User talk:Keesiewonder/Cataloging, Citing, ...

ISSN

Hi, Ive published my WP:AWB script for ISSNs at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Settings/ISSN. Rich Farmbrough, 22:23 2 December 2006 (GMT).

Cancelled ISBNs (as in Virtuti Militari)

Hello Keesiewonder! It's good to see somebody working on the invalid ISBNs. In the case of Virtuti Militari I believe that you have not hidden the problem from the ever-watchful SmackBot. For one thing, the colon after the word 'ISBN' has turned off the ISBN magic, but SmackBot watches specifically for colons, and it'll find it eventually. I'd suggest it's more reasonable to just remove the ISBN. Sometimes one of the regular editors will object, but if they don't, I think we're better off without it. Invalid ISBNs represent bad information, and it's not clear that they belong in an encyclopedia. EdJohnston 02:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know; I was afraid of exactly what you have alerted me to. I'll remove the ISBN from the article. If an invalid ISBN is on the talk page, will that also get flagged? Keesiewonder 02:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I see that there are a handful of Talk pages in CAT:INVALID, so it does flag them. To avoid flagging you could perhaps insert a word between the acronym 'ISBN' and the number. EdJohnston 02:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

As I see it, the invalid ISBNs are in use in the library catalogs (WorldCat, etc.) and are used as indexing by various individual library catalogs. So an invalid number is not entirely useless. The choice is to delete entirely or do something like, I think, putting them in a nowiki area with I S B N after the main citation should work. --Bejnar 21:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This example of an invalid ISBN in the original cataloging is from the Ekpeye article:

• Amini-Philips, Isaac C. (1998) Establishing a chronology for Ekpeye history Emhai Print. & Pub., Port Harcourt, Nigeria, ISBN 978-33527-9-1Please check ISBN - Calculated check digit (2) doesn't match given. ; Both the UCLA and Yale catalog MARC record list this same ISBN, the only other library listed in WordlCat as holding this volume, New York Public Library - Research, does not display MARC records, nor show any ISBN. --Bejnar 21:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that it is the spaces that prevent Smackbot from seeing the ISBN. I believe that most of the invalid ISBNs are typos in Wikipedia, based on a very small sample. I think OCLC numbers are more useful than LCCN. Some catalogs will key off of OCLC numbers, but most will not. I hope mare will in the future. --Bejnar 22:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks that OCLC format works great! --Bejnar 22:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

"Cannot Locate"

I recognize I am a relative newcomer to WP and to fixing ISBNs. (i.e. please don't bite the newcomers; I'll try to not bite the elders.) However, I have to say I do not particularly like the tendency to insert "cannot locate" after ISBNs that are tagged as being in error. Please see Anatoly Zverev for an example. I trust there is a way to insert this text so it does not appear as part of the article for the basic reader (as opposed to the ISBN hunters/fixers); I think I've already done this myself sometime in the last several weeks. Plus, for those that truly, truly truly cannot be found with a valid ISBN, there are at least three other numbers that can be used and linked to (OCLC, LCCN, ASIN). Please note more times than not, I am finding I am able to find a valid ISBN, though: see this for an example.

I am content that the "cannot locate" items appear to remain tagged as having an invalid ISBN, and am of the type that will come along and relatively quietly really clean them up rather than leave them 97% finished. I certainly am not as fast as other folks at fixing these, so maybe such a work flow, even with the unprofessional looking (to me, anyway) "cannot locate" is perfectly fine. Just thought I'd share my observation on this ... Thanks for your time. And please move this elsewhere if you find it appropriate. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 13:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

---

• Talk pages are not processed: these are all cut and paste from articles.
• "Cannot locate" could be put in html comments "<!-- -->" - it is a bit of a self-ref, talk to User:Ekotie, very friendly guy.

Rich Farmbrough, 13:12 1 January 2007 (GMT).

---

Ok ... I'll correspond with User:Ekotkie. Can you elaborate on your first bullet item above? I'll go make some more coffee since my brain may not be completely awake, but ... I'm not sure what you're talking about here ... sorry ... :-( ... Keesiewonder 13:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

"If an invalid ISBN is on the talk page, will that also get flagged? " Happy new year. Rich Farmbrough, 13:31 1 January 2007 (GMT).

Ah - a question from a different thread! And, what is "these" in "these are all cut and paste from articles?" Keesiewonder 13:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The "talk" pages that are in CAT:INVALID - three of them I think. Rich Farmbrough, 13:48 1 January 2007 (GMT).

Ok; I think I'm on the same page as you now. I must have asked my original question in a thread from another day poorly. I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to store the invalid and/or canceled ISBNs on article talk pages, especially when changing a SmackBot identified ISBN in error to an OCLC. I like the idea of keeping the "bad" ISBN around, but do not want it to get flagged by SmackBot if I store it on an article's talk page for safe keeping. It sounds like you are saying that article talk pages are not processed, so I could optionally store said "bad" ISBNs there w/o triggering SmackBot. I was not (yet) (intentionally) asking about ISBNs flagged on user talk pages ... but, when I am perplexed by this, I will hopefully remember what you've told me today. Regards, Keesiewonder 14:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hi Keesie, Just a quick note. I must feed dog (Border Collie) and angry cat (Calico) and coffee proof my comments. My comment (Cannot locate) was intended to let another toiler be aware that a ISBN had been looked at. I "typically" use Amazon and Abebook (Using both to search by title and author name). I have used LoC for other searches but not for this effort. I really wasn't sure who was looking at what, when or where and after discussing this with Rich was my *indicator* that someone had looked at the item in question. I didn't want to disregard the abilities of other. I had concluded the "C" row last night and did a couple D's before I quit for the night. All things considered, I tend to agree with EdJ that a final solution would be to leave the title ref and remove the incorrect ISBN. Since many that are left are foreign I sure expected a *type* expert to step into the fray. Off to feed the pets and myself. Back later. Ekotkie 16:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It'll all work out! Given the way I work, I'd prefer the error tags for bad ISBNs remain (as they have been) so I have a chance to find the really awful ones. I'd also prefer that we don't have reference pages all over the place that have reference lists that say "cannot locate." I've done several foreign (to me) language ones the last few days including Chinese ones. But ... it is not terribly important ... since we all have the same goal of cleaning the ISBN mess up as best we can. So ... when do you think we'll be under 1000? Ever? (Hi to your pets, BTW.) And Happy New Year to you. Regards, Keesiewonder 16:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Do I detect an eternal optimist? As a retired aerospace engineer I value structure and the ISBN process, as I have seen so far, is not it. My bride is a retired State U librarian who now catalogs church library books and shakes her head at this mess. This is like the business of "where to put the dashes?" Who cares? Just get the number straight. I think Amazon and Abe took the right approach and didn't use any dashes. BTW, Have you read the discussion area on the Cat:Invalid page? Ah yes, the language ones. I too have plowed through a bunch of them and resolved quite a few. I take them, one ISBN at a time and just try to do my best. As you have no doubt noted, many errant ISBN's have mis-worded/fragmented titles. This is a time consuming process that I would not have time for if I wasn't retired. As to leaving the template data, there is a flaw there also. The bot template is written to not show up for the normal page viewer, thus, my short comment will draw attention to the fact that there is and error of some sort. I have had a couple page developers ask me about my comment and all have corrected the information after receiving an explanation. As to getting down to 1000....ha, For awhile their I was getting discouraged that the bot would never quit filling stuff into the A row.Ha. Rich has a counter on his page but I don't know how accurate it is. The bot has finished its tour and Progress has been made. I feel sometimes like I have done "hundreds" but thats just me. Lots to think about but we have a new year and as Rich loves to say.....be bold. Have a great first day of the new year. I ssw where you are owned by pets also. Aren't we the lucky ones? Ekotkie 17:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles Whitham - Western Tasmania

