User talk:Rtrace

PLEASE NOTE: If you're writing to inform me that you've either added a missing COVER IMAGE or NOTES to any of my VERIFIED PUBS, please click HERE and add it to the bottom of the list. A link to the pub record would be appreciated. Once the pub has been reviewed, I'll remove your note from the list. Thanks. Ron (Rtrace)

See

• User talk:Rtrace/Archive (2007-2009 [1])
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive2 (2009 [2])
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive3 (2010)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive4 (2011)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive5 (2012)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive6 (2013)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive7 (2014)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive8 (2015)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive9 (2016)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive10 (2017)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive11 (2018)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive12 (2019)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive13 (2020)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive14 (2021)
• User talk:Rtrace/Archive15 (2022)

for older discussions.

A Hand-Drawn Map of New Crobuzon - interior artwork by China Miéville

Hi Ron, I have a 12th printing of the 2011 edition of China's novel Perdido Street Station and I'm trying to sort out all the map references under different titles to his credited map here. So I can make sure it's the same map, could you do me a favour and check for me:

China is definitely credited as the artist.

"New Crobuzon" appears as the title at bottom left.

4 points of the compass at top right.

Key (Skyrail, Railways, Woodland) at bottom right.

Scale (2 miles) at top left.

If the map is the same as the one I have, I think several changes would be in order.

'Your' map pub date is 2013-10-00 - I think this should be a variant of the original map pub title/date - see here, and here.

Further, a search on on Crobuzon shows Hitspacebar (in his 2014 entry) to be the only one titling the map correctly according to the Help guidelines.

Accordingly and if you think it's correct, I propose changing the titles of all the maps to "New Corbuzon (map) (2000-03-00) by China Miéville (as by uncredited)" and varianting your 2013 title to that.

I hope this all makes sense - the maps are a mess :) Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 07:18, 7 January 2023 (EST)

Hi BanjoKev

I also have the 7th Del Rey printing. The map in the World Fantasy Convention book is definitely a different map than that published in the Del Rey editions. It is credited to Miéville insofar as it is part of a collection of his drawings with a paragraph explaining when and why he drew them. While I don't believe it's mentioned in the help pages, there is a de facto standard of naming INTERIORART records by their caption when present, which is why the hand drawn map is named as it is. Thus, the 2013 map should not be re-titled or made a variant of the other maps.

That's great! Could you add a note to the title record so that this doesn't get messed up in future? --BanjoKev (talk) 08:30, 7 January 2023 (EST)

I see you've done that already, thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 08:41, 7 January 2023 (EST)

The map in the Del Rey edition matches your description with the exception that there is no artist credited. The map is not currently listed in the publication record of my copy. I agree with you that this map should be titled "New Crobuzon (map)" (correcting a small typo). Since you're working on this, I'll hold off on adding it to my publication until after you've determined the title and original date of the other maps. I do suspect that it occurs in all the Del Rey editions. You can go ahead and import the ultimate title record for the map to the 7th Del Rey edition. Alternatively, you can let me know once you're done merging that maps and I can do that. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 08:11, 7 January 2023 (EST)

So, your different map is the only one credited to China - all the rest are uncredited. I'll sort all this out, including the 7th Del Rey and let you know when it's all done. Many thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 08:30, 7 January 2023 (EST)

I've completed all the changes needed for all the maps, including your 7th Del Rey printing. The only loose end is the map & novel pagination in yours if you'd do the honours. Thanks for your help, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2023 (EST)

Forest J. Ackerman credits

When you have a moment, could you please check how your verified Forest J Ackerman pubs credit Ackerman? The other day a user pointed out that most of Ackerman's books/stories use Forrest J Ackerman as opposed to Forrest J. Ackerman, but only 30-ish of our pubs credit him that way. TIA! Ahasuerus (talk) 17:35, 7 January 2023 (EST)

Both lacked the period after the middle initial and I've changed them. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 21:09, 7 January 2023 (EST)

