusion criteria. Descriptions have been known to be wrong, though. Are there speculative fiction elements in it? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:24, 10 January 2020 (EST)

Though we do have Sibyllan, which is kind of a prequel to it, so maybe? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 13:46, 10 January 2020 (EST)

To me it sounds like it should perfectly fit into our little database. Lagerkvist's work per Wiukipedia thematizes the eternal conflict between Good and Evil, and using the speculative character of Ahasuerus should make the novel speculative. I for one have added some similar titles to the database. Christian Stonecreek 13:49, 10 January 2020 (EST)

The Swedish Wikipedia says that:

Sibyllan is a 1956 novel by Nobel Laureate Pär Lagerkvist. It begins Lagerkvist's religious epic in four parts: Sibyllan, Ahasuerus's Death [The Death of Ahasuerus], Pilgrim at Sea and The Holy Land.

According to the Encyclopedia of Fantasy, "[Ahasuerus was] allowed to die in the second volume as reward for abandoning his obsessive religious concerns".

It sounds like we want to include at least the second volume. The Encyclopedia of Fantasy refers to volumes 3 and 4 as "tales of interest", but it's not clear how much speculative content they have. Might as well add them and include a note about what we know about them. Ahasuerus 16:26, 10 January 2020 (EST)

Asimov's January-February 2020

First day back on the job and I made a mistake already. When I entered the recent Asimov's I misspelled Paul Di Filippo's name. When/if my submission is accepted, I'll correct. MLB 19:51, 11 January 2020 (EST)

Removing erroneous tags -- software changed

As per this 2019-09 discussion and FR 1303 "Allow the removal of erroneous tags", the software has been changed to allow the removal of erroneous tags.

The Title page has been enhanced to display a new blue link, "View Tag Breakdown", next to the "Current Tags" line if (and only if) the current user is a moderator. Clicking the link on the Title page for Jules Verne's De la Terre à la Lune takes you to the "Tag Breakdown by User" page for the title. The page shows which users are responsible for which tag. As we discussed last September, it "will let moderators contact taggers and ask them about questionable tags". If you are a bureaucrat, the page will also let you remove one or more tags.

For now, if you determine that a tag is erroneous and the tagger is not responding to you queries, please let me know and I will remove the offending tag. Hopefully this will let us address the most egregious cases. Depending on how it goes over the next few months, I may make the "remove" functionality available to all moderators. Ahasuerus 17:47, 14 January 2020 (EST)

Superb, Ahasuerus! Many thanks for the work! Christian Stonecreek 02:21, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Sure thing! It's so nice not to be sick any more and to be able to work on development again :-) (Keeping my fingers crossed.) Ahasuerus 10:56, 15 January 2020 (EST)

I am very glad you are feeling better (and not just because of your great work here). —Uzume 11:22, 17 January 2020 (EST)

Thanks for the kind words! Unfortunately, I apparently jinxed myself and got sick again right after posting. Hopefully it'll teach me to provoke the universe :) Once I over it, I really need to concentrate on the new Amazon interface since certain types of Amazon data, e.g. bestseller lists, is fleeting. Ahasuerus 20:29, 17 January 2020 (EST)

Now there's already the first case that might become a topic: we have the following tags that I recently stumbled over: 'classic werewolf anthology', 'werewolf', 'werewolves', 'werewolf anthology', 'werewolf romance' & 'Young-adult werewolf', with only 'werewolf' and 'werewolves' having a considerable amount of numbers behind them. I'd say that all others could be subsumed under one of those two. And would it better to apply the new feature or should those that were installed by users no longer active better be set to 'Private'?. Christian Stonecreek 02:21, 15 January 2020 (EST)

It looks like there are two separate issues here. The first one is how to handle clearly erroneous data, e.g. a title that has no time travel elements getting tagged with "time travel". The second one is how to handle duplicate or overlapping tags like "werewolf" and "werewolves".

