User talk:Ruddickn

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

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

Note: Image uploading isn't entirely automated. You're uploading the files to the wiki which will then have to be linked to the database by editing the publication record.

Please be careful in editing publications that have been primary verified by other editors. See Help:How to verify data#Making changes to verified pubs. But if you have a copy of an unverified publication, verifying it can be quite helpful. See Help:How to verify data for detailed information.

I hope you enjoy editing here! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will insert your name and the date. If you need help, check out the community portal, or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Hauck 18:16, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Science Fiction Adapted to Film

Hello, I've approved your submission, the result is here. I've made a few changes to conform to our standards: 1) regularized publisher to simply "Gylphi", 2) transfered series information from title series (it's used mainly for fictive universes) to publication series (a series of books that share the same "packaging"), 3) uploaded a scan of the cover. Thanks for contributing. Hauck 18:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Hauck. More additions to come once I get the hang of this. Ruddickn 23:52, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Science Fiction Across Media: Adaptation/Novelization

I accepted your Science Fiction Across Media: Adaptation/Novelization, but made the following changes:

  • Pages: Removed the spaces around the "+". For consistency, we don't use spaces.
  • Interview: Converted the essay on page 201 to an interview. Interviews are entered using the "Interviews" section at the bottom of the publication submission form.

We do appreciate your submission. ISFDB has some conventions that need learning, but everything should be in the help links in the welcome message above. We hope you will continue to contribute. And please let us know if you have any questions (ISFDB:Help desk is a good resource for asking). Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

I've also regularized (you'll find that we're fond of regularizations) "I.Q. Hunter" to "I. Q. Hunter". Hauck 06:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

The Arthur C. Clarke Award: A Critical Anthology

Hi Nicholas, I've accepted your edit to add the essays to your verified publication, with a few minor corrections:

  • After generic titles such as 'Preface' and 'Introduction', we add the title of the work so as to disambiguate them from the thousands of other Prefaces and Introductions we have in the database.
  • When no author for a title is given, we use "Uncredited", which I've added to the last two titles. It's not actually necessary to add things like bibliographies, appendices and acknowledgements if (as usual) they are uncredited, as they just tend to clutter the database while not serving any quantifiable bibliographic purpose.
  • Authors with consecutive initials have those initials separated with a space, so "L.J. Hurst" has become "L. J. Hurst".
  • I added your message to the moderator concerning the ISBN to the Note for the publication, as it might have some bibliographic use.

Otherwise, good job! And thanks for contributing. PeteYoung 23:29, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

The Time Machine: An Invention

Hello, I've approved your submission but had to make quite extensive changes to conform to our standards: 1) deleted Title series (see above for the same remark, "Broadview Literary Texts " is a publication series as you correctly entered it), 2) changed author to Wells only (the scholarly parts do not generate -in our sense- joint authorship, see here or there), 3) disambiguated (by adding title of the book) the "generically-titled" items (Introduction & Appendices), see remark above, 4) credited the Appendices to you alone (we do not use the "et al." concept) and changed its type to ESSAY (NONFICTION is only for books), 5) transferred some of the data given in the Note to Moderator (that are deleted) in the publication's notes, 6) deleted the extraneous NOVEL record that you added (a NOVEL record is automatically created when entering the publication), 7) I've also varianted the novel to its shorter-titled form. The result is here. Hauck 15:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your trouble. Will try to do better next time! Ruddickn 20:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Three Go Back

Hello, I've rejected your submission as we do not enter cover designers (as are credited the Tullett) as cover artists. This data can go in the notes (I've done this for you). As you set you up as PV of the publication, you can delete the part about Locus in the notes. Hauck 17:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I think I'd better consult you before making changes in future, as I'm not sure I quite understand certain distinctions!
Here's a question. I have a hc first US edition of Sue Harrison's Mother Earth Father Sky. This edition has already been verified, but my copy has 274 pp while the verified copy has 323 pp. (see http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?22980). What do I do, if anything? Ruddickn 15:49, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
The best is to contact the Primary Verifier (here) and directly ask him the question. This is effectively quite strange. Hauck 18:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Aô l'homme ancien

Hello, I've put your submission on hold. Can you be more precise about the spec-fic elements of this book (it seems standard prehistoric fare as per data that I've gathered, note also that it's not listed on the usual french sf sites). Hauck 07:57, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