Thanks for checking! Ahasuerus (talk) 21:40, 7 January 2023 (EST)

The Moon Maiden

Dear sir: I am fond of Garrett P. Serviss. In fact, I have read all his works (but The Moon Maiden) and I am translating them into Spanish for first time (e.g. https://www.amazon.es/gp/product/B09NRJTWT3). I have not managed to get a text of The Moon Maiden in any format and I have not been able to find Argosy 1915 not in paper nor scanned. I tried everything! Could you, please, somehow, hand me a scanned version (or pictured by phone or any mean) of the pages of Argosy May 1915 where it was first published? Nothing I can offer in exchange but gratitude and, if you wish, credit. Best regards. Rubene Guirauta (RubeneGuirauta@gmail.com)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lidenbrock (talk • contribs) .

Hi Rubene

Unfortunately, I do not own a copy of that issue of Argosy. I think you may have gotten the impression that I do because of the secondary verifications that I have marked on the publication record. What I have verified is that Bleiler's Science-Fiction: The Early Years, Clute and Nicholls Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Tuck's The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy all mention that issue of Argosy. Without rechecking each of those references, I suspect the issue is listed because of the Serviss story, the Franklin story, or both. As I'm sure you are aware, there is a later publication of the novel by Crawford/FPCI, but again, I don't possess a copy and have only verified its existence through secondary sources. I did also look for that issue of Argosy at the Internet Archive, which does have scans of many pulps, but unfortunately not the one you're looking for. Good luck with your project, and I'm sorry I couldn't be more help. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 17:55, 16 January 2023 (EST)

Hi Ron

Thank you very much for your answer. I understand the role of verificator... but I had to make this attempt, there was a chance you could have it. It is really a challenge to find this issue of Argosy (or the edition of 1978 of The Moon Maiden). I have tried in Internet Archive, Hathi Trust, Library of Congress and others, and in second hand sellers (Abebooks, eBay, Facebook groups...) unsuccessfully. In case in future (this quest is going to last, I am afraid) you could get any information, copy, scan, picture or any clue, please let me know. Best regards. Rubene.

Heroic Fantasy frontispiece artist

There's an unentered frontispiece in Heroic Fantasy that has a signature that I don't know how to interpret. Do you? --Glenn (talk) 17:20, 24 January 2023 (EST)

Is that an "R G K" which may indicate Roy G. Krenkel? He did do some covers for DAW. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 17:37, 24 January 2023 (EST)

Amazon image for Assassin's Price

I have replaced the Amazon image with a scan from my copy for Assassin's Price by L. E. Modesitt, Jr. ../Doug H (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2023 (EST)

Lovecraft's Notes

https://openlibrary.org/books/OL20222766M/Some_notes_on_H.P._Lovecraft.; https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?281745; OL cover has the price on it; alternate? --Username (talk) 09:29, 30 January 2023 (EST)

I don't think it's an alternate. My copy has the price and I've replaced the image with a scan of my copy. Given the date of the previous upload, I was probably replacing an unstable Amazon image and may have just saved theirs and re-uploaded. I don't know what publication the image without a price represents. Chalker/Owings mentions two subsequent editions. There was a library edition published without imprint by people associated with the University of Wisconsin. However C/O states that it was bound in green cloth and issued without a jacket. There was also a 1982 edition from Necronomicon Press, but their publications are usually larger in size. In any case, the image is now correct. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 22:00, 30 January 2023 (EST)

The Wizard of Maldoone

Ron, Any objection to converting to CHAPBOOK? While approving the addition of the softcover, I looked at the scan in the internet archive. There is no way this is 40,000 words. I'm checking since you entered the hc edition and added the secondary verifications. John Scifibones 12:30, 30 January 2023 (EST)

No objection at all. I've only verified from secondary sources. Reginald uses the terms "novel" or "story" for length and I believe has different thresholds for these terms than ours. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 22:03, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Whispers, 1987

