User talk:Biomassbob/Archive/2013Apr-Jun

< User talk:Biomassbob‎ | Archive
Revision as of 16:59, 11 February 2014 by Mhhutchins (talk | contribs) (Archiving messages from April-June 2013)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Magic Highways

"Signed" implies that the author signed the book. Is that possible for this publication? If not, specify who signed it. Thanks. Mhhutchins 00:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Why would that not be possible? Of course it's signed by Jack Vance. He may be old, and I don't think he writes any more, but he is still alive as far as I know. Bob 01:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
If you could see me now, you'd see how red-faced this goof has made me. Blame it on a brain burp that mixed-up Vance with Farmer, another author who Subterranean is currently publishing a series of early story collections. As Emily Litella famously said, "Never mind." Mhhutchins 02:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The World Menders

Based on the update to this record, the publisher is "Morley" and "The Elmfield Press" is its imprint. But it appears from your description that "A Morley Book" may be the imprint and "The Elmfield Press" is the publisher. Is "A Morley Book" stated anywhere but the spine of the book? If not, then it's probably a publication series. Mhhutchins 20:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I think my note said "A Morley Book" appears on the copyright page as well as the spine. See also The Light That Never Was that someone else entered and that I was the third verifier on. Bob 20:40, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
So does it mention explicitly that Elmfield is an imprint or division of Morley? With few exceptions, we usually only use the title page credit as the publisher. Mhhutchins 20:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
On the copyright page it says "A Morley Book published 1973 by The Elmfield Press, Elmfield Road, Morley, Yorkshire LS 27 0NN, in association with Shire Publications Ltd." The two are clearly related, but I'm not sure how. Bob 21:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
That clearly indicates that the publisher is Elmfield, not Morley. Mhhutchins 21:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I created a publication series for Morley, and placed 'The World Menders' in the series. --Willem H. 17:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Good idea! Thank you. Bob 23:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Bracketed roman numbers

In this record's page count field, you've added bracketed roman numbers to the page count. If any of the pages are roman-numbered, you should not bracket them. Bracketed numbers in the page count field indicates pages that have no number at all, and you use arabic numbers instead of roman numbers. Mhhutchins 21:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Crawford's The Garden of Fear

I added the Reginald and Bleiler citations to Crawford's anonymously edited The Garden of Fear and Other Stories of the Bizarre and Fantastic. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 01:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

You should probably add the same material to the other two versions of the same publication, Ron. Bob 16:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
You can do that, if you'd like. However, I'm not really sure that multiple records are needed here. Chalker/Owings states that reason the different colors is that Crawford ran out of stock while printing them. They go on to say that most covers are green, with blue, yellow and red being less common. There was a single printing of the sheets numbering 48,000. If I had been entering these, I probably would have entered a single record as this is really a single edition and printing, perhaps with multiple states. Personally, I wouldn't have entered multiple publication records for changes in the cover stock. I probably wouldn't have even uploaded all 4 versions and linked to them from a single record. I merely would have mentioned that the cover is printed on different colored stock. There are numerous examples where less trivial variations are simply noted without new pub records (e.g. [1]). I've never gotten a clear answer out of Rules and standards discussions about what our standard is for when a new publication record is warranted or not. However, you should feel free to bring it up there again. I chose the blue record, because that is where the Reginald1 verification that I was noting in the comments, as well as the other secondary verifications. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Intro in Balik #1

I accepted your Balik #1 submission, but I'm not entirely comfortable with the "Untitled introduction", unless, of course, that's actually its title. The help doesn't really anticipate untitled pieces, other than artwork, but if you look at the What to Include section of the help at the "Story Introductions" entry, you'll see there it calls for "Story (Introduction)" to used for an untitled introduction that's going to be entered standalone. My inclination is to apply that idea here, and name this piece "Balik #1 (Introduction)" and record in the notes that it is untitled. Read that help and see what you think. Maybe someone else will see this and chime in with an opinion. --MartyD 11:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Balik #2 content titles

I would be inclined to add "(Balik #2)" to Acknowledgements. It's one of those "standard" titles, even though it's uncredited and no one's going to be trying to distinguish one set of uncredited's acknowledgements from another.

