User talk:Holmesd

From ISFDB
Revision as of 09:17, 25 June 2022 by JLaTondre (talk | contribs) (→‎Understanding Physics: new section)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

See Archive 1 20 Jan 2008 to 23 October 2014

See Archive 2 24 October 2014 to 15 January 2018


Burroughs books

Still no response from the last seller for a date source for The Land that Time Forgot, so unlikely there will be one. If there was a source for the date there would be no problem having two records with the same date [at least one of them would be right]. But instead of just leaving it that way, use the ads to narrow down at least which order the two records should have. The existing record's ads are also in Out of Time's Abyss [see below] so I checked what was advertised and the latest book is Saberhagen's "Thorns" in ad S-12 which was published in July 1980, so clearly the 1982 date is wrong [Ace was always more current than that]. I probably have a book with the A-xx ads noted for the clone record but I'm not going to search for one. The A-xx series of ads antedates the S-xx ones so would be a later year [maybe even 1982?]. You can check that. Also, both can't be noted as eighth printings when it's just by count, not number line or stated. Since the cloned record seems to be the later one it shouldn't have that guesstimate. I'll unhold/accept the two edits but change the first one [date with note re-ad source], you'll need to do something with the second/clone.

I checked the manuscript and the Conan ad A-04 appears in (dated) printings ranging from April 82 (one) to Mar-Oct 85 (four). Doug H 15:11, 18 January 2018 (EST)
Anything past 1982 would have a higher price, at least $2.25, so the clone can keep the date, maybe a note the source for the month is unknown. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:44, 18 January 2018 (EST)

Out of Time's Abyss: ads show that neither printing [1] or [2] were printed in 1979. 1 has the same ads as noted above so was printed in 1980. 2 has ads with the latest books [Leiber's series] all printed in Mar/Apr 1981. Of course this now opens the door to there possibly being an as-yet unrecorded printing for 1979 [no, we're not going to make one up just for a © date on a cover]. I'll change both the records with appropriate notes.

Manuscript has three version: First has a printing history with June 1979 on 360 Park and ads 119, 115, 109, 110, 111. Second has no history, 51 Madison, and ads S-04, 118, 115, 148, S-12. Third has no history on 51 Madison and ads 130, 118, 125, 117, 120. Doug H 15:11, 18 January 2018 (EST)
Then a June '79 record does need creating! All the '79 printings I've seen have a single note "This Ace Printing: [month] 1979". I can do that. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:44, 18 January 2018 (EST)

The Moon Men: my copy of F-159 has the Ave of Americas address and the same Burroughs ad that includes up to F-204 as was the case with F-156 so is likely a 1963 reprint. If yours has the Park Ave address I'll create a new record but if it's the same as mine I'll have to check with a couple of more verifiers [both Ron and Willem are current and active so it wouldn't take long].

Ave of Americas. As for creating - there's quite a few publications in the same boat - I'm only addressing one's I own. Maybe when the dust settles on the manuscript I'll be able to add them. Doug H 15:11, 18 January 2018 (EST)
Good plan, I like sticking with what I own or have very good evidence for. I've directed Willem here, so see what shakes. I have a feeling the first four were all reprinted in 1963. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:44, 18 January 2018 (EST)
My copy of F-159 has the publisher's adress as 23 West 47th Street. Ads are for the F-series up to 158 and the D-series up to 555. --Willem 16:12, 18 January 2018 (EST)
Thank you! Will create a new record for the version noted above. --~ Bill, Bluesman 16:23, 18 January 2018 (EST)

The Monster Men: my copy of 53587 [1969] simply doesn't make sense. No Ace edition had numbered ads before late 1970, but my copy has ad 15. By June 1970 there were no more small Ace editions but the numbered ads still hadn't begun being used. So this particular printing is either a complete anomaly or it was printed in late 1970 and there's another 53587 with likely a different ad. What does yours have?

The same 15. Manuscript has only the one version. Also only has this one book with the ad. The address still uses the 2 digit zip code. Doug H 15:11, 18 January 2018 (EST)
In my whole Ace spreadsheet that ad only appears 4 times, including this one and the other three are from 1971/72. It's just so out of place in 1969. --~ Bill, Bluesman 15:44, 18 January 2018 (EST)
I have the same. Ad 15 on page 160. --Willem 16:12, 18 January 2018 (EST)

You did open the door! ;-)))) I still have about two boxes of Burroughs to go through [I'm just checking the Ace stuff] so there might be more! Your friend the aspiring publisher might want to hold off 'til the dust settles ..... Cheers! --~ Bill, Bluesman 13:46, 18 January 2018 (EST) Finished the Burroughs/Ace go-through for now.

Tarzan and the Jewels of Opar

Hello, I've approved your submission for this pub but there is a difference between the entered publication date "1981-12-00" and the notes "Twelfth Printing: August 1981". Can you have a look? Thanks. Hauck 03:10, 23 January 2018 (EST)

Getting glassy-eyed. Correction submitted. Thanks. Doug H 10:58, 24 January 2018 (EST)

Tarzan the Terrible

I'm holding your edit to Tarzan the Terrible. You have changed the date from "1974-01-00" to "1974-06-00", but you publication notes would imply this is the "Fifth U.S. Printing: January, 1974". Shouldn't the date remain "1974-01-00"? -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:42, 24 January 2018 (EST)

You are correct. I was cross-referencing to an unpublished catalog, noticed the same error and queried the author. They replied I was correct, but I failed to update their notes (from which I took the date) while leaving my notes (which become the notes) and thus generating the error which you also caught. Let me know if I need to resubmit or just change the date back. Thanks. Doug H 23:14, 24 January 2018 (EST)
Approved & changed the date back. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:11, 25 January 2018 (EST)

Tarzan the Untamed

Pingback - I have added a note to User talk:Marc Kupper#Tarzan the Untamed. --Marc Kupper 20:49, 24 January 2018 (EST)

One publication title updated ...

... for this. Now it does fit the canonical title and your note. Stonecreek 10:58, 25 January 2018 (EST)

Thanks for fixing it. Doug H 14:55, 25 January 2018 (EST)

The Lad and the Lion Cover Artist

You've verified two of the Ballantine editions of The Lad and the Lion ([1] and [2]). Both have the cover artist listed as "A. Bartran" and state that the credit is from a signature. The two Robert Zeuschner bibliographies credit the cover to "R. Bartram". Could you double check the signature and see if perhaps it should be as Zeuschner records it? I also wonder if he may be the same artist as Robert Bartram? I note that the other verifier of the Canadian printing also owns a copy of his only cover in the database. I was going to ask him to chime in, in any case, but he may be able to find a signature in the other artwork to compare. Thanks for checking. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:35, 29 January 2018 (EST)

No signature on the SFBC edition, but the style of faces is quite similar. The signature on the Burroughs book is clear for most of the letters but the last one could be an 'N' or an 'M' with maybe a 60% lean to an 'M'. I'm not stuck on either name, just what it looked like at the time. --~ Bill, Bluesman 21:51, 29 January 2018 (EST)
Sorry, I originally introduced a further typo above which I've now corrected. I've also found some further evidence: ERBzine also credits it as "R. Bartram". As do several sale listings. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:04, 29 January 2018 (EST)
The ERBzine took their information from Zeuschner, and the sale listings probably got it from one of these two. I agree with the lean to "M". I'm also inclined to go with a 20 year old 'bible' of ERBness. Doug H 23:38, 29 January 2018 (EST)
I got side tracked with other projects and am just getting back to this. I'm going to go ahead and change this at the author level rather than make a pseudonym. Let me know if I misunderstood your conclusions. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:43, 10 February 2018 (EST)

Tarzan Lord of the Jungle

In this publication, does the title not have the comma after Tarzan on the title page? Currently, the pub and the title record do not match. If it doesn't have it, it needs to be unmerged from the current title record and the resultant new title record varianted to the current one. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2018 (EST)

The entry already existed and I'd not noticed the lack of a comma. I'll put an edit in now. Doug H 21:50, 1 February 2018 (EST)

Frazetta

Hi! I've put your submission on hold, as we usually would credit this only to the artist, just like here. Is there really a credit for 'uncredited' or any other reason for stating this somewhat ominous person? Christian Stonecreek 11:00, 6 February 2018 (EST)

The back of the cards has bits of biography written in third person ("... approached Frank to do several paintings for ..."), but also has quotes from Frazetta. I was just reluctant to make it sound like he wrote it himself. But I don't really care as long as people understand the text is uncredited. I could put that in the notes instead. Some card series have only author quotes. Doug H 11:19, 6 February 2018 (EST)
Yeah, other art books also feature some biographical or other information written by some other hand. I'll approve and adapt the submission. Thanks, Christian Stonecreek 14:59, 6 February 2018 (EST)

The Best of the Brothers Hildebrandt

Yeah, I see I missed one of the greg -> to Greg Hildebrandt changes. I'll fix it when I correct the title and put the cover image in. Thanks. Doug H 14:47, 6 February 2018 (EST)

Duplicates in the current set of updates

Hello Doug,

I approved all of your updates however as it is interior art and you chose to add them instead of importing them, I assume at least some of those duplicates to pre-existing records are just names duplicates. When you have a chance, can you look through the records and either submit a merging or where you know they are different, add a note that they should be kept separately and which one is which? Thanks! Annie 12:45, 8 February 2018 (EST)

Add vs. import - I've never imported so no idea what you are referring to, so not really a choice. If you mean duplicates of other art (either cover images or interior art), then yes, I believe a number are duplicates and my intention is to pull down a list of the cover images and compare them to cards and their textual content to identify matches and variant them (as has been done for some card sets). Another interpretation for 'merging' is that an image may appear in two different sets or appear in an art book and hence have the same name, at which point I guess they should be merged. I guess I'll find those when I pull down the list from ISFDB (I wasn't going to type all those twice). Although without seeing the image from the other source - would it be right to merge them? Am I close? Doug H 13:24, 8 February 2018 (EST)
If you are not sure they are the same art, we are not going to merge them of course. I was just wondering if you know if some of them are the same art so we can clean up the pages a bit :)
As for importing - you can import pre-existing records into a publication as opposed to typing all the titles and needing to merge later. For some of your additions, I saw a lot of duplicates (by name) in the author pages after that so I did wonder if they are not the same ones. But as I do not have the books/cards, I cannot verify - thus asking you. Thanks! Annie 15:19, 8 February 2018 (EST)
I'd only ever used 'Clone This Pub" when it was the same as an existing. I've never tried the import/export option. I usually stay away from anthologies and collections and only find myself hip-deep in this content stuff when I run across something odd. Like six boxes of art cards of which only about half were entered. Once this is done, I get rid of them. Doug H 15:26, 8 February 2018 (EST)
Ah, I see. The Import is pretty nice when you are adding something that already has its content in the DB - all you need is the list of the IDs in comma separated list (or if you are importing the full content, you just need the parent ID) :) And with magazines not supporting Cloning, it is a time saver...
Have fun with those art cards... I am staying away from most art records - I am moderating them and I am fixing them if needed but I am not adding them too often. Annie 15:35, 8 February 2018 (EST)

Maitz art credit

Could you chime in on [this] discussion? Seems there is a source for the artwork [but not for Maitz]. Thanks! --~ Bill, Bluesman 23:29, 9 February 2018 (EST)

Ace Editions of At the Earth's Core

I'm going to add dates to three undated printings of Burroughs' At the Earth's Core, two of which you have verified. The dates are from Robert B. Zeuschner's Edgar Rice Burroughs: The Bibliography. For this printing Zeuschner dates it as 10/72, and for this one, he dates it as 1973. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:15, 10 February 2018 (EST)

Tarzan Lord of the Jungle (second one)

Here's another "Tarzan Lord of the Jungle" without the comma. Mind double checking like above? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:10, 10 February 2018 (EST)

It's buried deep and may take a while to get to. Doug H 08:22, 12 February 2018 (EST)

Cimoc Cover II

Hello, just to be sure, con you confirm this title? (Comic?). Thanks. Hauck 05:04, 11 February 2018 (EST)

I have this image which matched existing pub. Can only confirm mine is a variant of what is displayed for that pub, not original image. Doug H 10:52, 11 February 2018 (EST)
Thanks for having a look, surely CIMOC means something for someone... Hauck 11:17, 11 February 2018 (EST)
Cimoc is a Spanish comics magazine from the 80s (and early 90s). It is out of scope for us for obvious reason but Royo had done a lot of their covers and they had been reused after that for games and illustrations (and cards...). This one was for #35 for example :) Annie 21:42, 9 April 2018 (EDT)

The Chessmen of Mars

Hi, I've removed the wrong cover artist of this, through "Remove Titles From This Pub". Now you can add the correct artist. Horzel 09:22, 10 March 2018 (EST)

Took me a few minutes to figure out you were replying to my January note on Don's page. Thanks for the tip on deleting artists, but seems a bit odd that you can enter image URL's and artists separately but they are linked for deletion. Publication update submitted. Doug H 10:12, 12 March 2018 (EDT)

Tarzan, Lord of the Jungle

Hello, I've approved your submission but can you check the ISBN (perhaps "0-345-28986-2"?). Thanks. Hauck 02:31, 28 March 2018 (EDT)

Adding existing content

Hello Doug,

Just a reminder that when you are adding a title we already have (the Martian Chess essay for example), you can use Import (described here instead of adding it again - that saves on typing, minimizes typos and does not require an additional step afterwards to merge the new record with the existing one :) Annie 16:17, 9 April 2018 (EDT)

Caught me just in time - those were the one's I'm sole verifier for. The next six I've been prepping the notifications for the other verifiers. ../Doug H 16:22, 9 April 2018 (EDT)
:) Happy to be of help! Annie 16:27, 9 April 2018 (EDT)
When you are importing, keep an eye on the dates and make sure the content you are importing does not need to have its date adjusted (you cannot have a Foreword written in 1973 in a 1963 book - even if we are a SF Database, the laws of Physics are still valid) :) When that happens, you need to submit a title edit as well to get the date to the earliest pub date. I've adjusted the date on the essay from this last set of imports. Annie 17:21, 10 April 2018 (EDT)
When the Apple Lisa was introduced, my boss was pleased to show off the graphical interface. He dragged a document from one folder to another. My response: was that a copy or move? He didn't know. I feel much the same way with edits - there's a lot goes on the scenes but every so often it's not as far as you think. And it often takes several steps and you have to wait between for unknown periods. I tend to lose track if I try doing more than one thing at a time, but then it takes forever. One of these days I'll have to take a look at the data model. And thanks for covering my mistakes. ../Doug H 22:08, 10 April 2018 (EDT)
Before I became a moderator, I tended to write notes on my edits - if I know I need to wait for something to be done before I can send the next update, I would write in the moderator note what is to be done next (Import 123456 for example - something that won't require any search and checks later on - and just can be followed). If it was not too busy (or a moderator wanted to), they would follow the step in the note. If they did not, by going through my edits, I made sure to finalize it. Plus this way the moderator knows what you are trying to achieve. Just a thought
And no worries - in this case the date was not much of a problem - a single title import is easy. The problem with those is when you have a single collection with 20 titles for example (so the stories do not show anywhere else) and you clone it back in time or import back in time for example - once accepted, now you need to change each story one by one - while if you edit before that import, you can change all the dates in one edit from the Publication). If you remember to look for this in the single cases, you will also remember to look for it in the big imports/clones. And that helps (and as you can imagine, I did learn that the hard way...). Don't take that note as something bad please - I was just bringing your attention to something that you may not be aware of (as if these things ever end here...) :) Annie 22:26, 10 April 2018 (EDT)
In my tech support role, my dual goal was to make sure that I answered people's questions, but also that I planted the seeds for more questions. My one observation (complaint and issue are too strong) of the moderators behaviour over the 10 years I've been here is that they sometimes do too much behind the scenes, making it hard to understand what is actually going on and what we as editors should be doing. My contributions have been slow and steady, like the evolution of the software and procedures, so I've been more concerned with getting my dozen edits done than worrying about my next dozen. I appreciate the information and hope I can still remember it when the appropriate situation arises. And yes, I try using the moderator notes to describe what's been done and to be done, but have trouble remembering to go back and look at the notes three days later. ../Doug H 08:38, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
Damned if you do, damned if you don't :) Sometimes the behind the scenes is disjointed from a request - even if a moderator decides not to do the next action (thus leaving the action half done), if you do not get to it before the nightly reports, it will pop up there - and someone will deal with it. I try to go and tell the editor if I do some work on their entry after them but when the board is full and there are the same actions, sometimes things slip (or sometimes if it is a one time problem from the editor, I just silently fix it). And sometimes, after posting the same message to the same person, it feels like doing is silently makes more sense... And for every editor that would care about the process and follow up, we get a few that either do not care or just keep dropping the ball. So if I see a chapbook without a story or a mismatched date and no moderator note to let me know that the editor knows about it, I would fix them (and ping the editor - the first few times anyway) - because otherwise, in 99% of the cases, it will come up on the report later in the day anyway... :) Annie 12:52, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Tarzan and the Jewels of Opar / Jungle Tales of Tarzan

Hello,

Is this submission a duplicate of this one. Both appear to be for the first printing of the 1997 edition. What exactly are you trying to do here? Looking closer, are you trying to add the Canadian edition so you can add a second cover (if so, leaving the old cover in place is confusing. Can you clarify? :) Thanks! Annie 14:27, 10 April 2018 (EDT)

Yes - cloning for Canadian edition. I guess I missed the checkbox that said don't keep the image (although it looks exactly the same). ../Doug H 15:17, 10 April 2018 (EDT)
Approved. You said "Cover image to follow.", thus me being a bit confused. That and not enough caffeine in my system yet :) Thanks! Annie 15:20, 10 April 2018 (EDT)
I've put a couple hundred Edgar Rice Burroughs in the last few months, in painstaking detail to support someone writing a bibliography and the "Cover image to follow" is easy and automatic - reading and checking boxes apparently is not. ../Doug H 15:26, 10 April 2018 (EDT)

Tarzan and the Forbidden City cover

OK, let's talk through this. Is your goal to change the artist of this cover in both publications?

