Difference between revisions of "User talk:Rtrace"

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(456 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown)
Line 21: Line 21:
 
* [[User talk:Rtrace/Archive14]] (2021)
 
* [[User talk:Rtrace/Archive14]] (2021)
 
* [[User talk:Rtrace/Archive15]] (2022)
 
* [[User talk:Rtrace/Archive15]] (2022)
 +
* [[User talk:Rtrace/Archive16]] (2023)
 
for older discussions.
 
for older discussions.
  
−
== A Hand-Drawn Map of New Crobuzon - interior artwork by China Miéville ==
+
== Cover Image Licenses  ==
  
−
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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?442912 his credited map here]. So I can make sure it's the same map, could you do me a favour and check for me:
+
When using the "Upload new cover scan" option from a publication page, the software will automatically add a licensing template pre-populated with the publication information. In this case, you do not need to select a license under the "Licensing" pull down on the upload page (as it creates adds a second, incomplete template that needs to be cleaned up). The "Licensing" pull down only needs to be used when using the upload option from the wiki directly. Thanks. -- [[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 08:42, 1 January 2024 (EST)
−
:China is definitely credited as the artist.
+
:Thanks. Good to know.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 08:49, 1 January 2024 (EST)
−
:"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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1666143 - see here], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?19616 and here].
 
−
:Further, a search on [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=crobuzon&type=All+Titles 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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 07:18, 7 January 2023 (EST)
 
−
:Hi BanjoKev
 
−
:I also have the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?311532 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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1713854 title record] so that this doesn't get messed up in future? --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 08:30, 7 January 2023 (EST)
+
== [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?985361 Starman Jones] audio reading ==
  
−
:::I see you've done that already, thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 08:41, 7 January 2023 (EST)
+
Hi, Ron! Just wondering: the noted narrator and the one stated on the cover image do differ. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 13:16, 1 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:You are correct.  But is appears that the cover has the incorrect narrator.  Audible credits Paul Michael Garcia in their [https://www.audible.com/pd/Starman-Jones-Audiobook/B002UZQYN0 current listing] and I re-listened to the credits in the audio book which which also credit Garcia.  I had already checked that the current cover on the Audible site (the same as linked in the publication record), matches the one I downloaded when I purchased this book in 2011.  The images are identical and both credit Powers, apparently incorrectly, as you noticed.  I'll add a note that pictured credit is incorrect.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 13:30, 1 January 2024 (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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 08:11, 7 January 2023 (EST)
+
== Kioga Titles ==
−
::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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 08:30, 7 January 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::I've completed all the changes needed for [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1666143 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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:52, 9 January 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Forest J. Ackerman credits ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=kioga%3A&type=All+Titles; Should those all say "informal"? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:54, 2 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Corrected.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:58, 2 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
When you have a moment, could you please check how your [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/adv_search_results.cgi?USE_1=author_canonical&O_1=exact&TERM_1=Forrest+J.+Ackerman&C=AND&USE_2=pub_verifier&O_2=exact&TERM_2=Rtrace&USE_3=pub_title&O_3=exact&TERM_3=&USE_4=pub_title&O_4=exact&TERM_4=&USE_5=pub_title&O_5=exact&TERM_5=&USE_6=pub_title&O_6=exact&TERM_6=&USE_7=pub_title&O_7=exact&TERM_7=&USE_8=pub_title&O_8=exact&TERM_8=&USE_9=pub_title&O_9=exact&TERM_9=&USE_10=pub_title&O_10=exact&TERM_10=&ORDERBY=pub_title&ACTION=query&START=0&TYPE=Publication verified Forest J Ackerman] pubs credit Ackerman? The other day a user pointed out that most of Ackerman's books/stories use {{A|Forrest J Ackerman}} as opposed to {{A|Forrest J. Ackerman}}, but only 30-ish of our pubs credit him that way. TIA! [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 17:35, 7 January 2023 (EST)
+
== Amazing Stories, October 1960 ==
−
:Both lacked the period after the middle initial and I've changed them.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:09, 7 January 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
:: Thanks for checking! [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 21:40, 7 January 2023 (EST)
+
Regarding {{P|56651|Amazing Stories, October 1960}}: Would you mind checking the artwork on page 83? It is listed as "The Missionary [2]" by Bernklau, but Bernklau did the "Seeing Eye" artwork right before and Emsh did the "The Missionary" artwork after it. Should this be "Seeing Eye [2]"? Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:40, 6 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I agree and have made the change.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 12:07, 6 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::OK by me.--[[User:Swfritter|swfritter]] ([[User talk:Swfritter|talk]]) 18:52, 6 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== The Moon Maiden ==
+
== HIstórias Extraordinárias N.7 ==
  
−
Dear sir:
+
Hello Rtrace, thanks for reviewing and approving my submission [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5838401 5838401].
−
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 must have missed some information in it because it is not appearing as part of the series in the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/seriesgrid.cgi?67858 magazine series page] in the 2023 December slot.
−
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 fix it or tell me where I should insert the pertinent information so it can appear there?
−
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){{unsigned|Lidenbrock}}
 
−
: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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?277246 the publication record]. What I have verified is that Bleiler's ''[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1280738 Science-Fiction: The Early Years]'', Clute and Nicholls ''[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?102324 Encyclopedia of Science Fiction]'' and Tuck's ''[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?102393 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 [https://archive.org/ 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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 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 ==
+
Thanks! [[User:Pugno|Pugno]] ([[User talk:Pugno|talk]]) 13:00, 9 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Hi Pugno
 +
:Magazines are just a little bit tricky and involve at least one edit beyond the initial one to get everything correct.  One thing that you missed in adding this record was to add the series name, "Histórias Extraordinárias", in the Title Data section of the New Magazine screen.  Had you done this, your new record would have appeared in the Issue Grid.  However, even had you don that, there still would be an addition step to do.  We can take care of the series name at the same time that we do this second step.  You may have noticed that Magazine and Fanzine records have a special Title record of type EDITOR.  Also that title record contains all the publications (issues) for a given calendar year that have the same editors.  For example, the title record for 2023 for Histórias Extraordinárias is {{T|3180646|here}}.  You'll notice that the title is different that that of the individual issues ("Histórias Extraordinárias - 2023") and that the date is for the year only i.e. no month or day.  For the first issue that is added for a given year, the EDITOR title record has to be edited to change those fields.  In this case, since the 2023 title already exists, all we need to do is to merge your newly created EDITOR title ({{T|3265222|here}} with the existing 2023 title.  The best way to do that is to go to any of the three editor's pages and select "Show All Titles".  Then find the two titles in question ("Histórias Extraordinárias - 2023" and "Histórias Extraordinárias, Dezembro 2023").  Select the check boxes next to these and click the "Merge Selected Records" button.  This will take you to an intermediate page to resolve the conflicts between the two records.  Select the title with the dash and the year, the series name and the date without the month and click "Complete Merge".  Once that edit is approved, things will appear as they should.  Please go ahead and give it a try if you feel comfortable with the instructions.  If not, feel free to ask questions or if you'd like me to take care of the merge for you.  I'm happy to do so, but wanted to give you the change to learn how to do this.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:38, 9 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::Hi Rtrace
 +
::I am not sure I understood it all :) So what I did was to submit a change ([https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5856081 #5856081]) and I kindly ask you to please adjust it accordingly so it can appear correctly in the series page. I tried to follow your instructions and use the "Show All Titles" that you mentioned but alas, couldn't find it. I am sorry.
 +
::In the meantime, for the same magazine, I will also submit a number of changes to create variants of interiorarts, since they are the same art appearing in different spots, just zoomed in. Thanks! [[User:Pugno|Pugno]] ([[User talk:Pugno|talk]]) 22:55, 10 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::I'll go ahead and do the merge.  For the next time you need it, the "Show All Titles" link in on the author bibliography page e.g. {{A|Mario Cavalcanti}}.  In the left menu, under "Editing Tools", it's the 4th item down (or the second from the bottom, I've got the Moderator link first, which I'm not sure you can see, so your count may differ).  In any case, thanks for your contributions on these.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:41, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::Rtrace, thank you very much for your help. I hadn't realized that the "Show all Titles" link could be accessed via the author bibliography page. Now it is clear! Now I submitted two variant adjustements, #[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5856083 5856083] and #[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5856084 5856084] to correctly set two interior arts. Could you please see to it? Once it is done, I will clone the magazine to create its ebook version. Once again, thanks a lot!! [[User:Pugno|Pugno]] ([[User talk:Pugno|talk]]) 21:35, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::::Both approved.  You can proceed with cloning.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:38, 11 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::Thanks Rtrace! I just cloned it. Submission #[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5857813 5857813] - hope it is all OK. Thanks again! [[User:Pugno|Pugno]] ([[User talk:Pugno|talk]]) 17:20, 12 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
There's an unentered frontispiece in [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?16965 Heroic Fantasy] that has a signature that I don't know how to interpret. Do you? --[[User:GlennMcG|Glenn]] ([[User talk:GlennMcG|talk]]) 17:20, 24 January 2023 (EST)
+
== The Fourth Invasion by Alvim Correa ==
−
:Is that an "R G K" which may indicate [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?901 Roy G. Krenkel]?  He did do some covers for DAW.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:37, 24 January 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Amazon image for Assassin's Price ==
+
I saw that you registered Black Infinity, Fall 2018 and have two INTERIORART attributed to Alvim Corrrea, wouldn't it be a case of turning it into a variant of La guerre des mondes? [[User:Hyju|Hyju]] ([[User talk:Hyju|talk]]) 08:57, 15 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I wouldn't think so.  Those are two individual illustrations.  Whereas, {{T|743875|La guerre des mondes}} is the full set of illustrations for a book.  We don't generally make variant titles for only part of the whole (excepting serials).  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:44, 15 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
I have replaced the Amazon image with a scan from my copy for [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?657176 Assassin's Price] by L. E. Modesitt, Jr. ../[[User:Holmesd|Doug H]] ([[User talk:Holmesd|talk]]) 23:34, 29 January 2023 (EST)
+
== Exhalation ==
 +
In Your pv pub [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?788223 CoNZealand: 78th World Science Fiction Convention] there is an interiorart [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2763640 Exhalation (cover)] as a variant of "Exhalation" cover. In the ISFDB there are three cover titles Exhalation: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2780439 here], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2777439 here] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2553590 here]. Can You please have a look which one is the right one or is there another fittig title? Thank You. --[[User:Zapp|Zapp]] ([[User talk:Zapp|talk]]) 18:16, 15 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:It's the Shutterstock cover.  I'm guessing that we hadn't identified the "artist" it at the time I entered the ConZealand book, or I would have linked it then.  I'm not thrilled with identifying Shutterstock as an artist.  My impression is that they are more of a licensing company than a creator of artwork, but I'll defer to the verifier of publication.  All linked now.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:54, 15 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Lovecraft's Notes ==
+
== Robert Anton Wilson / Schrödinger's Cat - Glossary ==
  
−
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? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:29, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
Posted on the Talk pages of Rtrace, Marc Kupper, Spacecow
−
: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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:00, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
<br>All of the publications: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?49137 The Universe Next Door] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?29062 The Trick Top Hat] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?29063 The Homing Pigeons] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?985980 Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy] have a glossary at the back. I have all four of these pubs and have compared the glossaries and they are all the same. There is an existing ISFDb record for the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?656785 glossary] and it is present in the omnibus (all five print versions) but none of the individual volumes. Hence I propose to import it into each of these three pubs. As a consequence, I will also change the disambiguation from the omnibus name to the series name, ie from "Glossary (Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy)" to "Glossary (Schrödinger's Cat)". Is all this ok with you? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:38, 18 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:I've no objections.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:19, 18 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== The Wizard of Maldoone ==
+
== K. J. Parker's Relics/Under My Skin ==
  
−
Ron, Any objection to converting [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3091797 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. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 12:30, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
You've PVed the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?934729 2023 Under My Skin] collection.  One of the Hugo novella nominees seems to be the story [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3160540 Relics], which seems like [https://csfdb.cn/works/34951 it was first published in Chinese translation in 2022].  Can you have a look at the copyright page (which isn't part of Amazon's preview of the ebook) to see if that's correct? Thanks!
−
: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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:03, 30 January 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Whispers, 1987 ==
+
BTW, I'm not rushing to do the Hugos, given the errors in the nom report e.g. at least two duplicated nominees...  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 14:28, 20 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:The Parker story gives a 2023 copyright and states "First appeared in this volume".  That would appear to ignore the translation.  I am adding nomination data for the Hugos, though the Chinese titles are giving me trouble.  Please feel free to correct any errors that you see that I've made.  The duplicate nominees were called out in one of the blogs, which I'm keeping an eye on.  There's definitely several odd things about the nomination statistics.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:43, 20 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
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. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:15, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
:: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3107243 This] is Fungi Song according to [https://csfdb.cn/works/37152 CSFDB]. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 19:03, 20 January 2024 (EST)
−
:It looks like [[User:Biomassbob|Bob]] has already taken care of the correction and explained the contents error.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:07, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
::: Hi, I'm just slowly going over the Chinese entries.  I've added [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3272563 a title record] for [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?3272563 this "stub" award entry], but I'm perplexed how to get it to show the author name in the award record.  Any ideas?
 +
::: Thanks! [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 12:35, 21 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::I took care of it.  The author needs to be listed in the "untitled" award record before it is linked.  I unlinked them, added the author and then re-linked them.  The title and author fields are not editable in an award that has been linked to a title record.
 +
::::For the other two above, were you going to add the original Chinese publications?  In both cases, the nomination was for the Chinese version of the story as opposed to English original/translation. I can help link them if you'd like, or you can proceed, but to avoid the above problem, the author's name should be added to the award record prior to linking. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:13, 21 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::: Yeah, I'll do those short fiction records when I get to them - I'm planning on cleaning up one category a day.
 +
::::: Did you get very far on researching 余光 aka Residual Light (#13 in the Best Novel noms)?  I noticed you hadn't done that one.  Arthur Liu (CSFDB head honcho) mentioned that they couldn't track it down, even though it looked like it was a Chinese story.  I've now found [https://www.everand.com/read/653149574/Residual-Light a very weird 2023 English language pub] that looks to be (machine?) translated from another language, I'm wondering if that's it?  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 14:55, 21 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::I didn't really go much past checking Worldcat, amazon.cn, and google.  I'm interpreting whichever language is listed first as the one that was nominated in cases of translated works.  Since authors are not listed, I've omitted them if I wasn't able to find the nominee, which was the case with this one.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:49, 21 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::::::: Cheers; with the help of someone in (I think) Indonesia, we managed to identify what exactly Residual Light is, and I've added a proper title record and updated the award record, so I think this one is as good as it's going to get.  Apparently one of the Best Series nominees is related to it, but I've not looked into it as yet.
 +
::::::: Will try to start on some of the other categories tomorrow - not had chance today.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 15:26, 22 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Pearl Pumpkin ==
+
== Robert A. Heinlein / Stranger in a Strange Land ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?342293; Halloween, not Haloween, according to title page. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:31, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
I am editing and PVing [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?297700 Stranger in a Strange Land] and have added notes and also deleted OCLC/Worldcat: 220513743 because it refers to a different edition (1977, 21cm (ie hc) and different ISBNs). My submission is [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5865682 here]. I cannot find a record on OCLC/Worldcat for this specific printing but this pub record has been SVd to OCLC/Worldcat by Bluesman who is no longer active. Is it possible to get SVs by inactive verifiers removed? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 18:27, 20 January 2024 (EST)
−
:Corrected.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:08, 30 January 2023 (EST)
+
:I've approved your edit and removed the Worldcat verification.  Any moderator can remove a secondary verification, but since that feature was added, I'm the only one to use it. I only do so when the verifier is inactive.  In any case, thanks for your edit.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:32, 20 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Baxter - Raft ==
+
== Girl in a Swing ==
  
−
Hi Ron, just noticed your [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?664698 Raft]. My later printing pagination is x-245 - perhaps yours is a typo? Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 23:57, 31 January 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?11141; 1980 UK HC on Archive.org says, on back flap, that Reginald George Haggar, who has his own Wikipedia page, did the cover art; edition you PV says Karen Murray. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 16:27, 22 January 2024 (EST)
−
:Not a typo.  The last numbered page in my copy is 246.  The last page has the author bio and is numbered.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:43, 1 February 2023 (EST)
+
:Murray is credited on the back cover.  If you look closely at the two covers, they are subtly different.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:00, 22 January 2024 (EST)
 +
::SFE also says Murray for the HC so maybe that's why someone entered it. I made 2 edits, one adding archived link and note about last unnumbered page and the other unmerging cover art. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:25, 22 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== The Black Sorcerer ==
+
== SF Writer's Workshop ==
  
−
Hi Ron, could you moderate [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5568056 this submission] please. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 04:59, 1 February 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?102360; You entered price for Owlswick TP, as can be seen on back cover of archived copy, https://archive.org/search?query=longyear+workshop, the price is much lower, I'm letting you know in case something needs fixing. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:56, 23 January 2024 (EST)
−
:Done.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:44, 1 February 2023 (EST)
+
:It would appear that Chalker/Owings got the price wrong.  Please go ahead and update it.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:00, 24 January 2024 (EST)
−
::Thank you Ron! That record solves a lot of problems. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:14, 1 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Walter Wiggins ==
+
== First Men in the Moon ==
  
−
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. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:19, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5859839; I didn't actually erase anything at the time I made my edit, it's just that it took so long to be approved that the UK guy with the slang, who made an edit at almost exactly the same time as I did, has an edit queue much shorter than mine (as does pretty much everyone else) so it got approved first, which can easily be seen by going to edit history, so our edits conflicted. So I'm going to make another edit just adding archived link which he didn't do. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:45, 29 January 2024 (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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:32, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
:Odd that I didn't get the warning that the record was updated since the edit was submitted.  You should probably refrain from adding archive.org links pending the results of [[Rules and standards discussions#Linking to third party Web pages -- defining "legally posted"|this discussion]]. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:49, 29 January 2024 (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. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:52, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
::You should read the message from long-time mod Marty just above yours in that discussion where he says it is not ISFDB's place to decide what's legal or not, we just make links and if the host of the link gets a request to take certain works down for whatever reason then we can just remove the link, which is exactly what I said earlier in that thread. I made a simple message about Moondust a few days ago and it's somehow gotten blown completely out of proportion; if anyone had a problem with ISFDB hosting links they would have told you so long ago. Just let it go and move on. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:57, 29 January 2024 (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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:25, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
:::Of course I read it.  However, a single post in a discussion does not signify that the community has reached consensus on the issue.  Unless there is consensus on the issue or consensus that we should keep adding such links while discussing (the question I raised), I will not be approving any edits adding the potentially problematic links.  I would expect that the other moderators would behave in the same manner.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:03, 29 January 2024 (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? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:14, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
::::There is rarely any consensus reached on anything discussed here; things usually just peter out without anything being decided. I know one thing, deciding to remove thousands of Internet Archive links, very many of which were added by me and were used by me and others as research tools to add/correct info here, because someone is paranoid that the internet police are going to come after this site after not doing so for the nearly 20 years it's been open to public editing, is the last option anyone should consider. We don't host, we post. My suggestion would be to just add a line or two to the legalese saying that links are only to be used for private use (i.e. reading the book) or research/study (that's what we do here) and, boom, issue solved. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:12, 29 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:::::It would make fare more sense to raise your points on the Rules and Standards discussion rather than here. I see you've made other points, but not these. Regardless, this question isn't going to be resolved on my talk page. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:34, 29 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Pwendt for self-approver ==
+
== Proposed change to title novel to shortfiction ==
  
−
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.
+
Hi Ron. Faustus is looking to change[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/mod/submission_review.cgi?5874311] a novel to shortfiction in a 1928 magazine due to it's low page count, your the only PV.[[User:Kraang|Kraang]] ([[User talk:Kraang|talk]]) 23:38, 30 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:That's fine. I checked Miller/Contento and they have it as a novelette.  It appears that [[User:Mhhutchins|Mhhutchins]] made the variant.  Perhaps he misread "nv" as novel, assuming Miller/Contento was his source.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:05, 31 January 2024 (EST)
 +
:Thanks, I'll make the changes.[[User:Kraang|Kraang]] ([[User talk:Kraang|talk]]) 12:36, 31 January 2024 (EST)
  
−
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. --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 15:39, 2 February 2023 (EST)
+
== once more with footnotes ==
  
−
== Le Guin - The Wind's Twelve Quarters and The Compass Rose ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?71155; Page count is 282. Edit PENDING. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:18, 6 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Hi Ron, is [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/File:THWNDSTWLC0000.jpg this image] any use for your [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?523721 PV here]?
+
== Spock Storybook ==
  
−
Same for this [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/File:THMNWHFLLD0000.jpg image] for yours [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?567977 here]. Kev.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?32222; While working on a ton of novelizations lately I came back across this one where my name is in the edit list followed by you adding a note about missing paper edition but this, https://www.amazon.co.uk/Storybook-Paramount-Pictures-Corporation-Paperback/dp/B00OQTMGQC, seems to be it. Also, a book club edition as seen on back cover, https://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-III-Search-Spock/dp/0671476629. I just made an edit adding an Amazon cover with another photo on the page showing back cover with correct ISBN and price; archived copy's cover was way too dark. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:58, 10 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Thanks for that.  I've cloned the record for the paperback and moved the Reginald verification over.   I'll leave it to you to enter the book club edition if you'd like.  I'm not sure where to research which book club published it though SFBC seems likely.  I'm also skeptical of the date for the BCE, though it may have been later in 1984. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:52, 10 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
: 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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 19:41, 21 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Deryni Magic ==
  
−
::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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:46, 21 February 2023 (EST)
+
Hello,  
  