Do you know if Mailing Comments is likely to be recurring, using the same title? If so, that's a good candidate for "(Balik #2)" to be added as well. --MartyD 11:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment, I just missed it the first time around. For the second, perhaps that was the plan, but I don't think Cliff ever published another "Balik" or "Simba" after #2 so I didn't disambiguate the mail column. Perhaps it should be anyhow just in case there were additional issues. Bob 13:55, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


Just noticed "Aftrica" in this. Figured I should ask.... --MartyD 00:07, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

And, of course, the very next submission I moderated fixed it. Never mind! --MartyD 00:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

C. M. Bird

I accepted your variant submission for Balik and the Siren of Alcathoe to Cliff Bird and made a pseudonym. Are you sure the M is right, and if it is, that this is the same Cliff Bird? All of the other variations have his middle name as William and his middle initial as W. --MartyD 00:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Ouch! It is C. W. Bird. I misread it because the fancy lettering used made the W. look like an M. Still, I should have realized. Sorry. Bob 01:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

SFBC ed. of The Reluctant King

Can you confirm the gutter code your copy of this edition? We have several reprint codes, but none for the earliest SFBC printing and you may possibly have a copy of that printing. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

The code in my edition is P23, on p. 532. Bob 19:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. Mhhutchins 19:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

REH Foundation Newsletter

Re this record: Why would a cover of a photograph be credited to the subject of the photograph? Mhhutchins 22:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not the photo part, it's the writing on the reverse side. It will become a variant of a postcard already in the data base. Bob 23:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

But you've given him credit in the Cover/Artist1 field. Why not create a content record for the card giving the page number as "fc", and not as INTERIORART but ESSAY? Look on his summary page now, and you'll see he's credited under the "Cover Art" category for this publication's cover. And the title record is of the COVERART type. That's clearly wrong. Mhhutchins 00:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Seems like a reasonable alternative. Done. Bob 00:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


Re this record: What is "fp". It is not a standard page number. Mhhutchins 16:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Frontispiece. Didn't know what else to use. Bob 16:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Several options. You could leave the page field blank, you could use "bp" (meaning "before pagination"), or you could count the pages before page 1, add them to the page count field (using bracketed arabic numbers), and give the page number of the frontispiece based on that count, again using brackets. Mhhutchins 19:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Michael. I knew I could count on you for guidance! Fixed. Bob 22:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The Robert E. Howard Foundation Newsletter, Winter 2011-12

There were two different submissions to add the same issue of this title. I should have noticed it before accepting the second one, but didn't. You'll have to choose one, delete the other, and either delete the duplicate contents or merge the duplicate records. Mhhutchins 19:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. Bob 22:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Blood Work

Is Ballantine credited as the publisher of this graphic novel on its title page? Books published under the Del Rey imprint usually show the logo above the Ballantine Books credit on their title page, and we credit the publisher as "Del Rey / Ballantine" in the ISFDB record. Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 06:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Mike, it is. I surely do get confused about double publishers, obviously. Fixed. Bob 15:46, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Death's Ragged Army

A novel-length work published in a single issue of a magazine should be titled "Title (Complete Novel)" and entered under the SERIAL type. I've made the corrections to this record. Mhhutchins 19:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Pulp Review #22

Content in this record: "Foreword" or "Foreward"? Mhhutchins 02:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

And in this one? Mhhutchins 02:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Foreword. Fixed. Bob 16:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Windy City Pulp Stories #7

I've made a few changes to your verified Windy City Pulp Stories #7.