This is obviously the same cover in both publications so the artist will be the same. You cannot change the name from the publication (as you can if it is a single publication for the title) but you can do it from the title record - the one I just linked above (and you had to go to in order to unmerge). So there is no need to unmerge, change in 2 places and then merge again (which is what you will need to do if I approve this unmerge). So just click on "Edit" on the COVERART record and change it there. Or am I misunderstanding what you are trying to do here? Annie 14:57, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Yes. I tried changing the title record and it spawned off the variant cover art. If I change the artist in this cover art, I presume I'd end up with two cover arts that were identical except for the publications under them. So then the second step would be to merge the two cover art titles? ../Doug H 19:56, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
Merge which two covers? Can you post the links to the two records you are talking about? If you change the artist here, it will change the cover artist for both this and this in a single step. Annie 20:20, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
The two cover art titles - the base and the variant. ../Doug H 23:43, 11 April 2018 (EDT)
Ah, I see,. Here is another one-step way then. Go to Advanced Search. In the Title Search, set "Title Exactly "Tarzan and the Forbidden City" and Title Type equal Cover Art. This will get you to this page. Find the two you want to merge, Select them and click Merge. On the next page, select the author you want to keep and make sure that you select the empty string next to "title_parent" or you will make a loop (easily fixed if it happened so do not worry too much). All done :). Alternatively, submit the change of name in the one that you tried to unmerge earlier and then it needs to be merged with its variant. If you split them, you then will need to change two publications or titles and THEN do a 3-way merge (or remove two covers and do 2 imports) - in both cases you end up with 5 steps instead of 1 or 2. Let me know if I can assist you or if you want to try to submit it? :) Annie 00:03, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
Submitted as a single. Thanks for the patience, forbearance and guidance. ../Doug H 09:17, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
I found another cluster that needed merging (probably left over from an old action?) and this is the final result. I think it is all done now and look ok. Let me know if anything else is needed. I like one-step solutions - the reduce the number of times I forget to finish an action :) Annie 12:46, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
They all look valid. A couple aren't even mine. ../Doug H 15:33, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
Probably the ones I found :) Annie 15:36, 12 April 2018 (EDT)

The Mysterious Planet

Hello,

How is this different from this? What am I missing in the cloned copy? Annie 14:45, 23 April 2018 (EDT)

Printed in Canada - Canadian price. ../Doug H 17:06, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
Somehow missed that and I was trying to compare line by line... Approved :) Annie 17:10, 23 April 2018 (EDT)

Interview title typo?

Hello, Doug! The title for this seems to be a bit 'kaput', or is it really a typo in the magazine? Christian Stonecreek 15:07, 3 May 2018 (EDT)

Transient - so can't check, but given my typing skills - I've updated it to something more reasonable. ../Doug H 21:18, 3 May 2018 (EDT)

All those plates...

That's amusing :) Annie 15:35, 17 May 2018 (EDT)

I got lucky - in spite of the name differences the first one I tried was unicorn dolphin ken barr and someone had put the dolphin and unicorn in as keywords for the ad. Any of the others I wouldn't have got a hit to follow up on. ../Doug H 23:22, 17 May 2018 (EDT)
I call that google-fu - you do something enough, your subconscious mind somehow manages to serve you the correct terms at the correct time. :) Annie 14:51, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

Edgar Rice Burroughs: The Exhaustive Scholar's

Hello Doug,

Are you ok with this change? Annie 14:39, 5 June 2018 (EDT)

Who am I to argue with the author? Let 'er rip. ../Doug H 08:28, 6 June 2018 (EDT)
OK then - thanks :) Annie 12:55, 6 June 2018 (EDT)

There Will Be Time

The cover artist of this is Fernando Fernandez, see his site. Horzel 17:55, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

No argument here. ../Doug H 11:27, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

Planned Project Scope Expansion

(I am leaving this note on the Talk pages of some of the more active editors to make sure that we are not missing anything. If you have been following this Rules and Standards discussion and agree with the proposal, please ignore this note.)

As per this discussion, ISFDB:Policy#Rules_of_Acquisition is about to be expanded to include:

  • Speculative fiction webzines, which are defined as online periodicals with distinct issues
  • Special speculative fiction issues of non-genre webzines
  • One time speculative fiction anthologies published on the Web

If you believe that this scope expansion may cause unforeseen and/or undesirable consequences, please share your thoughts on the Rules and Standards page. TIA! Ahasuerus 11:18, 4 July 2018 (EDT)

Thoughts on tables

Hi -- I just posted a lengthy reply at the Help Desk, concerning my page where I laid out different translations of Maupassant's "Horla," and then did some experimenting with tables. And I found out something which you presumably found out already: that if you use <table> with no attributes there's no borders between cells (at least not in Firefox and Chrome) and that's frankly unreadable. So, even if it was possible to make a useful table to put in notes (and I have some ideas about that) the limited html/BBCodes allowed here make it not worthwhile. What a nuisance. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 14:03, 11 July 2018 (EDT)

If we decide that our default tables should have borders between cells, we can do it in less than an hour. Would you like to ask for opinions on the Community Portal? Ahasuerus 20:57, 11 July 2018 (EDT)

That said, what do you think of the following idea for a wiki page to be linked from the notes? I would use the page as I have it, but add the following at the top: Section heading: Summary. Below that, "See Details for more information on each of these translations." Then a table, and then Section heading: Details, and then what's on the page now. Here's a piece of the table:

Translation Date Beginning Title Records
1 Jonathan Sturges 1890 May 8th. What a magnificent day! I spent the whole morning stretched on the grass, before my house, under the great plane-tree which entirely covers, shelters, and shades it. (more) 2091022 (The Horla)
4 I. The Dunne edition (uncredited) 1903 May 8. What a lovely day! I have spent all the morning lying on the grass in front of my house, under the enormous plantain tree which covers and shades and shelters the whole of it. (more) 411514 (The Horla)
2206046 (The Horla, or Modern Ghosts)
II. George Allan England 1911 67969 (The Horla)
5 Dora Knowlton Ranous 1910 May 8. What a lovely day! I have spent all the morning lying in the grass in front of my house, under the enormous plane tree that shades the whole of it. (more) 2206050 (The Horla)
93688 (The Horla, or Modern Ghosts)
7 Storm Jameson/Ernest Boyd 1925 May 8. What a glorious day! I have spent the whole morning lying on the grass in front of my house, under the enormous plane-tree that forms a complete covering, shelter and shade for it. (more) 2089208 (The Horla)

Not bad... I think that makes the complicated list more user-friendly. How does it compare to what you were planning to do? --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 14:03, 11 July 2018 (EDT)

First questions - your wiki page is under your user: Is that be the right base for a title's data? How do I find your wiki page from the title page for Horla? And how does one go about creating wiki pages? Second point - I view the translation as the key element as there may be multiple titles under that translation and while I don't mind repeating a title (short) I'd rather not repeat the text. So if the title 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea are the two titles both used under two different translations, my preference for structure is:

Translated by Unknown | When I was just a lad ...

. 1875-00-00 | Routledge | 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

. 1898-00-00 | Sampson Low | Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea

Translated by Greerson | There are strange things done ...

. 1881-00-00 | Marsden | Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea

. 1904-00-00 | Dent | 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

Because I feel that identifying the translation is required especially if the title has not been identified before. I'd rather someone not think that a publication with a new title can go under any of the titles. This requires either two table row formats or multiple tables. ../Doug H 20:06, 11 July 2018 (EDT)

You have an excellent point about the title record links. I revised my table to put them at the end; that way it's clear that this is a list of translations, and the links are just there to show which title records use that translation. I hope the fact that I identified the records by number, with the story title only secondary, makes it clear that it is that record, not other ones with the same story title. Unlike you, I preferred to just associate a date with the translation, and not give the first date of the particular story title, but obviously it would be easy to change the table to do it your way.
Translator Translation text (from opening paragraph) Title Information
Date Publisher Title
William Lackland "There was a large audience assembled on the 14th of January, 1862, at the session of the Royal Geographical Society, No. 3 Waterloo Place,London. The president, Sir Francis M—, made an important communication to his colleagues, in an address that was frequently interrupted by applause." 1869-00-00 D. Appleton & Company Five Weeks in a Balloon; or, Journeys and Discoveries in Africa by Three Englishmen
unspecified "There have been disputes as to the originator of the great idea of traversing the African continent, in a manner to be independent of its multitudinous and deadly obstructions; but the subjoined narrative will, we cannot doubt, be sufficient to assure the reader that the man who undertook, and in the face of unexampled difficulties carried out the project, conceived it, and stands indebted to no one for the honours now accumulating on the name of Dr. Samuel Fergusson." 1870-00-00 Chapman & Hall Five Weeks in a Balloon: A Voyage of Exploration and Discovery in Central Africa
Frederick Amadeus Malleson "There was a large audience, on the 14th of January, 1862, at the sitting of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 3, Waterloo-place. The president, Sir Francis M-, made an important speech to his honourable colleagues, and was frequently interrupted by applause." 1875-00-00 Ward, Lock and Tyler Five Weeks in a Balloon
unspecified "On the 14th of January, 1862, there was a very large attendance of the members of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 3 Waterloo Place. The President, Sir Francis M—, made an important communication to his colleagues in a speech frequently interrupted by applause." 1876-00-00 George Routledge and Sons Five Weeks in a Balloon
unspecified "At the sitting of the Royal Geographical Society, No. 3, Waterloo Place, on the 14th of January, 1862, the President, Sir Francis M-, made his colleagues an important communication in an address interrupted by frequent applause." 1877-00-00 Goubaud Five Weeks in a Balloon
Arthur Chambers "There was a large audience at the meeting of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 3 Waterloo Place, on the 14th of January, 1862. The President, Sir Francis M-, made an important announcement to his honourable colleagues in a speech frequently interrupted by applause." 1926-00-00 J. M. Dent & Sons Five Weeks in a Balloon
1963-00-00 J. M. Dent & Sons Five Weeks in a Balloon / Around the World in Eighty Days
I. O. Evans "There was a large audience, on the 14th January, 1862, at the session of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 3 Waterloo-Place. The president, Sir Francis M—, made an important speech to his honourable colleagues, and was frequently interrupted by applause." 1958-00-00 Bernard Hanison Five Weeks in a Balloon
Frederick Paul Walter "They had a packed house for the Royal Geographical Society's meeting on January 14, 1862, at 3 Waterloo Place, London. Their president, Sir Francis M————, made a major announcement to his distinguished colleagues during a speech that was frequently interrupted by cheering." 2015-06-05 Wesleyan University Press Five Weeks in a Balloon: A Journey of Discovery by Three Englishmen in Africa
As to your other questions... I originally put these pages in my user namespace because I thought they would be temporary and private. Now that I am thinking about making them permanent and linking them from the database (I haven't done that yet), I should shift them to the main part of the wiki. I would create a new wiki page like so: Translations of Le Horla. You see a red link now; once I click on it, a blank page with that title will be created. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 20:57, 11 July 2018 (EDT)
I've updated my table with the real information - most of the second titles have not been identified as there was just a single title used as a melting pot. And I don't think the omnibus goes there as the content title is just Five Weeks in a Balloon. But it shows me how to enter them and what they look like.
Still not sure about the "unspecified" vs. "unknown" and how to put in the title link for the unexamined publications where no one has used the text to determine which is the correct entry and where entries for publications that the text is not available for need to go. ../Doug H 10:27, 12 July 2018 (EDT)

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Other Classic Novels

Sorry, that copy has passed on..gzuckier 17:51, 13 July 2018 (EDT)

"Make Variant" and series

A quick FYI re: "Make Variant" and series. When creating a variant relationship, the series information is always supposed to be copied over. The only problematic scenario is when both titles already belong to different series and/or have different series numbers, which doesn't happen very often. In addition, there is a cleanup report which looks for variants with series information. HTH. Ahasuerus 08:53, 17 July 2018 (EDT)

Five Weeks in a Balloon -- the 2008 Librivox version

A quick note re: the 2008 LibriVox version of Five Weeks in a Balloon. Your unmerge submission reads "Recording states it is the William Lackland translation (1869). Will merge this once separated." However, the title of this publication, Five Weeks in a Balloon, is different from the title of Lackland's original 1869 translation, Five Weeks in a Balloon; or, Journeys and Discoveries in Africa by Three Englishmen. For this reason I kept the unmerged title record for this recording and turned it into a variant of the canonical title. Does it make sense? Ahasuerus 15:53, 17 July 2018 (EDT)

It does. I knew when I ran into different titles that I'd have to clone the translation title from the first translation and set up another row in the wiki table. It's now on my list. (Actually submitted).
Wrestling with a different problem - this claims to be the US version of this and I was going to copy contents, but in checking found that it is only the first 10 volumes (but otherwise identical) and by the way is not National Union, but rather National Alumni. Even the OCLC link agrees. So do I try to edit it by hand, by copying content and deleting stuff or just create a clone of the 15 volume, delete content and then delete the original? ../Doug H 21:13, 17 July 2018 (EDT)
Let me make sure that I understand the situation correctly. The "National Union" edition (presumably soon to be the "National Alumni" edition) already has a bunch of Contents titles. Is my understanding correct that your research indicates that many of these titles are in error? If so, then I would recommend removing them first since it seems to help minimize confusion. Once all of the "bad" titles have been removed, I would use the bottom half of the "Import Title" page to import the titles that you need. The first page lets you import as many titles as you want and the second page lets you assign page numbers. Do you think this approach will work in this case? Ahasuerus 21:42, 17 July 2018 (EDT)
The National Union and Vincent Parke editions were once identical. I unmerged them then corrected the Vincent Parke based on a transient copy. Lots of title changes and additions (plus pages). Using your technique, I will be importing (after some deletions) over half the contents. The alternative was to delete contents in one submission, copy all the contents in a second (with page numbers) and then deleting the volume 11-15 contents in a third submission. Yours is more labour intensive, but more suitable to my attention span. I've pub notes to update as well as the publisher - where in the sequence makes the most sense? Can any submissions be made in parallel? ../Doug H 21:54, 17 July 2018 (EDT)
Sorry if I am being dense tonight (my brain doesn't function too well after 6pm these days), but let me try to make sure that we are on the same page. The approach that I outlined would involve only 2 submissions:
  • Submission 1: Remove the titles that do not belong in the pub
  • Submission 2: Import the titles that need to be important
You can even create the second submission without waiting for the first one to be approved. Does this match you understanding? Ahasuerus 22:08, 17 July 2018 (EDT)
Not dense. Yours is two, but labour intensive - I need to copy a couple dozen entries title by title. My approach took three submissions, but involved only full copies and individual deleting (and lots of waiting). ../Doug H 22:30, 17 July 2018 (EDT)
Well, that should work too. Ultimately, it's a question of what is easier for the submitting editor and we are all wired somewhat differently :-) Ahasuerus 22:34, 17 July 2018 (EDT)

Sourcery

Wanted to let you know I submitted expansion of the notes of Pratchett's Sourcery which you PV'd. MagicUnk 15:26, 16 August 2018 (EDT)

Thanks for the notice. ../Doug H 16:33, 16 August 2018 (EDT)

Moving Pictures

Same for Moving Pictures :) MagicUnk 13:14, 17 August 2018 (EDT)

Ditto for response. ./Doug H 10:28, 18 August 2018 (EDT)

Science Fiction Chronicle, January 1984

I accepted Science Fiction Chronicle, January 1984, but corrected the spelling of two authors in the review section. If the typos were actually in the magazine, you should add a publication note to that effect. Also, would you double check the title given for the Sucharitkul work in the review? The book is actually "from the" vs. "from a" given in the review. I have manually linked the review. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:42, 3 September 2018 (EDT)

Submitting changes - title was A, so updated review and added note. Thanks for fixing Aldiss, the MacEnroe already had a note. ../Doug H 18:32, 3 September 2018 (EDT)

Cinq semaines en ballon

Hello,

Are you sure about the BNF number here? It looks weird compared to all the numbers I had seen from them and it seems to error out at the moment - but it may be just a problem on their side? Annie 03:51, 24 October 2018 (EDT)

I'd never used the BnF template. The page I used to locate the number was here (second entry information, and the image I was looking for was here. I see that the template puts catalog.bnf.fr as a prefix as opposed to gallica.bnf.fr. ../Doug H 10:59, 24 October 2018 (EDT)
Ah, a gallica ID. I wondered if that was it. BNF has two separate catalogs - gallica and the main one. I am not sure how they are connected exactly, I just know they have separate ID systems. When you are on Gallica, look at the record:
Identifier : ark:/12148/bpt6k6572136x
Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Littérature et art, Y2-72841
Set notice : http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb31562308p
The BNF ID you need is the one at the bottom, not the Gallica one. I will swap the IDs and add a link to the Gallica page. Maybe we need the BnF templated and not as an external identifier (As it applies to many editions?) but I will need to do some digging. We have about 30 links to Gallica in the system, I wonder if we do not need a new template for that - let me send a few questions around - if these ID are stable, no reason not to use them in a separate template... Annie 13:14, 24 October 2018 (EDT)

A separate issue - should the content title of the publication actually be the same as the publication title and that title be varianted to the canonical title? The reason I'm unsure is that this is the first book publication and should take precedence, but the second editions uses "Cinq semaines en ballon: Voyage de découvertes en Afrique par trois Anglais", as would the only other existing entry here from Linguist (or would if he followed the subtitle rule on sub-titles). I don't know if there are any publications using the canonical title "Cinq semaines en ballon", so should one of these two editions replace the canonical? The reason I'm fussing is that there are another 50 titles to go and most were published in a periodical first, then followed this path. ../Doug H 09:51, 25 October 2018 (EDT)

They should match except in one case - the subtitles that are preceeded by ":". If they are the old style ("or, blah blah", it does not apply but the : ones kinda fall here - it has to do with the American/UK publishers being idiots with subtitles on non-fiction for example among other things). So if you have "Book: British subtitle" and "Book: American subtitle", the canonical name of the book can be "Book". It can be a judgement call quite honestly. See this: "The title should appear exactly as published, even though this may be different from the canonical title" for example showing that we expect separate titles sometimes. So back to your case... I would not split them into variants. But someone may feel differently. If you want, post over in the Community Portal? But for me "Cinq semaines en ballon" is the correct canonical here (there is a reason why we call it canonical and not first title). If you decide to do variants, I won't reject them - I would not do them but I will not reject them (unless I find something else that convinces me to). But I would not let a change in the canonical name through if I get to moderate it without discussion. Annie 13:28, 25 October 2018 (EDT)
I was entering the second publication and found that "Add a pub to this title" presumes a match of pub title to given title, so changing it requires the two submissions - add and edit. The alternative is to "Add Novel" then variant to the canonical. Adding subsequent publication under the variant title would involve a repeat of two steps in the first method, only a single step in the latter. So going forward, I will be creating variants when the titles differ. This is the approach I'd take with modern publications. I see no reason, whatsoever, to mess about with what is considered the canonical title. ../Doug H 12:08, 27 October 2018 (EDT)

Foundation - cover art

Hi, for your verified copy of Foundation I appended the note from "No art credit or signature". to "No art credit or signature, source for Kyle is unclear."--Dirk P Broer 09:00, 22 November 2018 (EST)