−
== Demons By Daylight ==
+
As you are the PV of both works, can you look at [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/mod/submission_review.cgi?5740941 this submission] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/mod/submission_review.cgi?5740946 this submission]. I do not have them on hold in case you want to handle them - if we go to Community, I will put them on hold pending the decision. We often create special series for the non-fiction in big series and Deryni Magic looks exactly like that so it makes sense to keep them separate... but they also can go up in the parent series. If you rather start a discussion on Community, I can do that as but as you are the sole verifier on one of these books, I am starting here. Thanks! [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 13:30, 13 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Hi Annie
 +
:In general, I don't like the way Kurtz's Deryni books have been put into series.  I'm rarely a fan of the XXX Universe super-series which doesn't make sense in this instance, especially as the works contained in it are nearly all Kurtz's own short fiction.  We have fan-fiction or sequels by other hands in a sub-series named "Deryni" and they are all authorized from an anthology edited by Kurtz.  Lastly, I'd take ''King Kelson's Bride'' out of "The Histories of King Kelson" sub-series.  My copy is certainly not marketed as part of that trilogy.  If it were entirely up to me I'd keep the 4 trilogies as a sub-series of a single super-series of the Deryni series which would contain all of the other works.  But that's not exactly what you asked.  I don't really see a need to group ''Deryni Magic'' with ''Codex Derynianus''.  I'm not even sure that the latter is properly non-fiction.  It's one of those in-universe encyclopedias i.e. as if written by a fictional person from the setting.  I see that [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] added the Deryni Magic series to {{T|102600|Codex Derynianus}}.  The edit history for {{T|17013|Deryni Magic}} is less complete, but there was a title merge by Ahasuerus on the same day as the series edition to the other title.  We may want to seek his input as to why these two were grouped by that series title.  I'll leave a note on his talk page.  If they must be grouped, I would prefer a name like "Deryni Non-Fiction", but my preference would be to not group them.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:12, 13 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:: Thanks for the answer - and that is why I started here. I am fine with either way - and I agree that the current series name makes little sense. Do you want to put the two submissions on hold until this is sorted out? (Or I can if you prefer - I just do not want someone to spend time digging through things and miss the conversations). [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 21:23, 13 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:::I've held them.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:33, 13 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
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? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:10, 9 February 2023 (EST)
+
:::: I am looking at the Title History page for {{T|17013|Deryni Magic}} and, surprisingly enough, I have a vague recollection of what may have happened to it back in 2006. I think I remember changing ''something'' in a robot-created Deryni record -- probably the title type which early ISFDB robots tended to set to NOVEL -- and then merging the result with a pre-existing title. Of course, it's been 17+ years, so I can't be sure, but it feels right. I also see that Bill Longley did another title merge that affected this title in 2009, but I don't know what that was about.
−
:No need for a separate publication record.  None of the secondary sources ([https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?983721 Chalker/Owings], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?971274 Jaffery], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?152881 Nielsen], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?709492 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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:38, 12 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Robot Visions ==
+
:::: Substantively, I have no objection to changing the series structure/name. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 22:49, 13 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
You verified a {{P|792984|3rd printing}}.  I'd like to verify the {{P|278195|4th}} but I have some updates to the contents which are likely the same in your printing:
+
:::::Thanks.  I've approved the two edits in question.  I've counted 15 active verifiers of Deryni books, and I think maybe a community discussion is warranted before restructuring the rest of the series.  I'm going out of town on Saturday, so I don't really want to start that discussion until I get back.  I'd rather not try to participate in a discussion using a tablet.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:19, 14 February 2024 (EST)
−
* 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.  [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?954582 Robot Visions (8)] (changed brackets to parentheses for the wiki markup only) into a variant of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?645229 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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:25, 15 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
::Thanks for the help.  I found instructions on making variants and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5584016 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? [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?227061 1st printing] if I can be of any assistance :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:34, 15 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Art of the Pulps ==
−
:::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. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:22, 16 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::::Kev, [https://photos.app.goo.gl/CrMbkK7oU1AnS3GU7 here are photos] of all the art in {{P|278195|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. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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 [[User:Mhhutchins|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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 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 [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5584016 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. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:58, 16 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
: It's good practice doing different kinds of edits.  I drafted [[User_talk:Fjh#The_Robot_Visions_McQuarrie_INTERIORART_Project_:.29|descriptions]] for each piece of art, if anyone wants to suggest improvements before I start submitting them. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 10:16, 21 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::No charge.  My talk page is your talk page.  I just appreciate you and [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] doing all this work.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 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. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk: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  {{P|203401|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. [[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk: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 {{T|954582|The Bicentennial Man}} were the parent title, the fact that is re-used as the frontispiece to the book is a little more obvious.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5892306; Notes say copyright page date is September 2017 with actual date from Amazon but date entered here is September; was some more exact date supposed to be entered and wasn't? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:22, 15 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::::::I agree that "Robot Visions [3]" should be simply "Robot Visions", provided that we use the "(frontispiece)" disambiguator to the artwork on page ii.
+
:It was entered but was changed back to the date from the book.  I'll remove the note.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:00, 15 February 2024 (EST)
−
:::::::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 {{T|645229|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 [[User:Mhhutchins|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 {{P|178053|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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:49, 16 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::::::Hello Ron, I borrowed a copy of the {{P|203401|1990-04-03 Roc hc}} and have started editing it. Also, I've just taken delivery of the {{P|178053|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 {{P|792984|your pub}} (and {{P|278195|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. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 18:15, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
  
 +
== WFR #3 ==
  
−
=== plan/progress ===
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/submitpub.cgi; Page count was added by other PV who often adds pages to the count that shouldn't be but since this is a magazine shouldn't all pages, including covers, be counted and count changed to 236? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 23:06, 15 February 2024 (EST)
−
* done: {{T|954582|pg. 260 art}} is a variant of {{T|645229|pg. ii art}}.  {{P|792984|3rd}} and {{P|278195|4th}} printing notes already say these are the same picture.
 
−
* done: add pg. 42 art and fix page numbering 82 -> 83 in {{P|278195|4th printing}}
 
−
* done: add pg. 42 art in {{P|792984|3rd printing}}
 
−
* done: fix page numbering 82 -> 83 in {{P|792984|3rd printing}}
 
−
* done: add descriptive note to {{T|3146409|new art title}}.
 
−
* rename and describe all other interior art:
 
−
** [4] Robbie [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5587750 done]
 
−
** [2] Introduction: The Robot Chronicles [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608873 pending]
 
−
** [5] Reason [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608874 pending]
 
−
** [6] Runaround [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608876 pending]
 
−
** [7] Feminine Intuition [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608879 pending]
 
−
** [8] The Bicentennial Man [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608893 pending]
 
−
** [9] Lenny [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608897 pending]
 
−
** [10] Galley Slave [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608902 pending]
 
−
** [11] Christmas Without Rodney [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5608906 pending]
 
−
* todo: investigate {{T|2374637|Portuguese title}}
 
−
latest update [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:46, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Early Asimov Book One ==
+
== Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact, Mid-December 1986 ==
  
−
Thanks for moderating [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5582810 my submission] to add the introduction to the contents.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?56983
−
Unfortunately I did it wrong.  A {{T|3145057|new title}} was created when I wanted to link to {{T|630321|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 {{T|630321|existing title}}
 
−
* delete the {{T|3145057|unwanted title}}, unless it magically evaporates when nothing links to it
 
−
Appreciate your patience as I learn how to do things here. [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk: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 ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:23, 16 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:: done! that was easy, thanks [[User:Fjh|Fjh]] ([[User talk:Fjh|talk]]) 20:04, 19 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Masque of Mañana ==
+
hiya Ron your the only pv still hewing at the coalface for this one.  just to let you know that he contents are missing another int art by hank jankus for "picaper" on p104.  cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 21:29, 16 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:Hi Gaz
 +
:I see you've verified it as well. I'm about to go out of town for a bit, so please feel free to add the missing item.  If you're not comfortable with that, I can take care of it when I get back.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:47, 16 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::righto mate Ill have a pop at it.  [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 22:03, 16 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5584480; Does the ISBN-13 on back cover barcode count? Note says there's none in the second printing, just the ISBN-10 from the original edition. I just fixed the printing wording in the note to what it really says on the copyright page. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:46, 16 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Theodore Sturgeon / Without Sorcery ==
−
:I'd say no.  All of the copyright page and the stated ISBNs above and below the barcode show the 10 digit ISBN.  That's probably Don's note, and I suspect it was added because this would have shown up on the cleanup report.  However, it's long since been marked as ignored, and removed from that report.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:34, 17 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Baby ==
+
I am editing and PVing [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?55088 Without Sorcery] and propose to 1) change Pages to xi+355. 2) change start page of Introduction to v. 3) change start page of Preface to viii. 4) add pub notes. 5) upload high res cover scan from my copy (existing image is a thumbnail). Is all this ok with you? [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 17:30, 17 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:All those changes sound good.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:41, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?409130; I made an edit in 2021 for this, you just made an edit, the Archive.org copy is an uncorrected proof with a higher page count (someone actually wrote in page numbers with a pen), so is it acceptable here to add a link even if it's not exactly the same or should the link be moved to the title record? Because I've seen some other proofs for various books that could be added if it is acceptable. Also, the 1982 Dell PB has been on Archive.org even longer than the proof but was never entered so I just did that but the 1 copy I can see on Amazon has a totally white cover instead of totally black. Not sure what that means; I doubt they released alternate covers for such a relatively minor work but who knows. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:37, 20 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Theodore Sturgeon / E Pluribus Unicorn ==
−
:I hadn't realized that the scan was of a proof, which we don't and shouldn't track in the database.  I've removed the link and the data added as a result of that scan.  I wouldn't add it to the title record.  We generally don't track proofs here as they don't meet the definition of published.  I did question the note about a publication month that was determined by examining a pre-publication scan.  It seems wrong to me, insofar as anything in the proof is merely predictive and there is no way of knowing whether the schedule slipped between when the proof was issued and the book was eventually published.  However, the note is likely sufficient to indicate that the publication month we have is unreliable.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:31, 20 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Asimov & Silverberg - Nightfall ==
+
I am editing and PVing [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?268135 E Pluribus Unicorn] and will correct two of the titles in the Contents section:
 +
<br>
 +
"The Silken-Swift" should be "The Silken-Swift..." (existing variant)
 +
<br>
 +
"The Professor's Teddy-Bear" should be "The Professor's Teddy Bear" (existing variant)
 +
<br>
 +
The pub record currently shows the titles as they appear in the ToC. I will add a pub note about the ToC discrepancies. [[User:Teallach|Teallach]] ([[User talk:Teallach|talk]]) 16:46, 18 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:As above, all these changes are fine.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:44, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Hi Ron, could you check the title of the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?24156 essay here]. Should yours be titled ''To the Reader (Nightfall)''? If so, I'm handling four other titles and can fix yours at the same time. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:29, 20 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Mona Lisa Overdrive audiobook ==
−
:Yes, it is titled "To the Reader".  Please go ahead and change it with the others.  Thanks! --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:40, 20 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
::Great, will do. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 04:24, 21 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== 1000 Faces ==
+
I added the price and ASIN to this [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?993892 Mona Lisa Overdrive audiobook] record. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 08:40, 19 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:I backed out the changes for [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?993892 this edition] and applied them to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?993893 this edition] where they belonged. Sorry. [[User:Philfreund|Phil]] ([[User talk:Philfreund|talk]]) 08:48, 19 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?337145; It wasn't supposed to be a mod note, it was supposed to be a note explaining that the price was changed from what was there before when someone entered the wrong price. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:03, 21 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Disclosures in Scarlet ==
−
:Why would we want that in a publication note?  After the price is changed, there is no context to show that the price was ever anything else than what is shown.  We don't add publication notes stating that incorrect data was changed and I'm unaware that you've ever done so in the past.  That note is totally appropriate for a moderator note, but not for a publication note. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:22, 21 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:OK, if you say so. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:31, 21 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Boucher - "S-F Books - 1960" or "S-F Books: 1960"? ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5895461; Pasted $6.00 sticker on flap in case you want to add a note about that. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:17, 19 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:There is no evidence that that price sticker is from the publisher, so no need to add a note. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:46, 27 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Are you sure? It's mentioned several times here, https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/disclosures-scarlet/author/jacobi-carl/first-edition/. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:00, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Ron, could you check your copy of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?178417 The 6th Annual of the Year's Best S-F] to see exactly how Boucher's essay is titled - I suspect it might be "S-F Books: 1960". If it is, and it's ok with you, I'll make the change. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:48, 21 February 2023 (EST)
+
== The SFWA Handbook ==
−
:Please proceed with the change.  The tile with the dash (actually looks like an em dash), appears that way in the table of contents.  The title page uses the colon.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:09, 21 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Dark Music ==
+
Ron, I'll leave [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/mod/submission_review.cgi?5883345 this submission] for you. [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?865674 This pub] was ignored when [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?879426 this one] was created. Don't know if you want to move your SV's or import and ask Michaelc to move his PV. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 11:02, 22 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?285854; LCCN ID added, publisher was longer, checked FantLab and longer name's on title page so I made it so. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:31, 22 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Catamount ==
−
:Please don't do that this way.  As I know I've explained before, if you change the publisher on the only publication by that publisher, you effectively erase the existing record for that publisher, and all the data contained therein.  It's better to update the publisher record directly (or if that's a moderator only function, ask on the moderator board that it be done).  I'm going to reject this edit and I'll update the publisher record as to preserve the existing notes.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:37, 22 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
::So you're saying I should have added LCCN ID and then made another edit in the publisher record changing their name? Is that how it's supposed to be done? Also, I did some edits for 2 books by the same author (C. Pallen) from Manhattanville Press, the only 2 books on ISFDB from that publisher, 1 of which started with "The" and the other, published much later, which didn't, so I differed them; since there's no info on that publisher record it doesn't matter that I changed it from within the book record, right? Is that what you're saying? Also, if the Herald info had been lost it would have been a shame since I'm the one who added it in the first place. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:50, 22 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::Yes, when you change the publisher within a publication record, what you're really doing is removing the existing publisher, and adding a new one.  If you remove the last publication to which the old publisher refers, the software will delete that publisher record.  So yes, in this case you should have done it in two edits.  For your other example, it's correct that it doesn't matter if the publisher being deleted has no additional data.  If it had, what you would want to do is to merge the two publishers, which I'm fairly certain is a moderator only function.  Even then, if both publisher records have conflicting data, that would have to be resolved during the merge.  Hope this helps. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:10, 22 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Sutro ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?233737; Archived link, +[1] to page count/[283] author's note. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:46, 24 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?346448; Transient, couple of titles differ from contents page but I assume you entered them as they appeared at story heads, but "Ships That Pass" says 73, not 23, in copy just added to Dalby's site; https://richarddalbyslibrary.com/collections/newest-shopify-test/products/sutro-miller-ghost-stories-sentinel-publications-1947-paperbacks. Was that an error in book or an entry error here? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:53, 23 February 2023 (EST)
+
== A Praed Street Dossier ==
−
:Unfortunately, I no longer have that copy.  Thus the transient verification.  I think it's likely that the page number is our typo, given the record numbers of the individual titles.  Please feel free to change that if you'd like.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:14, 23 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
::http://www.philsp.com/resources/ISFAC/t155.htm#A2781; Fixed page number and another story's date which was actually published years earlier. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:38, 23 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Introduction for The Wit and Wisdom of Discworld ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5900107; There's no note about copies so you may want to enter it from the colophon at the end like you usually do for these AH/M&M books. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:05, 24 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
Hello,
+
== Vathek ==
  
−
you verified two variants of the book (https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?301290 and https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?421825). I think the title record for the introduction is very likely wrong. It should be "Introduction: Through the Wardrobe Into Discworld". At least for the ebook I'm sure the title should be as said via Amazon LookInside: https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?463079. That would also remove the duplicate title with "&" and "and", as adding the book name would no longer be necessary. Also it would match the German translation title.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2892553
  
−
Can you please verify if that's true for your copy? --[[User:Stoecker|Stoecker]] ([[User talk:Stoecker|talk]]) 09:57, 24 February 2023 (EST)
+
Ron ive just been reading the introduction and bibliography by Roger Lonsdale in the OUP edition (1983) where he talks about the 1787 french editions and he says that the theory that they were retranslated from the english back into french is wrong.  He says "Professor Parreaux's careful investigation finally disposed of this theory in 1960.  The 1787 Lausanne text undoubtedly represents Beckford's own French text, from a manuscript which he must have had with him, in a slightly earlier state than that translated by Henley"  He says that the 1787 Paris edition is a revised version of the Lausanne one but this one does contain some of Henley's notes for the English translation, retranslated into french.  The bibliography indicates the first translation from the english back into french was in 1819.
−
:Thanks for pointing this out.  I've corrected the titles.  I also corrected the book title of the first printing and reversed the parent variant relationship.  I'm pretty sure that Doubleday wouldn't have changed between printings, and I'm sure the "and" was introduced because of the cover title.  I was also able to verify the Harper trade paperback as having an ampersand for the Amazon look inside version.  Oddly, the Harper eBook, uses "and".  I suspect some of the other "and" printing are incorrect, but can't find evidence to switch them.  In any case, I left the variant of the translation of the introduction to you.  Thanks again. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:02, 25 February 2023 (EST)
+
:All that might not be the final word and im sure you've dug into deeper than me but i thought you ought to know with regard to the notes for the title.  I can scan the relevent pages and send them to you if youre interested.  cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 10:18, 25 February 2024 (EST)
 +
::Hi Gaz
 +
::I haven't done any special research on this.  I do see that [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vathek Wikipedia] sticks with the original composition in French.  You could certainly add to the notes in the title record.  However, I'd note it as an alternate theory and cite your sources.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:54, 27 February 2024 (EST)
 +
:::righto mate ill have a stab at it.  Yeah Beckford wrote it in french and Henly was commisioned to do the english translation but he was cheesed off that beckford wouldnt let him publish and the rapscallion jumped the gun, published it without mentioning beckford and said it was translated from some old arab text.  The dispute is about the french versions published shortly after the english one.  I couldn't find anything in the wikipedia that says the first french versions were retranslated from henley's english version back into french which was what people originally believed and which lonsdale says has been refuted.  Ill see if i can find any other source for the double translation theory. cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 23:34, 27 February 2024 (EST)
  
−
== J.W. ==
+
== Grandon ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?327628; I think co-editor is this guy, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?11081. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:19, 26 February 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?21045; I just added edits with HathiTrust links to 333 and Werewolf of Ponkert, I checked online and all 6 books say The Grandon Company on the title page, I'm thinking of changing publisher's name to that, you PV 4 of them so if yours say the same let me know and then I'll make the change. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:23, 1 March 2024 (EST)
−
:Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:35, 26 February 2023 (EST)
+
:They all say "The Grandon Company" and it would be fine to change the publisher's name.  Just make sure you update the publisher instead of individually updating all the publication records. Let me know if you have any issues. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:14, 1 March 2024 (EST)
 +
::I can't do that; I'm not a mod. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:34, 5 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:::Updated.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:03, 5 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Futures Forestalled ... for Now: South African Science Fiction and Futurism ==
+
== Swear by Apollo ==
  
−
I was taking a look at {{P|935348|this publication}} based on [[ISFDB:Verification_requests#Futures_Forestalled_..._for_Now%3A_South_African_Science_Fiction_and_Futurism|this discussion]]. As far as I can tell, this is an essay (and not a publication) that appeared in the non-genre magazine [https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rcwr20/34/1 Current Writing]. I wanted to check with you as the processing moderator to see if you saw something I missed. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 15:51, 26 February 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291019; This is the book club edition (Random House / BCE) going by the page count but the record has trade price; your Reginald SV may be affected by that. There's a copy, https://www.etsy.com/listing/1292726176/swear-by-apollo-by-shirley-barker-1958, that shows trade with price on front and cover artist on back + LCCN on copyright page; eBay has nothing but club editions except for 1 seller who shows LCCN on copyright page but didn't bother with photos of the flaps. LoC site says 306 pages, not 307. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:33, 5 March 2024 (EST)
−
:Looking at the submission, I probably thought I was skipping it rather than approving it.  I never intentionally approve submissions with a image link from a site for which we don't have permissions. I do give deference when the submitter is working from their own copy, but the image warning would have made me think this one should not be approved without contacting the submitter.  The verifier was active recently.  It may be worth reaching out to them to see what they thought they were adding.  It looks like this may need to be converted to an essay in a non-genre magazine. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:28, 26 February 2023 (EST)
+
:Trade copy here, https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006592863. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:34, 5 March 2024 (EST)
 +
::Well, the Reginald verification is from [[User:Mhhutchins|Mhhutchins]], not me.  I also see that you effectively converted the publication record of the trade edition to that of the book club edition with [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5022497 this edit] in 2021 while not adjusting the publisher to indicate the book club.  Both the Reginald number and the Worldcat number refer to the trade edition. I would guess the page count in the record was 306 before you changed it, which would match Worldcat.  What I'd recommend is that you back out your edit and restore the data for the trade edition.  That would be easier than creating a new record for the trade,  fixing the publisher of the BCE, removing the external IDs and then getting two other editors to move their verifications to a new trade record.  After you've restored the trade edition, then you could clone it to create the BCE.  Lastly, I'm not sure why you're asking me about this record.  I'm not in the edit history and have no verifications, aside from marking the ones that are not applicable. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:17, 5 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:::https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5908165; OK, so I went back and did it the way it was before and then improved it with lots of other info which the previous editors apparently didn't care to look up. As I've said before, the only reason I ask you is because you're around more often than some of the others (at least until recently when you're doing mostly your own audiobook edits) so when I see your name in a record I default to you. Mr. Hutchins hasn't really been actively editing for years and barely responds to anything, anyway, so no use asking them. Rudam is the one who approved my nearly 3-years-old previous edit and I believe he's the one who I asked to slow down on the approvals because I was finding things that needed fixing that they were not noticing because they were just running through dozens of approvals in the space of a few minutes just to get the queue down to size, I guess. They went off in a huff after that. So, you know, it's really difficult dealing with all the personalities here and figuring out who's around and who's mad at who and whatever so if I get a little confused sometimes I think it's understandable. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:04, 5 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
== Peter Archer (I) adaptations of Oz novels ==
+
== Futuristic Tales, No.1 ==
  