Ok, so I had not put a note or withdrawn the reference - I wish I had now - the state reference library of tasmania has not got the correct isbn ( Ihave had a drawn out conversation with them about it) - the shire of queenstown when they reprinted - didnt put the correct ISBN number in - I personally think that the extra numbers are meaningless to the average australian user for instance (I ihave a copy of the 1949 edition and the 2003 or whatever reprint) . I think its a time wasting wild goose chase - I would rather cite the 1949 edition that had no isbn to avoid the whole issue. I am sure you are doing a very good job - and well done - but this particular remedy in my mind is pointless! The thing is the currently available reprint has the wrong isbn of which the correct ones hasnt been fo8und (even national library of austyralia is no help on this) - and really - there are not that many on the second market to warrant the amazon monster even knowing about it ( I know many books that never get in their clutches thank god) So pplease for all your effort - the oclc and amazon numbers might look good but i suspect they are no real help to the average punter/tourist whio buys a copy in Strahan or Queenstown with the wrong isbn anyways! I probably dont make much sense - have a happy new year SatuSuro 15:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

OOPS - Sorry I have repeated myself quite unnecesarily - rather than revert - thanks for your trouble in those arts - I can confirm the isbn is wrong - and the book is being sold on the west coast of tassie - and yes people are buying copies of a book with dud isbn- maybe it will go down in history as one of the quirks of western tasmania history ( I knew charles's nephew - it think it was when I was living on the west coast in the mid to late 1970's) - sorry I am so verbose - I thought I had made a nyr resolution about redcing talk page things. sorry!SatuSuro 16:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries, and Happy New Year! It's neat to meet someone who knew Charles' family! This book is cited heavily through the English Language Wikipedia with an invalid ISBN as published by the publisher. Such incorrect ISBNs trigger automatic processes such as SmackBot to tag articles that have "invalid ISBNs." People doing research worldwide, not just in Australia, will have a much easier time, I suggest, finding a book that has a valid OCLC than one that has an invalid ISBN. Later today, I will suggest a compromise format for citing this particular work that should not trigger SmackBot. I'm sure we can come up with something that will work for everyone. Also, we can always retain the ivalid ISBN on the article's talk page; article talk pages do not, as far as I understand, cause error tagging by SmackBot. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 16:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you being tolerant of my raving. I think the problem with my western tasmania project ( I seemed to have either started most of or populated most of the more obscure articles) is that whitham is citeable in most of the articles - I dont know whether to cite the 1949 edition- which the main libraries have, or include the 2003 edition - with the incorrect number within a parenthesis or note in some way - what do you think? SatuSuro 16:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

SatuSuro, please let me know what you think of my first idea for a suggested compromise. You may see it in all its glory at User:Keesiewonder/Whitham_Citation. Please feel free to edit there (assuming the Wiki Gods allow it) if convenient for you. (And, no need to apologize; these pages are near and dear to you, as is the content, I expect. I'm the "intruder!" But a curious, kind one. Maybe I'll be so lucky as to see the Western Coast of Australia some day ... or any part of Australia, for that matter). Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 17:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Rule number one on wikipedia - no one owns. I only go to battle with POV issues on the west coast - or kids with nothing better to do (Strahan article) apart from that I have no problem with modificcation. The more the intruders the better then it makes sure I am kept honest - so thanks! Next one - I shouldnt try talk messages at 2 am after seeing the latest james bond movie - the head was in too many places.. The one after that the OCLC link is great! just like the locations for my fathers books (similar holdings different subject - and fifteen to ten years older) . Thank you for the effort. SatuSuro 01:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Technicality - I have also cited Geoffrey Blainey's The Peaks of Lyell - I will do a similar thing and actually I will create whitham and western tasmania articles later today (he and his book are notable) so that we can put your excellent full cite there - and maybe do links for the subsidiary articles that link SatuSuro 01:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC) So please if you could leave that citation for 24 hours I should catch it! SatuSuro 02:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Cool! Glad to be of help, and to contribute a bit to your inspiration! Keesiewonder 02:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Dont let me even start about west coast tasmania or west coast australia (I live in western australia) - I'll never get off talk! SatuSuro 02:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Consider the benefits of the OCLC template

Hello Keesie. I admire the relentless march of your ISBN fixes! Since you have added some OCLC numbers, you might want to consider the Template:OCLC that was invented by User:JesseW, another ISBN-fixer. A typical use would be {{OCLC|48825404}} in the case of the Charles Whitham book, for example. This expands to OCLC 48825404, which gives a clickable OCLC reference that defaults to the 'Libraries' tab in OCLC, rather than the 'Details' tab, which is sometimes blank. If you use it in the 'cite book' template, you can just replace 'id=ISBN XXXXXXXXXX' with 'id={{OCLC|XXXXXX}}. Anyway, it saves typing! EdJohnston 17:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Cannot locate