  1. I'm replacing the single interior art credit for Gianni with individual items.
  2. I've added interior art items for magazine and book covers reprinted in the articles.
  3. I've expanded the title of "Weridisms" adding the emphasized text as a subtitle. I've also added a second item for the essay, and added it to the Weirdisms series. Somewhere in the archives of Rules and Standards discussions, I had previously asked about titling the other items in Weirdisms this way. It is helpful in keeping them straight. Especially the Coye items which are frequently reprinted. There is probably another R&S discussion about adding both an essay and an interior art item for these sorts of pictorial features.
  4. I've added an item for the back cover collage.
  5. I've added the book to a Windy City Pulp Stories series.

I see you've also verified #12 in this series, which I also picked up at last week's convention. I'll be making similar changes, if necessary, and will detail them when I get to that number. I did not pick up the program book from the 2002 convention. I don't know if you'd want to add it as #2 of the series, since the titling is different. Since I don't have a copy, it's your call. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Putting in the individual Gianni items is fine; I didn't feel it was necessary, but have no objection. I have put in magazine and book covers in the past, but have come to believe they shouldn't be entered, at least by me. Mostly they end up in B&W instead of color, and for me, they lose a lot.
I will add #2 to the series; even with the altered title, it's really the same series.
Wish I'd know you would be at the Windy City, I'd have liked to meet you! I go every year, since it's right in my back yard. I assume you will add #13. I have #4, 5, 10 and 11 as well. There is really no speculative content in #10, all westerns. But I will be adding the others. Bob 16:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I've updated #9 which I see you've verified since my earlier updates. Aside from adding the interior art, the only change I made was the title of the letter to Wandrei. Since we don't have a title page, I retitled it to match the start of the caption which also is how it is listed in the table of contents. I think it is OK to add #10 since Adventure magazine did print fantasy from time to time. I'll probably add very little of the artwork though. I'll continue to push through these until I reach the current book. I did actually post on the moderator board that I was unavailable because of attending the convention, but I did that on Friday morning right before leaving for the airport. I only spent Friday at the convention. For me, it was mainly about the dealer's room, and I probably will attend future ones. However, Worldcon is in London next year, which will take up a lot of my travel budget, so I may not be back until 2015. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I've finished with #12. Aside from adding the interior art, and the individual reviews, I altered the title to the ERB interview, adding the quotation marks. I also changed the name of the obituary to match its title page. I added the price as listed on the book. While it was distributed at the convention, it is also offered for sale from the publisher. I changed the artist for the photograph of St. John to uncredited. I can only suppose that you had intended the entry to stand for the painting that appears behind St. John in the photograph. I don't think we've ever added interior art items for artwork incidentally in a photo, and we'd probably want to get a consensus on whether that should be done first. Lastly, I've moved the page numbers for the essays from the page of their introductory artwork to the page they actually start on (matching the table of contents). I've re-read the standard about using the page number of related artwork, but that appears to be in place for stories in magazines which can be presented a little differently. One more to enter, and I can move on to other things. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 02:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Ron, the only change I really don't agree with is changing the page numbers for the start of a story or an essay to ignore the leading illustration. I really feel that the illustration is part of the item. I'm aware that tables of contents often ignore the artwork, but I thought the standard includes the artwork. I do use the art as the first page in books as well as magazines all the time. If the standard is meant to be applied only to magazines, then it should be changed to say so. But I think different standards on this point for magazines and other pubs would be confusing and unnecessary. Bob 18:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
The help page actually does specify that rule is for stories in magazines. I would have to assume given the way it is worded, there was no intent to have it apply to books or even to essays. Personally, I'd advocate matching the way the table of contents handles it, which is how I deal with separate title only pages that precede a title page with story text. You can certainly open a discussion at Rules and standards if you feel strongly about this. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The Weapon Makers

Added LCCN link to The Weapon Makers. I don't know if you think it's worth fixing or not but Allan Halladay is credited as "Allan Halladay" for the cover (on the front flap of the dustjacket) and as "Allan W. Halladay" for the frontispiece (on the copyright page). SFJuggler 04:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I changed the credit for the frontispiece to include the initial. Once its approved, I'll make it a pseudonym and variant it. Good catch! Bob 18:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