−
Hi, Ron. Recently I recognized that your Peter Archer A{{a|359605}} is distinct from others, so I revised your verified record of ''The Road to Oz'' picture book adaptation, in its 3rd printing of 2009 edition P{{p|366091}}, to distinguish the adapter as Peter Archer (I). A second edit/self-approve was necessary for the chapbook title --you probably know; I didn't.
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?995232
  
−
Pursuing Peter Archer (I), I learned that that is a joint pseudonym. More descriptive disambiguators and fewer roman numerals are used here recently (CoViD era, i have noticed since returning). Perhaps "Peter Archer (pseudonym)" would be a better choice.
+
hiya ron sorry to bother you I just wanted to pick your brains about how to handle cases like this re the alternate names of the authors.  Theres the 3 names which are all psuedonyms.  The authors real name is not on the db - presumably if it was on the db then those 3 would be made alternate names of it.  as the real parent name isnt listed then one of the others has been made the parent name (Stacker).  Did you do that because it was the earliest one in the contents or was there some other reason?  There's some more like that for later issues of this mag so i want to get on top of it before trying to sort them out myself. cheers from gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 17:35, 6 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
Byron and {{a|Kathryn Jackson}} are new to the database. (Husband and wife seem likely but I didn't find it stated.) From library records I learned that they adapted at least three Oz novels for Little Golden Books in the early 1950s. Last hour I added the other two as 1952 chapbooks. Library of Congress reports no other Peter Archer adaptations of Oz. WorldCat does not enable any such negative conclusions, as far as I know.  
+
Ron ive just noticed that you linked them by doing a variant title.  Does using the alternate name route have the same outcome?  [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 17:58, 6 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:Hi Gaz
 +
:I recall these edits from earlier today.  I went ahead and adjusted things to get the records in order, as you have noticed.  The first thing I did was to add "Abu Khattub" as the legal name for the three pseudonyms (or rather "Khattub, Abu" which is the proper format for the legal name.  In order to get those three stories under the same bibliography, there are two sets of edits that have to be done.  First the authors must be linked.  We ordinarily select whichever name the author is best know as in the field as the canonical name. Since we had three names with one story using each pseudonym, there was no way to give any name preference for the canonical, so I just chose one, Garry Stacker.  If we find more publications by this author, we may need to adjust which name is canonical. I should also note that because there are no publications with the "Abu Khattub" credit, we cannot us that one as a canonical name. So, choosing Stacker as canonical, I then made the other two names into pseudonyms by navigating to each author and using the "Make/Remove Alternate Name" tool. The other set of edits is to make the title records under the alternate names into variants of a parent title using the canonical name. Again, I went to each title record and used the "Make This Title a Variant" tool, selecting Option 2 with "Garry Stacker" as the author name to make the new parent title.  I hope this answers your question, but let me know if you need me to expand on any steps in the process.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:11, 6 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
The number of submissions was greater than should have been. If I understand correctly, best practice is to set all toggles {Non-Genre ; Juvenile ; Novelization ; Graphic Format} and set Length if known --all for the child SHORTFICTION created as content of the new CHAPBOOK. Only then, make that one a variant. Then put parent SHORTFICTION in a series, or add title Note or Synopsis, if appropriate. Right?
+
::cheers mate, a bit more in it than i thought, i'm glad I asked else i would have only tried to do one or the other of those. Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 20:46, 6 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
How many of the 4 toggles and Length should be set for the CHAPBOOKs? Here I made the child CHAPBOOK juvenile. Then make CHAPBOOK a variant. New parent CHAPBOOK gets a Note occasionally; no Synopsis or series.
+
== New York 2140 Audiobook ==
  
−
Your verified ''Road to Oz'' contains CHAPBOOK "The Road to Oz (abridged)" and SHORTFICTION "The Road to Oz". I did not name any of the four 1952 CHAPBOOKs and SHORTFICTION "(abridged)". What do you think nowadays?
+
Hello, question about the ISBN from audiobook download {{P|994420|New York 2140}}; where did you source it from? It doesn't match the one listed on the Hachette site (9781549128141). Thanks! [[User:Albinoflea|Albinoflea]] ([[User talk:Albinoflea|talk]]) 22:10, 6 March 2024 (EST)
 +
:Hi Albinoflea
 +
:Sure, I got that from the linked Worldcat record and the same ISBN is used for the three eAudiobook records I can find in Worldcat.  I did find a different ISBN, 9781478941224, listed in [https://www.audiofilemagazine.com/reviews/read/127281/new-york-2140-by-kim-stanley-robinson-read-by-suzanne-toren-robin-miles/ this review], however, searching that in Worldcat returns a record for the print book which doesn't actually list that ISBN.  Worldcat does not have the ISBN from the Hachette site.  I'll admit that I'm finding audiobook ISBNs a bit puzzling.  Audible doesn't list them and they do not appear in the book, nor in the metadata that I can see when I import them in iTunes.  Worldcat can list multiple ISBNs, though it doesn't in this instance.  That review site will sometimes list library edition ISBNs in addition to trade, but again, not in this instance. For ''New York 2140'' I suppose that we could list them all in the current record and cite the source of each.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:44, 7 March 2024 (EST)
  
−
Take a look at all these Peter Archer (I) records if and when you have a chance. For the next 10 days I will be away from home, and maybe away from ISFDB. --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 21:18, 26 February 2023 (EST)
+
== Scream for Jeeves ==
  
−
:I have a larger concern about these records. My understanding is that an adapter should not be listed with an author credit, but should be reflected in the notes only. It appears these records were changed after I verified the copy. I'm going to start a new Rules and Standards discussion to ensure my understanding is correct.  Regarding your question about the flags being used on CHAPBOOK titles.  Non-Genre seems appropriate for chapbooks, as it would place the title record at the bottom of the author's bibliography.  The other flags, to my mind appear to apply specifically to the SHORTFICTION, and not to the container (CHAPBOOK).  That's just my opinion, and you could pose that question on one of the community boards to get wider input.  I did add the disambiguator (abridged) to the SHORTFICTION title.  This especially makes sense if the adapter is not listed as an author.  It's partially to prevent the software from presenting it as a duplicate of the novel.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:33, 4 March 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?487698; Starting number of first story is wrong, title of essay is wrong. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:24, 12 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:: I have been away for most of this fortnight. Now I have redd that new discussion [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/Rules_and_standards_discussions#Adaptations_and_Abridgements Adaptations and Abridgements (at Rules and Standards)].
+
:Updated. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:25, 12 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:: For my information, does the 2015 publication update by Mhhutchins [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?2706045] show up on your report "My Changed Primary Verifications [New!]" or is the report limited in scope to "recent" updates?
 
−
:::No it does not.  The oldest update listed is from October 2016.  This may have been when that report or the underlying data supporting it was added.--Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:06, 11 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
:: I agree that the story title should be disambiguated, such as "(abridged)" or "(adapted)". I guess I would call this one an adaptation but I haven't seen it. With DougH, I would prefer to see those or similar parenthetical notations used when titles do not match.
 
−
:: I'll take your suggestion concerning CHAPBOOK titles as Juvenile, etc. --[[User:Pwendt|Pwendt]]|[[User talk:Pwendt|talk]] 17:06, 10 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Rohmer's Bast Pyramid Cover ==
+
== The Dark Tower ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?289865; Philsp.com page for this book says J. Lombardero did the cover and I see a little JL on the lower right. I assume if his name was in the book you would have entered it so how should it be entered? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:21, 28 February 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?63665
−
:Well your eyes are better than mine.  I can't find the initials even with a magnifying glass.  Since the artist is not credited in the book, you should add it as the canonical name, i.e. {{A|Joseph Lombardero}}.  When you not the source, I'd go with "The Page of Fu Manchu".  Galactic Central (philsp.com) hosts a large number of indexes and bibliographies, so giving the domain name doesn't really give enough information to identify the source.  Especially, as in this case, when they are only hosting the site, rather than creating it.  Good find.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:51, 28 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
::OK, I made an edit, but this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?27160, reveals that the other 5 Pyramid covers done by Lombardero for Rohmer have all been entered, but as J. It's a mess, with 1 PV mentioning the artist is credited on the back cover (as J.), 1 non-PV mentioning the same thing, some not mentioning anything, etc. Only 1 has an active PV (I think), MLB, and he doesn't complain much about change these days, so if you or some other Rohmer fan wanted to look at this further I'm sure you could probably improve things. I assume your back cover doesn't say anything; if it does it would probably say J., which means my edit entering Joseph will need to be cancelled. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:36, 28 February 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::As I mentioned above, there is no credit on the book, which includes the back cover. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:43, 28 February 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== My Favorites in Suspense ==
+
hiya ron i'm having a look at the int art for my book (https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?167561) to see if the existing int art title can be added to the contents.  The hodder hb has 12 named colour plates listed on an illustrations content page.  just wanted to check if the american editions have the same pictures.  cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 14:27, 15 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Hi Gaz
 +
:I replaced the {{P|63665|trade edition}} above with the {{P|770401|Artist Signed Edition}}, which is why I marked the former verification as transient.  You may try reaching out to [[User:Willem H.|Willem H.]] who has a permanent verification on that edition.  I can tell you that the Artist Signed Edition also lists twelve color plates on the illustration contents page.  There are also several monochrome spot illustrations and illustrations for section headings in addition to pictorial end-papers. Hope this is helpful for you.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:10, 15 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5597540; I believe the other Archive.org copy, which you worked on, is a book club edition. It has the same incomplete copyright page as the one here, https://www.ebay.com/itm/185721019229; publisher should be Random House / BCE, I think. There's also the question of where external ID's really belong since neither copy is the original edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:13, 2 March 2023 (EST)
+
:: sorry mate i didnt notice it was a transient, thanks for the info cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 20:07, 15 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:Well, no.  {{P|570083|this}} publication record is clearly for the trade edition.  The link to the scan was added to the record.  The record was not created from that scan.  I guess that may be a scan of a book club edition, but there's not really enough evidence to say definitively.  It's possible that the copyright page of the trade edition would include a printing or edition statement, or the LCCN.  However, there are many examples of trade books that do not.  If we were certain that the scan was for a book club edition, it should be removed from this record, but I'm not certain.  Feel free to clone that record to create a record for the book club edition, if you'd like.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:32, 2 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::Well, OK. At least there'll be another edition here soon once mine is approved. I see there's this, too, https://www.ebay.com/itm/334763510639, a third printing, so I don't know how many times they printed this thing, but I also found this, https://www.ebay.com/itm/334768776674, a first printing, so that's likely the original non-book club edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:57, 2 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::And thus you've proven that the title page differs for the first edition.  I've removed the scan. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:01, 2 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== PKD - Dr. Bloodmoney ==
+
== The Baum Bugle, Spring 2023  ==
  
−
Hello Ron, I'm about to add a 2003 3rd printing of your {{P|289298|2004 4th printing}} and I notice that your novel title is the long version. Is that correct, or should it be just "Dr. Bloodmoney"?
+
Please see [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5847952 this edit] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5847960 this edit] which impact your verified {{P|984332|The Baum Bugle, Spring 2023}}. Let me know how I should respond to submitter on first one and whether I should accept the second one. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 10:10, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:I think that both changes are essentially fine.  I can convert the first essay to an interview, or you can work with the submitter on how that is accomplished if you would prefer.  For the second edit, it was a little confusing as the title page has "Art and Additional Comments by Lorena Azpiri" which did not make it clear that she was also interviewed.  I would recommend cloning the interview for the Spanish version.  There is not a separate Spanish title listed, so maybe make the Spanish a variant of the English. Although, the interview itself is printed side by side with Spanish on the left, so I could go either way with which title should be canonical.  Let me know if you'd like me to work on these changes.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:27, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
::Since you have the pub, I will unhold these and let you work them. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 13:12, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
edit... and what about this {{P|115221|1st printing}} while we're at it? Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 08:03, 3 March 2023 (EST)
+
== Little Annie and Jack in London ==
−
:I've changed the record for my copy.  You should contact [[User talk:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] about the first printing.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:19, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::Thanks Ron, I've alerted Pete to this. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:04, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Necronomicon's Reanimator ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1969250
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?309542; I corrected a minor mistake (On/One) but noticed that every cover I can see online says $3.95 on the lower right corner, not $3.50. SFE has a clear cover showing the price. Wrong verification or higher-priced reprint? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:30, 4 March 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5922621
−
:{{P|283739|Chalker/Owings}} has the price as $3.50.  They also note, as does {{Reginald3}} that it was reprinted in 1985 with C/O stating that there were additional reprints after.  I would assume that the covers you are seeing are from later printings.  Reginald also has a variation in title between the 1977 and the 1985 editions, and I'm still researching that.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:58, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::I see price is $3.95 now; what changed? Also, you probably know already but there's this, too: https://fantlab.ru/edition249786. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:38, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::Well, after seeing that the cover included the date, and that it was listed on several sale listings described as the first edition from 1977, I determined that Chalker/Owings were probably in error about the price.  Fantlab is for a different printing than the two I working with.  Feel free to add it if you'd like.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:47, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Guinever's Gift ==
+
hiya Ron i didnt ask you about this first because your pv was transient.  I can scan the pages and get them to you if that would help. cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 10:05, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5598537; I made some changes in case that affects your verifications since this isn't the regular edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:32, 4 March 2023 (EST)
+
:I still have the book handy.  I'm afraid I have to disagree with you.  Reading footnote 7, makes it clear that "Little Ella" is the name of the mirror reversed reproduction by Currier and Ives of "My First Sermon" which is the illustration appearing on page 171 (it is also identified as such in {{P|558606|this later edition}} of the Annotated Alice).  The other Millais painting, "My Second Sermon" is described as the same girl sleeping, which does not fit either illustration.  Therefore, the remaining illustration on page 172 has to be the one from ''Little Annie and Jack in London''.  Let me know if you have a different interpretation, but I'm pretty sure the current title is correct.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:35, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:Please don't make edits converting the publication record of the trade edition of a book into the book club edition.  The record you were trying to change is clearly for the trade edition.  It includes the ISBN. The linked Worldcat record has the ISBN and notes first edition.  The publisher name nor the notes indicate that it is a book club edition.  The only piece of data that is incorrect is the link to the scan (which I've now removed).  As that link was obtained from a [https://www.worldcat.org/title/606129407 Worldcat record] which also indicates that it is a first edition, and upon your further research it is incorrect.  The problem with the edit you attempted is that it effectively deletes the trad edition and replaces it with a book club edition.  It also would create a record with incorrect external ids as they all refer to the trade edition.  I'm going to reject your edit for these reasons.  If you wish to add the book club edition, please submit a new edit cloning the existing record, which is a better approach as it doesn't delete the trade edition.  Also, if you see a publication record with an incorrect scan, feel free to submit an edit removing that link with an explanation that it belongs to a different edition.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:20, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::I added LCCN, cover artist (only photo of full back flap I could find anywhere and even then it's barely legible) and cover image to trade edition; however, I can't find price anywhere since almost every auction online is for the book club, so maybe you or someone can find it. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:41, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Dark Carnival Date ==
+
::sorry Ron but i still think i'm right on this one.  The bottom pic is the millais painting "MY First Sermon" https://victorianweb.org/painting/millais/paintings/43.html  the top pic is "Little Ella" https://www.americanantiquarian.org/514163.htm  Its note number 4 in my book not No 7 so maybe the notes are different?  Or even the pics are different? [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 21:13, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?8771; I added LCCN and also month/day to reg. title and cover art only to see Wiki says October, not May 10. Did you write the note about where the exact date came from? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 17:36, 5 March 2023 (EST)
+
:::OK, our books have different illustrations.  It does appear that what mine label as "My First Sermon" is in fact "Little Ella", though the note does not make this clear.  However, the second illustration in the QPB edition is neither of the images you linked. I'm going to reject your edit and update the title record to change "My First Sermon" to "Little Ella". For your book, if it has both the Millais painting and the Currier and Ives version, you should adjust the altered title to the correct page and add "My First Sermon".  Let me know if that makes sense.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:25, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:I did not, but it is in the LOC Catalog of Copyright Entries on page 192 [https://archive.org/details/catalogofcopyrig311libr/page/n207/mode/2up here].  That note appears to have been added by [[User talk:PatConolly|PatConolly]] on 2019-09-15.  My only complaint about your edit is that LCCN numbers of that vintage generally have a dash instead of 0s.  I don't know precisely when LOC stopped using the dashes, but is was at the end of the 20th century.  Since the LCCN does not appear in the the book, it's a minor quibble.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:53, 5 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::I enter LCCN as they appear on the LoC site; as long as clicking the ID link leads to the right page on their site it seems OK to me. If pre-2000 LCCN should have had dashes then somebody should have said something before countless moderators approved the hundreds/thousands of LCCN I've entered in the last 2+ years. I think I'll ask on Community if anyone can whip up something that can automatically change all LCCN entered here with 00 to -; unlikely but you never know. In this case I'll cancel my edit and enter it with the dash since this is a seminal work that should have info entered exactly right. Re: the date, it seems more right to me that a horror collection would be released in the month of Halloween, but then most of what Arkham House released was horror so it could very well have been released earlier like other books of theirs that year; just to be safe I'll remove the month changes and just do the LCCN. If anyone can say for sure what the exact date is then those can be changed later. EDIT: I added LCCN with the dash and the FantLab ID which I've somehow never entered and noticed something: there are several cover photos on their site and it's signed G. Barrows + front flap says George Barrows, yet George Burrows is entered here. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:14, 5 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
:The artist name should be changed.  However, it would be best to change at the author level.  I'll check with the other verifiers to ensure it's ok to change all instances.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:35, 5 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== MoM ==
+
::::righto mate - its a bit misleadin in my book as well as he gives the impression that the first pic is millais and the one underneath is the mirror reversed copy when its actually the other way round - he was taking the looking glass theme too seriously. cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 21:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Re: your rejection, it was discussed with him/her on their board under the title "A Month of Mystery". Usually we wait until they reply before rejecting (which rarely happens because they usually agree with the changes(s) I made). I'm not clear on what you mean about deleting the trade edition, the one that I entered recently. PV edition is book club (fewer pages; https://www.ebay.com/itm/266154678368) and needs BCE in publisher to differ it from the trade edition. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:15, 6 March 2023 (EST)
+
(undented)
−
:The policy is that you should seek (and receive) agreement before you submit the edit.  I know that's how I've explained it to you in the past.  The current record is for a trade edition of the book that has been verified by two editors.  If your edit had been approved, there would no longer be a record for the first printing of the trade edition.  There would only be a record for a book club edition and the second printing of the trade edition.  Even if [[User:Swfritter|Swfritter]] agreed that their copy is a book club edition, there would still be a verification for the trade edition that can't be questioned as the editor is no longer active.  What you should have done, is to clone this publication record to make a record for the book club edition.  Then if Swfritter has the BCE, they should move their verification to the new record.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:51, 6 March 2023 (EST)
+
Ron while were on it does your book have a picture not listed in the contents thats in mine.  Its in the tweedledum chapter just after the Tenniel picture with the rattle on the ground.  its a tenniel drawing from "Punch" of a boy on a gate with a gun and waving a rattle. also in the wool and water chapter next to the tenniel drawing of alice and the sheep shopkeeper theres a photo of "Alice's shop" in oxford not in the toc. [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 21:51, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
−
::I see. OK. I think I'll give up on this particular area of editing; way too many books were PV that have wrong info entered, in many cases this same issue of people not knowing or caring exactly what edition of the book they had, and my trying to fix them is more trouble than it's worth. There's endless other things to be done here. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:20, 6 March 2023 (EST)
+
:Yes, both the Punch drawing and the photo of the shop are present.  I hadn't bothered with the drawing as there is no good way of giving it a title.  I omitted the photo as it is uncredited and I don't usually include photos.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 22:03, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Stained-Glass World ==
+
::i put in a edit a few days ago adding the tenniel drawing to my book and its just been signed off.  I called it "Punch Cartoon". i'm happy to take it out to keep the different editions as consistent as possible.  I left the shop one out as i figured it might be because it was a photo. cheers Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 23:07, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::No need to remove or delete the new drawing.  I was just explaining why I hadn't originally added that item.  I'll go ahead and import it in my copies.  Thanks.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:30, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?232309; You're the last person in the edit history so I'm letting you know that when I was adding an Archive.org link I noticed that even though it says July in book and in note here someone entered the month as April. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:06, 6 March 2023 (EST)
+
== Horror: 100 Best Books ==
−
:Well, since my edit added only Worldcat and Reginald numbers and neither source gives more than the year, I have no special insight as to what the date should be.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:41, 6 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Great Disciple ==
+
Hi. There may be an error in the contents of the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?283627 publication] you've PV'd. Could you check & chime in [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Faustus#Lort_of_the_Flies_review here] with what you've got in your copy? Thanks! [[User:MagicUnk|MagicUnk]] ([[User talk:MagicUnk|talk]]) 14:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?246597; I made the 1 missing story that I added to this collection a variant of author's parent name but what's the procedure to get rid of the 6 variant titles in the contents? Should I correct the titles under the alternate name as I did for the name used in the book? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:51, 8 March 2023 (EST)
+
== An Informal History of the Hugos ==
−
:I'm not sure I completely understand what you are asking.  Are you saying that there are title records in this book that are incorrect?  If so, what you depends on whether they occur in any other publications.  If not, then you can correct the title record.  If the title is in another publication, then you should add a new title to this publication record, and make it a variant to the canonical title.  You would then need to remove the incorrect title record from this publication.  If you are asking about something else, please explain further.  Links to the titles you think are incorrect and what you think needs updating would be helpful.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:04, 8 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::I'm asking about the 6 stories in the link that say "variant"; as you know since you approved it, I corrected several incorrect titles but those titles are still incorrect under the alternate name. So how do I get both names to display the same correct title? Do I have to retitle them individually, merge, or something else? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:14, 8 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
:::All of the contained titles in that work are variants.  However, when a variant differs in title from its parent, it is displayed with both titles.  If you updated the canonical title, it would have no effect on the variant title.  This makes sense as one of the purposes of variant titles is to show variations in title.  Then my answer above is what you want and how you'd proceed depends on whether the variant title appears in other publications or not.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:34, 8 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Hyde & Wintz - Précieuses reliques ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?672377
  