If you exclude this, I fear you'll logically have to remove dozens of other works of prehistoric fiction already listed. I have a collection of pretty obscure works of prehistoric fiction of which Elie Berthet's The Pre-Historic World is the oldest. I've been verifying them on ISFDB and so far this one is the only one which isn't already in the database. As for the genre issue, well, I've written a whole book on this (The Fire in the Stone), in which I conclude that prehistoric fiction has the same fantastic status as science fiction, the difference being that one is set in the unknowable past and the other in the unknown future. Ruddickn 15:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Here, (in France), the preshitoric fiction is also sometimes merged with SF (all this is Rosny's fault). That said, my own opinion is that it's not spec-fic in the usual sense (be reassured, I didn't write a book on this). As I'm tired of playing the villain, I'll release your submission (left to my own devices, I would have rejected it) for another moderator to approve it. I could have directed you to Rules & Standard pages but it may prove a waste of your time. Hauck 17:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Please be assured that I greatly value your responsiveness and attention to detail on this and other issues.[User:Ruddickn|Ruddickn]] 19:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
After re-reading for the nth time this page, your proposed inclusion is perfectly in our scope (even if I don't agree with it). I've approved your submission. Hauck 06:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Approaches to Teaching the Works of Oscar Wilde

Hello, sorry to play the "bad cop" again but this time I had to reject your submission. In a nutshell (see here), we "exclude non-fiction which was not published as a standalone book." and this even in the case of authors above the threshold (don't ask me how high is the threshold, though). So in both counts, the text is outside our scope. Hauck 06:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Jabberwock 1: Anuario de ensayo fantástico

Hello, I've approved your submission for this pub (please enter only one ISBN). You'll notice that there are quite a few unlinked reviews that you'll have to attend to. Hauck 18:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Any advice about how to do that? Ruddickn 20:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
It'll be a multiple step process. The first step is to enter the spec-fic books that are reviewed based on the data given in the source (which may be sometimes sketchy). For the non spec-fic titles (if there are some), the REVIEW record should be changed into an ESSAY like this one. The second step will be to link the reviews to the titles obtained in the first step via the "Link Review to Title" option at the review title level here for example by passing the newly created TitleID. The third step will be to variant the titles obtained (e.g. Las Confesiones de Max Tivoli is probably to be varianted to The Confessions of Max Tivoli aka this title). Hope this help. Note that correctly entering reviews is one of the more complex and more time-consuming task of the db. Hauck 10:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I'll have a go at this in due course. Ruddickn 15:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
As they appear as anomalies in our cleanup reports, it may be quite urgent. Hauck 10:09, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Changed into ESSAYs. Hauck 08:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The Golden Strangers and Sous le vent du monde submissions

Hi, and welcome. I accepted your submissions for The Golden Strangers and Sous le vent du monde and made a couple of changes I wanted you to be aware of. And I also had a couple of other things to tell you about. So here's the list. :-)

  • Prices in new shillings (where 20 = 1 pound) are recorded as s/p, using "-" for zero. So I changed "21 shillings" to "21/-" based on your note to the moderator.
  • We record introductions as content (using the ESSAY) title type. So I added one to each of those publications using the information you provided in your notes to the moderator. Please review and make sure I got them right.
  • Note to the Moderator is not persistent -- it's just information for the moderator to help in processing the submission. Pub notes are made a part of the actual publication record. The sort of information you provided in your submissions might be appropriate for the pub notes.
  • When you come across an entry that says something like "Data from Amazon..." or "Data from [some other secondary source]", and you have the book, you should delete or alter that note. That note is telling everyone the record was constructed from one or more secondary sources, rather than from the publication itself. So if everything in the record is visible in the publication, you should delete the note entirely. If something is missing (e.g., the book might not give a publication date or might not have a price), then you should alter the note to be specific about what still comes from the secondary source (e.g., you'd change it to read "Publication date from Amazon.com" or "Price from Locus1" or whatever). Everything else is implied to have come from the book itself. So please revisit the note in Sous le vent du monde.

These are all very minor things. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks, and thank you for contributing. --MartyD 04:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I have deleted that note in Sous le vent du monde.Ruddickn 17:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The Story of Ab; A Tale of the Time of the Cave Man

I have approved your submission to make this a variant of Tale of the Time of the Cave Man: Being the Story of Ab. Do you know about a publication under the latter title? Stonecreek 08:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

After a bit of research I found that this step was wrong, 'The Story of Ab; A Tale of the Time of the Cave Man' being the first published and so the canonical title. I'll delete the variant. If you know about a publication with the differing title, please enter it. This is the correct way of adding variants (varianting will then be done in another step.) Thanks, Stonecreek 19:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

The Mallot Diaries

Hi, I've put your submission for that on hold: 1) Borzoi Books is an unknown publication series and sounds more to be an imprint. What's your impression? 2) You gave no source for the date of publication change, please do so. Thanks, Stonecreek 08:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Ruddickn&oldid=465259"