Moved to User talk:EdJohnston

You might be interested in this. Please know I'm not trying to cause trouble ... :-) ... Keesiewonder 13:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've posted again on Ekotkie's page. I've gotten a bit frustrated with seeing the messy "cannot locate" on article pages when I am subsequently able to locate the correct ISBN on my first or second try. Sure, I cannot clean up 30 bad ISBNs in an hour. I prefer to take the time and really, really get it right. Oh well. I'll clean them up, eventually, if they remain tagged as bad. I won't see them, though, if they're deleted. Regards, Keesiewonder 15:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I see your point about LOSING the SmackBot-marked entries from the system in favor of the 'cannot locate' indicators. My guess is that EdK's suggestion would ultimately result in a 'confirmed bad' template or some such, worded in a more politically appealing way. There is a school of thought (advocated by User:Cleduc for example) that since the bad ISBNs may still be able to retrieve some results on the web and on bookstores, we are hurting our readers by ignoring and neglecting them. So such a template would state 'confirmed bad, but still useful'. (Sorry I can't exert my political brain to find a more pleasant way of describing the situation). So my vote would be to KEEP all the originally SmackBot-marked entries in CAT:INVALID regardless of any 'cannot locates' that might be added to the visible text. Unfortunately then we would have TWO statuses of badness, the never-visited badness and the visited-once-but-not-fixed badness. This is not good for the maintainers.

I'll correspond further with EdK on this. EdJohnston 00:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hi Guys -- There's certainly no hard feelings on my account; we're a team, as I see it. We're amidst a massive collaborative effort here, and there are rarely 100% right answers. No worries, please! :-)

A bit of a personal story that may back up my perspective at bit: About 6 months ago, I didn't even really know Wikipedia existed. But, I started hearing about it everywhere. I recently enrolled in an online Master's degree program, after being out of school for many years. The course I had over the summer was "just" a writing class; the instructor insisted that we were not to use Wikipedia for anything we submitted to her. She emphasized scholarly resources, i.e. peer reviewed journals only. So something as oft over my head as Scientific American could not appear in anything we submitted. It was a great class, and I learned a lot. This fall I took a molecular biology class. The instructor was much less strict on where we got our sources (even though the first class was supposed to prepare me for writing well in the second), so, students quickly slipped in to essentially using Wikipedia for everything. Well, this drove me wild, having just finished the writing class. My message was perhaps quietly appreciated by the professor, but as far as I could tell, my student colleagues just didn't get it. They had no qualms about writing about deep scientific topics, using only WP for their source, even though WP can be edited by anyone (no, this does not count as a scholarly definition of peer reviewed, in my opinion), and even though the moment they copied and pasted from WP may be a moment when it was filled with "garbage." Fortunately for me, I managed to turn this around in my mind - I adopted an 'if I cannot beat them, join them' attitude and started editing on WP. So far, it has been a gratifying experience.

What's my point? Well, if I pull up an article as a student researcher, and see "can't find ISBN" in the footnotes or reference list, and see a tag at the bottom that says 'articles with invalid ISBNs,' for me, perhaps me only, it dramatically diminishes the integrity I give to the article and its content. (I would have had this feeling when I was in high school too.) Thus, I feel if we do not have a valid ISBN, then we should not display it for the "average" readers eyes. The other parts of the work's citation (author, title, publication year, etc) should still prove adequate for the reader to locate the source if they so choose. Meanwhile, I feel we should retain the problematic ISBN in the wikicode or a database or something so it can be a tool for the sleuths who try to find the correct ISBN or an alternate catalog number. Basically, I feel every time we press 'save page' for an article, we ideally should feel it is fit for publication. Yes, there will be mistakes, but do we need to deliberately display them?

Keesiewonder 04:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Cannot Find Tags

I have just finished removing all (cannot find) tags from CAT:INVALID pages, A,B,C,D, and that small part of E that I have just started working on. Those were the only ones I worked on. Any use of a tag that I used was to note the absence of a correct ISBN was only intended to flag this error to a user who was looking for a particular reference and might attempt to use one that was in error. It was not to cause heartburn as to the quality of the pages product or the author of the page. I seriously doubt that a typical user will go into edit mode to verify the accuracy of an ISBN, thus, I elevated the comment to the visible area for all to see. This was intended to be a short term solution and would allow others to use additional resources to find and correct the defective ISBN. I am currently using 6 different tools to search out ISBN's. In all honesty I feel the best answer, at this juncture is to just eliminate the errant ISBN and press on. There are over 2000 ISBN that need to be resolved. Let the user seek out his/her own ISBN, if one is even needed. I would rather give the readership an accurate title and author's name then to give them a bogus ISBN.Ekotkie 06:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine ... I feel we're all essentially saying the same thing albeit in slightly different ways. Keesiewonder 11:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

ISBNs and ASINs

A's are down to two entries now. I've created {{ASIN}}

• ASIN B0006R304U
  

- although I don't really like using ASINs

Rich Farmbrough, 12:50 4 January 2007 (GMT).

Sure , i'll try

Sure i'll try to find any citations ISBN if possible.Anyway the page has already been deleted. We can move on to some other page. Amita karpe 16:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Info on the ISBN-fixing activity now on my user page

Hello Keesie. Please take a look at the new version of my user page where I tried to summarize the ISBN-fixing activity. Let me know if I missed out on some useful bit of advice for newcomers. So far, there has not been a real project for this work, but it wouldn't hurt if the effort looked a tiny bit respectable, since our changes are sometimes questioned by people who don't know what it's about or why we're doing it. Anyone who starts fixing ISBNs 'automatically' joins the project, whether they want to or not, it's very democratic. :-) EdJohnston 22:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Looking at this and giving you some kind of feedback is my next WP task today. I'm delighted to be considered part of the project! :-) Keesiewonder 20:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll add things as I think of them ... one by one ...

