Search results

...Your recent set of submissions ]]) that point out that our current [[ISFDB:Policy#Rules of Acquisition|Rules of Acquisition]] are not as clear as they should ...ability, while no one can predict the future, PG has followed a consistent policy since its inception that when it issues a corrected, revised, or improved v

...//pagespineficshowcase.com/index.html Page & Spine: Fiction Showcase] is a webzine that publishes stories, poems and essays on a weekly basis, and it has been : Under the [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Policy#Included current rules], the only webzines that are eligible are:

...ed out that two of the ISFDB policies conflict with each other: 1. [[ISFDB:Policy]] says that we exclude "Works that are not related to speculative fiction b ...including ng works we agree on; the main point is that we can rewrite the policy so that "author above threshold" is no longer stated to be the only possibl

...] of Clute/Nicholls, which confuses matters a bit. I wanted to ask if our policy is still that Clute/Nicholls is reserved for the paper (or CD/ROM if anyone I've just had a quick look through [[ISFDB:Policy#Rules_of_Acquisition]], and I don't see anything explicitly addressing thes

We have a policy to disambiguate Introductions and similar items but it seems like we do not Should we change the policy for this field to reflect practice, and, if so, what should the standard fo

...s that have already been added to the database under the current inclusion policy. At that point, the issue becomes a rules and standards one. [[User:Mhhutch ::::::: As far as the "ANV" proposal goes, I will have to think about it. Depending on how it is implemented, it

== Proposal to update the definition of CHAPTERBOOK == BTW, there is nothing in this proposal which actually changes the ''de facto'' working definition for CHAPTERBOOK.

...or names to a standardized form—I just want all moderators to agree on one policy, whichever it is, and have the help screen changed if necessary. --[[User:V ...so as to avoid creating variants, then it seems we should apply that same policy in similar situations where we're omitting punctuation or spacing or are do

...ntry standard changes we decide on will need to be enforced as a matter of policy rather than in the software. Unless, of course, we decide to break it up in ...rate fields. Only issue 3 will remain and will need to be addressed at the policy level. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 05:04, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

...Your recent set of submissions ]]) that point out that our current [[ISFDB:Policy#Rules of Acquisition|Rules of Acquisition]] are not as clear as they should ...ability, while no one can predict the future, PG has followed a consistent policy since its inception that when it issues a corrected, revised, or improved v

...title records from the year. Not merging title records as per the current policy would make that problem worse. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User t == ISFDB policy on file hosting ==

...by the Moderator that changed it in the first place... is that a shift in policy or a "this isn't THAT important an issue, must clear the submission queue" :Question: does ISFDB have a policy on spoilers?

...to include a complete number-line printing, because it went against ISFDB policy concerning ARCs. The note in the first publicly available edition was enou ...the note field. But a discussion on [[User talk:Kpulliam]] has called this policy into question. I want to start a general discussion on this issue. To simpl