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?289107; https://fantlab.ru/images/editions/plus/big/219866_3; I added FantLab ID to digest edition; Russell story says "Kolorized" on contents page, not "Kolarized", and Eisenstein story says "Weasling", not "Weaseling". 1 seems like contents may be right, the other one seems like a misspelling. So if you can check your HC copy. --Username (talk) 18:15, 30 January 2023 (EST)

It looks like Bob has already taken care of the correction and explained the contents error. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 22:07, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Pearl Pumpkin

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?342293; Halloween, not Haloween, according to title page. --Username (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 22:08, 30 January 2023 (EST)

Baxter - Raft

Hi Ron, just noticed your Raft. My later printing pagination is x-245 - perhaps yours is a typo? Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 23:57, 31 January 2023 (EST)

Not a typo. The last numbered page in my copy is 246. The last page has the author bio and is numbered. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 06:43, 1 February 2023 (EST)

The Black Sorcerer

Hi Ron, could you moderate this submission please. Thanks, Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Done. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 06:44, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Thank you Ron! That record solves a lot of problems. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 12:14, 1 February 2023 (EST)

Walter Wiggins

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5567353; Isn't that a title page photo in the AbeBooks link I provided in the moderator note, with a Jr. on it? Also, I re-did the other edit of mine you rejected recently re: changing Charnal to Charnel with the page that says Charnel House on it. --Username (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2023 (EST)

So it does. I've changed the author's name which allowed me to approve your original edit without losing data. Just keep in mind, that when you change the last reference to an author's name in a publication or title, the software deletes the old author record and creates a new one. Thus, any data on the old author record is lost. No need to inform me about the re-issued edit, it will come up in the queue be handled by whoever is working it at the time. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 10:32, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Honestly, you're the main handler of my edits these days; some mods have quit recently, at least for the time being, others just do a few of my edits now and then that you skip for one reason or another. Dirk used to do a lot of mine until recently (he used to do a lot in my early days but got mad at me and stopped doing them for awhile) when he got mad at somebody else on these boards and decided to take a break until 2024, https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Moderator_noticeboard#Acceptable_moderator_behavior.3F, and JLaTondre and Ahasuerus used to do a bunch when they had the time but they're so busy doing site stuff that it rarely happens anymore. So odds are you'll be the one to approve that specific edit and you'll know why I provided the zine link because you're the one who rejected it and asked for proof; someone else may be unclear why I'm adding something like that. --Username (talk) 10:52, 2 February 2023 (EST)

As it turns out, I was the one who worked that edit. However, the title wasn't correct for what was in the scan. I've corrected it and it's fine now. If I'm the only one working the queue, then that's a problem. As I am going on vacation starting tomorrow, I will be approving few if any edits in the next 10 days. I do see other moderators approving edits other than their own in the recent approvals page. I'm not surprised that other moderators skip some of your edits. I do that myself when you've failed to notify primary verifiers, or not provided sufficient sources for your edit. I also skip them in cases where the research required to approve your edit is more than I have time for while I'm working the queue. In the past, I have held your submissions and left notes on your talk page, but this invariably results in arguments that you feel you don't need to notify or document. I'm tired of making the same arguments each time, so I choose to ignore these edits. I will still reject or hold edits that are destructive, or that introduce potentially incorrect data. I can't speak as to why others skip your edits, but this has been my experience. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 11:25, 2 February 2023 (EST)