1. Excellent idea to keep a log of the number of incorrect ISBNs we're dealing with. For the overly detailed among us, maybe a second number in the log for the number of total articles would be nice too for some perspective.
2. I would reword this sentence: The full list of articles still to be fixed can be found at: Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs. Perhaps yielding: The current list of articles with one or more ISBNs requiring fixing can be found at: Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs.
3. Consider not mentioning Wikipedia:List of pages with Invalid ISBNs at all. Us "old timers" will get rid of it soon enough. For people seeking a nice project to work on, if this kind of "work" is their thing, there's no point in overwhelming them with two lists. Especially since probably 99% of what is on the List version is either already fixed or is on the Category version.
4. If you could find out what kind of schedule SmackBot is on, i.e. frequency of run, does it check all of the English Wikipedia during each run, etc., that'd be great, or at least something I personally would find helpful/useful/interesting.
5. However there are relatively few of those numbers in Wikipedia. -> There are relatively few ISSN fixers? There are relatively few ISSNs needing fixing?
6. FWIW, my personal preference, most to least, is ISBN, OCLC, LCCN, ASIN ... i.e. reverse the last two.
7. Maybe try drafting a guideline's section. It could include things like

• Only include an ASIN if you cannot find a valid one of the other three cataloging numbers.
• Don't worry if you don't know the 'proper' placement of the dashes since an auto-something-or-other will come along to fix it (eventually).
• If you start with a page with an ISBN tagged as being in error, and need to supersede it with, say, an OCLC, consider leaving a courteous message on the article's talk page explaining what happened and leave the invalid ISBN visible inside html code. (An example of this will be necessary so it remains visible to editors and invisible to readers.) You may also want to leave a copy of the original citation with the "bad" ISBN on the talk page.
• If you're really stuck, move on to the next ISBN in error; if you don't like to leave things unfinished, make an effort to get help from people who may be able to help such as the frequent contributors to the article or the article's talk page, relevant portals, forums outside of Wikipedia, other ISBN fixers on Wikipedia, etc. Concise clues from your seemingly unsuccessful findings are most welcome within the html code written above. If you need to be more verbose about the situation, use the article's talk page.
• Be especially careful when editing articles with complicated reference list structures such as 75 in text citations.
• Be certain to do what you can to maintain the existing citation style in the article. If the article is using APA, stick with APA. If the article is using CMS, stick with CMS. If there is no citation style, or it is a mess, tactfully consider tidying things up by converting to citation templates, alphabetizing lists, etc. This is completely optional, since your primary intent is probably to clean up the "bad" ISBNs.
• Expect that there will be articles where the editors most familiar with the material will want to continue listing the ISBN, even if it is "bad." This is okay. A possible compromise may be to list the ISBN as I S B N since it appears that SmackBot does not identify bad I S B Ns, only bad ISBNs.
• It is ok to end up deleting an ISBN entirely, yielding a book citation that is just author, title, publication date ... or whatever the article editors want. It is probably best to communicate this on the talk page over at least a couple days ... i.e. try not to delete the ISBN in one sitting. Come back another day, try to find it again, correspond with those who may care about the article content, and, if all else fails, eliminate the ISBN, and leave a trail on the talk page regarding what happened.

8. I made a list of tools I like using when doing ISBN work. You can find it on my user page, and, I'll put it here for you as well.

Tools to help:

• [http://www.isbn-check.com/ ISBN Check] (When I've been really stuck, I've plugged the bad ISBN in to this tool and run WorldCat on each possible alternative ISBN check provides.)
  
• WorldCat
  
• Amazon
  
• Library of Congress
  
• Alibris
  
• Abebooks
  
• isbn.org's related resources list
  
• ISBN 10-.13 Converter
  
• WP's ISBN Article; see external links for tools
  
• Google (carefully; there are many mirror sites to WP)
  
• www.booksinprint.com - (if you have access)
  
• National libraries
  
• Talk page of article w/ISBN in question
  
• User placing ISBN in question
  

Ok -- That's my first draft pass thinking about this. Hope you're not sorry you asked. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 21:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Guideline draft needed

Hi Keesie, thanks for your very thorough review of my notes on ISBN-fixing! Since you would like there to be a guidelines document, do you want to start writing one? For instance, you could create it as a subpage under User:Keesiewonder, and I could add a link to it from the other document. EdJohnston 03:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Certainly; I'll let you know when it's ready. Keesiewonder 13:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Updated ISBN_fixing page

Hello Keesiewonder. I updated User:EdJohnston/ISBN_fixing in response to your suggestions. I think keeping the List is still worthwhile, because it's a means of communication about difficult numbers. If you do decide to write up your proposed Guidelines, I'll link to that as well. Can you put the list of Tools on the same page, or do you prefer that we link to your User page for those? EdJohnston 16:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I will do a guidelines and tools document draft; haven't forgotten; just too busy in real life. Keesiewonder 00:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see a draft at User:Keesiewonder/ISBN_Fixing_Guidelines. Feedback, as always, is welcome. Keesiewonder 14:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello KW. I agree with everything you said! At first, I thought you should mention 'published invalid' numbers, but we can actually get along without that concept. For a while I was trying to save all the published invalid numbers on the Talk page of CAT:INVALID. In practice, we do seem to wind up removing ISBNs that are uncorrectable even if we're not completely sure they were published that way. ISBN-fixers are usually quite persuasive in discussing the problems with regular page editors, regardless of learning the ultimate truth about a particular ISBN.

We could perhaps maintain a central list of removed ISBNs, since it happens that someone will get inspired and go back and fix one that seemed unfixable at the time. If you agree, that's something that might be aded to the guidelines draft. (Some people are making detailed notes on the List page already, and that page could eventually be turned into a removed-ISBN list, with notes of what was tried). EdJohnston 15:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

ISBN scans

I tend to scan with SmackBot when a data base dump has been completed. This means I can pick likely articles to set SmackBot on, last time 'round it was anything with "ISBN" in it. Rich Farmbrough, 23:16 12 January 2007 (GMT). P.S. I may scan the same list again this time, as no dump seems imminent. RF.

Gyeongju ISBN

Hi,

Thanks for bringing this up. An interesting case. The ISBN seems to be correct, or at least correctly copied from the book. Both the back cover and the inside page give the ISBN 89-953630-3-4... on the other hand, that ISBN doesn't appear in any online catalog. The number that does appear in an online catalog is 8995363037, which I presume is properly written out as 89-953630-3-7. Is that any better?

It seems odd that a book would systematically misrepresent its own ISBN. Oh well... Cheers, -- Visviva 05:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks for getting back to me! Unfortunately, books do get published with catalog numbers that do not comply with the internal check digit process. (See [1] or [[2]] for more info.) So, in this case, I bet even if we did find the book in some kind of online catalog such as WorldCat or Amazon, the "bad" ISBN would be "confirmed" there ... but it would still be an invalid ISBN per SmackBot which uses the check digit calculations described at the ISBN article.