Hello, I've replaced the amazon scan and added canadian price for your verified here. Hauck 16:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


Hello, I've replaced the amazon scan and added canadian price for your verified here. Hauck 16:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

[To] S. S. L.:Christmas 1920

Could you please take a look at the title of Lovecraft's "To S. S. L.: Christmas 1920" in your verified publication. The appearance in The Ancient Track is miss-titled and doesn't have the leading "To". If yours is likewise titled incorrectly, I'll adjust the title, otherwise I'll make the appropriate variant. It would also be helpful if you could tell me the length of the poem. The copy in TAT is 8 lines long, but there may be another poem with the same title that is 40 lines long (See this discussion). It would be helpful to determine if one of the copies was cut or expanded. I'm also leaving a note on the other verifier's page. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:18, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Ron, it's titled exactly as shown, both over the poem and in the TOC. The poem is 8 lines. Bob 14:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thomson or Thompson?

Hello, Bob! Just a request to check once more the credit for the artwork on p. 18 of this fanzine. Most probably it is the one and same as 'ATom': is there any signature visible?. If the credit is for Thompson, I'd like to set up a pseudonym. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 14:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

It is Thomson, credited on the TOC. There is no signature of any sort, but the nature of the cartoon is definitely in the style of "ATom". Good catch! Bob 17:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Stonecreek 18:28, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thy Cryptic Power

A quick check: Is the first word of the title of W. H. Pugmire 's "Thy Cryptic Power" really "Thy" rather than "The", which is how it apparently appears in other books? Ahasuerus 03:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

It definitely is "Thy". The story begins with a poem attributed to William Davis Manly: "Thy cryptic power from beyond / That links thee to ye daemon-spawn'd / Will be thy curse when it hast shewn / Thee secrets better left unknown." So "thy" really fits. Since the other pubs are not verified, I'm guessing that they are likely incorrect. Bob 18:08, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for checking! I suspect that the misspelling comes from the Locus Index for 1984-1998 and 2001. I'll make the change. Ahasuerus 14:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Your proposal for a pseudonym

Hello, Bob! I assume there's some evidence to make Bruce into a pseudonym of A. B. Clingan, just want to check that it's not made by accident. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 14:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

No doubt at all. He uses Bruce quite a bit in The Diversifier, just not often without his full name elsewhere on the article. Chet (C. C. Clingan) does the same. Bob 14:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll approve immediately, probably the last action for today. Stonecreek 14:56, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Llewellyn Cabos

I had to reject the submission to make Llewellyn Cabos into a pseudonym of Lew Cabos which is already a pseudonym of Llewellyn M. Cabos. Please determine which of the names should be the canonical name, then make variants based on that decision. Thanks. Mhhutchins 16:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

With some reservations, I chose the longer name, since that seemed to be where he settled as he grew older. Bob 16:54, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like the reasonable choice. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Credit in The Diversifier #20

If Hoffmann Price is credited as "Hoffman" on page 6 of this publication, then the record should reflect that and a variant be created. Thanks. Mhhutchins 19:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, if the review of Krozair of Kregen on page 35 of this record credits Drew Prescott as the author of the book under review, then the record should credit it as well. Because Prescott is an established pseudonym within the database, and not an error by the publisher or reviewer, then that's how the review record should give as the author of the work. Mhhutchins 19:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Bob 23:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The Diversifier #25

Please confirm the spelling of the editor and poet (page 46) (Froelich or Froehlich), and author (Frederick or Fredric) on page 41 in this record. Thanks. Mhhutchins 21:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