I'm fully aware of why you skip certain of my edits, although in almost all cases whatever I did in those edits ends up being approved by others because it was correct; most of my edits end up being approved by you, anyway, so the ones you skip are in the minority. As I've said before, with the massive amount of edits I do (more than almost any other non-moderator in the history of this site, and that's in just 2 years or so) I don't expect every one of them to be approved; a few always fall by the wayside. In the case of the Charnel House thing, I see that you added those secondary verifications you mentioned which had the incorrect "Charnal", but the scan of the issue at hand has been available on Archive.org for many years, so really before adding those verifications less than a year ago you could easily have checked all info in the magazine itself and would have discovered this problem and fixed it yourself instead of me having to fix it like I've had to fix thousands of other things on this site (and I suspect there are many other Cemetery Dance mistakes on ISFDB since so many different people have worked on the 70+ issues). Re: Dirk, he used to do a lot of mine, didn't like the fact that I questioned some of his rejections, and decided to stop, but started again last year, then stopped completely because of his problems with other mods, including both of those I mentioned above and a few others, questioning him. Apparently he has a problem with being questioned. Other mods just don't have the time because the server move created such a big mess they spend most of their time bug-fixing. I'm sure there's a couple that have some personal grudge against me because I'm not an ass-kisser who bows and scrapes so they can get themselves self-moderator status and that's why they rarely approve anything of mine (although they still do occasionally, usually for edits that have some minor problem they can complain about) but honestly, who cares, 43,000 edits and counting. I'm an amateur just doing this to pass the time; I have no time for any of the personal issues so many on here seem to have. As I go through old board messages I can see that many of the angry people who still edit on this site behaved the same way LONG before I started here, so really none of this has anything to do with me. Also, if you ever feel upset about a few of my edits not being exactly done right, just remember how many countless edits either approved by you for others or entered by you personally I've had to fix. Do I complain about that? --Username (talk) 12:14, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Pwendt for self-approver

Hi, Ron. I should be a self-approver here and I expect you agree with that. I prefer to be nominated by a longtime heavy-duty contributor, but I plan to nominate myself ("Self-nomination for self-approver") sometime tomorrow if you, plural, is available, ready and willing in the next ~20 hours. I write to a couple others too.

A couple hours ago, you approved this morning's creation of a parent Nancy Drew collection as by "unknown", noted "1st of 5 this collection". Recently I had deleted the other four, and several more, upon suddenly recognizing that it only creates more work to Make parent titles without attending first to the Juvenile tag, among other things. --Pwendt|talk 15:39, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Le Guin - The Wind's Twelve Quarters and The Compass Rose

Hi Ron, is this image any use for your PV here?

Same for this image for yours here. Kev.

Better yet, I can upload to your pubs "your-pub-specific" images which are exactly the same as the Amazon ones if that's ok with you. I'm trying to avoid linked images like the plague now, I did a test to find out the bad things that can happen with linked images. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2023 (EST)

I don't worry that much about Amazon images except for the ones known to be unstable. I do know with the SF Masterworks they've frequently had images that differ slightly from the printed copies, but not in this case. However, if you're more comfortable, I can link to your images. No need to duplicate them in the server. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 19:46, 21 February 2023 (EST)

Demons By Daylight

https://archive.org/details/demonsbydaylight0000camp; Does this require a separate entry, having the $6.00 sticker you mention in your notes, or should I just add it to your PV? --Username (talk) 22:10, 9 February 2023 (EST)

No need for a separate publication record. None of the secondary sources (Chalker/Owings, Jaffery, Nielsen, Joshi) mention a change in price, though I'm sure that is what this is. My copy is one of the ones with the sticker. However, the addition of a sticker isn't really a new publication. I've gone ahead and added the link to the scan. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 21:38, 12 February 2023 (EST)

Robot Visions

You verified a 3rd printing. I'd like to verify the 4th but I have some updates to the contents which are likely the same in your printing:

• artwork on page ii is same as on page 260. I would change the latter to the same title.
• artwork on page 42 is not listed. We could call this "Robot Visions [12]"
• page 82 should say 83

I can update both printings if you're in agreement. Thanks. Fjh (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2023 (EST)

All these changes are fine, except for the repeated artwork on pages ii and 260. A single title record cannot occur twice in the same publication. Thus if you renamed the artwork on page 260 to "Robot Visions" and then tried to merge the two INTERIORART titles, it would create a problem. What we want to do instead is to make Robot Visions (8) (changed brackets to parentheses for the wiki markup only) into a variant of Robot Visions. Please feel fee to proceed with the changes. I can help with the variant if you're not familiar with how to do that. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 21:25, 15 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks for the help. I found instructions on making variants and went ahead. Hope I got that right. Once that lands I'll go ahead with the edits to both pubs. I could use a clue on creating the new art title "Robot Visions [12]." My guess is I just put that in when editing a publication, and a title entry is automatically created in the db? Fjh (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2023 (EST)

By sheer coincidence, Robot Visions is next up on my pile and this thread came up on my watchlist. I have the VGSF 1st printing if I can be of any assistance :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2023 (EST)

Does your book have the same interior art? If so you could add them to the contents, once we're done with the title changes. Fjh (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Not the same. I'll use your pagination for clarity (mine is different).