Hmmm, looking at the evidence, it may be that Kyle's name might have slipped into the record when cloning it from this, especially as all other cover art pieces by him were for Gnome Press, an American publishing house. Stonecreek 14:03, 22 November 2018 (EST)
I was likely using the credit from this publication and copying the notation as well. ../Doug H 22:08, 22 November 2018 (EST)
But I'd say the credit could have slipped into that one via the same process; plus the style doesn't fit with Kyle's other pieces. Stonecreek 03:07, 23 November 2018 (EST)
Looking at the evidence, it seems to become more clear that this is in fact what had happened: the artwork is dated to the year 1951, but was published first in 1960! Stonecreek 23:45, 29 November 2018 (EST)
The only reason the credit is in my verified copy is because the same cover had been credited to him in another publication. If you find that credit to be erroneous and decide to correct it, feel free to do so to my verified copy as well. ../Doug H 08:09, 30 November 2018 (EST)
Thanks, Doug! I'll do the update and add a note (you may change it at your will). Sometimes title get cloned that shouldn't (hope that doesn't happen to some dictators). Christian Stonecreek 10:38, 30 November 2018 (EST)

Anathem

http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?292479 Hi, I added the supplements in the book to the Notes, if that's OK with you. Thanks. gzuckier 23:57, 18 December 2018 (EST)

Fine by me. ../Doug H 19:36, 19 December 2018 (EST)

Airmont Classics translation of Tour du monde

Here's a data point for your sorting of Verne translations: The Airmont Classics edition of Around the World... uses this translation (completely uncredited). --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 20:49, 31 December 2018 (EST)

Do you have a copy of the book? My sources indicate that the Airmont edition is based on the 1874 translation by White (opening with "in the year 1872, the house no. 7, saville row, burlington gardens—the house in which sheridan died in 1814—was inhabited by phileas fogg"), whereas the etext edition you cited is based on the 1873 Towle translation (opening with "Mr. Phileas Fogg lived, in 1872, at No. 7, Saville Row, Burlington Gardens, the house in which Sheridan died in 1814.") - according to the notes in the header of the etext. ../Doug H 11:27, 1 January 2019 (EST)
The book is word-for-word the same as the text I linked to. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 12:03, 1 January 2019 (EST)
"In 1963, Airmont Books published Around the World in Eighty Days, papercover, with an introduction by Frances H. Putman, priced at 50 cents. This book is complete and unabridged from the White translation copyrighted by Warburton." - from this and this source. Which tells me the (voluminous and detailed) source is not to be trusted. Also - see this write-up on Airmont books (page 3, second paragraph after "Part II") for details on the last page notation. You may need to create another publication. I find it hard to believe they would use a different translation for a reprint. I see you've updated the content and notes - any chance of images? Can't find any online. Front cover for ISFDB and first page for me? Thanks. ../Doug H 14:18, 1 January 2019 (EST)
I found an image, but it has 50c on the cover and you did not list a price. ../Doug H 23:59, 1 January 2019 (EST)
[Snapshot] --I will get a proper scan when I can. And yeah, I am creating a clone for this reprint copy. --Vasha (cazadora de tildes) 15:42, 2 January 2019 (EST)
I'll put my image on the original. ../Doug H 15:46, 2 January 2019 (EST)

BNF template

Hello,

Just a reminder that we have matching template for the main BNF catalog links for the cases where the ID does not belong to the exact edition (such as here). I swapped the direct link with the template and the full list of templates can be found here) :) Annie 01:20, 4 January 2019 (EST)

Your politeness is noted and appreciated. Although a "hey you dummy, didn't we do this once before?" would have a better chance of sticking. ../Doug H 22:47, 4 January 2019 (EST)
If you do not use the templates daily, it is easy to forget they are there :) Annie 15:04, 5 January 2019 (EST)
A little shaming goes a long way to retaining information. I'm just saying thanks for taking the less efficient route. ../Doug H 16:43, 5 January 2019 (EST)

From the Earth to the Moon

Hi, Doug. I know you thus from User talk:Rtrace. I wonder whether you receive any notice upon my use of a link to your homepage there, User talk:Rtrace#Illustrator for From the Earth to the Moon Direct in Ninety-Seven Hours and Twenty Minutes and a Trip Round It. Please tell me. And see my note there.

We say concerning this From the Earth to the Moon T2486616, "This translation was first published under this title in St James's Magazine." --probably your work, I infer from your homepage. I suppose the meaning is first publication of this translation, under any title, and this title is used. Right? --Pwendt|talk 18:15, 23 February 2019 (EST)

Your interpretation is correct. I suppose it could be taken to mean there might be an even earlier translation under a different title. But no. ../Doug H 19:41, 23 February 2019 (EST)

Concerning this text Round the Moon T2486617, we simply identify the translators. Is it known whether this is the first English-language translation of Part II? It's the earliest dated now in the database. --Pwendt|talk 18:15, 23 February 2019 (EST)

According to the Jules Verne Encyclopedia and jv.gilead.org.il it is. ../Doug H 19:41, 23 February 2019 (EST)

The Man in the Moon

I'm holding your variant for The Man in the Moon. You are varianting a novel as by Butler & Godwin to one just by Godwin. If this is a re-write / adaptation, then they should remain separate (though a title note could be added explaining the situation). If it's the same work, then do you know how the work is credited? Based on the cover, it looks like Butler did the introduction and notes so wouldn't have a credit on the novel itself. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:36, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Cover has "Edited ... by John Anthony Butler", Preface has "Editorial policy for the series calls for texts carefully researched in terms of variant sources, and presented in conservatively modernized and repunctuated form in order make these texts as widely accessible as possible, while respecting the substantive integrity of the originals.", from notes on "The Present Edition" - "The intention of the editor is to provide a readable modernised text with full annotation and notes suitable both for the scholar and student of seventeenth-century prose. ... The present edition was collated with the second edition, and in the odd instance I have in fact preferred a phrase or two from that edition; these alterations have been noted in the textual notes and commentary, as have any variant readings.", "The text has been modernised in spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing, although in regard to the latter I have attempted to leave Godwin's paragraphing as intact as possible. A few words, mostly conjunctions and pronouns, have been added, not because Godwin got them wrong but because some sentences might not seem clear to a modern reader without the extra words. ", "Some sentences have been shortened, but only when Godwin uses a long punctuation mark, usually a colon or semi-colon, and some have been lengthened, when Godwin uses commas.".
Does that mean the variant should just be a note in the title, or that I drop Butler as an author? I'm good with either, just not really clear on how adaptations are recorded. And I'll likely be getting into a number of them with later Jules Verne publications so would like to know. ../Doug H 14:53, 9 March 2019 (EST)
Couple things going on here:
  1. We credit per the pub. Since Godwin is credited as the author and Butler as the editor, it should only be credited to Godwin. Butler's role would go into the pub notes.
  2. There can be a fine line between editing and retelling, but we do differentiate between them. Every work is edited. Different versions of the same work can have significant changes. Generally, we treat them as the same work and just add notes. Occasionally, the changes are significant enough that we consider it a new work. In which case it would not be varianted to the original (same language variants means the same work under a different title, not variant text).
  3. For a retelling where the work is significantly different (often happens with fairy tales), we treat it as a new work. In those cases, if the pub only credited the original author, the pub would be credited to the original author only, but it would be varianted to a record as by the original author and the reteller (when known).
Based on your description, this sounds more like case 2. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:19, 9 March 2019 (EST)
So cancel the variant, edit to remove Butler as author, add him to note, maybe copy the stuff from above, then variant the result, as the title is different (moon vs. moone). ../Doug H 19:37, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Legends for the Dark

Just in case you haven't seen it, I answered your query on my page --Unapersson 07:21, 16 March 2019 (EDT)

Princess of Mars

http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/submitpub.cgi Added mention of foreword and "about the author" to note. gzuckier 16:11, 5 April 2019 (EDT)

Thanks for the notice. Your link doesn't actually point to anything meaningful however and I've verified a couple dozen editions of the title. ../Doug H 16:16, 5 April 2019 (EDT)

Pohlstars

http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?261022 Fixed an erroneous page number. gzuckier 19:56, 22 April 2019 (EDT)

It was transient, so I'm unable to check. I'll have to assume I missed something (yet again). Thanks. ../Doug H 22:27, 22 April 2019 (EDT)

Zwei Jahre Ferien

Thanks for adding this, though I'm sorry that I manipulated your submission to the likely first German edition of this translation - that was before I relaized that you actually transiently verified the publication. Well, this way the title year could be added and I recommend to withdraw your verification and clone the publication. Stonecreek 15:51, 7 July 2019 (EDT)

A couple things I wonder about. You modified the date, the page count, publication series and added a note line about being published in two volumes, but left my notes about my publication intact, which likely don't apply to the original publication. You also set the date for the illustrations to 1888, the original year, but not the first year published under this title - contrary to how I interpret this discussion in the Rules and Standards. I will withdraw my verification and add the new pub to the existing title, but would you clean up the notes in this pub to match whatever you found in your research? For the illustrations, I would now set the date to 1923 (original publication under this title) and variant to the original illustrations. I will also variant the title to the original French. But I'll hold off until you reply in case I'd just be making things more complicated. ../Doug H 10:06, 8 July 2019 (EDT)

The Death of Baldur

I'm holding an edit that would change The Death of Baldur to "The Death of Balder". Per Amazon Look Inside, "Balder" is the spelling used in the ToC. Would you please check your edition of Norse Mythology to see what it's title page has? I will also ping the other verifiers in case it changed between editions. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2019 (EDT)

Balder it is. ../Doug H 20:17, 14 July 2019 (EDT)

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

Approved the unmerge and got it under the correct one as per your note (so it does not get lost or helpfully combined somewhere else) :) Annie 18:06, 24 July 2019 (EDT)

Fighting Men of Mars

Replaced cover of this with full wraparound version scanned from my own copy --Mavmaramis 12:06, 7 September 2019 (EDT)

OK ../Doug H 11:10, 8 September 2019 (EDT)

Night of Madness

I approved the addition of the LCCN here together with the notes and the new cover but LOC's description is "384 p. ; 22 cm." and it does not list the pb ISBN so it seems to be only for the hc. Can you check again your LCCN? Annie 19:59, 8 September 2019 (EDT)

I did get it right. Says right on the copyright page "Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 00-031681". ../Doug H 20:08, 8 September 2019 (EDT)
Sounds like Tor just reprinted that part of the copyright page from the hc. You may want to add a note to that effect ("LCCN from the copyright page" or something to that effect. Or pull it from the field and add it as a template ({{LCCN|number}}) with a note that it is printed but belongs to the hc (I prefer to do the latter). Isn't American book publishing fun? :) Annie 20:17, 8 September 2019 (EDT)
Better? Although the flaw in the logic is that the following line is the ISBN for the pocketbook. ../Doug H 23:06, 8 September 2019 (EDT)
Approved. Not sure I understand what you mean about the ISBN? If you click on the LCCN link on the left, it goes to this (search by ISBN) and fails to find a record.
Ah, you mean the copyright page copy. That is why I said "that part of the copyright page". :) They swapped the ISBN, left other pieces in place. Either way works I guess and if you had said you really want it there, it is your book. Anyone following the link can read the description. Oh well - secondary sources - what can you do. Annie 23:14, 8 September 2019 (EDT)

Segrelles and ERB

Hi, could you please check Zeuschner's ERB bibliography? I really doubt the current cover art credit of Out of Time's Abyss to Vicente Segrelles. In my opinion the art is obviously the work of JAD (José Antonio Domingo). On the other hand, the cover art of The Land That Time Forgot should be credited to Segrelles, according to erbzine.com. Thanks! Horzel 05:01, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

Checked and Z. has "269. Out of Time's Abyss (New York: Ace Books, Inc., 1979)" "The next Ace paperback printing of the concluding installment has a cover illustration by Segrelles. Stock No. 64485, price $1.95, 139 numbered pages.". However, an earlier entry has "267. The Land That Time Forgot (New York: Ace Books, Inc, January 1979)" "The next Ace paperback edition of the first installment of the story has new cover art by Segrelles. Stock No. 47025, price $1.95. 153 numbered pages." The only other artists mentioned for Ace were Krekel and Frazetta and a movie-poster. I'd say you've ammunition for a change. There are three publications with that cover image to change and I'd request you when adding your source that you retain the reference to Zeuschner but state it is wrong. ../Doug H 08:25, 11 September 2019 (EDT)

A new 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

So... a new edition just came out: this one. No idea what translation it is so I will leave it in your hands - I know you are still sorting these. Annie 00:29, 24 September 2019 (EDT)

Hardly a new edition, just another reprint of an undisclosed translation. They've printed (under another imprint) some of the same titles that are not limited to 100, so may be able to find a copy and assume the same translation. However they do have both "Journey to the Center of the Earth" and "A Journey to the Center of the Earth" so some care will be needed. Who knows, maybe I could ask them. ../Doug H 10:52, 24 September 2019 (EDT)
Well, I did not say a new translation. I just added it after Fixer found it and decided to let you deal with it. Make sure it is not a DB problem in with this "A" on just one from the same publisher :) Annie 11:34, 24 September 2019 (EDT)
Given the number of translations for this title, they may well have copied two different translations. And who knows what the title page actually says until we can view copies. Lots of notes coming up. ../Doug H 12:36, 24 September 2019 (EDT)

Pal Szintei Merse

Hi, in your verified copy of Around the World in Eighty Days & Five Weeks in a Balloon you credit the cover art to Pal Szintei Merse. Is that a typo -either by you or by the publisher- for Pal Szinyei Merse?--Dirk P Broer 22:33, 3 October 2019 (EDT)

Per the publisher on the back cover. "Cover Design by Robert Mathias, Publishing Workshop", "Cover Illustration, a detail from Hot Air Balloon by Pal Szintei Merse (1845-1920) Magyar Nemzeti Galeria, Budapest, Courtesy of Bridgeman Art Library, London". ../Doug H 23:26, 3 October 2019 (EDT)
So it is definitely the same person, just wrongly attributed, name-wise. Ill make it a variant -the art is a variant of the one we have for Pal Szinyei Merse too.--Dirk P Broer 05:47, 6 October 2019 (EDT)
Thanks. ../Doug H 13:44, 6 October 2019 (EDT)

Link looks good

Please proceed :) Annie 22:29, 4 October 2019 (EDT)

Just realized that the anchor labels not only substitute underscore for spaces, but something else for accented characters and punctuation. Trying to find documentation on what they are. Either that or copy/paste all the labels to a new column in the spreadsheet. ../Doug H 22:37, 4 October 2019 (EDT)
Ah, yes... not spaces and weird characters allowed in address spaces. Have fun. Just wanted to let you know it looks ok and I did read the message you typed :) Annie 22:53, 4 October 2019 (EDT)
Cut and paste it is (only took two tries). Stay tuned for more. ../Doug H 23:07, 4 October 2019 (EDT)
That last one worked. Annie 23:15, 4 October 2019 (EDT)
Spreadsheet updated, but bedtime for Bonzo, too late to start something monotonous and repetitive. ../Doug H 23:25, 4 October 2019 (EDT)

Editing post creation

Don't forget that if you edit post creation, you need to change both the title record AND the pub record (and a cover one if one is there). I fixed this one. If there is only one publication, you can change them all from the EditPub :) Annie 23:24, 21 October 2019 (EDT)

Tunnel vision. Line 129 of 650 in the spreadsheet. And that's just fixing titles. Can't wait for the publication cleanup. I'll be pinging you then about a few Slavic titles. ../Doug H 23:26, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
No worries - I just like getting things to line up :) Any time for the Slavic titles. I can also deal with Hungarian somewhat if need be (just FYI). :) Annie 23:28, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
What I have are photos of several pages of each book, too many/big for email. I have DropBox, would that be a reasonable place for you to view them when the time comes? ../Doug H 09:49, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
Yes. Either post the location here or mail it to me once they are there. Annie 09:53, 22 October 2019 (EDT)

New cache of books I see

) Got tired from Verne? Annie 19:59, 10 November 2019 (EST)
Naw, just picked up a bunch of interesting books at my charity gig and wanted them off my desk. I figure less than a week of Verne title clean-up and I can get at my verifiable publications. ../Doug H 20:02, 10 November 2019 (EST)
You guys aren't off the hook for dealing with me and Jules for a while yet. ../Doug H 20:03, 10 November 2019 (EST)
I know. I just saw you doing more than 3 non-Verne submissions in a row and decided to stop by and show that someone does pay attention to changes in pattern. :) Annie 20:05, 10 November 2019 (EST)
Just submitted my last Title update to bring things into alignment. Now I need to re-align myself to the publications. ../Doug H 23:23, 10 November 2019 (EST)
And all approved. :) And I loved the last message. :) Annie 23:38, 10 November 2019 (EST)

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (the last submission)

Oops. I misread my screen - did not see the whole thing is an omnibus. In this case this would have been enough - you can change it from PubEdit and from editTitle and as you needed the note, it was the better choice. My bad - I did it after that. Apologies. Annie 18:48, 15 November 2019 (EST)

Slavic Verne

Before I go and do the rest of them, can you look at this one (just found it in OCLC as well) and see if you need anything else and/or if you would like me to do something differently. This is the first one from the dropbox folder. And let me know if you want me to also add other editions (no text but for most I have translators so we can match some) - just this one has quite a lot and some of them have even more and I would not mind adding them slowly. :) Annie 23:30, 17 November 2019 (EST)

PS: And for some the first page is there. So definitely can find you a few more translations after we are done with the library copies :) Annie 23:34, 17 November 2019 (EST)
Wonderful job on this. My immediate goal is simply to enter the one's I can verify to give a solid base. Next would be to clean up the rest of what's there, going to verifiers where possible. If I survive, going after other copies may be another project to take on, although Russian would be a long way down the list. So all I'm asking is the dozen or so on Dropbox. But I will put fantlab on my to do list. ../Doug H 08:22, 18 November 2019 (EST)
OK then. I will work on the rest and if I get bored, I will add some more international ones. FantLab are kinda like us but in Russian so they often have information for other languages. And so does Worldcat - and once I get enough data, I can actually parse actual pages from other languages to complete. So... we will see. Annie 16:42, 18 November 2019 (EST)
If you're ever stuck in Winnipeg, I should take you down to the library. But after the floodway, our real claim to fame. I wonder what other treasures are buried in university and public libraries local to our active editors? ../Doug H 08:28, 18 November 2019 (EST)
I know that my local one does not have much - but the valley has a few more systems and a few universities so who knows. I had been using ILL to get some books in so I can verify so... it works out :) Annie 16:42, 18 November 2019 (EST)

The Art of Keith Parkinson

Hi, I've changed the date of the interior art p80 The Hand of Chaos to it's original publication date (this pub 1994-00-00) - your transient PV here. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 22:50, 22 November 2019 (EST)

Thanks. ../Doug H 10:02, 23 November 2019 (EST)

The Kip Brothers

A new translation: here. I added the first sentence so all is good but I do not think you had reached that one in the standartizing of the notes so just heads up for the addition. If the other one had the link for the wiki, I would have copied it over :) Annie 16:57, 24 November 2019 (EST)

The wiki links in the notes is my standard for titles with no translation or translator. The wiki has been updated. Thanks for the heads-up. ../Doug H 10:25, 26 November 2019 (EST)

Contents of omnibus

When swapping variants inside of an omnibus, use "Remove titles" and then "Import" or the pulled out novels have weird names and takes a bit to straighten out. Remove/import or Remove/Edit if there is noting to import is much cleaner. :) Annie 23:01, 26 November 2019 (EST)

So two separate steps, but can they be submitted concurrently? ../Doug H 23:14, 26 November 2019 (EST)
Yep. And if you are swapping more than one work, you can submit the remove/import for all of them in 1 single request per type of request. Or separately. All of them can go concurrently. Annie 23:19, 26 November 2019 (EST)

A Romanian translator identified

Here - see the moderator note at the bottom for the source. Annie 00:06, 1 December 2019 (EST)

Wiki page now updated. Thanks. ../Doug H 10:45, 1 December 2019 (EST)

All those date changes

If there are that many, a viable option may be to Remove all titles from one of the copies (or all but one), then redate, then reimport them - takes less time than all individual dates changes :) Annie 13:15, 5 December 2019 (EST)

Not sure I follow - remove the Contents from one of the publications, re-date the publication? and re-import Contents? How would that change the title date? ../Doug H 13:21, 5 December 2019 (EST)
Sorry, let me try that again. If you have publications A and B, you remove them from A which leaves them only in B. Then you re-date the title in B with editPub (because you can as they are only in one publication). Once approved, you re-import into A (now the dates are the correct ones). :) Annie 13:28, 5 December 2019 (EST)
Got it. Different mind-set. I was just working through a Frazetta title with six or seven publications and it wouldn't work there. ../Doug H 13:31, 5 December 2019 (EST)
But this way puts my edit count up. ../Doug H 13:34, 5 December 2019 (EST)
No, it is not for everywhere. I was approving all your edits on the Rodney Matthews artbook and it would have been perfect for that.
Well, you do not need to - I am just mentioning that it exists :) Annie 13:42, 5 December 2019 (EST)
And you're using a different "time" measure than we non-moderators use. Your method introduces two 'gaps' where I get a chance to forget what I was doing. ../Doug H 15:29, 5 December 2019 (EST)
You can always catch a friendly moderator who can approve ASAP... :) As I said, it was just a method I found useful so I wanted to share. Plus... we can still make a moderator out of you one day :) Annie 15:50, 5 December 2019 (EST)

Allan Quatermain [with The Two Captains]

Hi, You verified this Cornell Series omnibus (or is it anthology?) P695783.

