User talk:Bitdancer

Welcome!

Hello, Bitdancer, and welcome to the ISFDB Wiki! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Help pages
• What the ISFDB Wiki is for
• ISFDB FAQ
• Help:Screen:EditPub#General contents - Warning and a note on how to update a publication's contents
• Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! BLongley 09:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Discussions

Thanks. Looks like it is going to take me a while to learn my way around and figure out the community conventions. I don't suppose those are documented anywhere? :) I'm specifically wondering about how discussion flow works, and how to figure out where to discuss particular things. Bitdancer 15:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

For discussion on wiki pages, like this one, we tend to use a simplified version of the conventions in use at Wikipedia. See Help:Editing and the pages linked from it for lots more detail, but in general, we use a new section (such as this one "Discussions") for a new thread or subject, and responses are indented one level for each person responding. This is done by starting each paragraph with a colon -- one colon per indent level. If a thread is long and the indents seem excessive, or a person is changing tack and not directly responding to the previous comments, a comment may be posted with no indentation. Normally such a comment starts with "(unindent)" to indicate that this is intentional.

We like to keep conversations together, so, unlike Wikipedia, we normally respond on the page where a thread was started, rather than flip back and forth between two users' talk pages. This is feasible on a small site like this, while it doesn't work as well on a huge one like Wikipedia.

As for where to discuss things, there are some general guidelines:

• To raise an issue with a particular user, start a new section on that user's user talk page. For example, to raise one with me, edit User talk:DESiegel60. To raise one with the mythical user Joe Cool, edit User talk:Joe Cool
• To raise a general issue for the community, start a new section on the Community Portal.
• To ask how to do something, or to ask for help in some task, start a new section on the Help desk.
• To specifically call something to the attention of a moderator, or ask for help that requires a moderator or wiki-admin (all mods are automatically admins on the wiki), start a new section on the Moderator noticeboard
• To discuss the rules and standards for how we record bibliographic data, start a section on the Rules and standards discussions page.
• To ask people in general to check a published book or magazine (or other source) to settle an unclear point, start a section on the Verification requests page.
• To discuss a policy issue, go to ISFDB talk:Policy.

There are specific pages for Publishers, Authors, and in a few cases Titles and Publications. These are linked to from the relevant DB records, but can be gotten to directly from the wiki. They are generally used for discussing issues on how to handle the entity in question, or for recording free-format info that can't be fit into any of the DB records (such as the source that justifies marking one author as a pseudonym of another).

If you want to discuss an issue on one of the above pages, check if there is already a discussion in progress on the same or a closely related issue. if so, feel free to just join in.

Many of the pages listed above have their own talk pages (use the tab labeled "discussion" to go to it) where what should be on the main page and/or how it should be arranged can be discussed.

The pages linked from Help:Contents document a good deal of how the ISFDB works. It is fairly complex -- feel free to ask at any time about anything that is unclear. Some of the help is out of date or not as complete as it should be -- this is a volunteer effort.

There are some useful Linking templates for making links to objects in the DB, See Template talk:A for authors, Template talk:T for titles, and Template talk:P for publications. Not everyone uses these, and they are never required. i find them helpful.

I hope this helps to answer your questions and get you started. -DES ^Talk 16:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Triplanetary

You submitted a publication for a Fantasy Press edition of Triplanetary dated 1948, based on a statement on the copyright page of a later edition. In general, this is a fine procedure. But in this particular case we already have this pub which is dated 1950, but which includes a note "Library of Congress shows this book as 1948." I therefore suspect that this may be the 1948 FP edition. I have put your submission on hold while checking further . -DES ^Talk 17:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Worldcat online database (see Help:Using Worldcat data) lists both 1948 and a 1950 FP editions, but doesn't indicate that either are "limited" as the existing record mentions. I am going to approve your edit, and put out a verification request for more info. -DES ^Talk 17:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I didn't understand that "variant title" could mean just the spelling of the author name was different. I didn't even see that other record, or I'd just have added a note to it.

As long as we are on the subject of Doc Smith, there is another "Triplanetary" where the author name is spelled with duoble quotes around the Doc instead of single. Clicking on that author name gives an error "Author not found E. E.". I think that pub should be moved to the 'Doc' variant and that title record deleted, but I don't see how to do that.

Based on the discussion discussion above I should probably be putting this on the Edward E. Smith discussion page... Bitdancer 22:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The verification request is at ISFDB:Verification requests‎#Fantasy Press eds of Triplanetary

Moving the title could be done, by simply editing the title record, and the publication record(s), and changing the author recorded on each. However, if there is any significant chance that the book was actually published with double quotes, we would want to record this by leaving the author unchanged, but making the title a variant of the usual title with the canonical author name, and making 'E. E. "Doc" Smith' a pseudonym. However, i think that the "Author not found" is due to a problem with quotes in fields used to construct SQL queries, which may mandate changing the author when we wouldn't otherwise, and leaving a note. I am going to post about this on the Help desk, and see what advice others have. -DES ^Talk 22:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The author page would be Author:Edward E. Smith, but as you will see there isn't much there. -DES ^Talk 22:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

See my comments at ISFDB:Help desk#E. E. "Doc" Smith. -DES ^Talk 22:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Starchild

Thanks for your addition, I've approved it: especially, thank you for the "Printed in" notes that distinguish it from our existing edition! BLongley

It took me a while to realise the difference though, and I wonder if there's anything else you can add? For instance, I found this image which might be of the Canadian printing or the US printing, or both. Does that match yours or specifically NOT match your copy? Does yours mention any other prices, or is there a cover artist discernable, even if only by a cover-art signature? The more data we can add to make it clear that these are two separate books the better, and I'm over here in the UK with no copy at all! BLongley 20:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

That image matches mine exactly. The only price is the 50 cents. There is no artist information in my copy that I could find, and no signature (as you can see in the image) on the cover itself. The back cover has "This is an original publication -- not a reprint. Printed in U.S.A" in blue type across the top, and the bottom half of the back cover is an advertisement, including images of the covers, for A Plague of Pythons, The Case Against Tomorrow, and The Reefs of Space. Don't know if any of that helps or if I should add it to the notes.

It's up to you if you add any of that info: I've bolded the USA and added the cover-art, that should help a bit. BLongley 19:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

A Treasury of Science Fiction

You seem to be treating this pub as a first printing, using the publication date stated in the 2nd printing, although you say "No printing stated". Or is there some other basis for the date? If there is no printing stated and no good evidence for the date, we usually use "0000-00-00" which dispalys as "unknown", but if there is some eveidence, even if not from the publication itself, that may be another matter. but in such a case it is usually better to add a note indicating the source of the date. -DES ^Talk 00:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I meant to make the date change but obviously I forgot to do it. Done now. Bitdancer 15:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

First printing of the Pyramid edition of Triplanetary

FYI, I have added a note, "First printing of the Pyramid edition according to the copyright page of the seventh printing", to your verified first printing of the Pyramid edition. Ahasuerus 00:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)