−
Hello Ron, could you process [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5601198 my submission] for this title that I asked in the Moderator note to not process. Marty has given me great advice which I will take post approval. I'll fix the titling, "nom" -> "Nom" and anything else I can find. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 14:07, 8 March 2023 (EST)
+
Ron Ive just pv'd this and theres a couple of walton's reviews in my copy not in the db contents. my book has a review of "A Canticle for Leibowitz" on p69 and a review of "Dying Inside" on p214. Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 09:14, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:Sure.  Done. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:16, 8 March 2023 (EST)
+
:Hi Gaz -
−
::Smooth running :) Thanks. Kev.--[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 14:26, 8 March 2023 (EST)
+
:I don't know how those were missed.  Please feel free to add them, or let me know if you'd like me to do so.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:32, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Resurrectionist ==
+
::i'm happy to do it mate but i'm not 100% sure about the second one.  thats the only review that doesnt have a surtitle (right word?) so should that just go down as a review and not a review and an essay?  Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 19:43, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::For the Silverberg review, you only need to add the review without a separate essay.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:00, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5601382; Isn't the procedure to unmerge when the artist name is different as I explained in my note, HefferMan vs. HefferNan? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:41, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
::::Ron one of the reviews isnt showing up as hypertext, is that something ive done - I cant see anything wrong with how it was added? Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 13:24, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:It's easier to remove the incorrect COVERART title from the publication that is in error.  Then add a new COVERART title to the same pub.  These can be done in either order, but best to explain in the notes to the moderator what is intended for subsequent edits.  Of course you'll also have to build the variant relationship once the new title is created.  The issue with unmerging, is that until you update the author credit on the unmerged title, it will appear as a potential duplicate both in the cleanup reports and if anyone checks for duplicates.  Given that approvals are running two days behind from submissions, that creates a window where the titles could get re-merged.  I will note that you could have expanded a bit in your note to the moderator.  Maybe specifically stating that the author credit is different rather than listing the two names and expecting the moderator to recognize they differ.  Your note left me wondering if you wanted to make a variant between the paperback and hardcover editions because of differences in trim.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:54, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
:::::I can explain what happened.  When a new review title record is created, the software attempts to match the reviewed title and author to an existing record in the database.  In this case, you entered the review author as "Walter M. Miller".  {{T|2283|A Canticle for Leibowitz}} has only ever been published as by "Walter M. Miller''', Jr.'''" Thus the software couldn't match your new review title to an existing title record.  I would recommend updating the review author in the {{T|3297174|review title record}} to "Walter M. Miller, Jr.".  Unfortunately, the software only attempts to link the review when it is first created, so that won't cause the hyperlink to appear.  To make that happen there is another step. From the review title, you'll want to use the "Link Review to Title" tool.  You'll need the title number for A Canticle for Leibowitz which is 2283.  Once that edit is approved, the link will appear.  Hope this helps, but let me know if you have any questions.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:10, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Same or different authors / artists? ==
+
== Third Cry to Legba ==
  
−
Hello, Ron! We have both [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?273536 Tania Ianovskaia] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?225848 Tatiana Ianovskaia], both did interior art  related to Lewis Carroll's work, which brings up the question if they are related, or even maybe one and the same person. They both pop up in publications verified by you, for example [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?668434 here] (Tania). Would it be possible for you to take a look into the identities? Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 12:26, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?77932; I added Luminist link, word in subtitle should be Cobbett. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:59, 28 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:Hi Christian
+
:Fixed.  I'm not sure about those wasabisys.com links.  In the recent discussion we had consensus for archive.org but not other sites.  I've posted the question in that [[Rules and standards discussions#Linking to third party Web pages -- defining "legally posted"|thread]] and will hold the edit for now.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:15, 28 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:The credits are as they appear in each book.  ''The Annotated Alice'' has short biographies of the artists and mentions that Tatiana illustrated some Carroll books that were published by "Tania Press".  There's also [https://www.lewiscarroll.org/2008/07/17/tanias-alice/ this post] from the Lewis Carroll Society of North America that uses both "Tania" in the header, and "Tatiana" in the body of the post.  I think this is enough evidence that they are the same person, and I'm going to make the variant relationship.  Despite the number of titles that we have, I'm going to make Tatiana canonical.  From what I'm seeing, that appear to be how she is most often credited in books which we don't seem to have in the database, but could.  Thanks for finding this.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:57, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
::Ahasuerus just approved an edit of mine for a book PV by him (among others) and it included a Luminist link so he's obviously fine with them. It's not a torrent site with passwords and membership and such, it just provides singular PDF's of old books and magazines. As always, if someone complains about an individual book they'll take it down, like Archive.org does, and the link won't work (someone with patience, i.e. not me, could have some fun doing an advanced search for the hundreds of Luminist links in ISFDB records, most added by me over the last few years, and remove any that don't work anymore if there are any); if not, the links are good. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:09, 28 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:: Tanya/Tania is also a very common diminutive for Tatiana in Russian (it is also a name on its own of course). Which also adds to the evidence. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 19:04, 9 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== The Minotaur Trilogy ==
+
== Dr. Caligari ==
  
−
Hello Ron. Regarding [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?284345 this] pblication. Cound you ell me if your copy is a limited edition (of 500) signed by Charles de Lint, George Barr, Robert Collins and Mathew Hargreaves. --[[User:Mavmaramis|Mavmaramis]] ([[User talk:Mavmaramis|talk]]) 13:21, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5926963; Most of the photos are from the limited edition, Gahan Wilson art, signature pages, 100 copies, etc. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:32, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
−
:It is.  I'm guessing that you are asking because you want to verify the publication?  If so, feel free to add notes about the limitation, or I can do that if you'd prefer.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 13:33, 9 March 2023 (EST)
+
:The ISBN is they list is for the trade edition, though for some reason, they are using a 10 digit ISBN for a 2016 publication. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:57, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
−
::I will indeed be verifying it once the copy I ordered arrives from the US. --[[User:Mavmaramis|Mavmaramis]] ([[User talk:Mavmaramis|talk]]) 00:23, 10 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Coming Attractions in F&SF July-Aug 2015 ==
+
== This year's Chinese Hugo Finalists ==
  
−
Hi, you're one of 2 PVs of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?526483 this magazine issue]. The [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1883751 Coming Attractions] seems to have a couple of minor (*) issues:
+
I'll do all the ones that aren't already in the DB - all but a couple were on two rec lists, so I already have the details at hand for them.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 11:54, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Sounds good. I may need to pause for a few hours. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:57, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:: Sorry for stepping on your toes for a couple of the later awards. I've think I've done all the Chinese finalists, apart from Wandering Earth II in Best Dramatic Presentation.  [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 14:15, 29 March 2024 (EDT)  EDIT: I'd missed Yao Haijun in Editor Long Form, but he's in now. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 14:27, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::No worries, I thought I was the one stepping on toes. Your notes were more extensive than mine which is why I zapped my own records. I'm going to wait until this evening to enter the rest, unless you wanted to work on them now. I can handle the DP Chinese finalist if you don't get to it since we don't need a record and it's simply a matter of cut and paste. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:31, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
* It's categorized as a COLLECTION, should be an ESSAY I think?
+
== Science Fiction Reader's Guide ==
−
* The "July-June" in the title seems a bit odd, looking at the similar entry in other issues, I'm guessing it should be "July-August"?
 
  
−
(* - minor, but the unexpected type is enough to break some program code I'm working on that is using the short fiction data...)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5928018; Link and fixed essay title, publisher should have something (Nebraska?) added to differ from much later unrelated one of the same name. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:52, 30 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?270380; https://archive.org/search?query=0822011697; Price is lower on archived copy so ISFDB record is likely for a later printing, essays from Reader's Guide originated in this book so you may want to import them. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:15, 30 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Thanks [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 19:48, 10 March 2023 (EST)
+
== Pisces of Fate ==
−
:Corrected.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:13, 11 March 2023 (EST)
 
  
−
== Aldiss - Cryptozoic! ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?622398; I added a cover artist to a book today and his name is Henry Christian-Slane which is the same as his site henrychristianslane.com; should the artist for the book linked be Slane, too? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 08:53, 31 March 2024 (EDT)
 +
:I don't own the book, nor have I verified it except for Worldcat which has no art credits, so I couldn't say.  The note states the artist is from a Vogel nomination which can be viewed [https://www.sffa.nz/sjv/sjvNominations-2016.html here].  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:37, 31 March 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Hi Ron, re this {{P|633905|1st printing}}, am I right in thinking we record the "official" pub date, not when it becomes available? Gollancz.co.uk and Amazon date is 2017-11-02. What do you think?
+
== When you get a minute ==
  
−
Even worse, [https://openlibrary.org/books/OL26792277M/Cryptozoic Open Library] has 2017-03-19. Kev.
+
Hey Ron, just a heads up. [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/cleanup_report.cgi?326 These audiobooks] have the wrong format. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:54, 3 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:My recollection is that there have been several discussions regarding publication dates over the years. I did find a [[Rules and standards discussions/Archive/Archive20#Proposed Date help text revision|recent update discussion]] that points to [[Template:PublicationFields:Date|this template]] (see Discrepancies Between Stated Date and Reality).  Looking at the edit history, it appears that [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] changed the date and added that note.  You may want to reach out to him to find out what his thought process was.  I've no objection if the date changes.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:28, 11 March 2023 (EST)
+
:All fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:42, 3 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::Thanks for taking the time to root out those links for me and I've left a note on his page. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 14:29, 11 March 2023 (EST)
 
−
::: As a Transient verifier I'll defer to the PVs. No problem here if the date is amended. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] ([[User talk:PeteYoung|talk]]) 03:11, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Thanks both of you for your help. I've submitted an edit to change the date and expand the notes. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 15:01, 20 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Self-Approver ==
+
== Aesop's Fables ==
  
−
Hello, as you're in the list of moderators handling my most recent submission, can you please comment on https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/ISFDB:Community_Portal#Self-Moderation_Request? --[[User:Stoecker|Stoecker]] ([[User talk:Stoecker|talk]]) 06:44, 11 March 2023 (EST)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?935296
  
−
== Necropolis ==
+
hiya Ron dunno what Ive done wrong this time but a couple of the fables that i was doing ie the 1912 Vernon Jones translations (the belly and the members and the boasting traveler) seem to have been merged with the ones that you did with the unknown translator. ive just done some edits removing them from my book and readding them - hopefully that is right. when i was editing them to add the perry number and webpage they seemed ok then so cant work out what happened. cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 10:36, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Hi Gaz -
 +
:I think I can see what happened.  If you take a look at the edit histories of the two titles in question ([https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title_history.cgi?2800518 The Boasting Traveler] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title_history.cgi?2433761 The Belly and the Members], you'll note that they were both merged with the existing title records with the unidentified translator on 4/7 by [[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]].  I would expect that he didn't realize that the translators were different.  Your method for correcting this error is exactly correct, and I've approved those edits.  You should be able to proceed to add the translator template to the new titles and make them variants of the canonical titles.  Hope this helps.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:39, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1482; https://fantlab.ru/images/editions/plus/big/138662_6; While adding LCCN and FantLab ID to Arkham House first printing, which you PV, I noticed 1 of the FantLab photos says second printing on copyright page. Second isn't verified here so I don't know if seeing an actual photo would help to add anything. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (EDT)
+
::thanks for sorting that our Ron I'll have to train myself to remembr to check out the edit history in future. cheers - Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 19:15, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:I don't read Russian, is the Fantlab record for the first or second printing?  Since they are showing pictures of the reprint and show no data that is inconsistent with the reprint, I would assume it's for the second printing. In that case the Fantlab id should be added to that record and not that of the first printing.  If that record is for the first printing, then showing only photographs of the second printing is misleading.  Please cancel your submission and add only the LCCN to the first printing.  You can add the Fantlab ID can be added to the record for the second printing with any additional data that you can find from that record.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 11:46, 12 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Right-click, "Translate to English". Also, I'll cancel and just add LCCN; there's already a link to an Archive.org copy of the first printing, so if anyone ever has the second printing and PV it that'll be better than relying on FantLab's usual jumble of random photos without any context. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:15, 12 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Thieves' World Printing ==
+
== Bowl of Baal ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?299652; What's the number line in your copy which you said is 2nd printing? Because there's one of those OL-only non-preview copies which has 2 4 6 8 0 9 7 5 3; I think that means 3rd printing, which is not on ISFDB. There are many other Asprin books which are also OL-only. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:24, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?264557; I added FantLab ID and thought you might want to enter the intro into contents; Teitler has a few other credits already on ISFDB. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:29, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:That number line, which matches the one in my copy, is for a second printing.  You'll note that the lowest number in the line is "2". Sometimes publishers put the odd numbers on one side with the even numbers on the other.  My understanding is that number lines were created so that the plates for a printing could be used for a subsequent printing by scraping off the prior printing number.  When a number line is done in the manner of this one, it keeps the line roughly centered on the page as each number is scraped off.  Hope that helps.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:44, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
+
:Added.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:11, 9 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::Yes, so I'll add the link to your PV. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 09:54, 13 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Image delete ==
+
== Worlds of If, February 2024 ==
  
−
Hi Ron, with reference to your approvals [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5604143 5604143] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5604180 5604180], could you delete the related, old images [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/File:THSTRSMDSF0000.jpg here] and [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/File:THSTRSMDST2010.jpg here] for me, to prevent them being reverted. The old ones do not have the Haldeman quote. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:53, 15 March 2023 (EDT)
+
As the approver of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5932603 this submission], you may be interested in [[ISFDB:Moderator_noticeboard#Worlds_of_If.2C_February_2024_Part_Deux|this conversation]]. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 19:53, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:Done. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:40, 15 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Asimov G&S ==
+
: Since the outcome of the conversation also would affect various magazine issues verified by you (I mentioned "Foundation" in it), your input would be appreciated. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] ([[User talk:Stonecreek|talk]]) 11:23, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
::I actually would prefer that we list the editor in chief with sub-editors in the notes.  It looks like a Rules and Standards discussion is going to be started and I'll chime in there.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:21, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?741539; Copy uploaded on Archive.org in 2014, your PV in 2019, I want to add a link but the front flap price, $50.00, and the back flap month, 0388, are visible along with artist's signature on back cover (good for notes), so I want to enter those, too. Is your copy coverless, which would explain why you didn't enter those bits of info? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 08:27, 17 March 2023 (EDT)
+
== Uncle Silas ==
−
:My copy does have a jacket.  However, the price is inked out.  I suspect that it was originally given as a gift as there is an inscription on the flyleaf.  I'm less sure about dating by the jacket date and have started a [[Rules and standards discussions#Dates on Dust Jackets|Rules and Standards discussion]] to see how we want to treat these dates.  However, I was able to get a full publication date from the LOC copyright record, so the jacket date is moot in this case.  I generally don't note the source of the artist credit when it is somewhere in the book.  If we were to do this for every piece of data in the record, it would soon get unwieldy.  I might have done so if the artist was identified by signature alone, since that can be a matter of interpretation.  I did add a note about the copyright office, because that source is unexpected.  As I approve my own edits, I don't need to let the moderator know where the data came from.  It's still a good idea to add such sources in the moderator notes.  Thanks for finding the scan.  I've also added that to the record.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:37, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Run ==
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291814
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5606436; The 1999 date was wrong, as should have been obvious juding by the awards which were for books published in 2000, but apparently someone entered the date long ago from somewhere and never bothered changing it; the HC is 2000, PB is 2001. When I entered the new PB edition the merged title date still said 1999 because my edit changing it to the correct date of 2000 hadn't been approved yet. That's why, so this should be un-rejected so the correct title date is shown. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:01, 17 March 2023 (EDT)
+
hiya Ron i've got a couple of the earlier printings of this one and when i imported the contents from yours i could see all the page numbers are the same except that "Note on the Text" is on page xxv in mine and xv in yours. I thought it might be a typo. cheers from Gaz [[User:Faustus|Faustus]] ([[User talk:Faustus|talk]]) 21:27, 10 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:My mistake for thinking you were adding a 1999 publication.  I'm still not used to the title data appearing on the publication update approval page, which was a recent change.  As it was, I had originally skipped the title update as there was no explanation in the moderator notes as to why you were making the change.  Even here, I'm not sure that dating based on award years is dispositive.  However, I've checked Worldcat and the earliest publication they have is from 2000, so I'll go ahead and approve this one.  You frequently add moderator notes, but not always.  You may want to add them to more edits, especially, as in this case, when the reasons for your edit are unclear. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:51, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
+
:Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:59, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Dance of Demons ==
+
== HPL Book of Horror ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?8641; I've been trying to standardize New Infinities books, as I said on Community Portal, and you are the only active PV of the 5 Gord books, but while the other cover images are the same as the covers of the Archive.org copies the image for Dance of Demons has the same ID on the upper left that I mentioned re: Sea of Death on CP while the Archive.org copy, https://archive.org/search?query=dance-of-demons, doesn't, and also it has New Infinities and BSM logo while image doesn't. So it seems there are other editions out there. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:33, 17 March 2023 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5939499; The price, $7.98, is in barcode on back cover like a lot of these instant remainder books in case you want to add it to the record. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:38, 12 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:I no longer have access to the book as evidenced by the fact that the verification is transient.  I don't recall whether that scan was from my physical copy or not.  Please feel free to upload a new cover from the Internet Archive scan.  Let me know when you've done so and I can delete the old scan.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:57, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
+
:Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:21, 13 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::Can't do that as it's dark, was photographed badly with lens flare, and has a price sticker on it. There's several copies on eBay. I'm just trying to fix the various publisher names and get them all down to 2, with Ace and without; I get the feeling after I'm done with that some new editions with those ID's on the cover will be added and then cover images can be taken care of for everything. The one New Infinities cover by Gygax that I tried to replace ISFDB's cover with gave me a warning because it's a "nicholls" which is not one of the approved subdirectories on SFE, even though it probably should be because Peter Nicholls passed away a few years ago. Maybe somebody here with some pull can convince them to grant access to more of their images. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:11, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== The One Tree ==
+
== Acolytes of Cthulhu ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?159731
+
Would you mind double checking a few items in your {{P|250774|Acolytes of Cthulhu}}? There are differences with the later Titan Books edition. Checking the Internet Archive scan of your edition, it appears some are database errors vs. changes in the Titan Book edition.
 +
*page 88, credit should be "Charles A. Tanner" vs. "Charles R. Tanner" (publication typo)
 +
*page 250, credit should be "John Glasby" vs. "Max Chartair"
 +
*page 316, credit should be "Dirk W. Mosig" vs. "Cemetarius Nightcrawler"
 +
Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 08:16, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:Fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 08:31, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
Mine says:
+
== Audible-ASIN which are ISBN10 ==
−
<ul>
 
−
<li>"First Hardcover Edition: April 1982"</li>
 
−
<li>"First International Edition: April 1982"</li>
 
−
</ul>
 
−
Thus seems to indicate a publication date of April 1982 instead of 1983 for del rey's pb edition. I also spot some layout differences on the cover, so maybe this is a different edition?
 