The presence of the novel and both having been previously published alone lead me to omnibus.

Its translation of "The Two Captains" may be that of the 2001 Project Gutenberg Ebook #2827, e.g. compare the climax, “Whoever will deny in any wise that the quarrel between Sir Heimbert of Waldhausen and Don Fadrique Mendez is honorably and gloriously settled must settle the matter at the peril of his life with the Duke of Alba; ..." (penultimate paragraph).

Based on the third-last paragraph, it is the same translation as the ebook. ../Doug H 19:46, 6 December 2019 (EST)

From your notes I guess that author de La Motte Fouqué is not identified in the book, and you have used the ISFDB canonical name for convenience. Is that right? If so, we have no genuine publications with known credit by our canonical name; all remaining "Baron FdLMF" publications are for convenience.

There was no credit for author. ../Doug H 19:46, 6 December 2019 (EST)

Part of our note on parent SHORTFICTION "The Two Captains" T1965349 is mine. [1] Genre unknown (do you know?) and [2] the estimated word count for an edition not in the database. [3] I don't know how to count or estimate Project Gutenberg words (do you?). [4] Is the last note item yours? If so, did you compare the text with that in 1843 collection The Four Seasons? --Pwendt|talk 12:28, 6 December 2019 (EST)

I don't know genre. The project Gutenberg is 16,000 words (give or take). I cut and paste the text into MS Word and looked at the properties. With all but the first chapter title, the count was 15,975. The notes in the publication are mine including the one about the headers. Which is badly worded - my intent was to give short name used for the main title. The page headers in the second story read "The Two Captains". I'm assuming that's the note you meant. ../Doug H 19:46, 6 December 2019 (EST)
Hi Doug. Thanks. No, I meant the SHORTFICTION title Notes T1965349, and above I have inserted [1] to [4] distinguishing four component notes. Evidently [3] the count 19000 is not yours, unless it's a typo. The so-called last note item is [4] "Date of 1843 from the earliest publication available at the internet archive. Book title was Four Seasons and is an English translation of four works by Fouqué."
I didn't find the reported 1843 publication catalogued as (The) Four Seasons. I guess note item [4] is erroneous or the publication/book is also known as something like Collected Works, Volume #. If the Date of 1843 is yours, do you recall or re-discover that? --Pwendt|talk 21:10, 7 December 2019 (EST)

Round the World in Eighty Days

I guess the format of Your PV pub here is tp (at least 7.25" or 19 cm tall). Do You agree? --Zapp 09:20, 8 December 2019 (EST)

Submitted updated to show pb. ../Doug H 09:48, 8 December 2019 (EST)

Foundation and Earth

Hello Doug,

Can you check the essay here? We seem to have two separate essays with that title - one from 1982 and one from 1986. Is there a date somewhere on it? We have the 1986 one here as well if we need to go down to comparing the text. Thanks! Annie 11:46, 10 December 2019 (EST)

Transient from 2017. Sorry, no can do. ../Doug H 12:19, 10 December 2019 (EST)
oops. Missed the transient. Thanks and sorry for bugging you. Look Inside helped here - so they are getting moved. Annie 12:34, 10 December 2019 (EST)

Ringworld

Hello,

Would you mind if I move your transient verified to the proper form of the publisher for 1992? Del Rey did not split on its own until 2013. Thanks! Annie 12:03, 12 December 2019 (EST)

No problem. ../Doug H 12:53, 12 December 2019 (EST)
Thanks! On a separate topic - I had not forgotten about the archive of Vernes - I will try to get to them this weekend but may need to be next one. Is that too late? Sorry about the delay Annie 13:00, 12 December 2019 (EST)
After a month, I'm about a third of the way through my pile. And it's most of what I'm doing on this site. And you think I'm concerned about how long it will take you to do the hardest dozen along with god knows how may other projects? I thank you for whatever I can get, whenever I can get it. (By the way, if god knows and you know then I'm still thinking that's only one - the other is a variant. The real question is which is which). ../Doug H 14:00, 12 December 2019 (EST)

Around the World in Eighty Days

this title pops up on a cleanup report, thought you could know more about it. The title is dated 1872, even before the first French publication, while the first publication under this title record is dated 1929. Can you think of any reason not to change the date to 1929? Thanks, --Willem 15:58, 28 December 2019 (EST)

It's the 'leftover' title record, and probably has the date of the first publication - in a magazine serial format. Theoretically, there should be no publications under this title - if we knew the translation, each would be under a different title record. If we could get our hands on the 1929 publication and place it where it belongs we could move the date up to 1963, the next in line. But if someone enters an earlier publication without knowing the translation, we'd end up having to put it back. So 1929 is accurate now and reasonable. I'd be just as happy to see 0000-00-00 and a note to indicate why. ../Doug H 00:16, 29 December 2019 (EST)
Thanks & corrected. The date can always be changed again if a publication is added or removed. --Willem 15:57, 30 December 2019 (EST)

Verne poetry

I suggest bringing it up on the ISFDB:Community portal. That way, several people can express their thoughts on including the poems individually. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:30, 1 January 2020 (EST)

I have opted to put the contents into the publication note. It was a slow New Year's Eve. ../Doug H 11:28, 1 January 2020 (EST)

Jules Verne translations

Hi Doug. A cursory look at the scans you gave me access to made me realize these are Yiddish translations ! I had first tried to make sense of some titles in Hebrew and got nowhere, until it clicked, and recognized most of them… Shouldn't be too difficult. Do you want me to enter them in the db, or just transcribe / translate them for you to do it yourself ? Linguist 11:02, 2 January 2020 (EST).

I suspect that letting you enter them (and self modify) makes more sense than me cutting and pasting and making mistakes. However, I have three concerns.
1) How to treat a 12 volume set. I believe each volume should be separate entry, unlike Works of Jules Verne (which I hope to expand, as I did run across a copy). If you disagree, maybe we should discuss first.
The general title of the set is "Gevehlte verk", i.e. "selected works". I think that could easily be made into a pub series (something like "Zhul Vern — Gevehlte verk", as appears on the spine). Linguist 11:46, 2 January 2020 (EST).
2) I have been trying to use a standard form for Jules Verne translations, which includes a sample of translated text in the TITLE record. E.g. Adventures in the Land of the Behemoth. I'd be happy to add this after, but may need a good proof-reader for my transcription.
OK with me ! Linguist 11:46, 2 January 2020 (EST).
3) I have also developed a wiki page for translations. I don't expect to have any problem copying the relevant values to the page. Would I be correct then in guessing that the language would be YIDDISH, rather than HEBREW? And should Yiddish be added to the list of language on the help page?
Yes to both ! I'll add Yiddish to the list, and mention my deep knowledge of Yiddish smatterings :o). Linguist 11:46, 2 January 2020 (EST).
../Doug H 11:30, 2 January 2020 (EST)
You'll have to let me know if they look like abridgements or not. At least more so than most of the English ones. ../Doug H 15:13, 2 January 2020 (EST)
For the moment, I am puzzled by the first volume, which I can enter as is, but I'm not sure what some contents refer to :
1. — אָנקעל בענעדיקט = onkel benedikt / Uncle Benedict. — Could that be l'Oncle Robinson ???
2. — די שקלאַפען הענדלער אין אַפריקאַ = di shklafen hendler in afrika / The slave-merchants in Africa. — An excerpt from Un capitaine de quinze ans ???
3. — אַ רייזע אין אַ לופט-שיפ = a reyze in a luft-shif / A journey in an air-ship. — Un drame dans les airs, I suppose.
4. — אונבעקאַנטע געגענען = unbekante gegenen / Unknown approach. — ???
5. — אַ רייזע איבער קאָםעטען = a reyze iber kometen / A journey on comets. — Must be an excerpt or a condensed version of Hector Servadac (as the book is only 99 pages long, as far as I can see; but it looks thicker on the photo…).
Shall I enter it like that, and let you do the necessary fiddling with it ? Or have you got other ideas about the situation ? Linguist 06:44, 3 January 2020 (EST).
Your guesses would be better than mine, as I've not actually read all of these books. If you enter whatever you have, along with observations, it's a lot more than I could manage and for which I am grateful. I'll set up variants/link and where there are any gaps, I can try to pursue them locally with the book in hand. There may be someone at the University Library that can help. ../Doug H 09:13, 3 January 2020 (EST)

[unindent]

I have entered the first volume, the result is here. I managed to identify each part (I think), as appears in the notes. I have used the general title of the set, "Selected Works", as no other appears on or in the book. Furthermore, I hesitated between COLLECTION and OMNIBUS, as there are indeed five distinct SHORTFICTION-size pieces, but corresponding to two novels and a novella (or possibly novelette). I chose the former, but this can of course be discussed.
Two more points :

  1. The WorldCat records are here, but the first one refuses to open with me, and the second one is too vague to be used.
  2. I'll go through the rest little by little, as it is rather time-consuming ! Not that I mind, but I also have a few other things of my own to do… I'll get there eventually ! Linguist 06:33, 4 January 2020 (EST).
The problem of that OCLC link is that there are no Latin characters in the name and Worldcat cannot build its title based link while this is what they coded it like. So you grab the ID and do a search for it which finds it in a bit different format here which is as vague as the other one. That one has a few more connected ones though - maybe something in one of them will help. Annie 06:46, 4 January 2020 (EST)
Thanks a lot ! I'll see what I can find ! Linguist 07:52, 4 January 2020 (EST).

[unindent]

Current state of things. Linguist 06:17, 6 January 2020 (EST).

Just a note to say I am under the impression that all the texts have been more or less messed around with, to different extents (from "translated and adapted" to "shortened". To take but one example : there is no doubt at all that דער בּלינדער פּאססאזשׁיר (der blinder passazhir = The blind passenger), second title of volume 5, is the translation of Claudius Bombarnac, but the translation is not literal at all. The text has been re-organized, as far as I could judge : chapter title added, May 13th date suppressed, and what's more, the name of the narrator, which appears twice in the first lines of the original, has disappeared (ditto for the last lines of the book). Ah well… Linguist 06:17, 6 January 2020 (EST).
Can't say all the English translations were exemplary. ../Doug H 08:38, 6 January 2020 (EST)
Volumes 7 and 8-9 ("The Reputed Indian Peoples" and "The Gold-Seekers in America" don't seem to correspond to anything I know. They seem to follow each other, and feel more like essays or travel narratives (but I must have a closer look at volume 9, which I haven't entered yet). They both mention Texas on the first page, and are both introduced by a foreword with the same title ("In Lieu of a Foreword"). Linguist 06:18, 7 January 2020 (EST).
OK, I've been through the lot. You can have fun varianting and tying up loose ends… :o) (I think Dirk P Broer had a go at a few in the meantime) Linguist 06:40, 8 January 2020 (EST).
Note there was no title page for volume 12. I had to use the page running head of the last page, which is a bit different from the title indicated in the ToC in the first volume. Moreover, the photo is slightly blurry, so that I am not sure the letter after pasha in דעם פּאשא’ס ירושה = dem pasha’s irushh is an s or a final m. Linguist 04:27, 9 January 2020 (EST).
The entries are updated. I'm holding off on updating the wiki page and linking the titles until I get a local opinion, Seems there's a Yiddish scholar at the university. ../Doug H 16:09, 15 January 2020 (EST)

Jules Verne Translation - Wiki question

(oops, sorry about reuse of this space but deadline strikes)

Happy New Year. I visited your creation, Jules Verne Translations; read the and slightly explored the first screens below. Comments postponed.

Did I write the following, and then correct its crucial link incorrectly? Try again (below horizontal line). --Pwendt 2012-01-30

One question: Is there (now or planned) a 1-to-1 correspondence between this novel title note (viewed 3 times for contents of 5-novel omnibus Jules Verne Collected Novels (Castle Books, 2012) "data from Amazon" P1396376). [link corrected]

Translated by an unknown hand.
This title contains publications where the translation (as well as the translator) is unknown. Please see this wiki page for more information on known translations.

and this note in the ISFDB wiki table, column "Translation text (from opening paragraph)"?

Publication text unknown

P.S. Presumably the example publication contains text identical to a 5-novel 1984 omnibus that you have verified and completely annotated P715655. [link added] --Pwendt|talk 16:50, 5 January 2020 (EST)

I'm not quite following the question. Your link is to the publication of an omnibus I verified. Each title in the contents of the omnibus has a note regarding it's translation. As far as I know, the information in the publication note and the corresponding title notes match. I believe that each of these five title records are presented in the wiki page, under the corresponding original title, translation and translated title. There are some publications which have not identified their translation which have been identified in the wiki as "Publication text unknown". I will be trying to track these down and determine the actual text, once I have verified all of the publications I have access to. The sample publication you linked to does not have this problem (although it may have prior to my verification). So I am unclear as to what "correspondence" you refer to. ../Doug H 23:20, 5 January 2020 (EST)
Sorry, I confused myself concerning the multiple OMNIBUS titles in multiple screen windows, and I ran out of time to proofread as my deadline struck. You must have wondered what I meant about the example 2012 publication.
"Correspondence": I suppose that every Jules Verne ISFDB novel title record is represented in your wiki tables, or that is the plan to be completed. So I should be able to find this one T1755194, when you get there if not yet. (I do find that one, second from bottom in the Journey table.)
And perhaps the table notation "Publication text unknown" corresponds to the NOVEL title note quoted above (green). --Pwendt|talk 15:00, 11 January 2020 (EST)
The wiki page should have all of the titles. The one you mention above is on the list - last of the English translations. Where it may get out of synch fairly easily is when a publication gets added or removed from a title. The wiki lists the date/publisher for the earliest publication under the title. And the grab-bags will be most susceptible to that. ../Doug H 18:23, 11 January 2020 (EST)

Four weeks later 2020-01-30, rewriting myself from above (strikeout):
One question: Is there (now or planned) a 1-to-1 correspondence between this note in the ISFDB wiki table, column heading "Translation text (from opening paragraph)"?

Publication text unknown

and the below (green) NOVEL title note that I see for 3 of the 5 novels in omnibus Jules Verne Collected Novels (now in the database as unique publication (Castle Books, 2012) "data from Amazon" P379216)

Translated by an unknown hand.
This title contains publications where the translation (as well as the translator) is unknown. Please see this wiki page for more information on known translations.
[That is: see ISFDB wiki page Jules Verne Translations for instruction. --Continuing myself 2020-01-30]

If I understand correctly, the primary objective here is to improve ISFDB coverage of Jules Verne novels in translation --crucially, in its attention to multiple translations into the same language, eg English-- in a way that perpetuates without your own continual monitoring. A NOVEL title such as T1755194 is intermediate, I suppose, for it does not yet contain any ISFDB wiki link for instruction, such as above (green). Crucial to success is design such that as many as possible contributors, from Ahasuerus and "Fixer" to moderators to beginning editors, will view such NOVEL title notes in the natural course of adding Jules Verne publications, and will find it easy enough to "get on board" or "get with the program" or your favorite idiom. --Pwendt|talk 17:54, 30 January 2020 (EST)

Basically, yes. More specifically, "Translated by an unknown hand" would be used when the translation text is not known, and "Translated by an anonymous hand" would be for unknown translators of known text. "Publication text unknown" would be used for the first case and "Translation text unknown" in the second. As regards "the primary objective", it was actually a bit weaker - I wanted to clean it up enough that I could enter any Jules Verne translation correctly. To make it more self-moderating, I'd have to make the wiki source a lot easier to edit. Among other things. ../Doug H 21:37, 30 January 2020 (EST)

2a. For the 2012 omnibus P379216, the objective is easy to reach because you have completed and verified a record of the same omnibus in earlier publication (1984). Although not yet recognized here as the same omnibus, we may infer that confidently from the matching publisher and ISBN, not to mention we have reported editions of the same 5 Verne stories (French-language parent titles) in the same sequence.

Without getting into steps, yes the two omnibus title should be merged. It is a way down on my to do list. Have you seen my home page? I'm still entering verified publications. ../Doug H 21:37, 30 January 2020 (EST)
Thanks for reply #1 above.
No, I have seen only your talk page, Jules Verne Translations and by accident some contributions other User talk pages. I never think to look at top pages, perhaps by I have nothing useful to others on my own top page. --Pwendt 2020-01-31

2b. You should leave that publication to me, for getting back to work here tomorrow. (I just completed grading a 4-week January course, retired again.) Steps [i] delete novel contents of the 2012 publication; [ii] merge the 1984 and 2012 OMNIBUS titles; [iii] export novel contents from the 1984 to the 2012.