And "Clark" on page 15. Mhhutchins 21:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Spellings are as given in the pub, except for Frederick, which is given as "Frederic", which I've fixed. Bob 00:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
And even that's wrong! Looks like this fanzine really needed a proofreader. Anyone who can't spell Arthur C. Clarke's name correctly should really consider another field of interest. Mhhutchins 01:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
This issue was obviously problematic -- all the "editors", story reprints, the $1.00 boost in price, which really alienated distributors (shown in the following issue's letters) and the fact that this was the last bimonthly issue. There are only three more issues before Chet gives up on the zine, although he tries another for a single issue. It has always amazed me the quality of the contributors the Clingans were able to attract considering they lived in Oroville, CA, which is really in the boonies. Not like today with the internet. Bob 15:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it's an impressive list of contributors. They obviously had some strong connections within the field. These are the kind of records that make the ISFDB unique. Or at least I think they are. I don't imagine such detailed listings available elsewhere online. Thanks for the time and effort of entering them into the db. Mhhutchins 17:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Another question about this issue: is Robert Metcalf the same person as Robert Randolph Medcalf, Jr.? Mhhutchins 18:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it is. Bob 18:35, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Bad moderation

Sorry, I just rejected a good submission by mistake. I thought it was meant to be a variant but you were updating it. I'll correct it. Mhhutchins 18:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

BTW, bimonthly dating should be given with a dash instead of a slash. I've corrected the title field of this record. Mhhutchins 18:07, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

O.K., but I think that makes it look like May through July, when with this bimonthly, it's really May and July. No big deal. Bob 18:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
That's exactly the reason I don't understand how the dash became the standard. It happened early in my joining the ISFDB, and without any discussion with the entire group, if I recall correctly. There was a group of editors who concentrated almost all their efforts on magazines and it was decided among this small cadre. If it were up to me, and if it had been brought to the whole group, I would have argued the same point: dashes imply a time period between the two months, while a slash implies a combination of the two months. Now it's too late to do anything about it, but it's bugged me for more than six years. Mhhutchins 02:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

"Artists' Forwards"

Is the piece on page xv of this book correctly entered as published? If so, please make a note in the work's title record to avoid the asking of the question by later users. Also, is it one piece written and credited to the three artists, or is it three separate pieces written and credited individually. Thanks. Mhhutchins 17:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

In this case it is "Forewords". There are two of them, one by the first artist and one by Jim and Ruth together. They have the one title at the top of the page, and the two pieces separated by space only on that page. Virtually all of Jim and Ruth's artwork and prose are by both of them. I fixed the spelling, but don't know what to do, if anything, about the two pieces of prose. Bob 19:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I would suggest creating a record for each piece. Mhhutchins 21:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Same situation with this title. Mhhutchins 17:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Correct as entered. Bob 19:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

And this one. Mhhutchins 17:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Correct as entered. Bob 19:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Unless you want to be asked this question repeatedly by other users, I would suggest updating the title records to note that the titles are entered as published. Mhhutchins 21:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Date and publication of a Mosig essay on Lovecraft

Hello, Bob! I do address this to you, since it's not clear when the primary verifier first in the slot will show up again: I have found the date for Mosig's essay Lovecraft: The Dissonance Factor in Imaginative Literature - it was stated in a german book. I would have changed the note in your verified pub. on my own, if there weren't something puzzling: according to the german source, the essay on p. 12 was published in The Platte Valley Review not the one on p. 3 ?! (see also the corresponding title note. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 18:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Christian, I checked the references in Crypt of Cthulhu more carefully this time, and found citations for each of the three articles in question. I've added these to the notes on the articles and removed the excess words from the pub. Apparently, the one you found a reference for in the German book first appeared as stated in Crypt in Mosig's APA submission, and subsequently in the Kearney State rag. Mosig taught as Kearney State at the time of publication. The APA submission really doesn't count as publication, of course, but the essay appeared there first. Bob 20:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