• Yours has 11 pages of interiorart, mine has 12.
• My art in the stories agrees with your pages: ii, 3, 24, 51, 82, 123, 235, 245, 343, 359, 401.
• Mine also has art in "Too Bad!" (a couple looking at a robot they're considering buying). It would be good if you would allow a gap for this in your numbering(?) system, so that this one can fit in nicely with the sequence when I add it.
• The art for "The Bicentennial Man" is the same as at your ii.
• My book pagination is correct at 383 pages and it's counted from the very first page inside the front cover. The first numbered page is page 7 and the Introduction starts on page 9. There are no pages with Roman numerals, as yours has.

[edit] It might be a good idea to put a brief description of the art in the title records when the dust has settled, to aid identification and guard against publishers swapping the art around. Let me know if there's anything else. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 12:22, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Kev, here are photos of all the art in my book if you want to compare with yours. If you were comparing with what isfdb currently says, I'm sorry, I haven't fixed that yet. (I'll let you know.) I love your idea of describing the art in the notes. I mean, unless there's a way to put in actual pictures (Ron?) then notes are needed to make the entries useful so I will add some. My book does indeed have roman numerals, only on the TOC pages oddly enough. ymmv. Fjh (talk) 14:59, 16 February 2023 (EST)

I wouldn't suggest linking to scans of the artwork, which is under copyright. I do have a suggestion, though it is a bit more work. There are a few ways that INTERIORART can be named. Here we have named it after the title of the collection, with a numeric disambiguator added to all but the first title. However, we could name each INTERIORART with the title of the story where the artwork occurs (and for which it presumably illustrates). Thus, we would avoid having to name a missed record our of sequence (Robot Visions [12]), and it would also go some way to describe each title. This would make a description less necessary, but it can still be added if desired. I would recommend naming the artwork on page ii as "Robot Visions (frontispiece)" while still making it's repeat on page 260 a variant. The only drawbacks to this, are that it's a bunch of edits, and we would want to notify the active primary verifiers of all the editions. Actually, it looks that aside from us three, that would only include Mhhutchins. We should also probably break the variant relationship for the Portuguese title. That title appears to be for all the artwork for the book and not just the frontispiece. This should be checked with the verifier. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 18:12, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks for the suggestion Ron. I'm willing to tackle this. I was going to edit all the titles anyway so renaming them along the way doesn't seem like much more work. I think it's ok to start with the variant business you proposed above? As I said up there (but easily missed because I foolishly inserted it in the middle of the thread) I already have a submission in for that. And as I asked up there, to create a title one just adds it to a publication, and if it doesn't match an existing title a new entry is created? Thanks. Fjh (talk) 19:45, 16 February 2023 (EST)

Sorry, I meant to answer that. But it sounds like you've got it. Just edit the publication and use the add title button. After you've added it to one publication, you can use the import tools to get it in the other publications. You'll need the Title Record # from either the newly added title (after it is approved), if you want to add an individual title, or you can import all the titles from the container that has the new one. The software is smart enough that it doesn't try to import titles that are already there, so you'll catch anything missing from the target record that is in the source record. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 20:00, 16 February 2023 (EST)

(unindent) Good idea putting the photos up for me to identify! It does take us a little further down the wormhole though.