I see no reason to leave it to you, on the one hand. But I see no reason you can't do any cleaning up you care to on the other hand. I think I'd have imported first to ensure there isn't an empty omnibus and then deleted the incorrect ones. Once they were the same, merging the omnibuses might be easier. ../Doug H 21:37, 30 January 2020 (EST)
Leave it to me so that I can get back on track here with something easy, work out the rust, get back on track, ... because I have lost skills, not to mention entirely losing my place, in three weeks immersed elsewhere!
I did submit [i] and [ii] several hours ago, as well as a refinement of the 1978 omnibus title note drafted below, and a couple of related updates.
I don't know in what respects you know everything about Jules Verne. Perhaps this will interest you, from the 1978 omnibus ("Jules Verne at Home (1895) --oops, the linked page is off-by-one). --Pwendt|talk 18:41, 31 January 2020 (EST)

2c. Looking ahead I see that one catch-all novel, The Clipper of the Clouds (1978) T21875, will be reduced from three to two publications. Before the evidence disappears, note that two of three are from Castle Books. It seems to me that a title/publication note for the 3-novel 1978 omnibus should be something like this:

The Jules Verne texts (3) may match those in the 5-novel 1984 Castle Books omnibus Jules Verne Collected Novels T2556771. The 1984 translation texts are [known and verified and reported in this database or reported at ISFDB --what do you think is best?]. One of the novel titles is verified as "A Journey to the Centre of the Earth", which differs from this unverified report.

What do you think? --Pwendt|talk 17:54, 30 January 2020 (EST)

I'm not too worried about the text in the 3-title omnibus. As long as the individual content titles in the publication aren't changed without sufficient notes to explain that the reason for the selection of a specific translation over a general one for the unverified publication are given. ../Doug H 21:37, 30 January 2020 (EST)
2012 reprint P379216 of your 1984 omnibus: Completed today by submission of PubUpdate and Import/Export. While not so uniform as a template would enforce, my crucial publication note may fairly be called the Pwendt "boilerplate" for its substance (quote):
Contents and page-count are from the verified ISFDB report of the 1984 first printing with radically different jacket illustration and design (see). See that record for more information about the translations and illustrations.
--Pwendt|talk 14:27, 1 February 2020 (EST)
I doubt the submission is complete, I don't see this in the contents or the notes. And by the way, the title note addresses the contents and translations. I repeated it in the pub as a reminder that I'd already verified them. ../Doug H 14:34, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Evidently you were too early, submission approved 14:59.
The OMNIBUS title note covers the translations, not the illustrations. Do you plan eventually to move all such notes out of publication records --in this case, including move to the 7 INTERIORART title records? --Pwendt|talk 18:51, 1 February 2020 (EST)
As I understand OMNIBUS, it refers to the text in the same way a NOVEL refers to the novel and the presence or absence or difference of illustrations between publications does not impact the TITLE referred to by the NOVEL. So the notes on interior art will not be moving to the OMNIBUS title. I don't know what information I would move from the publication to the INTERIORART title as you suggest. I have not detailed which, if not all, of the illustrations have been included in the novels and don't want to go there. As for the notes about the translation in the publications - I plan to leave them there. They confirm the translation of the publication which allows anyone to be sure it is placed under the correct title. ../Doug H 00:16, 2 February 2020 (EST)

Can you please start new questions under a different title thread rather than bringing them up under this monstrosity. ../Doug H 00:16, 2 February 2020 (EST)

Deus Irae

User Horzel found the cover artist for this pub. I added the credit and adapted the notes. Thanks, --Willem 15:15, 7 January 2020 (EST)

One down, n to go. ../Doug H 21:19, 7 January 2020 (EST)

Song of the Slayer

If that indication that this pub was printed in Lexington, KY is on a back page, it probably means it was a print on demand publication. Bob 15:16, 11 January 2020 (EST)

Capitalization in French titles

Hello Doug. I have approved your submissions concerning Les Cinq cents millions de la Bégum: suivi de Les Révoltés de la "Bounty", but may I remind you that we follow a sui generis rule on this db, as far as French titles are concerned : the only words capitalized are the first one, and the proper names contained in the title (thus, Les cinq cents millions de la Bégum, etc.). This rule is a minor alternative to the more common French one, which is rather complex and more tricky to apply (as well as not always followed correctly by some publishers). It goes against my personal habits as well, but for the sake of coherence, it is best to try and conform with it, rather than have two conflicting title rules here. I'll update the affected titles accordingly. Thanks, Linguist 04:48, 17 January 2020 (EST).

I'd seen discussions on the capitalization for English and the arguments for different approaches for other languages but not what the French (or indeed other languages) decided. In this case it was a book I was entering was different than the canonical. For future reference, can you give me a link to where the French rules are documented? Thanks ../Doug H 08:15, 17 January 2020 (EST)
Unfortunately, I think this is one of those unwritten rules that have been applied "from time immemorial". The only documentation I can think of is this discussion (at the time when I was starting to learn the tricks of the trade), with the advice given by Hauck at the end of the exchange. I might indeed have to add something about French titles in a template soon ! Linguist 11:59, 17 January 2020 (EST).
We agreed on changing to "based on the language" in the help pages (thus leaving the "all but these words as English only rule" and we started working on some languages but... it kinda died down so now the rules is "Talk to a native person or a speaker of the language if you are not sure". If people would like to add their languages and rules for them, we can get that page built. Annie 12:05, 17 January 2020 (EST)
Ah ! Is that where that was ?! I had been looking for it, and couldn't find it… Right, I'll add some considerations on French titles ASAP (meaning to-morrow, probably). Thanks for the reminder — as usual… :o) ! Linguist 12:13, 17 January 2020 (EST).
I'll add some more languages over the weekend as well (mostly on the Slavic side). Although I wonder if we should not just add a generic: If it is not on the list and it is not English, follow sentence case (proper names and first words capitalized only). So far, the only languages we do not follow it for are German (all nouns capitalized) and English (the original rule); most of the other concerns are mostly around punctuation (that space before ! and so on in French...) and so on... But yeah - we should probably at least add the top 20 languages and all languages we actually do have speakers in :) Annie 12:23, 17 January 2020 (EST)
I have added a note on the talk page Annie indicated. Linguist 06:06, 18 January 2020 (EST).
This is good, but like you, I found it difficult to find the page. Could a link to it be put into the Help page(s) via the {{Template:PublicationFields:Title}} template where it says there are language specific rules? ../Doug H 10:57, 18 January 2020 (EST)
That was the plan (use that as a working page and either link it or use it to update the rules - but it Never got finished so never got connected. We probably should just link it indeed. :) Annie 11:26, 18 January 2020 (EST)

Round the World in Eighty Days

Cover artist Barry Blackman added to this verified pub. The ISBN-10 indicates publication before 2007 and there was a new edition in 2008. --Zapp 14:21, 20 January 2020 (EST)

Okay. ../Doug H 15:06, 20 January 2020 (EST)

Born to Exile

The initials RLC on this (at the bottom, mirror-reversed) are those of Richard Courtney, see for example Count Brass. Horzel 14:50, 31 January 2020 (EST)

argument accepted. ../Doug H 18:30, 31 January 2020 (EST)

Family Without a Name

Hi. Did you accidentally forget to PV this pub? - MagicUnk 12:15, 4 February 2020 (EST)

Yup. Done now. ../Doug H 16:28, 4 February 2020 (EST)
Thank you! MagicUnk 01:45, 5 February 2020 (EST)

French or Yiddish?

Hi. While accepting your make-variant submission, I noticed the language on this is French. Should it be Yiddish? --MartyD 10:00, 13 February 2020 (EST)

Jules Verne variant length mismatch

Hi again. I have four of your Yiddish-to-French variants for Jules Verne titles on hold because the Yiddish titles are SHORTFICTION but the proposed parents are NOVEL. Do you know if the Yiddish ones should rightfully be NOVEL? I can fix them, if so. --MartyD 10:10, 13 February 2020 (EST)

The entries were created by Linguist as I do not know Yiddish. I expect he set the length based on the page counts as I only gave him first and last pages. I do know that many English Jules Verne 'translations' involved a fair bit of editing and abridging so wouldn't be surprised to find they had crossed a threshhold from the original novel to what we call SHORTFICTION. Do you want me to do word counts on the four? ../Doug H 10:22, 13 February 2020 (EST)
Looking at which ones they are - they are part 1 and part 2 of two different novels (hence 4). Verne also broke these novels down into two parts in the original book publications and each part variants to the full novel TITLE. ../Doug H 10:27, 13 February 2020 (EST)
I think for handling these split publications, we keep the original (parent) length, without real regard for the technically correct length designation for the parts. I will double-check with the rest of the moderating crew. --MartyD 12:50, 13 February 2020 (EST)
Annie concurs, which is good enough for me. I will accept the submissions and change the variants from SHORTFICTION to NOVEL. --MartyD 07:45, 14 February 2020 (EST)

The Space Novels of Jules Verne

Doug, Yesterday I sent email notice of several matters including WorldCat report of the Dover edition of two Roth translations as Space Novels. I missed that in the database because its here --they are here-- as publication series The Space Novels of Jules Verne, thus not listed in the Verne summary bibliography.

Now I see further that we handle To the Sun?/Off on a Comet! as a new 1960 novel T863112, thus not in the publication list for either component free translation by Roth. Just now I submitted 1960 NOVEL Notes correction. I haven't read it or viewed a copy, but I understand from our other title notes that "Captain, ..." is the beginning of Part Two only, not the entire work. --Pwendt|talk 16:34, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Yet HathiTrust shows 1895(?) David McKay publication as To the Sun? where Chapter I begins "Captain, ..." McKay, page 13. You should look at all three NOVEL title records.
Continued now under a new heading, posted both here and for User:MLB, because it concerns the Sun/Comet Dover edition for which you are the two PVerifiers. --Pwendt|talk 17:57, 23 February 2020 (EST)
From what I can tell, the title record for the publication has parts 1 and 2 mixed up in the notes (I still have access to that part of my verified copy). As to this being a novel vs. omnibus, there's a discussion I've been sort-of following regarding novels republished in parts that I don't quite get. It might be worth offering this as an example for guidance. ../Doug H 18:05, 23 February 2020 (EST)
And from what you say, and my copy, the translations are incorrect on the singular titles. I suspect they were done incorrectly the first time and the mistake propagated. I'm willing to fix, but not while there's a flurry of notes, conversation and updates going about. ../Doug H 18:12, 23 February 2020 (EST)
A second cause of confusion is publication of part 2 as Off on a Comet! (Roth translation) and the entire novel as Off on a Comet (which is also the article title at EN.wikipedia). I will flurry today --without any attention at all the omnibus/multivolume discussion or our records of "To the Sun? / Off on a Comet!" --and try to remember to summarize or say that I am done for now, which must be before Thursday travel for the weekend. --Pwendt|talk 14:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)
I've submitted revisions to the title with incorrect translation notes. I'm also aksing Anniemod for an opinion on the NOVEL/OMNIBUS treatment of the Dover edition. ../Doug H 14:44, 24 February 2020 (EST)

To the Sun? / Off on a Comet!

Posted also at User talk:MLB#To the Sun? / Off on a Comet! --Pwendt

Hi. You are one verifier of this novel (or omnibus) in its 1960 Dover ed./printing P257555. (The slash in both titles was "spaced" last hour, probably by the moderator who approved my correction/extension of its Notes, User:Dirk P Broer.)

[1] Let me draw your attention to Amazon US/UK records of this edition with cover images and leave it to you two whether to replace the image that we now link.

Note: A shows both "$1.75" (as $) and "49 illustrations" on the front and "T634" is not legible but believable on the spine. B shows both "1.75" (no symbol) and same text on the front. US states "import" and UK does not. If the price is £1.75 that must be some time after the UK change to decimal, which the report of ISBN also suggests.

By the way another dealer provides a third cover illustration/design, "large clear type", with "£1.40" either printed or affixed to upper left:

The really lousy picture is an actual photo of the book I transiently verified. Using the Amazon version might look nicer, but is subject to their whims on what to show for the title. ../Doug H 14:53, 24 February 2020 (EST)

[2] From our publication record I infer that the Dover republication does not include preface(s) by translator Edward Roth.

Correct ../Doug H 14:53, 24 February 2020 (EST)

[3] You report two interior title pages that suggest subtitles "A Journey Through Planetary Space".
Evidently those pages display the full titles of the 1st eds. LC catalog records as 1878 imply that: [3], [4] (both created 2011 perhaps from secondary sources) and [5] (created 1901). Compare the one 19c title page that I find online (two copies): t.p. and t.p., where the latter image of LC copy is pencilled "1895".
--Pwendt|talk 18:24, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Now I see you are both Transient verifiers, which I missed yesterday. I will let this sit a few days, maybe a week as I travel soon. --Pwendt|talk 11:50, 24 February 2020 (EST)
I've lost my place chasing down links. One of these led me to an image of the Claxton edition of To the Sun?, which I've added to the publication. Your remarks suggest that the title for the Claxton edition(s) should be subtitled, as would be the Dover edition and the McKay editions. I'm good with that and will make the change once I figure out if the Dover edition stays a NOVEL or becomes an OMNIBUS. ../Doug H 15:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)
"On October 10, 1877, Edward Roth copyrighted To the Sun?, the first part of Hector Servadac, which he had translated. For November 24, Publishers 'Weekly carried an advertisement by Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger which announced Jules Verne's latest and most extraordinary story, with 36 full-page original illustrations, beautifully bound in cloth, gilt back and sides, priced at $2. The front cover is both elaborate and dramatic, showing embossed black and gilt images of the comet heading for the sun at center, surrounded by scenes from the story. The spine of volume one is uniform in design with volume two, showing gilt embossed figures in song at the bottom, and dancing at the top." ... "On May 1, 1878, Edward Roth copyrighted Off on a Comet!, and two copies of the book were deposited for copyright on May 17. This volume is the second part of Hector Servadac, as translated by Roth." ... "In 1885, T. W. Hartley of Philadelphia published Off On A Comet!, from the Roth translation, 472 pages." ... "By November 23, 1895, all of the Roth translations were reprinted by David McKay, bound in decorative gilt-stamped cloth, and illustrated as in the previous editions." ... "In 1960, Dover Publications began to first publish Space Novels by Jules Verne, which is an unabridged republication of the Roth translation of To the Sun? and Off on a Comet! bound in one illustrated volume." {what Brian Taves has to say in the Jules Verne Encyclopedia about the Roth translations of Hector Servadac}. ../Doug H 15:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Some images are available for the Claxton and McKay editions, but none for the Hartley or Dover editions. ../Doug H 15:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)

The Rest of the Robots - Asimov

Hi Doug, in this submission I have adjusted the printing here from 6th to 7th to accommodate the 1970 printing not listed on your copyright page. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev 06:05, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Thanks for coming back and cleaning up. ../Doug H 08:12, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Jules Verne (in error)

Hi, just to inform you of another two sterling examples.--Dirk P Broer 07:43, 27 February 2020 (EST)

I am aware of these items, the complete list is here. Which is why I'd like to get this cleared up properly. ../ Doug H 08:20, 27 February 2020 (EST)

ISFDB policy on publication records for works in translation

Excerpt from one of my 2020-03-05 replies to you amid User talk:Pwendt#Jules Verne Translations - wiki:

[me] ISFDB may be close to a consensus for that. I would support it, meaning that such statements will not be at the option of Primary Verifiers.
Where the translator is not credited, I would support that any statement such as this, which identifies the grounds, must be accepted. "This is the translation by Doe, credited in its 1874 first publication [link to {p|}], relying on comparison of the first two paragraphs."

Excerpt from your reply to that:

[you] Ideally, for any PUB record for a translation, it should identify the translator (either because it's stated or by some other means). The associated TITLE record should repeat the information, and explain how to tell in the absence of a direct statement. Editors may feel that putting the PUB under the correct TITLE is sufficient but it does not allow someone to determine if a PUB has been correctly or erroneously placed - which is where I/we find ourselves today.
[...] To whatever extent you're willing to help sort this out, I thank you.

For publications that contain one translation, or translations by one translator or co-translators, I think I agree wholly. [Not for publ's of complex anth/coll, eg T2628264.] Offhand I think we should be able to agree that some limited boilerplate is appropriate, in the publication Notes and Note to Moderator, so that PubUpdate are accepted without prior approval of primary verifiers. If/when you do propose somewhere at isfdb.org/wiki/ then you should notify me because I don't follow any of those pages closely. --Pwendt|talk 20:27, 5 March 2020 (EST)

An identification in the PUB records would always be welcome. In the example you provided, an acknowledgement of the translators at the TITLE level would suffice. It would probably suffice for any PUB (except those without a translator or translation text).
As for boilerplate, I've been using something along the line of "Translated by" or "The anonymous translation first published by". The trick is to identify how you know. I've not been quite so consistent there. I think I've used - "based on the text" when it's not identified in the publication, or citing a website with a link or a reference book (with a link to the ISFDB entry) - so far only the Jules Verne Encyclopedia.
I'm not sure I follow regarding the Note to Moderator. If I have the book, I'm primary and I update and notify. If I don't have the book, and someone else does, I'll ask them to check. There will probably be a hundred or more to check and a few people with many books, so I'm going to hold off asking and make a list and ask each person for a list of lookups, rather than a list of requests. Which is why I want the Wiki page to be as clean and complete as I can.
I don't think there's a reason to try to get standardization from a forum at this point. Once JV is cleaned up as best I can, I'll offer it as an example of my vision and hopefully start a discussion on whether the approach is applicable to translations in general. Don't forget, there are plans to incorporate translations into the software (and have been for years). This might just be enough to get enough discussion and consensus to move forward with that. ../Doug H 22:51, 5 March 2020 (EST)
And I'm on Central Time so can usually get the last word. ;-> ../Doug H 22:54, 5 March 2020 (EST)
Re the adequate "Note to Moderator": A few years ago after creation of publication field External IDs, which displays working links to records at LC, WorldCat, and elsewhere, such links were relocated from publication Notes to the new field without consultation of verifiers, not even Primary Permanent. Instead, by policy it was adequate simply to use Note to Moderator "lccn moved", for instance [6]. Most of "My Changed Primary Verifications", speaking for myself, report Changed Fields "External ID, Note" because a manual hyperlink in the Notes was disabled at the same time. --Pwendt|talk 12:48, 6 March 2020 (EST)
And when the note says so (and was from me - and any others I moderated), it means nothing else was changed in the note. Even a single comma. Any other change was either also reported in the note ("br cleaned", "To ->to" (for capitalization changes) and so on for example) or communicated. The only reason we had to do that with a submission was because there was no safe DB way to move these - if one was found, they would have been pulled that way. Those are housekeeping submissions. There is a difference between this type of updates and a wholesale update on the Notes field which changes content. :) Annie 13:22, 6 March 2020 (EST)

Link to Missing Publication

Please see this clean-up report. This listed works all appear to have been created by you. Those pubs' notes all have a link of http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?495888, but 495888 is a non-existent publication. Can you please update the notes to point to the correct publication? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:21, 8 March 2020 (EDT)