−
--[[User:Spacecow|Spacecow]] ([[User talk:Spacecow|talk]]) 16:47, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Hi Spacecow
 
−
:You have a different edition.  Mine has "First Edition: April 1982" over "Paperback format:" over "First Edition: April 1983".  There is no mention of an international edition, nor is the first edition specified as hardcover, though you could assume so as the paperback edition is specified.  Hope that helps.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 16:53, 18 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:: Thanks for fast reply. I'll create a new publication. --[[User:Spacecow|Spacecow]] ([[User talk:Spacecow|talk]]) 05:54, 19 March 2023 (EDT)
 
  
−
== Cadigan - Synners ==
 
  
−
Hello Ron, can I suggest the pagination for the {{P|390622|1st printing}} should be xiii+475. Gaiman's introduction finishes on the last numbered page xiii before the novel. And pages 476-477 are acknowledgements and unnumbered. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 19:28, 19 March 2023 (EDT)
+
Hey Ron<br>
−
:I completely agree with your proposed change. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:33, 19 March 2023 (EDT)
+
When you have an Audible-ASIN which is an ISBN10, you also enter it in the ISBN field (converting to ISBN13 when appropriate). [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/cleanup_report.cgi?324 These] need correcting. I accidentally edited one of your verified pubs when I was working on the report. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 11:33, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
−
::And submitted :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 19:51, 19 March 2023 (EDT)
+
:I generally do, if I can find it in Worldcat.  However, there are instances where I don't think it's appropriate.  It's been my experience that audible doesn't change the Audibile-ASIN nor the Amazon ASIN when they change the cover of the audio book.  In those cases, I've no way of knowing if a new ISBN has been assigned, or not.  In fact, it's usually impossible to pin down the date the reissue occurred and with an unknown date, searching Worldcat isn't much help.  For example, the one you changed is actually a re-issue of {{P|1001594|this publication}} from 2018 and which I purchased in 2020.  Whereas, the {{P|1001605|reissue}} with the yellow borders came out sometime between 2020 and 2024 (I narrow the dates based on when I downloaded my copy and by checking archive.org).  The only eAudiobook record in Worldcat for this ISBN has a 2018 date. There is another eAudiobook in Worldcat published as Orbit, which has different ISBNs and a 2018 date and thus can't be for the yellow bordered publication (also the audiobook itself credits Hachette and not Orbit). Thus, I'm left with a puzzle.  Since Audible doesn't explicitly list ISBNs, and as far as I have seen, never changes their ASIN or listed release date for reissues, do we assume that the ISBN (for the publication) stays the same or not?  My take on it is that ISBN for the reissue can't be reliably determined, so I have left them blank. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:04, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:: I assumed the ISBN would remain the same. I stand corrected. Sorry i changed the pub. [[User:Scifibones|<b>John</b> <small>Scifibones</small>]] 15:33, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
 +
:::It may be, but there's no way of telling.  I see that the cleanup report doesn't have an ignore option.  I'll start a discussion on the moderator board to see if we need to have one added, or if my theory is way off base.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:50, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Topper ==
+
== Stephen Mitchell (translator) ==
  
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?269056; SFE just added a cover image and it is clearly signed "C V Farrow" on lower right corner but ISFDB image doesn't have a signature. Is there a signature on your copy or a credit for Farrow in your copy (maybe it's coverless)? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:43, 23 March 2023 (EDT)
+
{{T|3287650|This essay}} in your verified pubs is credited to {{A|Stephen Mitchell (translator)|375891}}. Is this really a different person then {{A|Stephen Mitchell}} who is a noted translator of ''Gilgamesh'' in addition to being the author of ''The Frog Prince'' as per the linked Wikipedia article? --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 14:03, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:My copy lacks a dustjacket.  I don't recall where I got that cover scan from.  Please feel free to add the cover artist and upload a new scan if you can find a better one.  The SFE one has some condition issues.  [https://www.dustjackets.com/pages/books/4954/thorne-smith/topper-an-improbable-adventure Facsimile Dust Jackets] has it, but that would need to be cropped.  Good find. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 13:07, 23 March 2023 (EDT)
+
:Merged them.  I don't recall what I was thinking, except that perhaps the author of a retelling of fairy tales was unlikely to be a translator of classics.  Regardless, they are on author now.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 14:11, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
  
−
== Purcell Papers ==
+
== Science Fantasy Club ==
  
−
https://archive.org/search?query=purcell+papers+arkham&sort=-addeddate; Another copy was just upped on Archive.org, sticker with $8.95 price on flap, new edition or just add link to old one? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 11:34, 25 March 2023 (EDT)
+
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?76305; Should that be Northwest? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:38, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
−
:I don't think this necessitates a new publication record.  I added a note about the price increases from Jaffery.  My recollection was that I purchased this one directly from Arkham House.  However, my copy has no sticker.  Personally, I wouldn't add a second scan since we already have one.  However, if you feel it's important, you can go ahead and do so.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 12:16, 25 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::I added a link to the new copy because the old one is an ex-library with sticker on front cover, library stamp on copyright page and card jacket inside the cover, etc. Also, the new copy's cover is better then the one on ISFDB in my opinion, with sharper color and more art visible on left and right and bottom (you can see the artist's signature), any objection to my uploading the new cover and replacing the one here? I also noticed there's some kind of slip inside the front flap in the new copy and someone wrote something next to the back flap that looks like 10.00, probably meaningless but noted anyway. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:25, 25 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Yes, you can go ahead and upload that cover.  That slip looks like a bookplate.  Neither that, nor the handwritten note you mention need be mentioned.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:24, 25 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::OK, uploading the cover, ignoring the rest. Just a note that I also have a pending edit adding an Archive.org link to an ex-Canadian library copy of C. Jacobi's AH collection Portraits in Moonlight, but there's no cover so not really helpful. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 15:53, 25 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== The Slipstream Journal ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, I suspect there is a good reason why you added the series number to the notes {{P|394841|here}} and not elsewhere. What's wrong with doing it as these submissions? Please reject them if they are wrong... [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5621013 #1], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5621014 #2], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5621012 #3], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5621011 #4]. Thanks, kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:05, 27 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Hi Kev
 
−
:The reason I moved the issue number to the notes was because I was removing it from the title field so that it would conform to the standards. See [[Template:PublicationFields:Title|this help template]] 3rd and last bullets.  As I didn't want to lose the issue number data, I moved it to the notes.  The last time this standard was discussed, I recall that it was proposed that a new field be added for the issue numbers (volume and issue or whole number).  However I don't recall if there was decision to move forward with proposal.  Regardless, a [[Template:PublicationFields:Title|publication series]] should not be used for magazines or fanzines.  Magazines/Fanzines are handled differently from other types of publications.  For example, the rules for the title field and the fact that all issues from a given year with a given editor share a singe title record.  The series for Magazines/Fanzines is handled with a title series.  I'll go ahead and reject those edits.  Let me know if something is unclear or if you have further questions.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 16:48, 27 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Holdstock - Mythago Wood ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi Ron, does your {{P|604046|1st printing}} contain an excerpt? If it does, I can enter it as:
 
−
 
 
−
:299  * Avilion (excerpt) * (2014-11-27) * short fiction by Robert Holdstock
 
−
 
 
−
Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 13:27, 28 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:It does.  Thanks for finding that and you can go ahead and add it.  Thanks again. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:51, 28 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::That's good, will do :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 19:06, 28 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Done. I also replaced the Amazon image while I was there - if you could just check that's ok. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 15:34, 29 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::It's fine.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:41, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Roadmarks pub date ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi Ron, your [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?930344 verified pub] has a pub date of 2022-00-00, although several online sources ([http://zenoagency.com/news/roger-zelaznys-roadmarks-out-today-in-the-uk e.g.]) cite 2023-01-19. Can you check? Thanks. [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] ([[User talk:PeteYoung|talk]]) 04:57, 29 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:The copyright pages states "This edition first published in Great Britain in 2022 by Gollancz..."  I would have thought that the 2023-01-19 was a street date.  However, I received my copy on January 6, in the US.  I checked my emails and the bookseller indicated that it was shipped on December 29. There is also an earlier email from December 25 stating that the publisher had released the book and it was on its way to the bookseller's warehouse. So it does look like while published late in the year, it was published in 2022.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 06:30, 29 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Finney - The Body Snatchers ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, as I'm editing a later printing of this {{P|328224|1st printing}}, I see that both Amazon and orionbooks.co.uk are listing the pub date as 2010-10-14. Would you agree to my amending the date to that. If that's ok, I'll submit. I'd also amend the Intro title date. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 20:07, 29 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:That's fine with me.  Please amend the note to state that both the month and day are not stated in the book.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:43, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Done. Just check you're happy with the notes wording :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 20:47, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Sterling & Gibson - The Difference Engine ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, I'm editing my 9th printing of {{P|337727|this one}}. In mine the novel ends on page 383, not 384 (and there's the {{P|435107|3rd printing}} as well).
 
−
 
 
−
Also, there are seemingly two versions of this cover. Mine has Gibson above Sterling, the reverse of Amazon's. Hope that helps. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 02:16, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Corrected.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:51, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::...and I've done the 3rd printing. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 20:23, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Boulevard Assassin ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?7270; Adventure of the Boulevard Assassin is titled The Adventure of the Boulevard Assassin in the anthology, Resurrected Holmes, where it first appeared but the title in Claremont is actually The Adventures of the Boulevard Assassin. Both editions of Resurrected Holmes are on ISFDB but only 1 story was entered in the HC and none in the TP. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 07:59, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Corrected the title.  Feel free to import any missing titles to the anthology records.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:53, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::You didn't correct the title correctly. Per my note above, title in Lupoff's collection is "The Adventures of the Boulevard Assassin", original title in Kaye's anthology is "The Adventure of the Boulevard Assassin". You added "The" but not "s" in "Adventures". So, when you've done that, feel free to enter the title in both editions of the anthology and variant the collection's title. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:13, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Well presumably you have a source for the contents of the anthologies, which I do not.  Your source would also perhaps have the page number on which the story occurs.  Perhaps you even still have the publication records open in a tab since you presumably looked at them to determine the story was missing.  I see no reason to redo research that you've already done.  If you don't want to take the effort to add the contents to those anthologies, I wonder why you researched them in the first place.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:30, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Regardless of whether you feel like entering the original title of Lupoff's story in the 2 anthology records, which I would think would be necessary since the later title in Lupoff's collection with the extra "s" would need to be made a variant of it, the title was entered incorrectly in the collection when it was first added here long ago and you didn't replace it with the correct title earlier today even though I said above what the correct title is. I have a pending edit adding the Archive.org link to the collection but I didn't fix the title myself because, as you've complained about many times, any changes that aren't minor, which this is not, need to be asked about first. There are 2 PV of the collection, you and some dude named Dmatlock who hasn't been here since 2010, so you are the only active PV. It clearly states in the collection where the story originally came from, so why it wasn't imported to the anthology back whenever you or somebody else entered it is a mystery. Lupoff isn't some obscure author so I would think you would want this done right. You seem to be one of the main PV of the old-time pulp stuff judging by all your verifications of Arkham House books and suchlike, so these Holmes pastiches should be right up your alley; they're not up mine. Perhaps most of the contents are non-genre but Lupoff should still be entered, being above the threshold. You obviously have a copy of the collection since you PV it, but if you really need me to point you to the anthology, here it is: https://openlibrary.org/books/OL9324870M/The_Resurrected_Holmes; they even list the contents in the OL record itself where it can be clearly seen that there's no "s" in the title and they actually list all the page numbers so you don't have to waste time actually opening the book's link. If you can't be bothered with any of this it's no big deal; I have 450 pending edits waiting to be approved. Speaking of which, I can understand why my Moonchasers edits are on hold since Feb. 18 because a TP copy still needs to be found to determine the correct title, but did any of you ever decide per your recent discussion on one of these boards what's to be done about the whole Argo/McElderry/Atheneum publisher/pub. series thing? Because I have 3 of those on hold since Feb. 23. If not, let me know and I'll just cancel all of them. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:08, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::::Sorry, but demanding that another editor submit edits on your behalf, for which you've done the research and only share incomplete information seems particularly petulant.  Your held edits are discussed [[User talk:Username#Title Change of One of Multiple Publications with the Same Title|here]] where you've failed to respond, and [[ISFDB:Moderator noticeboard#Atheneum publisher.|here]].  There is no consensus yet.  You're welcome to join in that discussion.  Regarding the numerous other edits of yours that are aging, the ones I've skipped generally fall into two categories.  Either they are inadequately sourced, or active verifiers have not been notified. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 20:54, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::::Maybe I'm not understanding all of this correctly, but you, the PV of a collection where one of the story titles was entered wrong here, being neither the same as the title as it originally appeared in Kaye's anthology or as it actually appears in the collection (and neither the editor who entered the contents or you or anybody in the intervening years seemed to notice it was wrong), and was never made a variant of the parent title because for some reason nobody ever entered the story in the contents of the anthology, had it brought to your attention by me, as I've done with hundreds/thousands of other wrong things entered here by the many editors who came before me, that it was wrong and, instead of saying thanks and fixing the title, and possibly actually entering the story in both editions of the anthology that are on ISFDB so you could make the collection's title a variant of it, decided to argue about this. If you had not bothered to enter the original title in the anthology and just fixed the title in your PV that would have been acceptable but you didn't do that and entered it wrong even though I wrote how it appears and you should know anyway because you actually own the book. The least you could have done if you have some kind of problem with doing anything in books you didn't PV is add a note in the story's record saying "first published in Resurrected Holmes" or something similar so people would know where it came from but I don't see any note. There's nothing petulant about this, it's simply making sure a book you PV has correct info entered, which may not be required but seems like the right thing to do on a site that claims to be about accuracy; Lord knows I've corrected countless things in other books that are PV. As for the edits you skipped, they are being taken care of now and then by other mods and, as far as I can recall, every single one of them was approved, so it seems to me that your skipping them is more out of spite than because there was really anything wrong with them; it's not relevant, anyway, because the vast majority of those 450 pending edits are very recent and weren't skipped but are just laying there because of the complete disorganization here (made even worse by the recent server move) in getting edits approved in a timely manner, as can be seen by the many messages on the boards complaining that edits are taking a long time to get approved. Whatever your real problem is, I don't care. I don't like most of the people here, their childishness or anger not to mention the low quality of much of their editing, but I continue to do what I do because my personal feelings mean nothing; this is a site about books. So you can do what I suggest or not, whatever, none of this really means anything, anyway. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:03, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Silverberg's ''Needle in a Timestack'' cover art ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi Ron, quick question for a side project I'm working on: How is the cover art credited on your [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?834559 verified pub]? If it's just a picture agency/library and not an artist, which agency? Thanks. [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] ([[User talk:PeteYoung|talk]]) 12:11, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
: Actually I have the same question for many of the recent Masterworks: [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?943091 Lord Valentine's Castle], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?798420 Bold As Love], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?810578 Desolation Road], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?826915 The Best of Greg Egan], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?854301 White Queen], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?865798 Kairos], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?930344 Roadmarks], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?873253 Nineteen Eighty-Four], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?873253 Life], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?873253 The Chronicles of Amber], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?908772 The Second Chronicles of Amber], [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?913897 Growing Up Weightless] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?913897 The Secret of Life]. I think it's a shame the series are using so many generic stock images these days, and I'd much rather they commissioned artists. Anyway, sorry for your trouble, and thanks. [[User:PeteYoung|PeteYoung]] ([[User talk:PeteYoung|talk]]) 12:26, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::You and [[User:BanjoKev|Kev]] are killing me with the Masterwoks titles ;-)  I agree with you about the stock images.  Although, I generally like the covers.  I'm not sure that I agree that the various companies should be listed as artists and generally don't list them for the records I enter.  I know other do, and I've no objection if folks add the names to my publications.  Anyway, I thing I've got them all:
 
−
:::* {{P|834559|Needle in a Timestack}} - Cover image Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|943091|Lord Valentine's Castle}} - Image © Gerry Images
 
−
:::* {{P|798420|Bold As Love}} - Images © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|810578|Desolation Road}} - Image © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|826915|The Best of Greg Egan}} - Illustration © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|854301|White Queen}} - Image © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|865798|Kairos}} - Image © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|930344|Roadmarks}} - Photography © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|873253|Nineteen Eighty-Four}} - Photography © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|873102|Life}} - Photography © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|873253|The Chronicles of Amber}} - Cover image Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|908772|The Second Chronicles of Amber}} - Cover image Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|913897|Growing Up Weightless}} - Photography © Shutterstock
 
−
:::* {{P|916090|The Secret of Life}} - Photography © Shutterstock
 
−
:::Hope that's helpful --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:20, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Thanks for the accolade Ron, just when I needed a good laugh :) (...just come along with us, Sir, and mind your head as you get in the car...). Seriously though, I don't think "generic stock images" quite describes what's happening. People who create images put them up to these image libraries in the hope that someone (a publishing house perhaps) will want to use them. I don't think anybody "at", say, Shutterstock actually creates any images - they might provide several images to Gateway and then Gateway arranges them.  Sometimes the agency gets the copyright, sometimes the creator, depends on their T&Cs. Take a look at the notes in this pub, Doc Smith's {{P|700037|Galactic Patrol}}. I searched for ages on Shutterstock to eventually find the artist. In that case, one artist created the whole image, but in, say, your White Queen, there are likely two elements to that picture, created by "artists" but the credit goes to Shutterstock. Anyway, that's my 2p, I hope you don't mind me jumping in. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:46, 30 March 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Le Guin - The Left Hand of Darkness ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, I'm [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5626362 submitting] an edit to this {{P|602865|1st printing}}. Would you take a look and let me know if you are agreeable to the essay title changes in particular, as well as the addition of the 3rd essay. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 00:32, 2 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:My first impression is that I don't really agree with the title changes for the essays.  To me, that really looks like a simple author credit for each essay. Also, if we do change the title, I'm not sure is we still need the parenthetical disambiguator.  However, they are also singed at the end.  I'll add an inquiry on the Community Portal to see what other folks think, and hold the edit pending that discussion.  The rest of the edit is fine.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 07:44, 2 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Thanks for putting that up to the portal Ron, it's cleared up something that's been nagging at me for a while. I've cancelled the original and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5628098 resubmitted], amending the titling errors. Thanks again, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 10:40, 4 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Nailed By the Heart ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5625372; I'm not sure what happened there, but I made another edit with right link; however, while doing that, I noticed that the original Brit HC/PB and the 2010 edition have totally different art and yet Steve Crisp is credited on the back of both. Since his ISFDB page stops in 2005 (except for a 2017 cover that may or may not be original) and the 2010 art doesn't look like his usual style and is just the usual modern mass-market stock photo, I think his credit there is in error and was just reprinted from the old editions. But who knows, just mentioning it in case anyone knows and can unmerge if he really did both or delete his credit from 2010 if he didn't do that one. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 14:59, 5 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Union ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi Ron,
 
−
 
 
−
I was working on forthcoming books and Fixer found the new Dragon Soul Press anthology which got me to [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?938978 this record]. After fixing quite a lot of issues which one would expect to be caught during moderation (see [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:JarlFrank#Union my message to the user]), I noticed that you moderated but never edited it after that - probably an oversight so just heads up - especially as it is a new editor who won't learn how to do things if we do not help them :) Thanks! [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 15:47, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Sorry about that.  I did miss the poorly formed suffix and the amazon link.  I noted the format was not entered, and thought that odd, but I generally give quite a bit of deference to primarily verified submissions.  Regarding the add this ASIN.  I thought our policy was to not add those when an ISBN is present.  I did catch a similar error on another submission and advised the submitter that there is no need to add a link as Amazon links are auto generated in the sidebar.  My understanding was that is the same reason for not adding ASINs when there is and ISBN.  In any case, I'll try to be more careful going forward.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:02, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:: This is an ISBN starting with 979. These do not form their ASINs by getting the ISBN10 as these do not exist - so the side link cannot create a link for these books as the side bar (try to click on it to see what happens and compare that to a 978 ISBN book ([https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?936640 for example]) and the Amazon URLs in general use the ASIN and not the ISBN so switching the bar to ISBN13 is not an option. So for books with 979 ISNBs, we generally also want the ASIN (it always starts with B) so we can have a link to Amazon. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 19:08, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::I'm getting a valid link in the sidebar for the US Amazon from the book with the 979 isbn and it does not appear to be forming it from the ASIN external id (<nowiki>https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_66%3A9798376838440&tag=isfdb-20</nowiki>).  I also tried a random publication {{P|911048}} with an ISBN starting with a 979 and no ASIN.  Again, the Amazon US sidebar link if fine.  My recollection is that I noticed the comment discouraging adding ASINs in a conversation on one of the boards.  It was some years ago, and I don't believe it is documented anywhere, so perhaps I was mistaken.  Perhaps someone was trying to move traffic to the sidebar links to that we would get the commission on the sale.  I believe that is moot now as I recall Amazon discontinued that program, although we still have a disclaimer on the links.  In any case the sidebar links seem to be fine. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:23, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::: It drops you into the search screen with the whole book selected but NOT into the edition as a 978 ISBN link or an ASIN link does. We do not record ASINs which are ISBN10; if they start with B, we always record them. And that had been documented [https://www.isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:PublicationFields:ExternalIDs here]: "Look for the "ASIN" line in the "Product Details" section of the page. If the ASIN matches the ISBN10 of the book, do not record it. Most ASINs will start with B but for some older books, there may be exceptions." for a long time. :) [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] ([[User talk:Anniemod|talk]]) 19:52, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, May 1959 ==
 
−
 
 
−
For your verified {{P|61294|The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, May 1959}}, I updated the title of the story on page 5 from "Tenth Time Around" to "Tenth Time Round" based on the [https://archive.org/details/Fantasy_Science_Fiction_v016n05_1959-05_PDF/page/n3/mode/2up Internet Archive scan]. This seemed pretty straightforward based on the scan, but let me know if on the off chance there were two versions of this magazine and we need updates. I am posting this message on all active verifiers' pages. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 19:32, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Venture Science Fiction [UK] ==
 
−
 
 
−
Our [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pe.cgi?29404 Venture Science Fiction &#91;UK&#93;] records contain a publication note of "Editor from Tymn & Ashley [http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?88429 here]." Where the here is a title record link to {{T|88429|The Inscrutable God}}. I am assuming this was supposed to be a publication record link as the corresponding publication record number is {{P|88429|Science Fiction, Fantasy and Weird Fiction Magazines}}. Since you have verified that publication, would you mind checking if that is the correct source? If so, I will update the records to fix the link. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 19:54, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Yes, Tymn & Ashley list Ronald R. Wickers as the editor while also noting that he is not credited in the magazine itself.  Neither {{Tuck}} nor Miller/Contento list an editor.  As an aside here, it may be worthwhile to create a [[Help:Using Templates and HTML in Note Fields|template]] for Tymn and Ashley to be used in these instances.  A few days ago, I thought about asking if one could be created for {{Series|36285|Chalker/Owings}}, but there are several editions of that, so it's hard to link to a specific publication.  I've no idea how difficult the notes field templates are to create.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:29, 6 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Thanks. The uncredited part matches the one issue whose scan I found on Internet Archive. I will update the records. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 07:56, 8 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Naomi Kanakia ==
 
−
 
 
−
Am I to understand that she needs to publish 50 more titles before isfdb respects her name change? [[User:Pnppl|Pnppl]] ([[User talk:Pnppl|talk]]) 17:39, 13 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:No disrespect is intended.  We are a bibliographical database and thus we reflect what has been published.  The canonical name of an author is not meant to imply that it is the author's preferred name nor their legal name.  It is simply the name by which they are most commonly known in genre publications.  In this case Naomi has had many more works published using the name Rahul than she has as Naomi.  Please see [[Template:AuthorFields:CanonicalName|this help template]] and [[ISFDB:FAQ#How does the ISFDB deal with author name changes?|this FAQ]] for further information on how we determine canonical name.  I hope this helps you to understand why her bibliography appears as it does.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:26, 13 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Is there any way I can propose a change of policy? [[User:Pnppl|Pnppl]] ([[User talk:Pnppl|talk]]) 20:56, 13 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::You absolutely can.  Changes have been proposed before and I looked for the prior discussions while composing my original response but was unable to find them.  The place to propose policy changes is [[Rules and standards discussions]].  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:02, 13 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Thanks! [[User:Pnppl|Pnppl]] ([[User talk:Pnppl|talk]]) 21:06, 13 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Summon, Bind, Banish ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?323471; I have a pending edit with Archive.org link, Mamatas story has commas, already on ISFDB, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=banish&type=All+Titles, fix/merge needed. I discovered this while adding links to stories from Apex Magazine's online days, which seem to have disappeared from the modern web and only exist as archived pages now. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:41, 20 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Fixed.  I also removed the comment about the story's first appearance in ''Apex'' as its appearance in ''Bandersnatch'' predates the magazine publication.  By the way, [http://www.philsp.com/homeville/fmi/j00/j00046.htm#A164 FictionMags] indexes the online version of ''Apex'' if you're interested.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 10:02, 21 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::I've been using the index to add stories that were originally published somewhere else before Apex; once I got to the Mamatas story they apparently started breaking stories up into separate pages, the old click-bait scheme, and the story after Mamatas, by Jay Lake, doesn't have the second page archived, so I think I'm done with that. Added nearly 2 dozen, though. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:09, 21 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== MFFS ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5644683; There's a 6-page unsigned intro that's not mentioned here, in case you think it needs adding to contents/mentioning in notes. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 18:17, 24 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Added.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:48, 24 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Bruno E. ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?947748; I own an edition of the American book but you just entered the original Brit edition; problem is, as was discussed here by some people not so long ago, the cover artist was credited differently sometimes. In this case, per back cover, it's Bruno Ellitori, which is a variation not yet on ISFDB and judging by text search there's no other book on Archive.org with that particular spelling. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 22:30, 25 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Yes, I got that from one of the secondary sites.  Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:17, 26 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Asimov - The Thunder-Thieves (afterword) ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, could you have a look at {{P|29759|this title}}. Is that correct or should it be "Afterword (The Thunder-Thieves)" ? Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 12:17, 28 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Hi Kev -
 
−
:I'm going to stick with the current titling.  Both the poem and the subsequent essay are under a single title page (on page 239), i.e. the essay does not have a separate title.  It's much longer than the poem. Thus I think using the same title as for the poem with a disambiguator is closest to how it appears in the book.  I'll add a note to the essay explaining that it is not separately titled.  I'll assume that the paperback presents these in the same manner. Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:35, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::That's helped me be clear as to its identity. The titling stood out a mile on Asimov's summary page amongst all the "Afterword (piece name)" formats.
 