• We've each got all 12 artworks.
• My versions of your p.37 (Too Bad!) & p.359 (Galley Slave) have been horizontally reversed - not that that matters to our titling, but it's a nice little observation to include in the Publication Notes if they're different from your description in the canonical title - for instance, in my publication notes I would add "The image for [........] has been reversed in this collection". This led me to consider how you would describe the art depiction in the Title Records#. The only thing I could come up with to overcome the 'direction' would be something like, for p.37, "....Robot facing page-right." and similarly for p.359. It's a bit more difficult with a couple of others... For the frontispiece (good one Ron) and p.260, the best indicator is the lighting on the robot's hand to page-left: brighter than the other one. For p.235 something like "...top of head hinged up towards page-left."
• I like the titling method: "Robot Visions (frontispiece)", "Robot Visions (Introduction: The Robot Chronicles)" ...etc. This will cover all eventualities I think.

  Not precisely what I was suggesting. For the artwork on page 3, I would name it "Introduction: The Robot Chronicles"; "Robot Visions" for page 24, "Too Bad!" for page 42, etc. This is how these would be handled if this were a magazine. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 07:24, 17 February 2023 (EST)

I appreciate the work you're putting into this, I'm sure the end result will be rewarding :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 21:58, 16 February 2023 (EST)

It's good practice doing different kinds of edits. I drafted descriptions for each piece of art, if anyone wants to suggest improvements before I start submitting them. Fjh (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2023 (EST)

I think you've done a pretty good job of meeting your goals there! Here are some suggestions for you:

• Too Bad! - "...glasses at left and man at right standing..." - i.e. lose the brackets.
• The Bicentennial Man - again, lose the brackets, plus:

• Make this the canonical and the frontispiece the variant - if a publisher is going to drop one of them, it'd probably be the frontispiece - yes/no?.
• "Robot in open shirt, holding board over its head. Pens in robot's left shirt pocket."

• frontispiece - "Same illustration as for The Bicentennial Man. Robot in open shirt, holding board over its head. Pens in robot's left shirt pocket." - the use of 'variant' could be misconstrued?

The other nine descriptions are excellent, and I also like Ron's magazine-like title treatment. Hope this helps.

Btw Ron, how much do we owe you for the rent? :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2023 (EST)

No charge. My talk page is your talk page. I just appreciate you and Fjh doing all this work. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 19:02, 21 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks for the suggestions Kev. Unfortunately by the time I saw them some edits had already landed. You can of course edit again. Sorry too for my long absence, but I am still working on this and eager to wrap it up. Fjh (talk) 14:59, 15 March 2023 (EDT)

No problem, thanks for the update. Like you, I'm waiting for the edits to land :) Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2023 (EDT)

Now that the dust has settled, may I make some suggestions, beginning with what I think might be a more elegant way of handling the frontispiece...

• Change "Robot Visions" to either "The Bicentennial Man (frontispiece)" or "The Bicentennial Man (as frontispiece)" - your p.ii
• Make "The Bicentennial Man (frontispiece)" a variant of "The Bicentennial Man" - your p.260
• Change "Robot Visions [3]" to "Robot Visions" - your p.24

At present, all the McQuarrie titles carry a 1990-00-00 date, I'd like to change that to the 1st printing date 1990-04-00

Add image descriptions to the title pages for (your) pps ii, 24, 260.

Add the source of the cover art credit to your notes.

If you're in agreement, I'll make the changes. Thanks, Kev. BanjoKev (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2023 (EDT)

For the title of the artwork on my page ii, I would have named this "Robot Visions (frontispiece)". The naming of the artwork is dependent on where it is located, and in this instance it is nowhere near "The Bicentennial Man". It is the frontispiece of the book as a whole. That being said, I've no objection to the current variant relationship being reversed. I think what you're getting at here is that the artwork illustrates the story. If The Bicentennial Man were the parent title, the fact that is re-used as the frontispiece to the book is a little more obvious.

I agree that "Robot Visions [3]" should be simply "Robot Visions", provided that we use the "(frontispiece)" disambiguator to the artwork on page ii.

I've no objections to adding descriptions or source of artist credits.

