Difference between revisions of "User talk:DavidHarlow"
DavidHarlow (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Since you added the beginning pages, I propose that I accept your submission and revert the publication to the initial state. I'll then clone the publication, set the date for that to 'unknown', and you can then withdraw your primary verification and add it to the new publication. Would that be okay for you? [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:59, 30 April 2018 (EDT) | Since you added the beginning pages, I propose that I accept your submission and revert the publication to the initial state. I'll then clone the publication, set the date for that to 'unknown', and you can then withdraw your primary verification and add it to the new publication. Would that be okay for you? [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:59, 30 April 2018 (EDT) | ||
: Actually the ninth printing is noted by Locus with the Mar 1987 date. Whoever originally entered the record failed to mention that [there's nowhere else the data could have come from]. Thus the edit was correct, just needed to leave the month and note the source. All other data, including the price, match the Locus record, though they call the 'additional' stories vignettes. --[[User:Bluesman|~ Bill, Bluesman]] 14:36, 30 April 2018 (EDT) | : Actually the ninth printing is noted by Locus with the Mar 1987 date. Whoever originally entered the record failed to mention that [there's nowhere else the data could have come from]. Thus the edit was correct, just needed to leave the month and note the source. All other data, including the price, match the Locus record, though they call the 'additional' stories vignettes. --[[User:Bluesman|~ Bill, Bluesman]] 14:36, 30 April 2018 (EDT) | ||
| + | :: I suspect that the publishers have rather confusingly not restarted the printing numbers when they created the 1987 edition. From the copyright page, it would appear that my copy is the 9th printing (by number line) of the July 1973 (1st) edition. However, the inclusion of the "Introduction to the 1987 Edition" makes it clear that this is actually the 1987 edition. I attempted to convey that in the publication notes, but I was clearly not verbose enough. Sorry. I am, of course, happy to follow whatever you think is best. | ||
Revision as of 15:04, 30 April 2018
Welcome!
Hello, DavidHarlow, 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
- Field-by-field guide to entering new publications into the database
- Help:Getting Started
- What the ISFDB Wiki is for
- FAQ
- Wiki editing help - Tips on how to use the wiki-specific features when editing wiki pages.
- Wiki Conventions - How things are usually done on this wiki.
- Help:How to upload images to the ISFDB wiki
Note: Image uploading isn't entirely automated. You're uploading the files to the wiki which will then have to be linked to the database by editing the publication record.
Please be careful in editing publications that have been primary verified by other editors. See Help:How to verify data#Making changes to verified pubs. But if you have a copy of an unverified publication, verifying it can be quite helpful. See Help:How to verify data for detailed information.
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! --MartyD 21:31, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
Your submission for The Wind from the Sun
Hello, and welcome! Alas, it seems there went something wrong for that publication (that's why I have put your submission on hold). This entry was for the first printing of the Signet / New American library edition from 1987-03-00 (though the printing was by mistake not stated). You verified it, though you seem to don't own it, as you added notes about the 9th printing (which certainly was not published in 1987).
Since you added the beginning pages, I propose that I accept your submission and revert the publication to the initial state. I'll then clone the publication, set the date for that to 'unknown', and you can then withdraw your primary verification and add it to the new publication. Would that be okay for you? Stonecreek 13:59, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
- Actually the ninth printing is noted by Locus with the Mar 1987 date. Whoever originally entered the record failed to mention that [there's nowhere else the data could have come from]. Thus the edit was correct, just needed to leave the month and note the source. All other data, including the price, match the Locus record, though they call the 'additional' stories vignettes. --~ Bill, Bluesman 14:36, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
- I suspect that the publishers have rather confusingly not restarted the printing numbers when they created the 1987 edition. From the copyright page, it would appear that my copy is the 9th printing (by number line) of the July 1973 (1st) edition. However, the inclusion of the "Introduction to the 1987 Edition" makes it clear that this is actually the 1987 edition. I attempted to convey that in the publication notes, but I was clearly not verbose enough. Sorry. I am, of course, happy to follow whatever you think is best.