FR 1303 only covered the first issue and that's what the latest software patch addressed. Duplicate and overlapping tags, on the other hand, were discussed in FR 911, "Allow moderators to edit and merge tags". FR 911 is not ready for implementation because we still need to reach consensus re: which (if any) types of tags can be merged by moderators. My personal inclination would be to allow merging misspelled and almost-identical tags like "werewolf"/"werewolves" and "near-future"/"near future". I wouldn't use very specific tags like "classic werewolf anthology" or "powerful young adolescent female character" myself, but I wouldn't be in favor of merging them either. Different users use tags differently and that's fine.

Then we have users whose tags are perfectly fine except for the messed-up format. For example, consider "futurist, science fiction, dark energy, dark matter, clockworks horse, clockworks people", which needs to be broken up into 6 separate tags. I haven't given it much thought yet. Ahasuerus 10:55, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Old Bones

I recently recieved Old Bones by Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child while at the rehab facility that I was "visiting", and while it seems, so far, not to have any fantastic content, it IS a sub-series of Preston & Child's Pendergast series, which is listed here. Should I list this book, link it to the Pendergast series, and note that it is non-genre? I'm asking on the moderator board because the moderators have to okay it. MLB 17:48, 14 January 2020 (EST)

Unless one of the authors makes it to the "above threshold" status (which none of them is IMO), it is not eligible. We do not list non-SF series books in the series we list unless they qualify in a different way. Annie 18:43, 14 January 2020 (EST)

Okay, just thought I'd ask as one auther has about forty books on this site, and the other has about thirty. But, less work for me. :) MLB 20:01, 14 January 2020 (EST)

Hm... if at least one of them can be considered above threshold, it will be in - I do not consider either of them genre but a lot of their books are borderline I guess thinking about them. Let me go check some numbers on their ineligible titles. :) Annie 20:11, 14 January 2020 (EST)

Reading the wikipedia entry for Still Life with Crows it is definately NOT spec fic imo. Makes me wonder if there's a single book in the Pendergast series that is? MagicUnk 00:12, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Doing some more reading, The Cabinet of Curiosities has spec fic elements, so at least that volume belongs MagicUnk 00:23, 15 January 2020 (EST)

SFE has them as well as books of interest under the author record - so most are in. Also - the whole series is set in a slightly alternate world if I remember correctly - just different enough to make them SF (although I would admit that I had not read any in more than a decade and my memories are a bit murky). So let’s not rush into deleting and/or marking anything as non genre based on descriptions. :) Annie 02:18, 15 January 2020 (EST)

I haven't read any of their books in quite some time, decades in fact, but Relic and Reliquary were definitely speculative, as Relic had a monster, and was made into a monster/horror/action movie The Relic in 1997 and Reliquary was a direct sequel. MLB 07:18, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Yeah, I did some further reading, and you're right. These are eligible all right. Reading some more wikipedia entries, I have strong doubts about Brimstone and Dance of Death, whereas The Book of the Dead as third volume in the Diogenes trilogy seems to be eligible again. Should we keep them all in and update the non-eligible titles and flag them non genre? MagicUnk 07:46, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Sorry, didn't read Annie's response properly MagicUnk 11:37, 15 January 2020 (EST)

If you look at SFE and SFE again, you can see what they consider genre. We can differ from them if we have a reason to - with notes and so on (and their list may not be complete) but a lot of those borderline thrillers tend to sound non-SF on paper - partially because the publisher is a mainstream one and they do not want to scare the readers who think that genre is for kids. Read the description here for example - nothing tells you it is one of our books - although it is. The more mainstream a publisher is, the more likely is that they will try to mask or outright forget to mention the SF elements so when you are looking to decide if it is genre, keep that in mind as well. Welcome to the fun :) Annie 12:25, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Cemetery Dance #77

I'm tired, so I submitted what I could of this issue. I'll finish the contents tomorrow. MLB 02:53, 16 January 2020 (EST)

I added the incomplete template so we do not forget about it. When you submit the complete contents, just remove it. :). Annie 03:06, 16 January 2020 (EST)

Split Famous Fantastic Mysteries magazine?