While I actually agree with you about the dates, it's against ISFDB policy. The first printing has a single title for all artwork in the book. Each of the individual artwork titles should carry the date of the first time they appeared in our records as individual titles. Right now, they should have the unknown date (0000-00-00). If the overall title in the first printing were replaced with the individual titles, then we could date them 1990-04-00. You could try contacting Mhhutchins through the email system (his preference for contact) to see if he is amenable to changing to the individual records. It looks like there is a scan of the book, so we wouldn't need him to provide us with the page numbers. Failing that, you could add them to the Gollancz printing, and we could then use a 1990-09-00 date. I had argued previously that differences in disambiguators or title type (COVERART reprinted as INTERIORART) should carry the date of the original appearance. However, the consensus on that issue went the other way. Thus, we'll need to stick with the earliest appearance as individual titles. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 18:49, 16 April 2023 (EDT)

Hello Ron, I borrowed a copy of the 1990-04-03 Roc hc and have started editing it. Also, I've just taken delivery of the 1990-09-13 Guild/Gollancz hc (yes, that's the date) - so all things will lead to the sunny uplands from here. I'm tracking all the things which need to be done and so, if you're in agreement, I can make all the necessary changes to your pub (and fjh's too, if he's agreeable). Once those four are in alignment, I'll go on to sort out all the other Robot Visions on the db. If I step off the lighted path, please let me know :) And thanks for all your good advice. Kev. --BanjoKev (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2023 (EDT)

plan/progress

• done: pg. 260 art is a variant of pg. ii art. 3rd and 4th printing notes already say these are the same picture.
• done: add pg. 42 art and fix page numbering 82 -> 83 in 4th printing
• done: add pg. 42 art in 3rd printing
• done: fix page numbering 82 -> 83 in 3rd printing
• done: add descriptive note to new art title.
• rename and describe all other interior art:
  • [4] Robbie done
  • [2] Introduction: The Robot Chronicles pending
  • [5] Reason pending
  • [6] Runaround pending
  • [7] Feminine Intuition pending
  • [8] The Bicentennial Man pending
  • [9] Lenny pending
  • [10] Galley Slave pending
  • [11] Christmas Without Rodney pending
• todo: investigate Portuguese title

latest update Fjh (talk) 15:42, 15 March 2023 (EDT)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?258877; I added an Archive.org link in a pending edit to the second VGSF edition and cloned the 17th Roc printing for a 19th printing also on Archive.org, but "Too Bad!" was on p. 37, not p. 3. I fixed it in my edit but 17th has no PV (ChrisJ is only editor in the history) so if anyone has 17th they can fix that; editor also didn't enter Roman numeral (x) in page count so I added that in my edit, too. I'm sure 17th is the same as 19th and editor just made mistakes. 1st printing here has right number for "Too Bad!" but is missing the Roman numeral; PV, Viter, is long-gone so if anyone has that printing they can add the x if it's there, which I'm sure it is. --Username (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2023 (EDT)

Early Asimov Book One

Thanks for moderating my submission to add the introduction to the contents. Unfortunately I did it wrong. A new title was created when I wanted to link to this one. (I have both books in front of me and the contents are the same.) I don't suppose you have an undo function for that submission? If not then I think I need to:

• "Remove Titles From This Pub" to get rid of what I just added
• "Import Content" to add it back, as a link to the existing title
• delete the unwanted title, unless it magically evaporates when nothing links to it

Appreciate your patience as I learn how to do things here. Fjh (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2023 (EST)

No worries. This is actually easy to fix What you want to do is go to either title record and click on the Check for Duplicate Titles tool. This will bring up a list showing both titles. Check both boxes and then click the merge selected records button. There is another page where you would be able to see conflicts and decide what to do with them. In this case, there are none, so you can just click on Complete Merge. Once approved, both publications will have the same title. For your future information, what you wanted to do (i.e. what would have done this in a single edit) is to use the Import Content tool from the publication record. You would then use option 2 to import an individual title. Let me know if you run into any problems. Thanks. --Ron ~ Rtrace^Talk 21:23, 16 Febru