−
::and btw, in case it got lost in the mix, I've added to the "Robot Visions" thread, above. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:01, 30 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Wolf Leader ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5648658; Changes OK? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 15:49, 28 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:They're fine.  I've approved the edit. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:38, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Ghost Summer Cover ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1918982; Made some edits for T. Due's collection, bunch of stuff was wrong, I didn't change the artist because you PV an art book that included the cover, real artists are Sten Schneider and Vesperity-Stock. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:53, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:The cover in the WFC Souvenir Book does not have an artist credit.  We don't use "uncredited" for artist credits when the acutual artist is known.  I've updated both art records with the correct artists.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 17:51, 29 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Avati ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5650644; Barcode on back says 3999, not $39.95. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:29, 30 April 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 09:29, 1 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula: or the Adventure of the Sanguinary Count, by John H. Watson, M.D. ==
 
−
 
 
−
[https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?287233 Your pub] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?406844 this pub] look like duplicates.  Any concerns about me merging the newer one into your entry? [[User:Taweiss|Tom]] ([[User talk:Taweiss|talk]]) 22:25, 5 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:They are different. Mine lacks the first edition statement mentioned in your edition and is presumably a later printing.  It does have the 1978 date on the title page.  The publication month is from an unknown source and was added to the record prior to my verification.  In any case, they shouldn't be merged.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 08:04, 6 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== GToFaI ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?363044; This, https://archive.org/details/bwb_T2-FPH-238, says 3rd on copyright page, you say 2nd. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 14:48, 9 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:52, 9 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Monter - Monster? ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, is {{T|2092130|this title}} really Monter? Could you transliterate the hyphen while you're there please. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 20:28, 9 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:53, 9 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Bride of Alderburn ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/external_id_search_results.cgi?ID_TYPE=12&OPERATOR=contains&ID_VALUE=GB; I just made an edit with Archive.org link to Bride and saw the GB WorldCat ID; those 2 linked above are the only ones with GB here, both entered by you, so should they be some other ID, not WorldCat? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 10:10, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Yes, that should have been BNB.  Fixed.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:16, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:OK, but does the other one, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?941692, need fixing, too? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:22, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Sorry, but it's rather confusing when you paste bare urls in the wiki.  Perhaps individual links to each publication with either wiki markup (the link tool in the toolbar), or using the [[Template:P|publication template]] would make your posts easier to understand.  I looked at this while at work, so I didn't have time to deal with it for more than a moment.  My recollection is the link returned a single publication which I fixed.  The other one is now fixed.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:33, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::I think the problem might be your computer setup, something I vaguely remember us discussing a long time ago when you complained about something similar, because on my end clicking the link I provided showed both Bride and the other book just fine, and later after you fixed Bride but before you left your first response here the link showed just the other book. After you fixed the other book it now says "No matching records found". So all of that makes perfect sense to me. My writing "the 2 linked above" and "only ones" and "both" and "they" was probably a good indication that I was talking about more than 1 book. Jargon about "wiki markup" and templates is pointless because I'm no computer expert, just a regular person, so I have no idea what that stuff means. Perhaps part of the problem as to why you made these ID mistakes and all the countless others I've had to fix or asked you to fix is the same reason you didn't notice my clear message about 2 books, because you're doing this while you're preoccupied with work and not giving it your full attention. I'm not sure why you didn't just wait until you were done with work before you looked into this issue. There's no hurry, obviously, since I currently have nearly 1,300 pending edits awaiting approval. Gratitude, not attitude. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 20:04, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Since you are editing a wiki, I assume that you are comfortable with the the terms used in editing wikis.  In fact you you use the signature tool in your posts.  However, you balk at using the link tool which is in the same toolbar (or perhaps you are hand typing the signature markup, but refuse to hand type the link markup).  The link to the publication template that I provided explains how to use it with examples.  I'm not sure what the number of pending edits has to do with this discussion.  In any case, I've given you suggestions on how to better communicate and make your posts easier to read.  If you can't be bothered to make your posts more readable, misunderstandings will continue to happen.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:09, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::::I'm tired of talking about this. I used advanced search to find books with WorldCat ID that included "GB", 2 results were found and my link above showed both books, and both were no longer there after you fixed their ID. Simple, and even if your computer didn't allow you to see that my several uses of plural terms in my message made it obvious there were 2 books with wrong ID, so your "recollection" of the link only showing 1 book makes no sense. So my point about the reason for all these mistakes and often further problems when I ask you to fix them being due to you doing other things at the same time and not giving ISFDB your full attention seems likely. Obviously work is more important, this stuff is unimportant in the grand scheme of things, but my suggestion somewhere on this site recently to a mod that the webmasters, whoever they are, should look into "hiring" more mods seems logical, since many here now are either too busy with work/moving/hospital/doing background coding on the site instead of approving edits, or have seemingly lost interest/are angry at one or more people here, thus the enormous backlog of pending edits with mine being the majority because I usually do so many every day but also several hundred from other editors. Editors don't have to do things exactly the same way you do them; the problem isn't me adding a URL link because I've done that in hundreds of other messages and people seem to see them just fine, the problem was not entering those ID properly and then not reading my message properly about fixing the ID because you were rushed at work. You and the others here have certainly never had a problem since I started here a few years ago complaining about every little mistake I make so you shouldn't have a problem when I do the same. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 21:55, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Delaware ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5649495; https://delaware.gov/artistroster/artistProfile.php?aid=365. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 16:48, 11 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Well,  it would have saved a lot of time if you had documented your source in the original edit.  I can approve this edit if you agree to add the additional link, or if you'd prefer you can enter this edit again with both links.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:51, 11 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::I didn't think it was necessary because when I typed "born Delaware Margiotta" on Google the first site that came up was the one above, so your "but I can't find anything stating it is her birth place" doesn't make sense; where do you search? I've been told, or someone else was told, I can't remember, that it's only required when the person's info is not publicly available and comes from a private or not-easily-found source; this couldn't be more easily found. So approve it, if I remember I'll add the link, if not you can add it or nobody can, who cares, I'm tired of these constant rejections and complaints for no legitimate reason except personal ones; my time is just as important as yours. P.S. I also left a message on CP about the Hitler cover you rejected because the cover artist is almost certainly wrong, not being mentioned in the book and by an artist who died long before Hitler was known by anyone, so hopefully someone will find out which cover the artist really did and that rejection can be un-rejected, too. Just because SFE says it's by him means nothing; they, like all other online sites including this one, are unreliable and from personal experience they've been wrong many times before. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:17, 11 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Sorry, I'm not willing to rely on whether you remember to fix the record, so please re-enter the edit with both links.  I stated in the rejection message that I couldn't find her birth place in the source you did add in the edit.  You've been asked several times to site your sources.  There isn't an exception if the source can be found in Google.  I'll also point out that moderators can approve more edits if you don't require them to do extra work.  You've stated that edits aren't approved as quickly as you like.  Well, properly sourcing your edits would be one way you could speed up their approval.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:29, 11 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Locus Award category names ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hi, I'm pinging you as the most prolific - by an order of magnitude ;-) - creator of award records.  I've just added the last of this year's Locus top 10 nominees, and I noticed a couple of things that I was a bit puzzled by.
 
−
 
 
−
I'm using [https://locusmag.com/2023/04/2023-locus-awards-top-ten-finalists-2/ this page on their site] as reference.  Amongst the category subheadings, it has "PUBLISHER" and "ILLUSTRATED AND ART BOOK", so I've added those respectively as [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_category.cgi?367+1 Best Publisher] and [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_category.cgi?332+1 Best Art or Illustrated Book].  The latter isn't an exact match for what's on that locusmag.com page, but seemed closer than [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_category.cgi?331+0 Best Art Book].  Most recent publisher entries have been recorded under [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_category.cgi?370+0 Best Publisher/Imprint], rather than "(Best) Publisher" which is what I've used for this year's entries.
 
−
 
 
−
Do you have any recollection about what the correct names for these are, or what the definitive reference might be?  I've not looked at previous year's pages on locusmag.com - and I haven't seen a copy of the mag since before the pandemic - but I see that the SFADB entries for [http://www.sfadb.com/Locus_Awards_2022 2022] and [http://www.sfadb.com/Locus_Awards_2021 2021] have different names for this pair of categories for those 2 years, which doesn't match what what we have.
 
−
 
 
−
Thanks for any thoughts you might have. [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 17:21, 13 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Hi ErsatzCulture -
 
−
::I don't know that we have any documented standards for naming award categories.  The way I've approached it previously is that minor differences in category names should probably be ignored (e.g. "Science Fiction Novel" vs "Best SF Novel")  My theory is that there is usefulness in looking at a category as a whole and seeing all the years for that category together.  That being said, when a category name changes enough to denote something new is included (for locus see the non-fiction, related, art categories).  I've also let previous categories remain as they are unless I have a good reason to believe they should be changed. As to what the authoritative source for the category names for Locus, I would refer to the magazine where they are presented.  I skimmed through this years issues and I don't see the ballot for 2023.  I did find last July's issue with the winners announcement and the categories are nearly identical to what we have for 2022.  The differences being "Best Non-Fiction Book" (mag, winners) vs "Best Non-Fiction" (mag, full results) vs "Best Non-Fiction" (us); "Best Book Publisher" (mag, winners) vs "Best Publisher/Imprint" (mag, full results)  vs "Best Publisher/Imprint" (us).  The 2022 ballot (top ten) is [https://locusmag.com/2022/05/2022-locus-awards-top-ten-finalists/ here].  Maybe my memory about standardizing categories is faulty as last years seem to match the categories as listed in the full results exactly.
 
−
::Clearly, Locus can alter the names between ballot, winner announcement and full results.  I would probably stick with what we used last year to start with and make adjustments when the full results are published, if they seem necessary.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:43, 13 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::: Thanks for response.  I'll leave these two 2023 categories as-is for now, and if they get changed when the final results are announced, I guess they can/should be changed then.
 
−
::: One minor positive side-effect of this is that I've dusted off some incomplete code I wrote ages ago to report on when award categories were run, and fixed it.  This has highlighted that there are gaps in our data:
 
−
 
 
−
    $ ./award_categories.py  -W "Locus Poll Award" -c "publisher"
 
−
    = Locus Poll Award =
 
−
    * Best Book Publisher [1972-1974, 1980-1990, 1993-1999]
 
−
    * Best Book Publisher/Imprint [2000-2003]
 
−
    * Best Publisher [1977-1978, 1991-1992, 2023]
 
−
    * Best Publisher - hardcover [1975-1976]
 
−
    * Best Publisher - Paperback (old) [1975-1976]
 
−
    * Best Publisher/Imprint [2004, 2009-2022]
 
−
    # There are no awards on record for the years 1979, 2005-2008
 
−
 
 
−
SFADB doesn't have anything for 1979, but does have data for 2005-2008.  If no-one else beats me to it, I'll add those 4 years at some point, but I've had my fill of Locus right now, so it won't be for a week or two at least... [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]] ([[User talk:ErsatzCulture|talk]]) 12:46, 14 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== August Derleth ==
 
−
 
 
−
We seem to have duplicate entries for {{T|1009500|August Derleth}}. The version with less information (no contents, no cover, etc.) has your secondary verification for Reginald3. It looks like that should be moved over to the more complete record and the less complete one deleted. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 07:53, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Done.  Thanks for finding this.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:01, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== 2021 Locus Poll Award ==
 
−
 
 
−
A quick question about [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?69581 this Locus Poll award] which you added in 2021. The Note field currently reads "For Inclusivity, Representation, and Education". However, the [https://locusmag.com/2021/06/2021-locus-awards-winners/ announcement reads] "Amplifying diverse voices". Would you happen to remember where "For Inclusivity, Representation, and Education" comes from? TIA!
 
−
 
 
−
Also, as an FYI, I have changed the [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?78672 2020 award] based on Dave Langford's update -- see the Note field for details. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 12:23, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:I got that language from the [https://file770.com/2021-locus-awards/ File 770] announcement, which is where I usually learn about award news.  I've no objection to changing the note.  I can check later in the magazine if you'd like.  With the research done for [[User:ErsatzCulture|ErsatzCulture]]'s question above, we've determined that the locus.com and magazine publications can be slightly different.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 13:32, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:: Thanks for the clarification! Both announcements look plausible, so I have updated the Notes field of [https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/award_details.cgi?69581 our award record] to reflect what they say and added links. [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] ([[User talk:Ahasuerus|talk]]) 15:39, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Asimov - Robot Visions ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, just letting you know I've completed all the edits affecting {{T|517297|the main title}} and which arose from our [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:Rtrace#Robot_Visions earlier conversation] above. If you have time have a look. Please let me know if you find anything amiss. I'll drop a note on Fjh's page to let him know too. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 18:10, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
:Hi Kev
 
−
:There is one issue that I have with the changes now that they're done.  That is the title of {{T|3175000|The Bicentennial Man (frontispiece)}}.  As I explained in my post at 18:49, 16 April 2023 (EDT) in the above thread, I feel fairly strongly that the title of this should be "Robot Visions (frontispiece)".  As I argued above, the frontispiece is for the collection as a whole, not just for the story "The Bicentennial Man".  There's a lot in that topic, so perhaps you missed that point.  Other than that, things look good.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 21:10, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Good, I'm glad you found that, it will look much better. I've submitted the change :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 22:14, 15 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::And...fixed. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 18:57, 16 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::::Looks good.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:59, 16 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Teresa T. ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?401191; Tunaly is credited as Tunaley elsewhere on ISFDB; mistake or variant? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 12:23, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:It was a typo and I've fixed it.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:36, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Stapledon - Odd John ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, you are joint PV for the {{P|373991|1st printing}}. I'm editing a 3rd printing of this edition and yours is the only one extant to clone from. I notice a couple of things that don't seem quite right and propose the following for your copy (which will also apply to mine):
 
−
* Pages change x+208+[2] to x+208. There isn't any "...additional content in these pages that requires the creation of a content record" (from the help).
 
−
*:I agree completely.  I think these bracketed numbers are frequently misused.  If Pete agrees, please go ahead with this change.--Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:43, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
* Title record {{T|1403847|1403847}}. Change date 2011-03-00 to 2012-03-00. This looks like a simple typo - I can find no reference to a 2011 Roberts Introduction.
 
−
*:Sure.  I'm not sure how that was introduced as new content takes the date of the container unless specifically specified.  Perhaps the publication record was dated incorrectly and subsequently changed.--Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:43, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
* Apart from that I have an image to replace the Amazon one and can add the publisher (Gollancz / Orion).
 
−
*:I'm fine with the publisher change.  The Amazon image matches my copy and is one of the stable URLs.  I've no issues with changing it as long as it still matches.--Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:43, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
What do you think? If you agree, I can make the changes while I'm processing my 3rd printing. I've posted the same to [https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php/User_talk:PeteYoung#Stapledon_-_Odd_John Pete's page]. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 15:01, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Responses inline above.  Thanks. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:43, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::Thanks Ron, I'll wait for Pete's reply. On the covers, to reassure you, I'm always very careful with replacements, checking for text alignment and looking for all the things that I know publishers (Gollancz in particular) like to fiddle with, sometimes to only small degrees :) Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 16:06, 20 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Pete has agreed to the changes so I'll submit them before I clone for my printing. Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 13:31, 24 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Haldeman - The Forever War ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, you're PV2 {{P|500093|here}}. On the title record page for the {{T|847613|Author's Note}} I can't find the origin of the 1997-08-00 date. Could you sleuth it please? Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 17:41, 22 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:I can't with complete certainty.  However, my edition does list 1997 as one of the copyright dates.  Further, the August 1987 {{P|40063|Avon edition}} has the following note in its Locus1 listing: "According to the author’s note, this is the “definitive” version."  Further still, Locus1's note for the 1997 {{P|40062|SFBC edition}} states "This has a 1997 copyright, but lacks the author’s note of the “definitive” version published last month by AvoNova...".  Given those statements, I think we could safely import the note into the 1997 Avon edition.  I'm certain that the record was added prior to my verification.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 19:03, 22 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::There's lots of editions available and while trying to add a link to original '74 St. Martin's which ironically is the most recently uploaded, https://archive.org/search?query=1974+forever-war+joe-haldeman, it turned out it's a book club (?) edition which is missing the "first printing" on copyright page, so it seems it's an edition not on ISFDB. I just added an eBay link with a note, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5671796. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:21, 22 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:::Ron, I'll import the Author's Note into the August 1987 {{P|40063|Avon edition}} and add a note referencing the Locus1 entry and your {{P|500093|11th printing}}. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 21:34, 26 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Destiny Times Three (Part 1 of 2)  ==
 
−
 
 
−
For "Destiny Times Three (Part 1 of 2)" in {{P|57566|Astounding Science Fiction, March 1945}}, it looks like the credit should be Fritz Leiber, Jr. (instead of Fritz Leiber) per the Internet Archive scan. Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 10:08, 23 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:You are correct.  Fixed.  Thanks! --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:43, 23 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Best Tales of Hoffmann ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://archive.org/search?query=best-tales-of-hoffmann&sort=-addeddate; Edition with $2.00 on cover just uploaded, $6.95 in your PV high for 1967, you may want to adjust price/add other editions using this info. --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 16:02, 25 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Actually, mine is priced at $3.00 which is very difficult to see.  I've cloned the record we have for my edition and another for the $6.95 edition.  I've removed the price and the ISBN from the 1967 edition.  It's unlikely that it had an ISBN then.  The archive scan with the yellow cover is a good candidate for the first printing, but we can't say for sure.  Unfortunately, Dover didn't go in much for providing printing history or marking first editions.  It looks like they may have gotten better at some point.  Tuck is the only verified secondary source which has a price ($2.50) which disagrees with the $2.00 price of the scanned copy.  Whether Tuck is in error, or the price was reduced at some point requires additional research.  Thanks for pointing this out. --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:40, 26 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::The 1968 Budrys review was easy to find and has the $2.00 price.  I think that's enough evidence that the scanned copy is the first edition.  I'll update accordingly.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 18:46, 26 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== The Tragedy of Macbeth ==
 
−
 
 
−
Please see [[ISFDB:Community Portal#Macbeth]]. We currently have a 1988 Shakespeare review linked to a 1997 retelling by Coville. You have verified one of the pubs containing this review so would you mind checking if this should linked to the original Shakespeare story instead? Thanks. --&nbsp;[[User:JLaTondre|JLaTondre]] ([[User talk:JLaTondre#top|talk]]) 09:07, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Strugatsky - The Snail on the Slope ==
 
−
 
 
−
Hello Ron, with regard to our PVd {{P|730349|1st printing}}, I propose changing the coverart credit to Getty Images. It's my understanding that, as a rule, we don't credit designers. Someone authored this image and made it available through Getty and the copyright is with Getty. To credit Getty with authorship is not to say they created the image, if that makes sense. If you think my reasoning is sound, then the {{T|2645121|title record}} will need amending. What do you think? Thanks, Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 13:36, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:Well, it clearly shouldn't be Almeida.  Personally, I don't ordinarily like crediting Getty who, as you say, is the copyright holder and not the cover artist.  I'm uncomfortable with it for that reason, though I know others have added credits that way.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:21, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
::I find it easier to think of the photo-stock library as the intermedial link between our credit and the artist responsible. I also used to feel ambivalent about adding a library as credit until I went looking on Shutterstock's site for the artist who created the works that Gollancz used for their Golden Age Masterworks series. Using their image search function I found {{P|700041|Tithi Luadthong}} and all the rest of her works for the series. My reasoning now is that, <i>where the art merits it</i>, we ought to point the way to finding the actual identity - if someone has the time or inclination. Kev. --[[User:BanjoKev|BanjoKev]] ([[User talk:BanjoKev|talk]]) 18:09, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
 
 
−
== Cosmos ==
 
−
 
 
−
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?33498; I just added an Archive.org link in an edit to this, https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?147141, and copyright page says published by Dorchester so should publisher be re-named to what it is in the first link I provided here? --[[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 13:41, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 
−
:I wouldn't say so.  It's only on Cosmos on the title page which is an imprint of Wildside.  You need to check with the other primary verifiers who are all active.  If they wish to change it, I won't object, but I don't think it's necessary.  --Ron ~ [[User:Rtrace|Rtrace]]<sup>[[User talk:Rtrace|Talk]]</sup> 15:19, 27 May 2023 (EDT)
 

Latest revision as of 20:38, 14 April 2024

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

for older discussions.