Usually I can find the book of interest (i.e. the one with the "bad" ISBN) in a catalog somewhere, and then I can use another catalog number such as the OCLC or simply a web link. Since I (we) cannot do that in this case, my suggestions are as follows:

• 1) Find a different book that we can cite in this one's place, one that does have a valid catalog number. Might you be familiar enough with the article's content to locate an alternate book with a valid catalog number?
• 2) Simply remove the ISBN from the article's content. So, the article's reference would end up looking like this ...

• Kim, Deok-muk (2003). 전국의 기도터와 굿당 (Jeon-gukui gidoteo wa gutdang. The nation's prayer and gut locations). Seoul:한국민속기록보존소.

and the wiki-code like this ...

{{cite book|author=Kim, Deok-muk|year=2003|title=전국의 기도터와 굿당 (Jeon-gukui gidoteo wa gutdang. The nation's prayer and gut locations) |publisher=Seoul:한국민속기록보존소|id=<!--invalid ISBN per publisher is not displayed-->}}

Please let me know your preference. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 10:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the number form the catalogue "should" find the book. Perhaps if it's relatively recent theres a 13 digit barcode/ISBN that can be used? Rich Farmbrough, 22:54 15 January 2007 (GMT).

I tend to agree, and thus, in this case, if I lent the deciding vote, it'd be to eliminate the ISBN that is printed on the book from the WP article. The published one is not valid, fails SmackBot's test, and doesn't seem to be listed in any catalog. The "correct" one provided by Visviva is also not found by any catalog. All around, catalog numbers seem rather useless for this book, so I would resort to title, author, publishing year, publishing company, and leave it at that. Keesiewonder 01:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Cite- date

Looks ok to me. Rich Farmbrough, 22:52 15 January 2007 (GMT).

Whitham

If my mental mathematics is correct of the 74 items that call up with a search charles whitham - 16 items are not related - then 57 articles - many stubs are the ones that need the cleanup..SatuSuro 10:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that youre the only person I know who appears to have two talk pages - Typical that I should get that wrong...SatuSuro 12:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Its ingenious - I could actually do the threads of conversation with sub pages - SatuSuro/Western Australia, SatuSuro/Indonesia and Java, SatuSuro/Tasmania, SatuSuro/Maritime - I'm sure some smart admin would pull me up If I tried it though :( SatuSuro 12:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• :-)

The manul cleaning up is very slow I found another tasmanian editor I hadnt met who has created a whole range of articles that are classic sitting ducks for afd and I am trying to let him (I presume) know a few survivial techniques - there are always so many diversions  :) SatuSuro 15:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to address some of the Whitham references this weekend if that is ok with you. I can help discuss AfDs and/or clean up articles too ... as long as I can "vote" in AfDs as I see fit. Let me know ... :-) ... Keesiewonder 16:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thats fine - I hve no possession issue over anything but my user and talk page - so go ahead - you might find my way of linking has been to make sure the isbn and comments are out - and have 'see charles whitham for further details - if that can be imporved - do wht ever you like - I was bit astonished that I had done so many articles for the west coast! The potential target for afd articles I will not bring up until I have had a chance to have a chat with the new editor - no sign no word yet SatuSuro 01:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

What you have done on 'western tasmania' larger region article is great (as it is a start level article assessment wise) - but I would think in most of the stubs - just a link would suffice - what do you think? SatuSuro 01:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I was just scrolling down your talk page to get to this - can't help but point to [3] I am in the process of starting the big sort on his papers...sigh SatuSuro 01:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I was going to do the same in each instance of Whitham I found. For me up here in the northern hemisphere, it took a while to find the 3 different editions. So, until someone is trying for FA status on the article and they're worried about how much space the citations are taking up, I think it may be ok to list all 3 editions everywhere. I prefer just linking the author's name to the Charles Whitham article, rather than including a separate line of text in the reference section saying something like 'see also Charles Whitham.' The hyperlink is a self explanatory "see also." I think I may call it a day ... Chat later! Keesiewonder ^talk 01:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Boring

Ekotkie should learn civility., and how to sign with four tildes. I dont care how many thousands fix ups - if he cannot find the time to see how wikipedia works, maybe something more appropriate would be blogging for angry old men...? SatuSuro 23:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW - I cannot see how you can cope with isbn issues and the lutheran thing as well - I trust someone gives you a barnstar for your coping with all that! SatuSuro 23:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for doing all that - you didnt have to...! SatuSuro 23:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

You are very kind - thank you - I appreciate your help - as I have said before in words to the same effect civility and generosity from such editors as yourself easily cancels out the grumps. SatuSuro 23:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Please excuse

The lateness of my comments back to you. As I went to complete the note, EdJ dropped a msg on my page which then posed a "conflict" with my response back to you and blew away my comments. One more example of the crudeness of this "communications tool" Right now I am getting off this frustrating tool and making myself a drink. Have a great day. BTW, I have no idea what your little friend is talking about with the four tildes. I use them in all of my correspondence and when they don't show up I have found myself in a logged off state whereby I log back on and resign my note. Ekotkie 22:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Interrupted Response

Well, lets see if I can re-created what I lost from the msg. conflict.

1) Hi Ed K. I fixed the articles I could find with the solution I proposed since I wanted to. Of course I didn't have to.

Understand, It was just that since he knew where all the skeletons were it "should have been" a snap for him to implement the changes and eliminate the "offensive" invalid isbn cat title. I have explained this to a number of folks and have NEVER received the outcry that he was making.

2) It was easy for me to do, when I finally had time and it seemed like it might help keep the peace among several good editors here, you, me, SatuSuro and EdJ included. No one is protecting anyone's articles here.

Sorry, I have not, in any way considered him to be a player in this effort.

3) As for my not always responding or writing where you'd like me to ... I'm not so sure that it really matters. I expect we have all read everything and either responded or not as we saw fit. If I remember correctly, it started when I was on EdJ's user page for another matter, and I realized that you were basically writing to him about me, without using any names. That's fine, and I posted something in that thread ... and you never responded ... not there nor on my talk page. That's fine with me.

No, it wasn't fine with me. It was lost communications that I had not found for a week and only then, by accident. I "assumed" that when someone had something to say to someone that it would be don in a manner where it appeared on their page. I do NOT ignore people I am working with. That creates a disruptive atmosphere like someone is trying to hide something. That is not professional and left unattended, is unhealthy in getting the job done. At first I found it a bit offensive to be looking at other folks pages. Later, while the task was being done, it became a distraction. A lot of you folks work, your time here is a labor of love. For me, it is an interest in books in general. I have authored a number of novelist pages here and have developed a close connection with them in the process. Those who I have communicated with have been very happy to have someone doing this sort of thing for them.