And one other thought: Maybe this special Mosig issue could provide us with some bibliographical information on this author - we seem to know nothing about him. Stonecreek 18:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a lot of information about Mosig in that pub, particularly in the Joshi essay, focused on his Lovecraft work and his interactions with the three authors who wrote the essays. Apparently, he burned out on Lovecraft in 1979, shortly after he moved from Georgia Southwestern College to Kearney State in Nebraska and sold what was apparently a huge collection of Lovecraft material. He was a professor of psychology, was married and had three daughters. He also exchanged frequent letters with a large group of Lovecraft enthusiasts. Joshi starts his essay by saying, "I should hardly exaggerate if I were to declare Dirk W. Mosig not merely the greatest Lovecraft scholar of all time but the central and indispensable figure in the transition of Lovecraft studies from the avocation of frequently incompetent fans to a real scholarly discipline." I vaguely remember seeing a notice of his death somewhere in one of the pubs I entered as well. I suppose I could take a cut at using the pub to provide some information on Mosig. Bob 20:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

And, hey, I have another question: if the essay on p. 48 of this pub. deals with Lovecraft, I'd think it would be a variant of this. Would it be possible for you to take a look into this matter also? Stonecreek 18:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It does deal with Lovecraft, and I suspect the two essays are the same. Bob 20:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
You should change the date field of this record, which currently conflicts with the note just added. Mhhutchins 21:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I was waiting for the first change to be approved. Done. Bob 23:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
It could have been done in the one submission. Why wait? Mhhutchins 02:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
As well as this one. Mhhutchins 21:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. I don't think the appearance in an APA qualifies as publication. I'm always careful to say "first appeared", not "first published" in these limited-to-members docs. I have copies of the first 200 issues of the REH UPA docs, and no intention of entering them into the data base. Bob 23:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
So how can you explain the dozens of records you've created for publications which are "limited-to-members" documents? If these works "appeared" but not "published" then they shouldn't be dated, according to your previous statement. (The Date field is the date a work is published, not "appeared".) Your definition of "published" may differ from others' (and the ISFDB's), but it should be consistent. Mhhutchins 02:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
The only item I recall entering that was "members only" was the REH Foundation Newsletter, but the REH Foundation does not limit membership, it's open to anyone who is willing to pay dues. The APAs and UPAs are not open, but limited to a fixed number of members, and may have waiting lists to join. The Junto that first printed a variety of Howard material was even more limited in circulation, and items that first appeared there are not dated to that zine, nor are issues of the zine entered. I may have made some mistakes on using Junto dates early on, but I hope that they have all been corrected. Sometimes, items that appeared in the REHupa have been entered, but the copies of such items were produced not just for members, but also sold separately (although in limited amounts). So I stick by my statement. And I don't see that this definition conflicts with ISFDB's, which I don't think deals with APAs and UPAs. Bob 16:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Bob, and sorry for causing a misunderstanding: I mistyped my statement - I did mean biographical information (rather than bibliographical), such as exact birthday or place of birth. I tried his name on wikipedia and there was a page. I added the information provided to the author summary page, but it only had year and country of birth (and an additional forename). Thank you again for taking a deeper look into the matter. Stonecreek 06:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Christian, that's the way I read your comment! I, too, found the wikipedia item. Unfortunately, the essays in Crypt don't give any more detailed information on the man. Bob 16:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, but thank you for taking a look anyway! I have found that sometimes there's information to be found in sections like 'About the authors' or in magazines / fanzines that haven't found their way into the world of the internet. It would have been nice if there was something to be found in that issue.
By the way, I know what APA means, but I don't know what UPA stands for (especially the U). Could you explain it to me, the unknowing? Stonecreek 19:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
United press association. Why one is picked over the other, I have no idea. There is a brief history of these associations on the REHupa website. Bob 00:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the explanation and the link! Stonecreek 09:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Howard's Skull-Face and Others

I expanded the notes to Howard's Skull-Face and Others, noting some of the secondary sources. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 02:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Howard's Conan the Conqueror et al