Cover Image Licenses

When using the "Upload new cover scan" option from a publication page, the software will automatically add a licensing template pre-populated with the publication information. In this case, you do not need to select a license under the "Licensing" pull down on the upload page (as it creates adds a second, incomplete template that needs to be cleaned up). The "Licensing" pull down only needs to be used when using the upload option from the wiki directly. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:42, 1 January 2024 (EST)

Thanks. Good to know. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:49, 1 January 2024 (EST)

Starman Jones audio reading

Hi, Ron! Just wondering: the noted narrator and the one stated on the cover image do differ. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 13:16, 1 January 2024 (EST)

You are correct. But is appears that the cover has the incorrect narrator. Audible credits Paul Michael Garcia in their current listing and I re-listened to the credits in the audio book which which also credit Garcia. I had already checked that the current cover on the Audible site (the same as linked in the publication record), matches the one I downloaded when I purchased this book in 2011. The images are identical and both credit Powers, apparently incorrectly, as you noticed. I'll add a note that pictured credit is incorrect. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 13:30, 1 January 2024 (EST)

Kioga Titles

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/se.cgi?arg=kioga%3A&type=All+Titles; Should those all say "informal"? --Username (talk) 11:54, 2 January 2024 (EST)

Corrected. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:58, 2 January 2024 (EST)

Amazing Stories, October 1960

Regarding Amazing Stories, October 1960: Would you mind checking the artwork on page 83? It is listed as "The Missionary [2]" by Bernklau, but Bernklau did the "Seeing Eye" artwork right before and Emsh did the "The Missionary" artwork after it. Should this be "Seeing Eye [2]"? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 09:40, 6 January 2024 (EST)

I agree and have made the change. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 12:07, 6 January 2024 (EST)
OK by me.--swfritter (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2024 (EST)

HIstórias Extraordinárias N.7

Hello Rtrace, thanks for reviewing and approving my submission 5838401. I must have missed some information in it because it is not appearing as part of the series in the magazine series page in the 2023 December slot. Could you please fix it or tell me where I should insert the pertinent information so it can appear there?

Thanks! Pugno (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2024 (EST)

Hi Pugno
Magazines are just a little bit tricky and involve at least one edit beyond the initial one to get everything correct. One thing that you missed in adding this record was to add the series name, "Histórias Extraordinárias", in the Title Data section of the New Magazine screen. Had you done this, your new record would have appeared in the Issue Grid. However, even had you don that, there still would be an addition step to do. We can take care of the series name at the same time that we do this second step. You may have noticed that Magazine and Fanzine records have a special Title record of type EDITOR. Also that title record contains all the publications (issues) for a given calendar year that have the same editors. For example, the title record for 2023 for Histórias Extraordinárias is here. You'll notice that the title is different that that of the individual issues ("Histórias Extraordinárias - 2023") and that the date is for the year only i.e. no month or day. For the first issue that is added for a given year, the EDITOR title record has to be edited to change those fields. In this case, since the 2023 title already exists, all we need to do is to merge your newly created EDITOR title (here with the existing 2023 title. The best way to do that is to go to any of the three editor's pages and select "Show All Titles". Then find the two titles in question ("Histórias Extraordinárias - 2023" and "Histórias Extraordinárias, Dezembro 2023"). Select the check boxes next to these and click the "Merge Selected Records" button. This will take you to an intermediate page to resolve the conflicts between the two records. Select the title with the dash and the year, the series name and the date without the month and click "Complete Merge". Once that edit is approved, things will appear as they should. Please go ahead and give it a try if you feel comfortable with the instructions. If not, feel free to ask questions or if you'd like me to take care of the merge for you. I'm happy to do so, but wanted to give you the change to learn how to do this. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:38, 9 January 2024 (EST)
Hi Rtrace
I am not sure I understood it all :) So what I did was to submit a change (#5856081) and I kindly ask you to please adjust it accordingly so it can appear correctly in the series page. I tried to follow your instructions and use the "Show All Titles" that you mentioned but alas, couldn't find it. I am sorry.
In the meantime, for the same magazine, I will also submit a number of changes to create variants of interiorarts, since they are the same art appearing in different spots, just zoomed in. Thanks! Pugno (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2024 (EST)
I'll go ahead and do the merge. For the next time you need it, the "Show All Titles" link in on the author bibliography page e.g. Mario Cavalcanti. In the left menu, under "Editing Tools", it's the 4th item down (or the second from the bottom, I've got the Moderator link first, which I'm not sure you can see, so your count may differ). In any case, thanks for your contributions on these. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:41, 11 January 2024 (EST)
Rtrace, thank you very much for your help. I hadn't realized that the "Show all Titles" link could be accessed via the author bibliography page. Now it is clear! Now I submitted two variant adjustements, #5856083 and #5856084 to correctly set two interior arts. Could you please see to it? Once it is done, I will clone the magazine to create its ebook version. Once again, thanks a lot!! Pugno (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2024 (EST)
Both approved. You can proceed with cloning. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:38, 11 January 2024 (EST)
Thanks Rtrace! I just cloned it. Submission #5857813 - hope it is all OK. Thanks again! Pugno (talk) 17:20, 12 January 2024 (EST)

The Fourth Invasion by Alvim Correa

I saw that you registered Black Infinity, Fall 2018 and have two INTERIORART attributed to Alvim Corrrea, wouldn't it be a case of turning it into a variant of La guerre des mondes? Hyju (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2024 (EST)

I wouldn't think so. Those are two individual illustrations. Whereas, La guerre des mondes is the full set of illustrations for a book. We don't generally make variant titles for only part of the whole (excepting serials). --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:44, 15 January 2024 (EST)

Exhalation

In Your pv pub CoNZealand: 78th World Science Fiction Convention there is an interiorart Exhalation (cover) as a variant of "Exhalation" cover. In the ISFDB there are three cover titles Exhalation: here, here and here. Can You please have a look which one is the right one or is there another fittig title? Thank You. --Zapp (talk) 18:16, 15 January 2024 (EST)

It's the Shutterstock cover. I'm guessing that we hadn't identified the "artist" it at the time I entered the ConZealand book, or I would have linked it then. I'm not thrilled with identifying Shutterstock as an artist. My impression is that they are more of a licensing company than a creator of artwork, but I'll defer to the verifier of publication. All linked now. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:54, 15 January 2024 (EST)

Robert Anton Wilson / Schrödinger's Cat - Glossary

Posted on the Talk pages of Rtrace, Marc Kupper, Spacecow
All of the publications: The Universe Next Door and The Trick Top Hat and The Homing Pigeons and Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy have a glossary at the back. I have all four of these pubs and have compared the glossaries and they are all the same. There is an existing ISFDb record for the glossary and it is present in the omnibus (all five print versions) but none of the individual volumes. Hence I propose to import it into each of these three pubs. As a consequence, I will also change the disambiguation from the omnibus name to the series name, ie from "Glossary (Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy)" to "Glossary (Schrödinger's Cat)". Is all this ok with you? Teallach (talk) 18:38, 18 January 2024 (EST)

I've no objections. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:19, 18 January 2024 (EST)

K. J. Parker's Relics/Under My Skin

You've PVed the 2023 Under My Skin collection. One of the Hugo novella nominees seems to be the story Relics, which seems like it was first published in Chinese translation in 2022. Can you have a look at the copyright page (which isn't part of Amazon's preview of the ebook) to see if that's correct? Thanks!

BTW, I'm not rushing to do the Hugos, given the errors in the nom report e.g. at least two duplicated nominees... ErsatzCulture (talk) 14:28, 20 January 2024 (EST)

The Parker story gives a 2023 copyright and states "First appeared in this volume". That would appear to ignore the translation. I am adding nomination data for the Hugos, though the Chinese titles are giving me trouble. Please feel free to correct any errors that you see that I've made. The duplicate nominees were called out in one of the blogs, which I'm keeping an eye on. There's definitely several odd things about the nomination statistics. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:43, 20 January 2024 (EST)
This is Fungi Song according to CSFDB. ErsatzCulture (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2024 (EST)
Hi, I'm just slowly going over the Chinese entries. I've added a title record for this "stub" award entry, but I'm perplexed how to get it to show the author name in the award record. Any ideas?
Thanks! ErsatzCulture (talk) 12:35, 21 January 2024 (EST)
I took care of it. The author needs to be listed in the "untitled" award record before it is linked. I unlinked them, added the author and then re-linked them. The title and author fields are not editable in an award that has been linked to a title record.
For the other two above, were you going to add the original Chinese publications? In both cases, the nomination was for the Chinese version of the story as opposed to English original/translation. I can help link them if you'd like, or you can proceed, but to avoid the above problem, the author's name should be added to the award record prior to linking. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:13, 21 January 2024 (EST)
Yeah, I'll do those short fiction records when I get to them - I'm planning on cleaning up one category a day.
Did you get very far on researching 余光 aka Residual Light (#13 in the Best Novel noms)? I noticed you hadn't done that one. Arthur Liu (CSFDB head honcho) mentioned that they couldn't track it down, even though it looked like it was a Chinese story. I've now found a very weird 2023 English language pub that looks to be (machine?) translated from another language, I'm wondering if that's it? ErsatzCulture (talk) 14:55, 21 January 2024 (EST)
I didn't really go much past checking Worldcat, amazon.cn, and google. I'm interpreting whichever language is listed first as the one that was nominated in cases of translated works. Since authors are not listed, I've omitted them if I wasn't able to find the nominee, which was the case with this one. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:49, 21 January 2024 (EST)
Cheers; with the help of someone in (I think) Indonesia, we managed to identify what exactly Residual Light is, and I've added a proper title record and updated the award record, so I think this one is as good as it's going to get. Apparently one of the Best Series nominees is related to it, but I've not looked into it as yet.
Will try to start on some of the other categories tomorrow - not had chance today. ErsatzCulture (talk) 15:26, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Robert A. Heinlein / Stranger in a Strange Land

I am editing and PVing Stranger in a Strange Land and have added notes and also deleted OCLC/Worldcat: 220513743 because it refers to a different edition (1977, 21cm (ie hc) and different ISBNs). My submission is here. I cannot find a record on OCLC/Worldcat for this specific printing but this pub record has been SVd to OCLC/Worldcat by Bluesman who is no longer active. Is it possible to get SVs by inactive verifiers removed? Teallach (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2024 (EST)

I've approved your edit and removed the Worldcat verification. Any moderator can remove a secondary verification, but since that feature was added, I'm the only one to use it. I only do so when the verifier is inactive. In any case, thanks for your edit. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:32, 20 January 2024 (EST)

Girl in a Swing

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?11141; 1980 UK HC on Archive.org says, on back flap, that Reginald George Haggar, who has his own Wikipedia page, did the cover art; edition you PV says Karen Murray. --Username (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2024 (EST)

Murray is credited on the back cover. If you look closely at the two covers, they are subtly different. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:00, 22 January 2024 (EST)
SFE also says Murray for the HC so maybe that's why someone entered it. I made 2 edits, one adding archived link and note about last unnumbered page and the other unmerging cover art. --Username (talk) 19:25, 22 January 2024 (EST)

SF Writer's Workshop

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?102360; You entered price for Owlswick TP, as can be seen on back cover of archived copy, https://archive.org/search?query=longyear+workshop, the price is much lower, I'm letting you know in case something needs fixing. --Username (talk) 23:56, 23 January 2024 (EST)

It would appear that Chalker/Owings got the price wrong. Please go ahead and update it. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:00, 24 January 2024 (EST)

First Men in the Moon

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5859839; I didn't actually erase anything at the time I made my edit, it's just that it took so long to be approved that the UK guy with the slang, who made an edit at almost exactly the same time as I did, has an edit queue much shorter than mine (as does pretty much everyone else) so it got approved first, which can easily be seen by going to edit history, so our edits conflicted. So I'm going to make another edit just adding archived link which he didn't do. --Username (talk) 09:45, 29 January 2024 (EST)

Odd that I didn't get the warning that the record was updated since the edit was submitted. You should probably refrain from adding archive.org links pending the results of this discussion. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 09:49, 29 January 2024 (EST)
You should read the message from long-time mod Marty just above yours in that discussion where he says it is not ISFDB's place to decide what's legal or not, we just make links and if the host of the link gets a request to take certain works down for whatever reason then we can just remove the link, which is exactly what I said earlier in that thread. I made a simple message about Moondust a few days ago and it's somehow gotten blown completely out of proportion; if anyone had a problem with ISFDB hosting links they would have told you so long ago. Just let it go and move on. --Username (talk) 09:57, 29 January 2024 (EST)
Of course I read it. However, a single post in a discussion does not signify that the community has reached consensus on the issue. Unless there is consensus on the issue or consensus that we should keep adding such links while discussing (the question I raised), I will not be approving any edits adding the potentially problematic links. I would expect that the other moderators would behave in the same manner. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:03, 29 January 2024 (EST)
There is rarely any consensus reached on anything discussed here; things usually just peter out without anything being decided. I know one thing, deciding to remove thousands of Internet Archive links, very many of which were added by me and were used by me and others as research tools to add/correct info here, because someone is paranoid that the internet police are going to come after this site after not doing so for the nearly 20 years it's been open to public editing, is the last option anyone should consider. We don't host, we post. My suggestion would be to just add a line or two to the legalese saying that links are only to be used for private use (i.e. reading the book) or research/study (that's what we do here) and, boom, issue solved. --Username (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2024 (EST)
It would make fare more sense to raise your points on the Rules and Standards discussion rather than here. I see you've made other points, but not these. Regardless, this question isn't going to be resolved on my talk page. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:34, 29 January 2024 (EST)

Proposed change to title novel to shortfiction

Hi Ron. Faustus is looking to change[1] a novel to shortfiction in a 1928 magazine due to it's low page count, your the only PV.Kraang (talk) 23:38, 30 January 2024 (EST)

That's fine. I checked Miller/Contento and they have it as a novelette. It appears that Mhhutchins made the variant. Perhaps he misread "nv" as novel, assuming Miller/Contento was his source. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:05, 31 January 2024 (EST)
Thanks, I'll make the changes.Kraang (talk) 12:36, 31 January 2024 (EST)

once more with footnotes

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?71155; Page count is 282. Edit PENDING. --Username (talk) 19:18, 6 February 2024 (EST)

Spock Storybook

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?32222; While working on a ton of novelizations lately I came back across this one where my name is in the edit list followed by you adding a note about missing paper edition but this, https://www.amazon.co.uk/Storybook-Paramount-Pictures-Corporation-Paperback/dp/B00OQTMGQC, seems to be it. Also, a book club edition as seen on back cover, https://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-III-Search-Spock/dp/0671476629. I just made an edit adding an Amazon cover with another photo on the page showing back cover with correct ISBN and price; archived copy's cover was way too dark. --Username (talk) 11:58, 10 February 2024 (EST)

Thanks for that. I've cloned the record for the paperback and moved the Reginald verification over. I'll leave it to you to enter the book club edition if you'd like. I'm not sure where to research which book club published it though SFBC seems likely. I'm also skeptical of the date for the BCE, though it may have been later in 1984. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:52, 10 February 2024 (EST)

Deryni Magic

Hello,

As you are the PV of both works, can you look at this submission and this submission. I do not have them on hold in case you want to handle them - if we go to Community, I will put them on hold pending the decision. We often create special series for the non-fiction in big series and Deryni Magic looks exactly like that so it makes sense to keep them separate... but they also can go up in the parent series. If you rather start a discussion on Community, I can do that as but as you are the sole verifier on one of these books, I am starting here. Thanks! Annie (talk) 13:30, 13 February 2024 (EST)

Hi Annie
In general, I don't like the way Kurtz's Deryni books have been put into series. I'm rarely a fan of the XXX Universe super-series which doesn't make sense in this instance, especially as the works contained in it are nearly all Kurtz's own short fiction. We have fan-fiction or sequels by other hands in a sub-series named "Deryni" and they are all authorized from an anthology edited by Kurtz. Lastly, I'd take King Kelson's Bride out of "The Histories of King Kelson" sub-series. My copy is certainly not marketed as part of that trilogy. If it were entirely up to me I'd keep the 4 trilogies as a sub-series of a single super-series of the Deryni series which would contain all of the other works. But that's not exactly what you asked. I don't really see a need to group Deryni Magic with Codex Derynianus. I'm not even sure that the latter is properly non-fiction. It's one of those in-universe encyclopedias i.e. as if written by a fictional person from the setting. I see that Ahasuerus added the Deryni Magic series to Codex Derynianus. The edit history for Deryni Magic is less complete, but there was a title merge by Ahasuerus on the same day as the series edition to the other title. We may want to seek his input as to why these two were grouped by that series title. I'll leave a note on his talk page. If they must be grouped, I would prefer a name like "Deryni Non-Fiction", but my preference would be to not group them. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:12, 13 February 2024 (EST)
Thanks for the answer - and that is why I started here. I am fine with either way - and I agree that the current series name makes little sense. Do you want to put the two submissions on hold until this is sorted out? (Or I can if you prefer - I just do not want someone to spend time digging through things and miss the conversations). Annie (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2024 (EST)
I've held them. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:33, 13 February 2024 (EST)
I am looking at the Title History page for Deryni Magic and, surprisingly enough, I have a vague recollection of what may have happened to it back in 2006. I think I remember changing something in a robot-created Deryni record -- probably the title type which early ISFDB robots tended to set to NOVEL -- and then merging the result with a pre-existing title. Of course, it's been 17+ years, so I can't be sure, but it feels right. I also see that Bill Longley did another title merge that affected this title in 2009, but I don't know what that was about.
Substantively, I have no objection to changing the series structure/name. Ahasuerus (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2024 (EST)
Thanks. I've approved the two edits in question. I've counted 15 active verifiers of Deryni books, and I think maybe a community discussion is warranted before restructuring the rest of the series. I'm going out of town on Saturday, so I don't really want to start that discussion until I get back. I'd rather not try to participate in a discussion using a tablet. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:19, 14 February 2024 (EST)

Art of the Pulps

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5892306; Notes say copyright page date is September 2017 with actual date from Amazon but date entered here is September; was some more exact date supposed to be entered and wasn't? --Username (talk) 13:22, 15 February 2024 (EST)

It was entered but was changed back to the date from the book. I'll remove the note. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:00, 15 February 2024 (EST)

WFR #3

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/edit/submitpub.cgi; Page count was added by other PV who often adds pages to the count that shouldn't be but since this is a magazine shouldn't all pages, including covers, be counted and count changed to 236? --Username (talk) 23:06, 15 February 2024 (EST)

Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact, Mid-December 1986

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?56983

hiya Ron your the only pv still hewing at the coalface for this one. just to let you know that he contents are missing another int art by hank jankus for "picaper" on p104. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2024 (EST)

Hi Gaz
I see you've verified it as well. I'm about to go out of town for a bit, so please feel free to add the missing item. If you're not comfortable with that, I can take care of it when I get back. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:47, 16 February 2024 (EST)
righto mate Ill have a pop at it. Faustus (talk) 22:03, 16 February 2024 (EST)

Theodore Sturgeon / Without Sorcery

I am editing and PVing Without Sorcery and propose to 1) change Pages to xi+355. 2) change start page of Introduction to v. 3) change start page of Preface to viii. 4) add pub notes. 5) upload high res cover scan from my copy (existing image is a thumbnail). Is all this ok with you? Teallach (talk) 17:30, 17 February 2024 (EST)

All those changes sound good. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:41, 27 February 2024 (EST)

Theodore Sturgeon / E Pluribus Unicorn

I am editing and PVing E Pluribus Unicorn and will correct two of the titles in the Contents section:
"The Silken-Swift" should be "The Silken-Swift..." (existing variant)
"The Professor's Teddy-Bear" should be "The Professor's Teddy Bear" (existing variant)
The pub record currently shows the titles as they appear in the ToC. I will add a pub note about the ToC discrepancies. Teallach (talk) 16:46, 18 February 2024 (EST)

As above, all these changes are fine. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:44, 27 February 2024 (EST)

Mona Lisa Overdrive audiobook

I added the price and ASIN to this Mona Lisa Overdrive audiobook record. Phil (talk) 08:40, 19 February 2024 (EST)

I backed out the changes for this edition and applied them to this edition where they belonged. Sorry. Phil (talk) 08:48, 19 February 2024 (EST)

Disclosures in Scarlet

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5895461; Pasted $6.00 sticker on flap in case you want to add a note about that. --Username (talk) 09:17, 19 February 2024 (EST)

There is no evidence that that price sticker is from the publisher, so no need to add a note. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:46, 27 February 2024 (EST)
Are you sure? It's mentioned several times here, https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/disclosures-scarlet/author/jacobi-carl/first-edition/. --Username (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2024 (EST)

The SFWA Handbook

Ron, I'll leave this submission for you. This pub was ignored when this one was created. Don't know if you want to move your SV's or import and ask Michaelc to move his PV. John Scifibones 11:02, 22 February 2024 (EST)

Catamount

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?233737; Archived link, +[1] to page count/[283] author's note. --Username (talk) 09:46, 24 February 2024 (EST)

A Praed Street Dossier

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5900107; There's no note about copies so you may want to enter it from the colophon at the end like you usually do for these AH/M&M books. --Username (talk) 22:05, 24 February 2024 (EST)

Vathek

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2892553

Ron ive just been reading the introduction and bibliography by Roger Lonsdale in the OUP edition (1983) where he talks about the 1787 french editions and he says that the theory that they were retranslated from the english back into french is wrong. He says "Professor Parreaux's careful investigation finally disposed of this theory in 1960. The 1787 Lausanne text undoubtedly represents Beckford's own French text, from a manuscript which he must have had with him, in a slightly earlier state than that translated by Henley" He says that the 1787 Paris edition is a revised version of the Lausanne one but this one does contain some of Henley's notes for the English translation, retranslated into french. The bibliography indicates the first translation from the english back into french was in 1819.