4) If it's not fine with you, then you too can start communicating to me about me on my talk page. I've assumed good faith about SatuSuro, and that seems to have paid off in his and my rapport. I'm doing my best to do so with you too, but don't feel like that is going very well. That's ok.

No its not ok. I had no immediate reason to contact you for any direct information but would not have hesitated in doing so. You were off working on a segment of the list that I was not. We had a little disagreement about that "hiding the comment" business but did I not, immediately, go back and revise my method? Your little "friend" has been a source of aggravation. His initial note to me was fragmented and didn't make any clear sense. When I saw that you were handling his needs I just went away. His next note apologized for using the invalid isbn. His apology was unnecessary. I hadn't made one comment to him about it and was reading what all you had discovered along the way. I'm sorry but I just got impatient with his "apparent" lack of action in closing out these invalid isbn's. All I ever really told him was that if the isbn was invalid, to make it go away. There are countless examples of pages with references that don't have an isbn. Big deal. They do have what reference data is helpful for others to research off of. I had not asked him to just drop his resource, just the invalid isbn. Instead, he elected to take the approach he took....do nothing.

5) If EdJ has a complaint or concern about something I'm doing, I trust he'll let me know. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder talk 20:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

EdJ will be the first to tell you that he is "not in charge". He is a guide. I have already asked Rich to consider nominating him to admin level. He is a good troop. I will be glad when this business is done and I can go back to enhancing author pages. I am sorry if you may have mis-understood my intentions and position. There never has been an ax to grind or ill feelings. Have a great day. Ekotkie 00:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi EdK. The way you've responded makes it hard for me to reply, so I've inserted numbers for each section.

1) I guess my perspective here is we are working on a dynamic, collaborative, international effort where anyone can edit. It's a great opportunity to exercise WP:BOLD. You could have gone ahead and edited any articles as you saw fit, but for whatever reason, chose not to. It seems a bit unfair to also then be upset with another user for not implementing certain edits faster than they did. Also, as I'm sure you've noticed, there are a lot of unkind people editing on Wikipedia. I'm not saying SatuSuro is unkind; I am saying this is a tough environment. I've had people ask me to take a look at an AfD and then be outraged when I didn't have the opinion they expected me to. I've had one user, apparently one effectively with a split personality since I got messages from them under two different user names, accuse me of not being of the gender that I say I am. Need I go on ... ?

When I look at the concept of AfD I sometimes see a vein of personal ownership. Something Wiki is not supportive of and rightfully so. Thus, I am not the least bit surprised at an outcome like that. I guess the best approach is to lay out a couple of ground rules ahead of time.

2) SatuSuro may not be part of the ISBN clean-up effort, but, in his realm of interests and editing, I don't see that he is anything but a decent editor. If I remember correctly, after I noticed you and he not getting on well, I checked his block log, and it was clean. I see him as a bit rough around the edges ... but ... he's an ok guy.

5) I only mentioned EdJ since you seemed to be telling me to not post certain correspondence on his talk page. I found that to be something that EdJ should tell me about, if it really was a problem. I too like EdJ, and he and I have swapped some tricks ... but ... as he himself points out, he needs quite a few more edits under his belt before he's a shoe-in for adminship ... and I'd need even more. You make it sound like you don't like fixing ISBNs, but you are going to plow through it anyway. There are always going to be a million and one maintenance things to take care of on WP ... if not ISBNs, then something else. It's a thankless task. Some will be delighted that we do it; some will never notice; some will be furious. It just comes with the territory. From what you've said, it sounds like you receive more gratification from authoring bios than from cleaning up messes. Possible food for thought? Be well! Keesiewonder ^talk 00:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I only meant that if you post to someone else, on EdJ's site, don't be surprised when you don't get an answer. And above all, don't assume that someone might be disagreeing with you by not answering you. Its the product of the poor communication system they have here. As to disliking the isbn task, it has become more of a let down by the folks making the rules. Right from the beginning Rich and I had some bumpy roads to cross on why he was making changes to author page isbn on books that were 25 years old and still in circulation. I owned the books and objected. The answer that came back lead me to a "HUH?". It had to do, as it turns out, with not the number, but with the hyphen locations! Initially isbn only ensured me that I could track to a 1st edition books. The more I looked into the isbn business, the more convoluted the process became. This has caused me to be a strong supporter of not using hyphens. If you read some of the issues on the new isbn-13, you soon find that there are folks out there already say that 13 isn't enough, oh, and EAN is just around the corner. I left EdJ a note over in the Cat section about the DVD flap. No one is in charge of the isbn bus. But doing this task has led me to reading a bunch of interesting pages along the way. Oh well, the pay isn't great but it keeps me out of the bars at night.......Later. Ekotkie 01:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I too have no fondness for hyphens in ISBNs!

It all takes time

I am impressed by the way the EdK's working through some of the frustrating issues being on Wikipedia - I think he will come around to being a very good editor - if not down the track an admin as I say on his talk page - it simply takes time to get used to being in the wikipedia frame of reference - there are some very frustrating aspects to it when encountering it at first. I wish him all with good faith - and dont hesitate to withdraw any hard feelings about referring to me as his scapegoat of his frustrations - yes - its time for closure and to move on... I hope.... SatuSuro 00:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

You have emails SatuSuro 01:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Please

Could you talk with Droll - It feels like the whole thing is starting up again, sigh SatuSuro 10:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey it doesnt matter - we're talking - it felt like the whole thing was to happen again - but it looks ok - wow youve been doin quite some archiving!SatuSuro 10:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
As always thank you very much for taking the time to explain - the very basic question - is should we change the listings that we have done in the articles to date at all? SatuSuro 11:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Excellent - thanks for the explanation - appreciate that.SatuSuro 11:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Lets continue this discussion here. It feels like neutral ground. Also forgive me if I seem sort as its is 3:30AM here and I'm a little tired. I've opened a discussion about the template:Listed Invalid ISBN at Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs. I agree with your concern about its possible misuse. Perhaps you could bring up that point in the discussion.

I responded to SatuSuro the way I did because I felt, mistakenly it appears, that he was attacking me. I see now that I misinterpreted this message. I wish to apologize.