I updated the notes to Howard's Conan the Conqueror. I also noticed that Reginald, Bleiler, Worldcat and the Library of Congress, all have the subtitle "The Hyborean Age" listed. You may want to see if it is listed that way on the title page and add the subtitle if appropriate. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 02:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Same updates and the same question about the subtitle for The Sword of Conan. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 03:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Similar updates to The Coming of Conan, but no issues with subtitles. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 03:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Also King Conan, and the subtitle is already present for this publication record. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 03:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Similar updates to Conan the Barbarian. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
and The Dark Man and Others. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
and Red Shadows. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
and Tales of Conan, with de Camp. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
and Conan the Adventurer. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
and finally Conan the Usurper. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Ron, the subtitle appears on three of the Gnome Press Conan pubs, but not on the first two. I've added it to the two that did not have it (Sword of and Conquerer). It appears on the title page, but not the jacket or cover. Bob 19:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Startide Rising

Re the page number of the frontispiece given in this record: "bc" means back cover. I'm assuming this book's frontispiece appears facing the title page like other volumes in the series. It can be placed by counting the number of pages from the first numbered page or counting the number of unnumbered pages starting with the first page after the front loose endpaper and adding that number to the page count field. Mhhutchins 18:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Should have been "bp". Sorry. Bob 19:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


There are only six pages that precede the first numbered page in this book. We don't count endpapers (see the third bullet point under "Pages" here).So I rejected the submission to change the preface to page "[viii]". I also changed the pages to arabic numbers since there are no roman numbers in the book. Another thing: you shouldn't make a submission to change a data field (other than the Note field) of a primary verified book without discussing it with any active editor who did a primary verification of the record. Mhhutchins 16:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused. I thought I was cloning "Earth", not modifying the existing pub. I guess I hit edit instead of clone. Sorry. The pub I'm trying to enter does have an extra page, that containing Brin's signature. The binding and endpapers are fancier, but otherwise the interior of the book is identical. I don't know the original price. I've redone the clone. Bob 18:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I've accepted the submission to clone. Unless you have a copy of each, remove your verification of the trade edition. You might also want to update the last line in the notes about six unnumbered pages. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
According to Locus1: "Also available in a signed leatherbound limited edition of 300 copies ($125.00)." Mhhutchins 18:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I do have both. Bob 00:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
You should give the source for the price and the limitation in the Note field, unless they're stated in the book and you failed to mention that originally. Thanks. Mhhutchins 02:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Michael, I didn't have the price in my original submission. After you gave me the price (above), I did say in the notes where it came from. Your welcome. Bob 14:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Fantasy Fiction, November 1953 credit

I mistakenly accepted your submission changing the editor credit on Fantasy Fiction, November 1953's title record from Lester del Rey to Cameron Hall. There was already such a title record, here, varianted to that. If you think Cameron Hall is a real person and not a pseudonym for del Rey, then you should take that up with Swfritter, primary verifier. Perhaps he's the source of the pseudonym attribution. I've reverted the edit back to Lester del Rey. --MartyD 11:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

No problem with the rejection, Marty. As I said, I didn't understand the note; I'll clarify it. Is there any reason this pub shouldn't be merged with the other three issues of the mag? Bob 13:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
You can't merge it, because the author/editor credits are different. The choices are to leave it separate and put it into the same series, or to make the Cameron Hall credited record a variant of the master 1953 title record that has all of the other pubs in it. If Hall is truly a pseudonym of del Rey, then that would be appropriate. --MartyD 14:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Bob 15:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Brandon Sanderson's The Emperor's Soul

I noticed that we have Brandon Sanderson's The Emperor's Soul listed as a novel and this it received a Hugo nomination for best novella. I believe our definitions of the fiction lengths are identical to the Hugo rules. The Hugo packet included a MS Word version of this book with which I was able to get a word count (31,975, excluding the postscript) and I've added that as a note to the title record. I'll leave it up to you to decide if you want to change this to a novella/chapbook. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Like the old Ace doubles, sometimes novellas published as short novels get mis-classified! I'll make the change. Bob 14:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The Black Stranger And Other American Tales