Two of them were right in the series. Not sure where the cut/paste error started. Fixes submitted. ../Doug H 18:06, 8 March 2020 (EDT)
Thanks! -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:27, 8 March 2020 (EDT)

Jules Verne: Four Novels

This may have dropped off your radar - it needs its variants done:) And as you PV'd a month ago, I thought I should ping you :) Annie 21:34, 11 March 2020 (EDT)

It was there somewhere, I've got so many bogies pinging on my radar, I wish some would drop off. I spend most of my time trying to remember what I was doing before and recreating trains of thought. I won't start anything unless I have at least an hour to gear up and find I'm spun out and confused after 15 minutes. Thanks for the reminder on this one, would have been months before I found it again. At least I embedded enough notes in this that it was easy to do. ../Doug H 22:10, 11 March 2020 (EDT)
I was adding some new(ish) editions (from good old Fixer) and matching the translations based on the texts and saw the orphans in my duplicates screen and figured I should ping you :) Annie 22:16, 11 March 2020 (EDT)

LCCN

this is the 4th printing. The LCCN is for the first printing (date and so on). Why would you add it as an external ID for an edition it does not belong to? Or is it for the 4th printing? Thanks! Annie 16:25, 13 April 2020 (EDT)

Because the LCCN is listed on the copyright page? ../Doug H 22:04, 13 April 2020 (EDT)
That’s when we template it (as it was) and add a note why it is there (if known) - LCCNs tend to be printed all over the place - it is common for a paperback to have the LCCn of the hardcover even when the LCC record is very clear on being for the hardcover only. Higher printings also get that - the date for them is wrong :) I approved it not to block your other changes but that lccn does not belong there as it does not belong to the book. :) Annie 22:18, 13 April 2020 (EDT)
I've restored the note, but would like to point out that a) I couldn't find anything out about this rule on ISFDB's help pages and b) I couldn't find out anything about different numbers for later printings at Library of Congress. I couldn't find this book (any printing) at the OCLC, but did find a later edition (new introduction, 2 page longer) from 2004. One small source of irritation over all my years here is the lack of distinction between what is in a publication and what has been added based on research, such as cover artists, printings, publication dates (this one is annoying - if the book in hand has no date, you have to look at all the other printings to find a match). Sigh. ../Doug H 09:22, 14 April 2020 (EDT)
There is no rule that says not to put random number either :) The idea of the fields is to have numbers that belong to the edition itself - and the templates were created for cases where the ID is associated but does not belong. For the lack of notes - yeah... people should add a note what comes from where (unless all comes from one place). And yes - multiple 0000-00-00 are annoying - I had been asking for printing rank as a field and added into the table view for awhile but it always goes into philosophical meanderings on what is a printing and dies there and I just gave up for awhile. Annie 12:09, 14 April 2020 (EDT)
I'd thought that the LCCN was not printing specific. If it isn't, there's a lot of stuff not on there. That's one of those things I can't find documented here or at LOC. And the 0000-00-00's aren't the worst - when someone researches a date and uses that and your book doesn't have it .... I've sometimes wished for a sort order by publisher. ../Doug H 19:23, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Verne translations

I've edited the 3 publications, adding a pub note about the Verne translation. Hope that's what you needed.Markwood 19:00, 18 April 2020 (EDT)

Dutch Verne translations / Wordsworth edition

I added the first lines to the wiki-page for the books on your list, plus two more. The Reader's Digest edition of 'Naar het middelpunt der aarde' is identical to the Elsevier edition, so I added a title note. The Wordsworth edition of 'From the Earth to the Moon' and 'Around the Moon' is identical to the T.H. Linklater translation. That probably means the other Wordsworth edition (August 2011) is also the same. Shall I move these to the right title records? --Willem 15:23, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

As a moderator, you can do it much faster than I can, so it would be appreciated. ../Doug H 15:32, 28 April 2020 (EDT)
Done. The titles are different from the 1877 edition, but I added a link in the notes. The new titles are From the Earth to the Moon and Around the Moon. --Willem 16:04, 28 April 2020 (EDT)

Works of Jules Verne 11

In Your pv pub above there is a title containing The Giant Raft: Eight Hundred Leagues on the Amazon. I don't believe that this translation (part 1) begins: ""P h y j s l y d d q f d z x g a s g z z q q e h x g k f n d r x u j u g i o c y t d x v k s b x h h u y p o h d v y r y m h u h p u y d k j o x p h e t o z s l e t n p m v f f o v p d p a j x h y y n o j y g g a y m e q y n f u q l n m v l y f g s u z m q i z t l b q g y u g s q e u b v n r c r e d g r u z b l r m x y u h q h p z d r r g c r o h e p q x u f i v v r p l p h o n t h v d d q f h q s n t z h h h n f e p m q k y u u e x k t o g z g k y u u m f v i j d q d p z j q s y k r p l x h x q r y m v k l o h h h o t o z v d k s p p s u v j h d." as shown. Please check it in Your copy. Thank You. The same is here. Maybe a joke? --Zapp 05:15, 1 May 2020 (EDT)

See Internet Archive for an image of a later edition that has not yet been entered on ISFDB. ../Doug H 09:23, 1 May 2020 (EDT)

Unmerging the earliest edition

Just a heads up (in case you had not figured that one yet) - when you pull out the earliest edition, the remaining original title will still carry its date. Pulling a later edition will leave both sides with correct date but we do not recalculate the date of the remaining piece after an unmerge. Annoying, I know :) Annie 17:13, 6 May 2020 (EDT)

About the weird name

"somehow collection title ended up as a content title" - When you use unmerge to remove a novel from an omnibus (because it is a different translation), you end up with a novel with the title of the ombibus. That is why Remove Title (to get the wrong one out) together with import or PubEdit (o get the new one in) should be used for these unless you are trying to unmerge the omnibus record itself :) Annie 03:13, 11 May 2020 (EDT)

After having done it (several times), I am aware. But I wasn't going to go into details with whomever I'd made the comment to. ../Doug H 08:55, 11 May 2020 (EDT)
It was a moderator note and sounded like you are not sure how. Was trying to be helpful here. Sorry Annie 11:27, 11 May 2020 (EDT)
Punch drunk. I've been spewing notes out to editors, moderators and myself trying to keep the Verne translations straight. We're all starting to blur together. I'd like to think I'm over the hump, but the distribution of work seems to have a mighty long tail. COVID-like. ../Doug H 13:05, 11 May 2020 (EDT)
No worries. As there is no way to leave a message when approving, I tend to post answers to comments on people's pages (usually with a link to the submission but I guess I was too tired last night) :) One thing I learned around here is that every time you think you are done, something new pops up... Annie 14:03, 11 May 2020 (EDT)

HTML and parameters

Yep, the border is why you get the yellow warning for this table - it is a known issue with the few tags that accept parameters(aka - too complicated to fix for the low number of tables we have so we just ignore it). Thanks for adding the note! Annie 17:35, 15 May 2020 (EDT)

A volta ao mundo em 80 dias

Hi, for what i can understand you need the first initial lines of the novel, is that right? if it is, here it goes: "Capitulo I - (first it has a brief introduction to he chapter) Em que Phileas Fogg e Passepatour mutualmente se aceitam, o primeiro na qualidade de amo, o segundo na de criado. - (Then the actual text begins) Em 1872, a casa número 7 de Saville-Row, Burlington Gardens - casa onde Seridan morreu em 1814 - era habitada por Phileas Fogg, esquire, membro dos mais singulares e digno de reparo do Reform-Club de Londres, apesar de sistematicamente, segundo parecia, evitar nos seus actos tudo o que pudesse de algum modo despertar a atenção dos seus compatriotas." This is the complete first paragraph. Is that enough? I also have other Jules Verne novels and texts that soon (I hope) will add here to the database, and in one of the books (a collection of essays and short stories) i probably will need your help to check the original titles. Write on my page if you need something else. regards--Wolland 10:54, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

It is just what I needed. I have added the text to both the wiki page and the title record. I'll be glad to help where I can. The Discussion tab on the Jules Verne Translation wiki page has some notes on what how it's organized, if you're interested. ../Doug H 12:43, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

Europeana and Jules Verne

Not sure if you are aware of this but they have full text of quite a lot of texts in a lot of languages (and some details and links for non-full text ones). Annie 19:17, 2 June 2020 (EDT)

I'll log it, but I don't think my next project will be tracking down all the translations of Jules Verne. I was gearing up for getting the full text of all the English ones (no accents). And cleaning up the existing entries - I've pinged Linguist for his opinion on publication series. Thanks for thinking of me. ../Doug H 19:44, 2 June 2020 (EDT)
I don' blame you - Verne can give you a headache even in only 2 languages. Annie 19:51, 2 June 2020 (EDT)

Peter Pan

Your verified publication Peter Pan has far too few pages (especially with all the artwork) to be the full novel. Like the other publication from the same series, it must be abridged. Please change the type to "CHAPBOOK", and note that the story is abridged. Bob 20:18, 17 June 2020 (EDT)

Unmerge submitted. Will change type and content once completed. ../Doug H 22:08, 17 June 2020 (EDT)
I give up. I unmerged the pub so I could modify the type and it won't let me save it as a CHAPBOOK and with content of SHORTFICTION, says something about the types having to match. How do I fix this? ../Doug H 14:04, 25 June 2020 (EDT)
You need to add a chapbook as a contents item. I did that here while changing the pub type and the title to a shortfiction. Basically if you just change the NOVEL to a story in the contents, you now do not have a container (Novel is both contents and container but short fiction needs a chapbook container (or collection, anthology and so on - but here it is a chapbook)). So the software does not allow you to save the book without a container. Hope this makes sense. Annie 15:54, 25 June 2020 (EDT)
So in addition to changing the NOVEL content to SHORTFICTION and the pub to a CHAPBOOK, I also needed to add a CHAPBOOK title to the content to mimic the creation of a CHAPBOOK, and the existing NOVEL title disappeared? ../Doug H 21:41, 25 June 2020 (EDT)
Yep. The existing novel did not disappear - you converted it into a short story. Unlike chapbooks, novels don’t have two separate title records inside of themselves - they have a single one that serves both as a container and as a contained item. While chapbooks need a container record (title of type chapbook) and a contents title (the story). So every time you convert a novel to a chapbook, you always need to add one more title record - for the chapbook itself - the old novel record becomes the story inside of it. Annie 22:10, 25 June 2020 (EDT)

Allan Quartermain

Would you mind double checking this pub and this one?

  • The typical spelling is Quatermain (though some editions did use the extra "r"). The cover image and the notes have the single "r" version so is the second "r" in the title a database error?
  • Both have "Being and Account" which I believe should be "Being an Account".

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:47, 28 July 2020 (EDT)

I agree with both recommended changes for both editions (although I can only confirm one now). I've submitted updates for the omnibus publication and title but wasn't sure how you wanted to go about changing the content or the novel, given the title record is shared and not updateable from the pub edit. ../Doug H 09:15, 29 July 2020 (EDT)
Thanks. I approved the edits. I unmerged them from the "wrong" title record and merged them with the "correct" one (2075413). I suspect that all the editions in the wrong one need to be fixed, but waiting on additional verifier input. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:29, 29 July 2020 (EDT)
Bueno. Muchas gracias. ../Doug H 11:06, 29 July 2020 (EDT)

A Memory of Light

Your pv pub has the publication date 2013-12-31 from Amazon. But OCLC has the first pub with this ISBN published in 2014. Isn't there a printing date in book? --Zapp 15:20, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

There is and an update has been submitted. I'm starting to wonder about you though. :) ../Doug H 17:58, 2 August 2020 (EDT)
What do You think is strange with me? --Zapp 04:00, 5 August 2020 (EDT)
There are hundreds of thousands of existing entries on the database, and probably more missing and you link a difference between an Amazon date and OCLC on a primary verified pub and chase me down. I am impressed by your dedication and meticulousness. I'm looking for translation variations in Jules Verne books and can hardly keep them straight. ../Doug H 08:53, 5 August 2020 (EDT)
The database claims to be as correct as possible, so I have fun to find out differences. I my case, I can use digitized data. Jules Verne is analog in most cases. --Zapp 09:18, 9 August 2020 (EDT)

4th printing Earthborn with original publication date

Was there a reason you retained the original publication date when verified [7], rather than marking 'unknown'? I have an edit on hold with this change, but MagicUnk prefers I run it by you first. --GlennMcG 15:17, 14 August 2020 (EDT)

Transient verification, three years ago so if there was a reason, it's long gone now. If you've a reason, go with it. ../Doug H 19:31, 14 August 2020 (EDT)

House of Chains with excerpt Midnight Tales

You PVed [8] which has excerpt 'Midnight Tales'. Seems likely it should be 'Midnight Tides', to match the whole book title. Should I change it? --GlennMcG 16:58, 13 September 2020 (EDT)

I've submitted an edit. Might as well at least make an effort at pulling my weight. Thanks for pointing it out. ../Doug H 08:13, 14 September 2020 (EDT)

Asimov's The Rest of the Robots

I've started a discussion on the Community Portal regarding some changes I'd like to make to the publications of Asimov's The Rest of the Robots. Since you verified a copy, please weigh in there and let me know your opinion on the proposed changes. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:27, 15 September 2020 (EDT)

Ken Kelly Collection 2

I've added more content so I can finish matching art to covers to Ken Kelly Collection 2. Also trying to add more to https://www.tcdb.com/Gallery.cfm/sid/79929/1994-FPG-Ken-Kelly-2 Susan O'Fearna 08:11, 27 September 2020 (EDT)

I've gotten rid of the cards, but still have full scans if you're interested in any of them. ../Doug H 10:54, 27 September 2020 (EDT)
That'd be super-cool. I have most of the fronts but not the backs and I only have one holo from each set (a friend is helping me to fill my chase sets), though I *do* have the binder for KKColl2 -- I started collecting the fantasy art trading cards in 1991 when Boris and Chris Achilleos (and Olivia) first released their first sets. my email is Susan (my first name) at OFearna (my last name) dot US Susan O'Fearna 12:32, 30 September 2020 (EDT)
A Dropbox invite is on it's way. ../Doug H 09:59, 1 October 2020 (EDT)

Verified Publishing Names project

I have added a late reply to User talk:Marc Kupper#Verified Publishing Names project. --Marc Kupper 16:01, 15 October 2020 (EDT)

Forest Mage cover

It looks like you PVed and added a cover image to [9]. On my copy the New York Times blurb and title are in orange, but it appears as if yours are pink. Do you think this is a scan artifact, or that there are actually two cover styles? --GlennMcG 19:26, 21 October 2020 (EDT)

Just checked to see if it was fading and the actual colour is orange - so probably a colour adjustment by the scanner to compensate for something. ../Doug H 22:59, 21 October 2020 (EDT)
Then I'll scan my cover and update the record. --GlennMcG 01:01, 22 October 2020 (EDT)
And my HP laserjet has the same problem. I had to take a picture with my phone to get it orange. --GlennMcG 01:26, 22 October 2020 (EDT)

Princeps' Fury / Butcher

I'm cloning [10] for a later printing, and noticed the format given doesn't match my copy. My copy of later printing, but same price, is a premium/tall rack format. --GlennMcG 21:18, 26 December 2020 (EST)

I need to put this (and several other books) into Transient. I recall that the books in the series did contain the premium/tall rack size, but couldn't swear to this particular one. Given it's my image and the proportions match, I'd say this one should change. It's been a long time since the earlier discussion in 2009 and I suspect many editors haven't been following the rules. ../Doug H 11:01, 27 December 2020 (EST)

Are you suggesting that I change it? --GlennMcG 14:40, 28 December 2020 (EST)

I no longer have it, so the other primary verifier now has the last word. My inclination is to change it. My inclination is also to resurrect the 2009 discussion in light of 10+ years of experience and mayhem. ../Doug H 09:14, 29 December 2020 (EST)

Tim Hildebrandt's Flights of Fantasy

I added a cover, some notes and the chase/promo cards to the set Flights of Fantasy Susan O'Fearna 16:41, 1 January 2021 (EST)

Good stuff. ../Doug H 09:49, 2 January 2021 (EST)

Submission 4909635

So busy checking titles I missed some author errors - Ann K Schwader (missing a period), Kevin L. O'Brien (missing the initial), Stanley C. Sargent (missing a period). Need to add O'Brien revision to notes as well. Please approve and I'll fix. Thanks ../Doug H 11:17, 10 February 2021 (EST)

Talking to yourself? :) Approved, fixed the 3 authors and "Welcome To Goatshead" -> "Welcome to Goatshead". I don't like how the Introduction is named but I need to find a title page before I go fixing it... Annie 11:31, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Oh - and I just did all the needed merges :) Annie 11:34, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Might explain why my edit submission errors out - Python - index error. Intro pre-existed as did one story. ../Doug H 11:37, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Sorry... :) Yeah - I know it was preexisting - I was just saying :) Annie 11:41, 10 February 2021 (EST)
PS: And just the usual reminder - use "Import" :) Annie 11:42, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Since when did submissions create a new tab when submitting? If I'd noticed I'd have cancelled the update, fixed it and resubmitted. Or was it switching from Firefox to Edge? I still think of import only for cloning situations - anthology to anthology kind of thing. ../Doug H 11:52, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Or is simply the submission that errored out. I create too many tabs to for breadcrumbs. ../Doug H 11:55, 10 February 2021 (EST)
They don't create a new tab unless you do Control+Submit (or whatever button you have in there) and force the browser do to them. :) And yeah - tracking down the stories ID may be annoying but then we do not need to merge all the titles (plus it reduces mistakes in titles and authors names) :) Annie 12:00, 10 February 2021 (EST)
Control + (mouse) Select ==> new tab !! Finally an end to right click and "Open in a new tab". I owe you one. ../Doug H 12:13, 10 February 2021 (EST)

Starlog

As an active verifier of Starlog issues, please see this conversation regarding its genre status. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:37, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

Took a look, no comment, only verified because the entries existed and I rans across some copies. ../Doug H 21:38, 23 March 2021 (EDT)

Saga of Recluse

You are a PV of at least one volume please follow link to review proposed changes Saga of Recluse maps consolidation thanks John Hi Doug, posted a response to you comment. Scifibones 18:05, 25 March 2021 (EDT)

Another map consolidation

As a PV of many volumes please follow link to review proposed changes to Magic Kingdom of Landover map consolidation. Hopefully you thought the last one was beneficial. John, Scifibones 19:27, 24 April 2021 (EDT)

Carolie Bickford-Smith?