Should we split off the latest installment from Famous Fantastic Mysteries magazine, published by Altus Press, and make it a (new) magazine series? Some more info I can find elsewhere? (there seem to be only two... from Altus Press) Thanks! MagicUnk 12:27, 16 January 2020 (EST)

If you look at the copyright / introduction page of the Fall 2016 issue (via Amazon Look Inside), they are pitching it as a continuation of the original series (Vol 14, No 5 where as June 1953 was Vol. 14, No 4 plus the essay starts "Yes, it's back"). I have no preference whether we accept that or separate them out, just providing it as background. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2020 (EST)

Kindle vs. Smashwords

Should I enter both Kindle and Smaswords (with ISBN) ebooks if I can't find the Kindle ISBN to be absolutely sure they're different pubs? (see Goodreads here for an example of both Kindle and Smashwords pubs.) Thanks! MagicUnk 16:33, 24 January 2020 (EST)

At least half (if not more) of all Kindle books don't have an ISBN. It's only if they are released on other platforms that they sometimes have one. Most publishers that assign them to ebooks use the same ISBN for all versions (Apple, Kobo, etc.) of the ebook. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:56, 24 January 2020 (EST)

So, what you're saying is that I should merge Smashwords and Kindle records, right? MagicUnk 02:36, 25 January 2020 (EST)

Often the same file is offered for sale via different store fronts (basically the same as happens with physical books and stores). Unless you have evidence they are different editions, I would leave them as a single record. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:08, 25 January 2020 (EST)

Second opinion

I'd like a second opinion here (Vértice publications catalog number); I would remove the catalog ID (as it's a copy of the pub serial #), would you? Thanks! MagicUnk 16:47, 24 January 2020 (EST)

No, I also think the catalogue no. doesn't belong in this entry. Christian Stonecreek 08:54, 26 January 2020 (EST)

I.m.o. it's better to have the numbers in two places than not at all. If you want to remove the catalog ID's, there are hundreds, maybe thousands (M=SF, Zwarte beertjes, Heyne Science Fiction, etc. etc.) --Willem 14:59, 26 January 2020 (EST)

I don't want to go that far :) only removing those catalog IDs that are abused as substuitute for pub series no. - have a look at the series in the thread over at Zapp's page for an example; the numbers will still be available from the pub no field. MagicUnk 17:36, 26 January 2020 (EST)

Ugh, I really need to learn to pay more attention... @Willem. You're right. The examples you mentioned have these duplicates as well - should be removed imo. MagicUnk 16:06, 27 January 2020 (EST)

Personal opinions of editors in listings

Hi, I've recently signed up so I could add some SF entries where I can help with missing covers, publishing info etc. In the meantime, as I've been using ISFDB on my own SF research project (as a reliable data source), I've come across the following entry:

Title: Computerworld Author 1: A. E. van Vogt Date: 1983-00-00

Note: Novel of post-Orwellian '1984' days - from computer's point of view. Pretty pathetic on the technical front. Seemingly written with 1970s knowledge of computer power and architecture.

The magazine Computerworld asked DAW Books to change its title since they claimed it might be confused with their own publication. So from July 1985 DAW reprints were published under the title "Computer Eye".

Is it acceptable to make such statements as:'Pretty pathetic on the technical front.' ?

A brief perusal of your Help file indicates the opposite. What is correct procedure here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brentwz (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for finding this! No, that's not what ISFDB intends for a note or a synopsis. I'll delete this phrase. Stonecreek 05:35, 26 January 2020 (EST)

As a point of reference, here is what Template:TitleFields:Synopsis says:

Synopsis - A short non-spoiler synopsis can be entered here. Note that this is not a place for criticism or reviews, and should maintain a neutral point of view.

Ahasuerus 08:35, 26 January 2020 (EST)

Ignoring on the "Non-Latin Authors with Latin Characters in Legal Names" cleanup list

Can we set up this cleanup report so we can ignore entries? For example, this author needs to be ignored because his legal name is in Latin characters, but he writes under 榎宮祐. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:23, 29 January 2020 (EST)