You have verified this pub and this pub. They are identical except for ISBN and price. However, instead of both being trade paperbacks, other sites show the second one (the more expensive one) as a hardcover. Is the listed binding correct? -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Good catch! The second is indeed a hardcover. Fixed. Bob 23:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Brundage interview and article in Etchings & Odysseys #2

Could you double-check this interview of Margaret Brundage appearing in your verified Etchings & Odysseys #2. Your record states that the interviewer is listed as Eric A. Carlson. However, Miller/Contento has the interviewer as R. Alain Everts. Additionally, the interview is reprinted in Korshak and Spurlock's The Alluring Art of Margaret Brundage where it is again, credited to Everts as the interviewer. I'm going to go ahead and make it a variant, since the title varies slightly form the original. However, if yous is credited to Carlson, we've got two sources stating it is Everts which makes me think that it is more likely that he (Everts) really did the interview. If you agree, we should make the Carlson interview a variant of Everts under the canonical title as it appeared in the magazine.

I'd also like to check if Evert's essay titled "Margaret Brudnage" in the same issue is identical to the essay of the same title in the Korshak and Spurlock book. Unfortunately, there is not an acknowledgements page. The essay in the book begins "On December 9, 1900, the sole chile of Jonathan E. and Margaret (Loutit) Johnson was born in Chicago." It is only 3 pages in the book, with illustrations, and ends "And not long after Margaret's death, her last apartment on N. Troy burned down — seeming to co-operate in erasing all traces of Margaret Hedda Brundage." If the essay appears identical to yours, we can go ahead and merge them. If not, I'd like to add a note to prevent them from being accidentally merged. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:01, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I don't know where I got Carlson as the interviewer. The interviewer is not identified except as "E&O". Since Everts is credited with the leading essay, I suppose it's reasonable to assume he conducted the interview. He is credited ahead of the interview, "...motivated the scholar and researcher R. Alain Everts to seek out some facts concerning [Margaret Brundage]." The interview lead-in then becomes first person with phrases like "It was this interviewer's extreme pleasure...". So there is no assurance Everts did the interview, but he probably did. The essay has the same sentences at beginning and end as you give them, so I'm sure it's the same. I'll change the E&O entry to Everts. Bob 23:19, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I've approved your edit and merged the other essay. Thanks for checking.--Ron ~ RtraceTalk 02:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Shape Changer - Keith Laumer

Added publication date to SFJuggler 03:44, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Planet Run - Laumer & Dickson

Added gutter code note and publication date to SFJuggler 03:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Leiber's Night's Black Agents

I expanded the notes to Leiber's Night's Black Agents detailing some secondary sources. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 16:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

also his Gather, Darkness!. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 16:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
and Conjure Wife. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
and Two Sought Adventure. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Ron. Bob 16:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Six folded sheets

Wouldn't that make the page count 24 pages? (A sheet folded in half creates 4 pages.) Thanks for checking. Mhhutchins 18:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

This is referencing the May-December issues of the Fantasy Newsletter. Mhhutchins 18:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Michael. Fixed. Bob 16:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Problem with new registration requirement

It was suggested that I ask whether you may have a spam filter on your email account which directs some email messages to a spam folder. If so please check that folder to see if the registration message may have been misdirected. Thanks. Mhhutchins 18:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Bob, I'm still not getting any definitive answers to what may be causing this problem. I've been told to have you check your account settings. click on the preferences link at the top of the wiki pages (you must be signed-in), and then click on the User Profile tab. Make sure that the email address you've given is correct. I'm not sure if that's going to do anything, but it's worth checking. Mhhutchins 18:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I have sent Bob an e-mail at the address currently stored in the Wiki database. Let's see if he gets it... Ahasuerus 18:56, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
This time it worked!! Thank you! Bob 16:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Great. I hope we know what caused the problem so we can avoid it happening again. Mhhutchins 17:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
I am afraid I still don't know what caused the problem. I had to set the "e-mail confirmed" flag manually since the e-mail route didn't seem to work at all. Ahasuerus 18:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)