Hi, just wondering if the entry is really correct here, since there's Coralie Bickford-Smith. In case it is (which seems a bit more likely than the other way 'round) the two should likely connected per pseudonym, I guess. Christian Stonecreek 11:17, 2 May 2021 (EDT)

Probably a mis-reading/typing. According to Amazon it is Coralie Bickford-Smith. I'll submit an edit. ../Doug H 13:40, 2 May 2021 (EDT)

Children of the Fleet

Added a couple Ext ID's to Children of the Fleet. Let me know if you don't want to be bothered with these minor edits. John Scifibones 15:01, 8 May 2021 (EDT)

I like to know about things I can check (an exercise in humility, a lesson in taking care), but things that are the result of research that go in notes or specific fields don't matter. Also don't need to know about things I only verify as transient. ../Doug H 22:50, 8 May 2021 (EDT)

Islands in the Sky artist

Since your verification was transient and from 2015, I don't suppose you still have access to a copy, but just in case... A new editor added an artist credit to Islands in the Sky based on an "RAO" signature at the bottom left of the front cover. I don't see it in the scan, but I may be missing it or it might be cropped. Anyway, if you do still have access to it and could confirm or deny, that would be great. I did accept the submission and also encouraged the editor to do a primary verification. Thanks. --MartyD 08:19, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

I keep scans of all the books, and my copy does not appear to have what I can recognize as RAO. I'll give him a ping to see if his cover is cut differently or see if I can learn how to spot these things better. ../Doug H 13:56, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

Le pays des fourrures

Found a nice one for one euro ! Linguist 05:24, 12 August 2021 (EDT).

With the recent easing of restrictions in Canada / Manitoba, I'm hoping to get back to the University library to finish their collection and the book charity where all kinds of odd things show up. ../Doug H 08:38, 12 August 2021 (EDT)

Glide Path printing statement

Hi. I have on hold a submission wanting to clone your transient verified 1965 Dell Glide Path (Arthur C. Clarke) based on his copy's stating "Printed in Canada". I realize your verification is transient and was done 5 years ago, so I'm not terribly hopeful, but do you by any chance still have access to it? If so, would you check and see what it says? There is a permanent PV, so I'm asking him as well. Thanks. --MartyD 08:43, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

No real chance - many of my transients are books passing through a charity sale I work for. I do tend to be sensitive to Canadian printings as it is my home, so expect that if I hadn't cloned it to say it was a Canadian printing, it likely wasn't. ../Doug H 10:16, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Changing Burroughs Books

Hi Doug -

I have some suggestions for your edit to effectively split Ace publications of Burroughs books. First, I think before you made these edits, you should probably have conferred with all the active verifiers. I don't have an issue with what you're doing, but you're arbitrarily deciding which of the two different printings is represented by the existing publication record and which one gets the new record. I think a better approach would be to see which printing each verifier has. The existing record should probably conform to the earliest verifier's copy. Alternatively, to whichever edition is held by the most verifiers. For my copies, Thuvia and Moon Maid have the 47th St address; Monster Men has the ads for F-156 through F-181. One additional point, this is really something that should have gone on my regular talk page. The other "changes to verified" page is really just for covers and minor changes to the notes. I don't get an automatic notification on the other page like do on the main one. I've put your edits for the three that I've verified on hold. Please reach out to the other verifiers and see if you're noting the correct edition for the existing publication record. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:08, 25 August 2021 (EDT)

I don't disagree, but would like to offer a defense, although I question your use of "effectively". As to conferring in advance, I've tried that before when was splitting based on my own copies, rather than a reference book. The response ratio was low and slow. And the choice is not arbitrary - I have chosen based on copies I own and have verified. Whichever variant I had already vouched for remained, the reference-only version was cloned. Your other suggestions (earliest, most) would depend on getting responses from everyone, and many are not available. Also changing verifications is in editor's control and immediate, whereas moving text from entry to entry requires moderator intervention. So, while you may disagree, and may enforce your suggestions, it was not unconsidered or arbitrary. And in response to your additional point, your talk page does say "If you're writing to inform me that you've either added a COVER IMAGE or NOTES", and my change was just to the notes. I do not know why you chose to use the technique, or how it works. And finally, I have reached out to all the other 'active' verifiers as I've made the changes.
So, that said, how would you like me to proceed? I have 4 more potential entries to create in the Ace Books. There are likely a number of Ballantine, but these tend to be straight-forward (no ads, addresses, printing history variants). ../Doug H 22:42, 25 August 2021 (EDT)
Let me start off with a bit of history about the cover image and notes pages. It has been the etiquette here to discuss any changes to a verified publication with the primary verifiers prior to making the edit for some time. Several years ago we did not have the note to moderator function, nor did we have fields for external ids. Several editors considered edits to add a missing cover image, or to to add an external ID to the notes, or other trivial matter to the notes to be minor such that they did not wish to be pre-notified before the edit was made. The two innovations that I mentioned makes these pages less necessary, though editors, myself included, have not bothered to take these pages down. The issue with the edits you submitted is that they were not merely a minor addition to the notes, though that is how they are accomplished. In this cases you changing a publication record that referred to a specific edition of a book such that it would refer to a completely different edition. This would be no different than if one had verified the first printing of a book and it was edited to make it into a second printing (assume the date didn't change for this hypothetical). Yes, that would be accomplished by merely updating the notes, but to do so without getting the assent of the verifiers would not be within the agreed etiquette of the project. While I am really not excited about moving a verification because you have determined that the edition that I verified back in 2009 needs to be moved to a new record, I will move my verification if a majority of the other active and responsive verifiers have the other edition. However, none of this should be done until we have everyone's agreement (everyone active) on how to proceed. I'll also note that it's the same number of edits no matter which edition is the existing one and which is the cloned. Keeping the existing to the one that most have already verified, keeps the movement of verifications to a minimum. Anyway, my suggestion is to start by finding out who has what edition. I gave you mine above. Once that's done we can determine whether your proposed edits are appropriate, or should be reversed. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:12, 26 August 2021 (EDT)
An observation - I went back through the notifications I received since 2008 and pretty much all of them were after the fact. A question - if the change had been a simple assertion of publisher's address, or an advertisement (in the context of helping date the entry), an artist credit or the colour of the page edges without the assertion that there was an alternate version, would that warrant prior notification under the old etiquette or actual notification under the new one? The argument being that what you have matches the existing entry and you are just adding more information. ../Doug H 09:51, 27 August 2021 (EDT)
You'll definitely find examples where proper notification was not given. For the examples you give, it's really up to the verifier, and personally, I wouldn't object to being notified in only in the moderator notes for those. Even simple edits can be a problem though. Another editor recently updated my verified copy of a trade edition of a book, with all the information for the limited edition (all in the notes). If he had checked first, it would have eliminated extra work. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:57, 27 August 2021 (EDT)

Changing Burroughs Books (Poll)

Based on a new reference book on Ace (and Ballantine) editions of Edgar Rice Burroughs, I have identified several ISFDB entries that should be split. Details first:

Rtrace 1 | Holmesd 2 | GlennMcG 1
Rtrace 1 | Holmesd 2 | Spacecow 1 | GlennMcG 2
Kpulliam | Rtrace 1 | Biomassbob 1| Holmesd 2 | GlennMcG 1
Rtrace 1 | Holmesd 2 | Hifrommike65 1 | Spacecow neither (23 West 47th Street) | GlennMcG neither (23 West 47th Street)
Rtrace 1 | Taweiss 1 | Holmesd 1 | GlennMcG 1

Please indicate which version you have. I have included the names of the verifiers after the titles, please enter your version after your name. I have completed mine (Holmesd) as a model. I would also like to get agreement on how to decide which variant stays with the existing entry (and verifications) and which one is created, possibly necessitating changing PVs. Some options are:

  • Earliest verifier wins (as ordered above)
  • Most frequent version wins
  • Earliest version chronologically wins
  • I win (simply because I'm found and entered the changes)

Please feel free to suggest, comment or vote. Two points: by marking your version above, you can prevent having to pull the book(s) twice and there are PV who have not been included as they are no longer active. The floor is open. Thank you. ../Doug H 23:18, 26 August 2021 (EDT)

Done. Can you link the ISFDB record for this new reference work on Burroughs? Thanks. (BTW, you did mean "I've found," right?) Mike 00:15, 27 August 2021 (EDT) (I've or I'd or simply I - The moving finger writes; and having writ, moves on ../Doug H 08:54, 27 August 2021 (EDT))
Also Done. Doug's reference book is here. While I'd love to keep my own verifcations intact, I think the fairest course would be most frequent version wins, followed by earliest verifier wins as a tie-breaker. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:41, 27 August 2021 (EDT)
Also done (last night). Ok with Ron's resolution. --GlennMcG 14:54, 27 August 2021 (EDT)
I've approved the edits for Thuvia, since we all have the same edition. For Monster Men, the held edit is the reverse of what we want. For Moon Maid, we'll hopefully get a response from Spacecow soon. I don't believe the edits for remaining two have been submitted yet, but it looks like they could be now. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:42, 28 August 2021 (EDT)
The remaining vote won't change the outcome, so I'll submit the remaining edits and once approved, I'll post links to the new entries on the talk pages of those affected. Thanks to all for participating. ../Doug H 10:48, 29 August 2021 (EDT)
And for the record, in case this becomes a precedent, my preference for choosing would be that the editor gets to decide. My reasoning is that they can then post links to both entries when notifying PVers and minimize the elapsed time and editor's time. ../Doug H 10:48, 29 August 2021 (EDT)
Done. Sorry for being late. --Spacecow 14:02, 29 August 2021 (EDT)
I've moved my PVs as needed. I see that Holmesd has verified the ones he claimed above, but not yet unverified the others. --GlennMcG 22:06, 2 September 2021 (EDT)

Thuvia[,] Maid of Mars

The NEL editions of Thuvia Maid of Mars (per cover) have a mismatch between their publication title (no comma) and their content title (comma). The cover art also has no comma. Could the PVers please let me know whether there is a comma on the title page of their editions. I have created an entry for the first occurrence of Thuvia Maid of Mars (with no comma) here, a 1921 Grosset & Dunlap edition. I'm willing to make the change as it seems to be tricky to get the content of a novel changed, and there is one publication with no PV that I will change if the other two match each other. Thank you for your attention. ../Doug H 11:01, 31 August 2021 (EDT)

1974-12-00 edition Willem H. / Dirk P Broer
1975-06-00 edition Unapersson
The comma is present on the titlepage of my edition. Should also be added to the coverart title. Thanks! --Willem 03:18, 1 September 2021 (EDT)
Willem's edition is the same as mine, so the comma is also present on the title page of my edition.--Dirk P Broer 09:48, 1 September 2021 (EDT)
Comma present in my edition --Unapersson 12:11, 3 September 2021 (EDT)
Updated submitted. Thanks. ../Doug H 22:01, 3 September 2021 (EDT)

The Chessmen of Mars

I approved your edit to this edition of The Chessmen of Mars. The cover scan has both US and Canadian prices listed, so if that cover is correct, I think we can determine the price as US with C$5.99 for Canada. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:52, 3 September 2021 (EDT)

There are 4 different Canadian printings 20-23) under that ISBN that were printed in Canada and are listed as $4.99 in the catalogue. There is no way to be sure that the Amazon image is for this particular printing. The exchange rate applied on books can be much higher than the money market might suggest. ../Doug H 15:26, 3 September 2021 (EDT)
We may want to remove that cover image then, if we're not sure, or at least note that the price in the photo may not reflect the price on the book. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 16:58, 3 September 2021 (EDT)
Opted for the note approach. ../Doug H 21:51, 3 September 2021 (EDT)

Question about Burroughs

Does that book have translations as well or just English language editions? Thanks! Annie 11:21, 15 September 2021 (EDT)

Just Ace and Ballantine (well Charter, Tempo and Del Rey as well). They are all English. I don't know if they do non-English. ../Doug H 11:23, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
Nope, they don't. Oh well :) Have fun with them :) I may decide to add some non-English versions at some point... Annie 11:24, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
I think I've got a couple of Hungarian ones in there (that you helped with as I recall). I should probably try to find the others. ../Doug H 11:36, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
Goodreads and OCLC are good starting points, especially for modern editions. Fantlab for older ones, especially Slavic ones... On the list it goes. Annie 11:41, 15 September 2021 (EDT)

Asimov's Annotated "Don Juan"

I'm holding your edit to add Asimov's Annotated "Don Juan". I don't think this should be NONFICTION. I'm also not certain that it is eligible. If it is, I would think this would be a CHAPBOOK containing Byron's poem. Although, there are several epic poems that are entered as novels. The problem is that I don't think the poem is speculative. Whether a non-genre item can be entered because of annotations by an above the threshold author is kind of a new question. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:59, 4 October 2021 (EDT)

I don't disagree regarding the NONFICTION vs. CHAPBOOK. I've never read Don Juan. I expect the content to be non-genre, as that was the point of the exercise - adding non-fiction material by the threshold author Isaac Asimov. The request was non-specific and I've Talk'ed with the sponsor Annie here and you didn't reject my approach here when I suggested Paradise Lost was non-genre. If you'd like to hold it pending a resolution of the new question, I'm fine with that. I watch most forums so should be able to follow the discussion. My current approach is basically enter the referenced publications with a minimum of research, and will do a second pass to augment with covers, content and external sources. The first pass gives the submissions time to be processed and the second will include pre-existing non-fiction / non-genre. Since Paradise Lost, I've been checking the type of content in the first pass. ../Doug H 12:17, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
The difference is that Paradise Lost is genre (so its annotated version is also in) while Don Juan is not. So I'd say it is not-eligible (yes, it is on that list - the majority of it IS eligible thus me asking someone to work through them but that does not mean that there are no exceptions). We won't add an annotated Bible either or a book about thermodynamics just because Asimov happened to write an introduction. If the main text of the book is not his (and for annotated works the main text is whatever is being annotated), the book's eligibility will come from the actual author (or book)'s eligibility, not Asimov's IMO. Annie 13:21, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Paradise Lost (as such) is not listed under John Milton's Bibliography. ../Doug H 13:53, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
We miss a lot of books. :) Most likely it was never added because of the same rules that stop us from adding the Bible but as it is not a religious text, it is ours IMO. I think we should have it. It is a thin line sometimes...
I've had enough worms, I don't plan on adding it. Either add it and let me know and I'll finish/create the Asimov entry or tell me you're not going to and I'll cancel the submission. ../Doug H 16:50, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Well, unless we claim Paradise Lost as genre, the annotated version is not eligible. Annie 17:19, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
We can open a discussion on the topic and see what everyone else thinks but... If it is decided that it is not really genre for some reason, its annotated version will be also out.
What about non-genre collective works in which he contributes an essay? Topic is non-genre, bulk is ineligible, but his contribution is homogenous with the remaining portion? What about his contribution to TV Guide Magazine - would that depend on how genre-related it is? ../Doug H 13:58, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Non-genre nonfiction is only eligible if it is a book and not just an article somewhere. So "TV Guide Magazine" - unless it is about speculative fiction, it is out; essays in other people's book - unless they are about speculative fiction, they are out (or we will end up adding thousands of books because a genre author wrote an introduction). Annie 14:07, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
What if an Arthur Clarke introduction to a non-genre text made reference to how he came to write 2001, A Space Odessey? Would that make it genre? Do we have to read and assess everything even after an author is above a threshold? ../Doug H 14:02, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
If it is just an article/essay and not a full book, you do not include it UNLESS it is genre. Above threshold does not mean "everything is in" - there is an exception there exactly for these essays. I would not include Clarke's essay in that case quite honestly but it is borderline and if it is about his own book, it is technically eligible. Annie 14:07, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Presumably referencing point 4 in the ISFDB Policy : Included which talks about exclusions as opposed to anything in the Excluded. Gotcha. Back to the salt mines now. ../Doug H 16:50, 4 October 2021 (EDT)
Yep. The "Included", point 4. It gives us the threshold stuff (which is why we are adding these but excludes non-genre "non-fiction which was not published as a standalone book" - which cuts all the introductions, magazines articles on all kinds of topics and so on unless the publication is otherwise eligible OR they are about speculative fiction in some way or form. Point 3 does not have the same exclusion so a review of a speculative book or an article tied to a speculative publication is always in but non-genre is a bit more fine-grained. :) Annie 17:19, 4 October 2021 (EDT)

Cleaning for the sake of cleaning

Hi Doug,

See my message here. I will be happy to discuss more if needed but let's keep in mind the basic idea of the Wiki cleanup:

  • Move the data from the Wiki to the DB (or link to the Wiki if needed)
  • Retire the old links which connected wiki to DB based on tags once we have the previous done.