As for my use of the template in this case. I seem to recall that I did a search and found the invalid ISBN on a website somewhere that lead me to believe it was a published ISBN. I just did a search trying to find it again and I cannot and so I think that the best thing to do in at this time would be to revert my edit. I would be glad to do it myself.

I would like to assert that I have acted in good faith. If you feel that any further response is necessary leave a note here or one my talk page. I'll watch this page for awhile. Thank for your concern. --Droll 11:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Droll! :-) ... Thanks for the note. If you have not already, please see this; as I understand your edit to one of the Whitham citations, it seems perfect to me. I only see good faith on your part; SatuSuro has unfortunately been burned (poor guy) a couple times before meeting you and me. Somehow I've become a willing mediator in this. (My role in life seems to be to put out figurative fires!) I'm not aware of any outstanding issues. I did just post some Random Thoughts on the ISBN talk page. Your use of the Listed Invalid ISBN tag is most appropriate since I think SatuSuro has a copy of it on his desk; it is indeed published as invalid, but, for real just the same. I will bring up my concerns about the inappropriate and/or hasty use of the new Invalid tag at the category's talk page. Hope this helps clarify things. Keesiewonder ^talk 12:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

My apologies - I should have not said that - Its all a bit of a blur - I have been involved in a few vandal chaces in the last day or so - and was a bit liberal - I should revert/modify the comment...SatuSuro 12:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Which I have done so - thanks for pointing that out - being liberal with the vandal hunt is one thing... dealing with the isbn team - another :) SatuSuro 12:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok guys ... I think we're all here now, right? I have written to both of you (SatuSuro, Droll) and am not aware of any unfinished business that needs to be addressed. Please let me know if there is something more that I might not know/understand yet that would be helpful, or if something may require more clarification. No worries, please! Whatever it is, it'll work out. Keesiewonder ^talk 12:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Odin

Hi Rich, I see this edit. I used the ISBN printed on the document (visible by going to the last page of the .pdf link in the article). Can you provide a link to what you found in ODIN? I searched a bit and did not quickly see what you saw, but, not having used ODIN before, I probably missed something. Thanks for your help. Keesiewonder ^talk 23:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Email from Odin. "Dear sir, This is an unfortunate misprint. Correct ISBN is 978-82-7924-058-7. Yours, XXX XXXX XXXXX The Norwegian Ministry of Defence The Documentation centre" (Name removed) Rich Farmbrough, 09:36 30 January 2007 (GMT).

Note to self: Hmmm. This is, to me, precisely the reason the Listed Invalid ISBN tag is useful. Those with the document in hand have a 14 digit, and to them, legitimate ISBN. Upon further research, we can "prove" that the ISBN should have been something else (albeit very close to the actual one printed). Sure, we can display what 'should have been' in the WP article. But, knowing how government agencies typically work, if you ask for the document, they'll ask for the document number, in this case probably the ISBN, and if you give the "wrong" 13 digit number, they may, sorry, I don't have a document with that number. Come back when you know what you want. It is a viscious cycle; I maintain we should display in WP what is displayed on the original source, i.e. in this case, the 14 digit ISBN. Keesiewonder ^talk 10:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Response

Just left you one on my page. Later Ekotkie 01:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, read your comments and went back to that site. It was 12 days from when I first hit it until you went there. No activity in between. That can happen when you think all is well with a page. I see that my text error reared its ugly head. Thanks for taking care of that. I don't recall seeing anything wrong with the page format. Don't know what HTML format change you made. I see Droll dove in and fixed some of the isbn's. I still wish there was some sort of announcement that could have been made to elevate folks awarenesses about the invalid isbn activity. It's kind of like working with one hand behind your back. Ekotkie 03:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

OCLC/ASIN

Just saw your comment on this subject. Are you saying that just listing the OCLC and ASIN isn't enough? You have to create the link on top of that? Bummer. Explain something for me.....When using WorldCat I notice that sometimes there are multiple isbn's listed on a page. Multiple 10 digits, that is. I have looked high and low for an explanation and can't find any. In Amazon you can at least do a reroute to find the isbn for a paperback but I have seen cases where there might be 3-4 10 digit isbns. How does one sort that out on WC? Also ran into a 13 digit today that got clobbered when the user used the term "ISBN 13" (no hyphen) Smackbot grabbed it for a "too long" isbn..... I hit a page today with 11 isbn errors............Time for a long winters nap...and a Jack Daniels. Ekotkie 04:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My preference is when listing an OCLC or an ASIN, to list it in such a way that it yields a link, analogous to the link we get for ISBNs. Most people don't know what OCLC or ASIN are; if we hyperlink the catalog citations, they are apt to see the hyperlink, click on it, and have found their book. It is just a few characters, so not a lot to type. In fact, one trick I sometimes use is to have a small text file open that has phrases I will be using a lot. (I use Notepad.) Store the OCLC tag there, and when you need to use it, you just need to do a copy/paste, remembering, of course, to insert the correct number for the current book. This technique at least saves having to type braces and pipes (vertical bars) all the time.

I do not know what the multiple ISBNs of the same length for the same edition of a book mean in WC. When I run in to this situation, I just list one on WP, first making sure that the one I pick is one found, say, on Amazon.

Hope that helps, Keesiewonder ^talk 10:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

ISBN for "Deregulation Knockouts: Round Two"

Hi, I noticed that yesterday you attempted to correct the ISBN number for Deregulation Knockouts: Round Two on the article WinAir Airlines. However, the ISBN number you gave is for Deregulation Knockouts: Round One which covers different airlines. I've changed it to use the OCLC instead, which someone else had found for the book and used on the Reno Air article. I'm still not sure why the ISBN link doesn't work, I have the book and that's the number in it. -- 17:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's the number that's in the book. It could be a missprint I suppose. If you want I can scan the copyright page and you can see for yourself. :) The OCLC link does work though, and since it actually gets somewhere that provides useful information, I don't see a reason to replace it with an ISBN link that doesn't. -- Hawaiian717 17:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I've used the {{Listed Invalid ISBN}} template on the other article too, and will keep it in mind for the future. I did fix it so that both the ISBN and OCLC are displayed and linked properly. -- Hawaiian717 18:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Roy Keane - falsified book

Hey Kessie, Thanks for ruining my joke, a whole year later ! Sucka !!!! Unsigned at 11:35, February 6, 2007 from Aldini98

League of Copyeditors participation drive!

