Search results
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- ...y with the consensus gained on the ISFDB Wiki on the resolution of various bibliographic debates. * '''Bibliographic experience'''. A moderator should know the basics of bibliography. This i6 KB (952 words) - 12:49, 9 February 2018
- ::Having just read Ahasuerus's comments about serial display on the [[Bibliographic Rules]] page, I tend to agree that serial display within Long Works is not2 KB (328 words) - 11:29, 19 December 2006
- ...graphic sources should certainly be recorded here; this will be useful for bibliographic researchers and, more importantly for the ISFDB, is information a moderator Bibliographic comments for {{p|JCKOEG1952}}.10 KB (1,773 words) - 03:49, 14 April 2008
- ...roject then from the ISFDB publication record click on the ''Bibliographic Comments'' link. This will take you to a Publication: article in the wiki. Edit the4 KB (620 words) - 00:49, 27 September 2008
- ...raphic Comments: Publication:THMSNCHNTD2000" with another option "Artistic Comments: Publication:THMSNCHNTD2000". The COVERART titles are frankly polluting our ::::I see your point, but I fear that people would misunderstand "artistic comments" to mean reviews & discussions, and even if we found a better name, bepole8 KB (1,402 words) - 17:57, 30 September 2008
- *'''Bibliographic Comments''' :* When the title is displayed in a non-specific bibliographic section (for instance, a collection that appears in the ''Series'' section9 KB (1,280 words) - 02:31, 14 April 2008
- * Added full linewrap for bibliographic data on the summary page, so awards don't spill off the right margin. * Initial comments indicated a desire to show award nominations as well as award wins on the a6 KB (901 words) - 14:22, 16 April 2006
- ...rcing page protections on many wiki pages and moderation on blog comments. Bibliographic data tends to be far more objective than encyclopedia articles, but detaile ...ents section of this blog, and set the comment policy to moderated. So any comments made here won't show up instantaniously. Additionally, I cleaned the porn o25 KB (4,372 words) - 11:04, 16 April 2006
- :Well, www.sigla.ru is already present in the list of [[Sources of Bibliographic Information]] and it searches 1,600 online catalogs simultaneously, includi ==Bibliographic Category Definitions==37 KB (6,425 words) - 17:22, 17 December 2015
- ===Bibliographic Support Features=== ...tated in the publication rather than adding "(pub title)" manually and the bibliographic displays would be more informational. Related to this would be to have a l110 KB (17,630 words) - 20:24, 3 January 2020
- ...ning. I've been thinking about the verification issue, and verification of bibliographic data falls into two distinct camps: objective and subjective. Objective dat ==Bibliographic Category Definitions==168 KB (27,880 words) - 17:18, 17 December 2015
- ...to keep in mind is that we are following an old (and arguably unfortunate) bibliographic convention that demands that we use the date of the first '''book''' public ...agazines Américains" is stunning! I don't read much French though, so some comments on whether they have bibliographically useful material or just great presen124 KB (21,154 words) - 17:19, 17 December 2015
- ...ontent is constantly changing and expanding, books are rarely removed from bibliographic sections. ...the idea was based on the [https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ MARC-21 bibliographic format], which is used by most major libraries. The standard includes a [ht231 KB (38,975 words) - 12:44, 29 June 2022
- ...lso capitalized except for'''... Wording it this way closes that loophole. Comments? [[User:Syzygy|Syzygy]] 19:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC) Comments? [[User:Syzygy|Syzygy]] 19:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC)180 KB (29,287 words) - 15:38, 23 March 2017
- ...meaning of Primary Verification to reflect that, and add another entry in "Bibliographic References" for "Primary, INCLUDING all Artwork checks". However there shou ...tor Nomination?|"lapidary" and "laconic"]]. Might be worth rereading those comments. Might not be worthwhile. That BLongley bloke talks too much at times. Happ206 KB (35,390 words) - 17:20, 17 December 2015
- ...(if I'm understanding him correctly): that interstitial editorial material/comments/responses are neither recorded as content, nor are they credited; that the ...publication" date of the e-ARC. Except for the dates of some of the reader comments you wouldn't know when this became available for sale. And the submission g191 KB (31,181 words) - 17:28, 17 December 2015
- ::::We have author photos, and scans of miscellaneous bibliographic data (copyright pages, etc.) as well. ...d be in the notes or not included at all. Please stop reading more into my comments than is there. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="darkgreen">日本穣</fon246 KB (40,297 words) - 20:05, 26 September 2017
- ::: Other comments: it doesn't have to be the Comic Book database, that was just my first thou ...t where the original meaning of the post has disappeared. As for your last comments, Dana, the problem is that for any particular issue there may be only 4 or212 KB (35,169 words) - 17:27, 17 December 2015
- Do I correctly understand from the comments of Mhhutchins above that if John Benson changed his site to make a "downloa ...sider text that has been posted to the web as being "unpublished". Frankly comments like the above tempt me to find and delete all our vanity publications. How208 KB (35,083 words) - 17:26, 17 December 2015
- :::::::::::::: Well, all of the comments following Annie's proposal (which is, by the way, in perfect consensus with : Reading through all the comments, there's something that I still don't understand; why would a novel that ha225 KB (36,311 words) - 12:24, 12 April 2021