All that might not be the final word and im sure you've dug into deeper than me but i thought you ought to know with regard to the notes for the title. I can scan the relevent pages and send them to you if youre interested. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2024 (EST)
Hi Gaz
I haven't done any special research on this. I do see that Wikipedia sticks with the original composition in French. You could certainly add to the notes in the title record. However, I'd note it as an alternate theory and cite your sources. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 20:54, 27 February 2024 (EST)
righto mate ill have a stab at it. Yeah Beckford wrote it in french and Henly was commisioned to do the english translation but he was cheesed off that beckford wouldnt let him publish and the rapscallion jumped the gun, published it without mentioning beckford and said it was translated from some old arab text. The dispute is about the french versions published shortly after the english one. I couldn't find anything in the wikipedia that says the first french versions were retranslated from henley's english version back into french which was what people originally believed and which lonsdale says has been refuted. Ill see if i can find any other source for the double translation theory. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 23:34, 27 February 2024 (EST)

Grandon

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?21045; I just added edits with HathiTrust links to 333 and Werewolf of Ponkert, I checked online and all 6 books say The Grandon Company on the title page, I'm thinking of changing publisher's name to that, you PV 4 of them so if yours say the same let me know and then I'll make the change. --Username (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2024 (EST)

They all say "The Grandon Company" and it would be fine to change the publisher's name. Just make sure you update the publisher instead of individually updating all the publication records. Let me know if you have any issues. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:14, 1 March 2024 (EST)
I can't do that; I'm not a mod. --Username (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2024 (EST)
Updated. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:03, 5 March 2024 (EST)

Swear by Apollo

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291019; This is the book club edition (Random House / BCE) going by the page count but the record has trade price; your Reginald SV may be affected by that. There's a copy, https://www.etsy.com/listing/1292726176/swear-by-apollo-by-shirley-barker-1958, that shows trade with price on front and cover artist on back + LCCN on copyright page; eBay has nothing but club editions except for 1 seller who shows LCCN on copyright page but didn't bother with photos of the flaps. LoC site says 306 pages, not 307. --Username (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2024 (EST)

Trade copy here, https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006592863. --Username (talk) 12:34, 5 March 2024 (EST)
Well, the Reginald verification is from Mhhutchins, not me. I also see that you effectively converted the publication record of the trade edition to that of the book club edition with this edit in 2021 while not adjusting the publisher to indicate the book club. Both the Reginald number and the Worldcat number refer to the trade edition. I would guess the page count in the record was 306 before you changed it, which would match Worldcat. What I'd recommend is that you back out your edit and restore the data for the trade edition. That would be easier than creating a new record for the trade, fixing the publisher of the BCE, removing the external IDs and then getting two other editors to move their verifications to a new trade record. After you've restored the trade edition, then you could clone it to create the BCE. Lastly, I'm not sure why you're asking me about this record. I'm not in the edit history and have no verifications, aside from marking the ones that are not applicable. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:17, 5 March 2024 (EST)
https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5908165; OK, so I went back and did it the way it was before and then improved it with lots of other info which the previous editors apparently didn't care to look up. As I've said before, the only reason I ask you is because you're around more often than some of the others (at least until recently when you're doing mostly your own audiobook edits) so when I see your name in a record I default to you. Mr. Hutchins hasn't really been actively editing for years and barely responds to anything, anyway, so no use asking them. Rudam is the one who approved my nearly 3-years-old previous edit and I believe he's the one who I asked to slow down on the approvals because I was finding things that needed fixing that they were not noticing because they were just running through dozens of approvals in the space of a few minutes just to get the queue down to size, I guess. They went off in a huff after that. So, you know, it's really difficult dealing with all the personalities here and figuring out who's around and who's mad at who and whatever so if I get a little confused sometimes I think it's understandable. --Username (talk) 20:04, 5 March 2024 (EST)

Futuristic Tales, No.1

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?995232

hiya ron sorry to bother you I just wanted to pick your brains about how to handle cases like this re the alternate names of the authors. Theres the 3 names which are all psuedonyms. The authors real name is not on the db - presumably if it was on the db then those 3 would be made alternate names of it. as the real parent name isnt listed then one of the others has been made the parent name (Stacker). Did you do that because it was the earliest one in the contents or was there some other reason? There's some more like that for later issues of this mag so i want to get on top of it before trying to sort them out myself. cheers from gaz Faustus (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2024 (EST)

Ron ive just noticed that you linked them by doing a variant title. Does using the alternate name route have the same outcome? Faustus (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2024 (EST)

Hi Gaz
I recall these edits from earlier today. I went ahead and adjusted things to get the records in order, as you have noticed. The first thing I did was to add "Abu Khattub" as the legal name for the three pseudonyms (or rather "Khattub, Abu" which is the proper format for the legal name. In order to get those three stories under the same bibliography, there are two sets of edits that have to be done. First the authors must be linked. We ordinarily select whichever name the author is best know as in the field as the canonical name. Since we had three names with one story using each pseudonym, there was no way to give any name preference for the canonical, so I just chose one, Garry Stacker. If we find more publications by this author, we may need to adjust which name is canonical. I should also note that because there are no publications with the "Abu Khattub" credit, we cannot us that one as a canonical name. So, choosing Stacker as canonical, I then made the other two names into pseudonyms by navigating to each author and using the "Make/Remove Alternate Name" tool. The other set of edits is to make the title records under the alternate names into variants of a parent title using the canonical name. Again, I went to each title record and used the "Make This Title a Variant" tool, selecting Option 2 with "Garry Stacker" as the author name to make the new parent title. I hope this answers your question, but let me know if you need me to expand on any steps in the process. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:11, 6 March 2024 (EST)
cheers mate, a bit more in it than i thought, i'm glad I asked else i would have only tried to do one or the other of those. Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2024 (EST)

New York 2140 Audiobook

Hello, question about the ISBN from audiobook download New York 2140; where did you source it from? It doesn't match the one listed on the Hachette site (9781549128141). Thanks! Albinoflea (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2024 (EST)

Hi Albinoflea
Sure, I got that from the linked Worldcat record and the same ISBN is used for the three eAudiobook records I can find in Worldcat. I did find a different ISBN, 9781478941224, listed in this review, however, searching that in Worldcat returns a record for the print book which doesn't actually list that ISBN. Worldcat does not have the ISBN from the Hachette site. I'll admit that I'm finding audiobook ISBNs a bit puzzling. Audible doesn't list them and they do not appear in the book, nor in the metadata that I can see when I import them in iTunes. Worldcat can list multiple ISBNs, though it doesn't in this instance. That review site will sometimes list library edition ISBNs in addition to trade, but again, not in this instance. For New York 2140 I suppose that we could list them all in the current record and cite the source of each. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:44, 7 March 2024 (EST)

Scream for Jeeves

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?487698; Starting number of first story is wrong, title of essay is wrong. --Username (talk) 10:24, 12 March 2024 (EDT)

Updated. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:25, 12 March 2024 (EDT)

The Dark Tower

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?63665

hiya ron i'm having a look at the int art for my book (https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?167561) to see if the existing int art title can be added to the contents. The hodder hb has 12 named colour plates listed on an illustrations content page. just wanted to check if the american editions have the same pictures. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2024 (EDT)

Hi Gaz
I replaced the trade edition above with the Artist Signed Edition, which is why I marked the former verification as transient. You may try reaching out to Willem H. who has a permanent verification on that edition. I can tell you that the Artist Signed Edition also lists twelve color plates on the illustration contents page. There are also several monochrome spot illustrations and illustrations for section headings in addition to pictorial end-papers. Hope this is helpful for you. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:10, 15 March 2024 (EDT)
sorry mate i didnt notice it was a transient, thanks for the info cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2024 (EDT)

The Baum Bugle, Spring 2023

Please see this edit and this edit which impact your verified The Baum Bugle, Spring 2023. Let me know how I should respond to submitter on first one and whether I should accept the second one. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2024 (EDT)

I think that both changes are essentially fine. I can convert the first essay to an interview, or you can work with the submitter on how that is accomplished if you would prefer. For the second edit, it was a little confusing as the title page has "Art and Additional Comments by Lorena Azpiri" which did not make it clear that she was also interviewed. I would recommend cloning the interview for the Spanish version. There is not a separate Spanish title listed, so maybe make the Spanish a variant of the English. Although, the interview itself is printed side by side with Spanish on the left, so I could go either way with which title should be canonical. Let me know if you'd like me to work on these changes. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 11:27, 24 March 2024 (EDT)
Since you have the pub, I will unhold these and let you work them. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2024 (EDT)

Little Annie and Jack in London

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1969250

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5922621

hiya Ron i didnt ask you about this first because your pv was transient. I can scan the pages and get them to you if that would help. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 10:05, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

I still have the book handy. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you. Reading footnote 7, makes it clear that "Little Ella" is the name of the mirror reversed reproduction by Currier and Ives of "My First Sermon" which is the illustration appearing on page 171 (it is also identified as such in this later edition of the Annotated Alice). The other Millais painting, "My Second Sermon" is described as the same girl sleeping, which does not fit either illustration. Therefore, the remaining illustration on page 172 has to be the one from Little Annie and Jack in London. Let me know if you have a different interpretation, but I'm pretty sure the current title is correct. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:35, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
sorry Ron but i still think i'm right on this one. The bottom pic is the millais painting "MY First Sermon" https://victorianweb.org/painting/millais/paintings/43.html the top pic is "Little Ella" https://www.americanantiquarian.org/514163.htm Its note number 4 in my book not No 7 so maybe the notes are different? Or even the pics are different? Faustus (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
OK, our books have different illustrations. It does appear that what mine label as "My First Sermon" is in fact "Little Ella", though the note does not make this clear. However, the second illustration in the QPB edition is neither of the images you linked. I'm going to reject your edit and update the title record to change "My First Sermon" to "Little Ella". For your book, if it has both the Millais painting and the Currier and Ives version, you should adjust the altered title to the correct page and add "My First Sermon". Let me know if that makes sense. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:25, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
righto mate - its a bit misleadin in my book as well as he gives the impression that the first pic is millais and the one underneath is the mirror reversed copy when its actually the other way round - he was taking the looking glass theme too seriously. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:33, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

(undented) Ron while were on it does your book have a picture not listed in the contents thats in mine. Its in the tweedledum chapter just after the Tenniel picture with the rattle on the ground. its a tenniel drawing from "Punch" of a boy on a gate with a gun and waving a rattle. also in the wool and water chapter next to the tenniel drawing of alice and the sheep shopkeeper theres a photo of "Alice's shop" in oxford not in the toc. Faustus (talk) 21:51, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

Yes, both the Punch drawing and the photo of the shop are present. I hadn't bothered with the drawing as there is no good way of giving it a title. I omitted the photo as it is uncredited and I don't usually include photos. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 22:03, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
i put in a edit a few days ago adding the tenniel drawing to my book and its just been signed off. I called it "Punch Cartoon". i'm happy to take it out to keep the different editions as consistent as possible. I left the shop one out as i figured it might be because it was a photo. cheers Gaz Faustus (talk) 23:07, 25 March 2024 (EDT)
No need to remove or delete the new drawing. I was just explaining why I hadn't originally added that item. I'll go ahead and import it in my copies. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:30, 26 March 2024 (EDT)

Horror: 100 Best Books

Hi. There may be an error in the contents of the publication you've PV'd. Could you check & chime in here with what you've got in your copy? Thanks! MagicUnk (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2024 (EDT)

An Informal History of the Hugos

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?672377

Ron Ive just pv'd this and theres a couple of walton's reviews in my copy not in the db contents. my book has a review of "A Canticle for Leibowitz" on p69 and a review of "Dying Inside" on p214. Gaz Faustus (talk) 09:14, 26 March 2024 (EDT)

Hi Gaz -
I don't know how those were missed. Please feel free to add them, or let me know if you'd like me to do so. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:32, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
i'm happy to do it mate but i'm not 100% sure about the second one. thats the only review that doesnt have a surtitle (right word?) so should that just go down as a review and not a review and an essay? Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
For the Silverberg review, you only need to add the review without a separate essay. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:00, 26 March 2024 (EDT)
Ron one of the reviews isnt showing up as hypertext, is that something ive done - I cant see anything wrong with how it was added? Gaz Faustus (talk) 13:24, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
I can explain what happened. When a new review title record is created, the software attempts to match the reviewed title and author to an existing record in the database. In this case, you entered the review author as "Walter M. Miller". A Canticle for Leibowitz has only ever been published as by "Walter M. Miller, Jr." Thus the software couldn't match your new review title to an existing title record. I would recommend updating the review author in the review title record to "Walter M. Miller, Jr.". Unfortunately, the software only attempts to link the review when it is first created, so that won't cause the hyperlink to appear. To make that happen there is another step. From the review title, you'll want to use the "Link Review to Title" tool. You'll need the title number for A Canticle for Leibowitz which is 2283. Once that edit is approved, the link will appear. Hope this helps, but let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 19:10, 27 March 2024 (EDT)

Third Cry to Legba

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?77932; I added Luminist link, word in subtitle should be Cobbett. --Username (talk) 09:59, 28 March 2024 (EDT)

Fixed. I'm not sure about those wasabisys.com links. In the recent discussion we had consensus for archive.org but not other sites. I've posted the question in that thread and will hold the edit for now. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:15, 28 March 2024 (EDT)
Ahasuerus just approved an edit of mine for a book PV by him (among others) and it included a Luminist link so he's obviously fine with them. It's not a torrent site with passwords and membership and such, it just provides singular PDF's of old books and magazines. As always, if someone complains about an individual book they'll take it down, like Archive.org does, and the link won't work (someone with patience, i.e. not me, could have some fun doing an advanced search for the hundreds of Luminist links in ISFDB records, most added by me over the last few years, and remove any that don't work anymore if there are any); if not, the links are good. --Username (talk) 19:09, 28 March 2024 (EDT)

Dr. Caligari

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5926963; Most of the photos are from the limited edition, Gahan Wilson art, signature pages, 100 copies, etc. --Username (talk) 10:32, 29 March 2024 (EDT)

The ISBN is they list is for the trade edition, though for some reason, they are using a 10 digit ISBN for a 2016 publication. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:57, 29 March 2024 (EDT)

This year's Chinese Hugo Finalists

I'll do all the ones that aren't already in the DB - all but a couple were on two rec lists, so I already have the details at hand for them. ErsatzCulture (talk) 11:54, 29 March 2024 (EDT)

Sounds good. I may need to pause for a few hours. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 11:57, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
Sorry for stepping on your toes for a couple of the later awards. I've think I've done all the Chinese finalists, apart from Wandering Earth II in Best Dramatic Presentation. ErsatzCulture (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2024 (EDT) EDIT: I'd missed Yao Haijun in Editor Long Form, but he's in now. ErsatzCulture (talk) 14:27, 29 March 2024 (EDT)
No worries, I thought I was the one stepping on toes. Your notes were more extensive than mine which is why I zapped my own records. I'm going to wait until this evening to enter the rest, unless you wanted to work on them now. I can handle the DP Chinese finalist if you don't get to it since we don't need a record and it's simply a matter of cut and paste. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:31, 29 March 2024 (EDT)

Science Fiction Reader's Guide

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5928018; Link and fixed essay title, publisher should have something (Nebraska?) added to differ from much later unrelated one of the same name. --Username (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2024 (EDT)

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?270380; https://archive.org/search?query=0822011697; Price is lower on archived copy so ISFDB record is likely for a later printing, essays from Reader's Guide originated in this book so you may want to import them. --Username (talk) 11:15, 30 March 2024 (EDT)

Pisces of Fate

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?622398; I added a cover artist to a book today and his name is Henry Christian-Slane which is the same as his site henrychristianslane.com; should the artist for the book linked be Slane, too? --Username (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2024 (EDT)

I don't own the book, nor have I verified it except for Worldcat which has no art credits, so I couldn't say. The note states the artist is from a Vogel nomination which can be viewed here. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 10:37, 31 March 2024 (EDT)

When you get a minute

Hey Ron, just a heads up. These audiobooks have the wrong format. John Scifibones 15:54, 3 April 2024 (EDT)

All fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 18:42, 3 April 2024 (EDT)

Aesop's Fables

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?935296

hiya Ron dunno what Ive done wrong this time but a couple of the fables that i was doing ie the 1912 Vernon Jones translations (the belly and the members and the boasting traveler) seem to have been merged with the ones that you did with the unknown translator. ive just done some edits removing them from my book and readding them - hopefully that is right. when i was editing them to add the perry number and webpage they seemed ok then so cant work out what happened. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 10:36, 8 April 2024 (EDT)

Hi Gaz -
I think I can see what happened. If you take a look at the edit histories of the two titles in question (The Boasting Traveler and The Belly and the Members, you'll note that they were both merged with the existing title records with the unidentified translator on 4/7 by JLaTondre. I would expect that he didn't realize that the translators were different. Your method for correcting this error is exactly correct, and I've approved those edits. You should be able to proceed to add the translator template to the new titles and make them variants of the canonical titles. Hope this helps. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 17:39, 8 April 2024 (EDT)
thanks for sorting that our Ron I'll have to train myself to remembr to check out the edit history in future. cheers - Gaz Faustus (talk) 19:15, 8 April 2024 (EDT)

Bowl of Baal

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?264557; I added FantLab ID and thought you might want to enter the intro into contents; Teitler has a few other credits already on ISFDB. --Username (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2024 (EDT)

Added. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:11, 9 April 2024 (EDT)

Worlds of If, February 2024

As the approver of this submission, you may be interested in this conversation. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2024 (EDT)

Since the outcome of the conversation also would affect various magazine issues verified by you (I mentioned "Foundation" in it), your input would be appreciated. Christian Stonecreek (talk) 11:23, 11 April 2024 (EDT)
I actually would prefer that we list the editor in chief with sub-editors in the notes. It looks like a Rules and Standards discussion is going to be started and I'll chime in there. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 21:21, 11 April 2024 (EDT)

Uncle Silas

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?291814

hiya Ron i've got a couple of the earlier printings of this one and when i imported the contents from yours i could see all the page numbers are the same except that "Note on the Text" is on page xxv in mine and xv in yours. I thought it might be a typo. cheers from Gaz Faustus (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2024 (EDT)

Fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 06:59, 11 April 2024 (EDT)

HPL Book of Horror

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/view_submission.cgi?5939499; The price, $7.98, is in barcode on back cover like a lot of these instant remainder books in case you want to add it to the record. --Username (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2024 (EDT)

Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 07:21, 13 April 2024 (EDT)

Acolytes of Cthulhu

Would you mind double checking a few items in your Acolytes of Cthulhu? There are differences with the later Titan Books edition. Checking the Internet Archive scan of your edition, it appears some are database errors vs. changes in the Titan Book edition.

  • page 88, credit should be "Charles A. Tanner" vs. "Charles R. Tanner" (publication typo)
  • page 250, credit should be "John Glasby" vs. "Max Chartair"
  • page 316, credit should be "Dirk W. Mosig" vs. "Cemetarius Nightcrawler"

Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 08:16, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Fixed. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 08:31, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Audible-ASIN which are ISBN10

Hey Ron
When you have an Audible-ASIN which is an ISBN10, you also enter it in the ISBN field (converting to ISBN13 when appropriate). These need correcting. I accidentally edited one of your verified pubs when I was working on the report. John Scifibones 11:33, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

I generally do, if I can find it in Worldcat. However, there are instances where I don't think it's appropriate. It's been my experience that audible doesn't change the Audibile-ASIN nor the Amazon ASIN when they change the cover of the audio book. In those cases, I've no way of knowing if a new ISBN has been assigned, or not. In fact, it's usually impossible to pin down the date the reissue occurred and with an unknown date, searching Worldcat isn't much help. For example, the one you changed is actually a re-issue of this publication from 2018 and which I purchased in 2020. Whereas, the reissue with the yellow borders came out sometime between 2020 and 2024 (I narrow the dates based on when I downloaded my copy and by checking archive.org). The only eAudiobook record in Worldcat for this ISBN has a 2018 date. There is another eAudiobook in Worldcat published as Orbit, which has different ISBNs and a 2018 date and thus can't be for the yellow bordered publication (also the audiobook itself credits Hachette and not Orbit). Thus, I'm left with a puzzle. Since Audible doesn't explicitly list ISBNs, and as far as I have seen, never changes their ASIN or listed release date for reissues, do we assume that the ISBN (for the publication) stays the same or not? My take on it is that ISBN for the reissue can't be reliably determined, so I have left them blank. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:04, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
I assumed the ISBN would remain the same. I stand corrected. Sorry i changed the pub. John Scifibones 15:33, 14 April 2024 (EDT)
It may be, but there's no way of telling. I see that the cleanup report doesn't have an ignore option. I'll start a discussion on the moderator board to see if we need to have one added, or if my theory is way off base. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 15:50, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Stephen Mitchell (translator)

This essay in your verified pubs is credited to Stephen Mitchell (translator). Is this really a different person then Stephen Mitchell who is a noted translator of Gilgamesh in addition to being the author of The Frog Prince as per the linked Wikipedia article? -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Merged them. I don't recall what I was thinking, except that perhaps the author of a retelling of fairy tales was unlikely to be a translator of classics. Regardless, they are on author now. Thanks. --Ron ~ RtraceTalk 14:11, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Science Fantasy Club

https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/publisher.cgi?76305; Should that be Northwest? --Username (talk) 20:38, 14 April 2024 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Rtrace&oldid=684174"