Dear League member,

We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you can, please help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:

• Select an article to copy-edit from the backlog. After your copy-edit, list the article in the articles ready for final proofread section.
• Select a different article to proofread from the articles ready for final proofread section.

Thanks for your help! Rintrah 16:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Issn example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibbulmun_Track#Track_maps - they are as i found on the back of maps... cant work out in my head how come youre on ( I keep thinking this is not daylight hours in the states)  :) SatuSuro 03:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

No rush - I just dont want to be seen creating incorrect numbers again (sigh) - maybe they should be isbn and the authority producing the items got it wrong (sigh, again) - catch you later SatuSuro 03:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I brought my copies at a closing down sale of an outdoors shop yesterday - so its the actual thing - the produced/publisher dosnt identify numbers on their order list - http://www.bibbulmuntrack.org.au/Products/Maps/Map-1-The-Darling-Range.aspx - SatuSuro 03:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yup they are isbns! My eyesight! need to get magnifying glass for small print - very sorry to be a nuisance SatuSuro 03:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Corrected - nothing needs to be done - if you ever get australian issues - the national library catalogue http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First is excellent for checking things.... SatuSuro 03:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Aroha Island

Hi Keesiewonder, I don't know where in the list this island belongs. I can suggest that you inquire at Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand (or search on Google maps). I was also working to provide links to an orphaned article when I was working on the list. Regards, Gilliam 01:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Finding ISBN-10

I'm nostalgic for the good old days of ISBN-fixing. Notice you have been correcting occurrences of ISBN-10 and ISBN-13. Do you have a secret method of finding these? EdJohnston 18:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot will fix these when he's fully functional again. Rich Farmbrough, 19:19 4 March 2007 (GMT). 19:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm now finding ASINs that aren't using the template by searching a database dump in AWB. Keesiewonder ^talk 22:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

ISSN

I have changed the template as you requested, however the template itself propose that it should only be used on talk pages. The cat can be enabled for article and talk page, but I can't get the syntax right ATM. Can't help much with the Sega magazines. Rich Farmbrough, 19:19 4 March 2007 (GMT).

IF you think that's a good idea, don't forget to revert my changes to the template. Rich Farmbrough, 19:47 4 March 2007 (GMT).

Try it now.

I have reversed the sense of the template's test. --Kevinkor2 06:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

DOI?

I saw the discussion of IS.Ns. Are you aware of any useful tools for dealing with DOIs? Samsara (talk • contribs) 10:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not (yet) aware of any tools for tackling these. I bet if you can describe what you are trying to do or identify a problematic one that you are trying to fix, one of the following users would be able to help. You've got me curious now too ... User:Rich Farmbrough, User:Jayvdb, User:EdJohnston. --Keesiewonder ^talk 12:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Found it: http://www.crossref.org/guestquery/

The reverse is at http://www.doi.org/

Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The Prestige and Connect Savannah

Thanks for pointing out the erroneous cite that referenced Connect Savannah in The Prestige article. Sorry it led you astay.

—  Jim Dunning  talk  :  23:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

bar code & issn connection

Is there one? Someone just uploaded an image of a magazine for which I have not been able to locate an ISSN ... you can see the bar code digits on the image ... ? ... Thanks for your help! --Keesiewonder ^talk 12:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes it will be 0964-264 with whatever checksum is correct. Rich Farmbrough, 18:32 12 March 2007 (GMT).

I make it 0964-2641. Rich Farmbrough, 18:36 12 March 2007 (GMT).

Categorization

Hi, scarykitty here from the Uncategorized task force. I appreciated your weighing in and letting me know I wasn't the only one toiling away over there! A few questions for you. You said that you noticed that you noticed that people start editing on articles after you categorize them. how do you see that? also, I see you signed up for AutoWikiBrowser. I did too and downloaded it but I don't see how it's useful for categorization. how do you plan to use it? Thanks, dear. Scarykitty 00:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I totally agree with you about AfD. I visit every now and then myself to try to save a poor article from deletion. Scarykitty 00:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Hi! Thanks for your notes and your questions.
• Re: AWB ... let's either ask whomever recently gave a plug for this tool on the Uncat page, or, give me a week or so to play with it. The 'more' tab in AWB has a specific zone about categories, and, I have a hunch that it may be possible to somehow load into AWB, for instance, all the articles that are uncategorized since January 2007 beginning with the letter H. Then, one by one, you could plow through them with a bit of automation done by AWB. Right now, I'm letting AWB move through part of my watch list so I can get an idea of what it notices.
• Re:reinvigorated articles post-categorization ... I guess it is kind of a subliminal thing. For one, I tend to notice when the last time an article was edited as I'm snooping around discerning what category I think it belongs in. Then, I have my preferences set such that anything I edit ends up on my watch list. I review my watch list periodically, and, frequently see that an article that hadn't been touched for weeks starts to attract editors. Many of the uncategorized articles are also as yet unloved articles on WP. I expect most people are pretty focused on whatever their favorite topics are, and come to look at articles in their realm. So, when we put a "new" one in for them, they pick up on it pretty quickly. Hope that helps; sorry it is kind of vague. But, if you don't currently have articles you edit automatically added to your watch list, doing so may help you notice what I'm seeing. Of course, it also means I need to go and prune my watch list so it doesn't get unmanageable. I also like having this feature on because I sometimes see people vandalizing my good faith edits (in articles I don't personally care about). So, it gives me a heads up on who to keep an eye on! Keesiewonder ^talk 00:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • You certainly can build lists in AWB from categories and plough through articles at quite a rate. If you need extra features the devs are quite responsive too.
  • When you edit an article it not only appears briefly on recent changes but also will likely pop up on watchlists. When I did a very large bot run through the living people category I was told by one editor that I'd activated around 100 articles on his watchlist! I'm sure what you've noticed is genuine not subliminal :) --kingboyk 00:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• !! You're right; I didn't word that well. I meant something along the lines of ... hmmm ... I haven't thought of my formula for this yet, but I know it's true. Thanks for your observation; I appreciate it. And I might need your help at some point with AWB ... Regards, Keesiewonder ^talk 00:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

SBNs

Hi Keesie. If you have an idea for clarifying the mention of SBNs on CAT:INVALID please go ahead. I am aware that the real fix is probably to add more text to ISBN so they are explained better, but that sounds like actual work :-). A separate article (even a very short one) could be the best option. EdJohnston 02:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)