Trying to fix something on these reports by deleting valid data is the opposite of what we want to do. That means that the reports WILL have some uncleanable entries - that's ok. Once we know that all remaining are the uncleanables, we can either retire the report or change it to allow for them or to allow ignoring or something. But losing data so we lose a line on a cleanup report is never the correct way to fix something :)

PS: And thanks for working on these :) Most of the remaining in some categories are the hard ones that were left over after multiple passes. Annie 14:21, 5 October 2021 (EDT)

Nonfiction and chapbooks

Chapbooks are only used when there is a fiction element (story, poem or serial). When the whole content is non-fiction, we use NONFICTION regardless if the contents is 10 pages or 1000 pages or if it is unified text or a collection of articles (anthology and collection are also only used when there fiction pieces). I fixed this one. :) Annie 15:25, 5 October 2021 (EDT)

Double quotes around href

Hi Doug,

You may want to check your template for new books: You have ""https://asimov.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Books_by_Isaac_Asimov"" which then gets into a report because of the "" at the start and the end :) Annie 14:34, 6 October 2021 (EDT)

Cut and past from the Excel spreadsheet, works differently if you copy from the cell or the edit box. Given the number of times I've started/stopped I'm not surprised I missed some. I plan to go through them all again adding external references and images, so will check them all then (along with any other things I notice as I go). Thanks for caring. ../Doug H 17:13, 6 October 2021 (EDT)
They showed up on the Invalid HREF in Notes reports - so I fixed the ones that were having the problem. This was more of a "you have a glitch in your process somewhere" post and not a "we have problems that need fixing". :) Annie 17:22, 6 October 2021 (EDT)

Ask Isaac Asimov

I approved your edit to add Is Our Planet Warming Up?. I made one change to your edit. You had listed "Ask Isaac Asimov" as a publication series. I think this is more properly a title series and I've changed it to reflect that. My evidence is that this Worldcat record shows the book issued by a different publisher as being in the same series. Pub series are almost always under a single publisher. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:47, 7 October 2021 (EDT)

Clearly, there were a few other new publications, and I've made the same changes to each. I spot checked a few others and they use the series name across publishers. Thanks again. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:00, 7 October 2021 (EDT)
Most bibliographies don't mention the Heinemann editions, certainly not the site I was 'given' to enter these from. ../Doug H 10:16, 7 October 2021 (EDT)
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?64606; I added/fixed info for the last book, Ozone Layer, from the copy on Archive.org, and all other books in this series are also on there (including some Heinemann editions) except, oddly, Why Do We Have Different Seasons? --Username 11:06, 7 October 2021 (EDT)
Thank you for the assistance. I am working on this request to put the Asimov non-fiction in based on one bibliographic web site. My first step is to simply enter what's on that site, with research only into correct titles and nature of Asimov's contribution. Consulting the many other sources of information is a bit of a juggling act, so I wanted a complete list of titles in ISFDB before delving into them. Besides archive.org, there is the OCLC, Hathi, Google books, Open library, a review website and an annotated bibliography. Let me know if you're interested in working on this more systematically. ../Doug H 12:20, 7 October 2021 (EDT)
Thanks for replying so soon. Open Library and Archive.org are connected; I provided OL link to Ozone Layer's page because a lot of books on the Archive aren't really supposed to be there and get taken down because of copyright complaints, so I rarely provide direct links. Also, Google Books is a nightmare to navigate and get info from and times out if you do too many searches, and Hathitrust usually features public-domain books, which I doubt these are. The Archive copies are available for anyone who's a member; I tried becoming a member a few years ago and couldn't even get the book to open in whatever format they use, so cancelled my membership, but if you know what you're doing you can get to pretty much any page in most books by searching for keywords, page numbers, etc. I've done it many times while editing here. I would recommend using their actual copies as a reference because the 1 book I worked on had a different date than the fandom site the previous date came from. Physical always beats virtual. --Username 12:54, 7 October 2021 (EDT)
My archive.org id works fine and I've used it several times to get page counts that partial views don't often give you. ../Doug H 13:34, 7 October 2021 (EDT)

(unindent)It may make a bit more sense to slow down on adding these and actually add a bit more details in each on the first pass. Just saying. While just adding them is appreciated, just parsing the list and creating essentially skeleton entries could have been easily scripted. I hope the plan is to go back and actually flesh out these entries a LOT more although I would have preferred more details to start with and not just copy/paste from the list. Especially because I hope you are cross-referencing somewhere to make sure these books exist and are titled exactly like that. :) Annie 19:24, 8 October 2021 (EDT)

My first depth first attempt ended up generating multiple entries and I spent hours flipping back and forth between the edit screens and sources and when I finally submitted them, I had to spend too long merging / varianting to make me want to do another that way. I figured if I got the first one (base title), I could go through the other sources in an organized fashion, figuring out how many editions/printings and which source went with each and do add pub instead of new nonfiction and replicating title information so they'd merge. As for cross-referencing, one frequent place is OCLC, but I'm looking for a match and not figuring out which ones are duplications (Wentworth Co. vs. Wentworth and Co.) or later printings or alternate titles. Yet. It is on my list as it is really the interesting part. I've been noting the archive.org copies where they match the initial edition. ../Doug H 20:06, 8 October 2021 (EDT) P.S. I'll have to learn how to script things one of these days.
Oh, I understand - I am working on my long suffering project to add the Bulgarian SF books so I know how fun it can be with sources. But you are loading a ton of these very quickly - so I was just saying to slow down and do them in smaller batches so we have less "unverified anywhere but in a random list online" books on the board at the same time. Annie 20:16, 8 October 2021 (EDT)

Dick Sand - Jules Verne

Copy-pasting this here from the main discussion page;

First time coming across this community as I am struggling down a rabbit hole.

I picked up a copy of Jules Verne's Dick Sand at a library sale - however, there is no publishing date on the inside cover, and the only identifying marking is the A.L. Burt Company on the side of the binding, and at the end of the book, A. L Burt's Books For Young People, which is a catalogue of book recommendations. I've been unable to find any copy with the same cover as the one I have on google images.

In going down the rabbit hole of trying to identify this version, I found on A.L. Burt's publishing page, that you had previously verified a copy of another Verne work. Could you offer any assistance? Pictures attached of cover and side binding. [11] [12]

- Helsinki, 10:07 PM, 10/12/2021

The Jules Verne Encyclopedia gives "Reprints appeared by the turn of the century from publishers such as A. L. Burt Company in their Home Library, Cornell Series, and other nicely illustrated editions for boys.". It seems to say it was the Frewer translation. My favourite image site www.julesverne.ca has four different cover images, but not this one. The cover looks as if it might be a generic boys book, rather than specific to Dick Sands. That's all I have to hand. ../Doug H 23:51, 12 October 2021 (EDT)
Thank you so much! I've done a bit more research on my end, and I've reached out to another person who has written a bit on the publishing company itself; more specifically, the Home Library Series by A. L. Burt. However, there's some incongruity there, in that all the Home Library Series books, as far as I can tell, all have jackets, and blank covers with illustrated side bindings. I'll hopefully have some more information soon. Helsinki 08:05, 13 October 2021 (EDT)Helsinki

Mikaël Bourgouin

Your PV (see here) has been varianted to the Mikaël Bourgouin spelling. Please let me know if you have any questions. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:09, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

A little correction. That became possible due to a bit of a bug - the two names cannot exist at the same time safely on the server at this time. So it will appear as "Mikaël Bourgouin" on this book. I think that the publication note showing the spelling from the book is enough as it is but heads up in case you want to change/add more to it. Annie 14:24, 4 November 2021 (EDT)

British Library IDs

Careful when copying these, you want the number without "BLL01" at the start. If you are looking at a record, it is the "System number" and not the "UIN". I fixed it here. Annie 20:58, 21 November 2021 (EST)

Been a while since I used one. Thanks for the reminder. Going depth first on each one is going to take for...ever. At least it will if they're all this bad. I still have about a dozen foreign language ones to parse. ../Doug H 22:08, 21 November 2021 (EST)
Figured - so stopped by with a reminder. Thanks for working on these! You know where I am if you need me for any Central/Eastern European language :) Annie 22:13, 21 November 2021 (EST)

The Feline Wizard / Christopher Stasheff

Would it make sense to change the publication date of [13] to unknown? It seems unlikely the 2nd printing happened in the same month as the 1st. (Which I'm PVing). --GlennMcG 22:07, 22 December 2021 (EST)

Eminently. I've submitted a change. ../Doug H 23:47, 22 December 2021 (EST)

Here be monsters / Christopher Stasheff

Could you check out the discussion @ [14]? Thanks. --GlennMcG 14:46, 28 December 2021 (EST)

Seems you're all coming to my side, so nothing to add. No idea why two or why I picked the one I did. ../Doug H 22:35, 28 December 2021 (EST)

The People of the Wind / general question about OCLC

I wanted to verify The People of the Wind and I'm wondering how fussy one should be about OCLC when verifying. This is a first printing but links to what claims to be a tenth printing. I often find there isn't enough info in worldcat to definitively match an isfdb entry, but I let it go as long as there is nothing contradictory. Thanks for any guidance on this. Fjh 16:13, 1 January 2022 (EST)

Sorry, just saw this - two messages in between checks caught me off guard. I don't do much verifying of OCLC generally, but presume the editions / printings should match. However, your links left me confused. The OCLC is not claiming any particular printing, so should presumably be associated with the earlies 'match'. The link you gave was to the first printing which would be correct. The tenth printing has no reference to the OCLC. I generally don't verify external information when verifying a publication - just confirm that what's in the book and the record match and that additional information is flagged as such (e.g. artist based on signature). It's one editor's view. ../Doug H 14:27, 25 January 2022 (EST)
If I can chime in: What Doug said in general :)
For the specific case: Fjh is right - this OCLC listing (ID 905970) is for the 10th printing ("Tenth printing, "First printing, May, 1973." in the details of the OCLC record) and need to be attached to the 10th printing record here, not to the first. So if someone here would like, find the record for the first, swap it into the first printing record and add this OCLC number to the 10th printing record instead. Annie 14:39, 25 January 2022 (EST)
Didn't scroll far enough to see the 10th. I do however see that there are editions at both the local universities. ../Doug H 15:26, 25 January 2022 (EST)
Multiple pairs of eyes and so on. :) One thing I had learned is that the separate libraries don't always connect their copies to the correct OCLC record IF there are multiples with the same ISBN (as is the case here). So don't get surprised if your local universities have 3rd and 12th printing instead. :) Annie 16:22, 25 January 2022 (EST)
Just saw them at the top of the list, disappear when I click "This edition only" so no idea what they are listed as. I've also learned to chase down specific library copies when OCLC records don't line up sensibly. ../Doug H 16:49, 25 January 2022 (EST)

Forward the Foundation

I'm planning to submit additions to Forward the Foundation. Fjh 14:41, 2 January 2022 (EST)

Thanks for the notice. No concerns. ../Doug H 15:12, 2 January 2022 (EST)

Roadside Picnic

Hi, Doug! There are two thing I'd like to ask on this:

1) Is it possible that the afterword is identical to the commentary, that is: does it tell about the genesis of the novel and the Russian history of publication?

2) The cover photo has been credited to the director Andrei Tarkowski here (and a similar movie still has also been varianted). Maybe you want to do the same for your verified publications? Christian Stonecreek 04:53, 22 January 2022 (EST)

1) Highly likely, that is: yes it does. 2) The movie still you call similar is different, the main character's stance is quite different. I doubt that makes them variants by ISFDB rules, but don't really care. As for crediting to Tarkowski - a) I verified the publication, but did not create it b) there is no mention of that name in the book c) the matching image is from a 1979 movie, but there is no indication it was used as a cover in 1979 and no title notes to indicate why it exists as a parent in a variant or why the producer is considered the artist. It's minefield I don't care to walk into, just for having verified the book. The cover image is (now/soon) mine, so any observations you care to make on that basis are fine, as long they are recorded so they don't suggest that they come from the verification. ../Doug H 12:09, 22 January 2022 (EST)
Okay, thanks! I'll do the varianting for the afterword, and add the artist and a hopefully sufficient note: Tarkowski is credited in the German edition, and that the still(s) is/are from a movie which came out in 1979 is stated with the French edition (but I think, I'll do it tomorrow, at least I need a break). Christian Stonecreek 13:13, 22 January 2022 (EST)
And it's not the same still as in the French edition but as used with the German one, I'd think. Christian Stonecreek 00:28, 23 January 2022 (EST)

Self-approving

Interested in self-aproving - the new and shiny in between step that just allows you to self approve your submissions? If you decide you are ready for it, I would support it. Post over on the Moderator board to start the process :) Annie 18:35, 26 January 2022 (EST)

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I'll probably wait for the current frenzy to abate while I rethink my Asimov process (currently geared to staggered entry). ../Doug H 22:23, 26 January 2022 (EST)

National libraries

As you are collecting your own list, here is the list of all the COBISS libraries (it is a South European/Balkans framework and library for libraries - no overall catalog so each is independent but they use the same software and conventions):

Some of these have more members than others; all of them have the big national library I think so if you are looking in that language, most books are there. Old Yugoslavian books can be in either of the new states that spawned out. :) PS: Croatia is missing because they had not joined (yet). Annie 13:56, 28 January 2022 (EST)

Cover artist for Shadowkeep ...

... is Victoria Poyser, according to the German edition. You might like to add her. Regards, Christian Stonecreek 07:10, 29 January 2022 (EST) ... and I have produced a variant, ready for merging or importing. Christian Stonecreek 07:12, 29 January 2022 (EST)

I've updated the entry, notified the (currently active) PVs and am hoping that the addition of the Cover artist will automatically select your canonical variant. ../Doug H 10:52, 29 January 2022 (EST)

Vingt mille lieues sous les mers

Hello,

We have a lot of books under Le Livre de Poche and your lonely verified under "Livre de Poche". And the "Le" is visible at least on the cover as with all of them. How about reuniting it so it is not so lonely? The note already says how it is credited exactly but there is no point leaving it out in the cold that way... What do you think? Annie 13:11, 11 February 2022 (EST)

Until such time as the Publisher gets clarified, I bow to the will of the common thought. ../Doug H 16:14, 11 February 2022 (EST)
Well, you cite the front cover and it has "Le" in there on that one so tehnically it should have been "Le" unless it is mentioned without it somewhere inside :) Thanks for fixing! Annie 16:48, 11 February 2022 (EST)
I can re-check the title page, but am quite willing to go with our 'standardization' for now, regardless of what it says inside. ../Doug H 17:15, 11 February 2022 (EST)

Stout 2

I corrected one number and added the last of the cards to William Stout 2 Susan O'Fearna 18:10, 14 February 2022 (EST)

David Starr, Space Ranger

Would you look at your copy of David Starr, Space Ranger and check the title page to see if it actually shows "David Star: Space Ranger" and "by Isaac Asimov writing as Paul French". I have what appears to be the same publication where those are on the title page but the cover shows "david starr, space ranger". If so, this record needs to be changed to look similar to this with the author changed to Paul French, the title changed, additional notes added, etc. After that, it also needs to be unmerged and then merged into title 687117. I'm willing to do any/all of this and PV once all that is done. Thanks! Phil 08:09, 17 February 2022 (EST)

Now I have it out, I will firstly agree with your assessment and proposed action(s). Some nits - the title page has "David Starr" [over] "Space Ranger", the second line in italics which suggests the sub-title colon separator is warranted. I question a number of the existing titles with a comma, but agree that your approach is correct for this publication. For content, there is an Introduction on page [7], signed "Isaac Asimov" and dated November 1970, although the copyright is 1971 and referred to as a foreword. The first printing of November 1971 suggests that 1971-11-00 is correct. The artist credit is based on a signature on the cover, as noted in the first printing (with a comma). Do I need to pull the other five in the series out when I put this one away? ../Doug H 08:32, 17 February 2022 (EST)
I've contacted Nihonjoe about the rest of the series since he's the only active PV for them so you don't need to pull them out for me. I agree about the "Introduction" and think I should import [15] to include it in this pub. Shall I go ahead and make the changes? Phil 11:36, 17 February 2022 (EST)
Better thee than me. ../Doug H 14:09, 17 February 2022 (EST)

Re: The Chemicals of Life: Enzymes · Vitamins · Hormones

I'll fix the erroneous template - an artifact of my collating various sources. I could cancel, fix and re-submit but all the external entries would have to be re-typed. Looking forward to self-administration. Maybe just leave this one? ../Doug H 11:20, 21 February 2022 (EST)

Self-approver flag set

The self-approver flag has been set on your ISFDB account. Congratulations!

From now on, creating a submission will take you to the "Approve/Reject" Web page which will let you approve your own submissions. Ahasuerus 11:51, 24 February 2022 (EST)

To all and sundry who are responsible, I thank you. I've not yet chosen a name for my super-persona, although I'm leaning towards Topaxi. :-) ../Doug H 12:21, 24 February 2022 (EST)
I have some bad news for you - you are stuck with your original name ;) Have fun - and you know where everyone is if you ever need assistance! :) Annie 13:05, 24 February 2022 (EST)
In all my other ISFDB dealings, I'm still Holmesd, but when I push that approve button --- Topaxi !! ../Doug H 13:30, 24 February 2022 (EST)
As long as that persona can spot the typos of all your other personas, welcome to the fun to him as well. ;) Annie 14:14, 24 February 2022 (EST)
Hi, Doug! Congratulations! (And have fun with the new possibilities!) Christian Stonecreek 13:26, 24 February 2022 (EST)

MacVicar Cover

http://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Image:SCRTFTHLST1959.jpg; This is the wrong cover, isn't it? --Username 00:02, 25 February 2022 (EST)

'Tis and thanks to self-approval, already fixed. ../Doug H 08:17, 25 February 2022 (EST)

Zoboa

For Zoboa, would you mind if I change the page count to [8]+430 and add the title for the unsigned maps on pages [6]-[8] before I PV? Phil 07:42, 9 March 2022 (EST)

Sounds reasonable. ../Doug H 07:59, 9 March 2022 (EST)

Day of the Triffids Artist.

For Day of the Triffids I imported the Richard Powers credit from the first Crest edition. MOHearn 09:34, 30 March 2022 (EDT)

Appreciate the effort, but to be clear: The first Crest edition does not have this cover, the second Crest edition, is the first with the illustration, is credited to Richard Powers, but does not quote a source, but the third Crest edition does credit Powers in the Notes. I've added it to the Title record for the COVERART. ../Doug H 12:02, 30 March 2022 (EDT)

The Land That Time Forgot

Hi, You seem to have added the wrong cover artist for this edition. Please compare to this, which has the correct artist (George Akimoto). (This is the Segrelles-covered edition.) Thanks! Horzel 19:14, 9 April 2022 (EDT)

You are correct, and hopefully now the entry is as well. The source has Segelles listed at the end of this entry, but as a separator and I goofed. Thanks for the pointer. ../Doug H 19:33, 9 April 2022 (EDT)

The Waif of the Cynthia

Happy New Year, 2021 and 2022!
Seaside Library Pocket Edition #659 P761882 is not one you have PVerified. Yet I report:
Moments ago I submitted update to use the full publisher name George Munro, and revised your notes to specify that the stated sources give only the short name "Munro". (submission)

By the way, your link jv.gilead.org.il now returns Internal Server Error. --Pwendt|talk 21:14, 11 April 2022 (EDT)

No problem. Another site has mirrored gilead, just need to prefix with "julesverne.ca/". Also, they have images of the cover and the price is really 20 cents. I'm posting here so I'll remember to put this in after your submission is processed. ../Doug H 22:21, 11 April 2022 (EDT)

Allan Quatermain [O] by Haggard and La Motte Fouqué

It seems to me your 6th and final paragraph should be the 3rd par, following "1927." If I understand correctly, pages [1]-266 carry the headers "Allan Quatermain" (?beginning p4 with the page numbering) and second series pages [93]-147 carry the headers "The Two Captains" (?beginning p96 with the second series page numbering). Except front matter before first p[1] and the Burt Catalogue as back matter, those are all the printed leaves in the book, 133+28 of them.

We should have a name for such books, akin to dos-a-dos. I have seen a few: full title page identifies only the first and foremost of contents; Surprise! contents follow their own interior half-title page(s). Some libraries miss the Surprise!, and may report simply 147 pages too. Re the pagination, Burt maybe issued a La Motte Fouqué collection in which "The Two Captains" text spans p[95]-147.

Did you read "Authorities" by "The writer of "Allan Quatermain." (probably missing one quotation mark)? Perhaps it should entered as ESSAY content. (If you send me its lead sentence, I will carry it sometimes and maybe once when I visit the big library, look for it in Allan Quatermain eds.) --Pwendt|talk 17:47, 30 April 2022 (EDT)

I've touched up the text along the lines you suggested. I've chosen to leave it as an acknowledgement of sources rather than an essay, figuring the notes cover it well enough. As for "Authorities", I've emailed the entire contents to you. ../Doug H 19:59, 30 April 2022 (EDT)

Understanding Physics

This and this appear to be the exact same omnibus. Am I missing something? Based on the notes, it seems like the only reason they are separate is to record the two dates? If so, that is not a valid use case. Titles are dated based on their first appearance only. The Barnes and Nobles data can be captured in the title notes or (the best approach) stub records created for the first printings of each edition. -- JLaTondre (talk) 10:16, 25 June 2022 (EDT)