Randall J. Paske

Thanks for the comment. This morning I redid the download by holding the Shift key and selecting Check for Updates within ComicBase, and this time I got a new Downloaded Update Log file. I didn't get an Unknown Items list, but maybe there aren't any this time. I still don't know what went wrong the first time around. For what it's worth, I updated via Sidekick that time.

I downloaded the new content update, but it didn't generate any log files (Unknown Items and Downloaded Update Log) like it normally does. Did something go wrong? Is it just me? I usually try to at least glance at those logs.

How about doing something similar with the recent Earth-Prime series published by DC? There were six issues, numbered #1-6, with variable titles. They are part of the same series, but each issue is given its own listing in ComicBase, even though the only issue of a given title variation might be #4 or #5. It's a little different from these two Archie titles in that there's no parenthetical issue number--but then they didn't make each issue of Earth-Prime a #1 (surprisingly), they just played around with the title. I'd prefer to group all the issues of Mr. Monster Super-Duper Special together, too, but instead they are split across multiple titles. They have presumably been that way for a very long time, unlike these more recent titles, so this would likely be a more problematic change than the others.

I can follow that logic to a point. I can see why it looks like Sengi and Tembo 1/A and 1/B would be missing from the listing when only 1, 1/A-2, and 1-2 are shown. I agree that it's a little confusing. To me, it would make more sense if they were listed as 1-2/A and 1-2/B, instead of 1-2 and 1/A-2, but that's not how it's been configured to go in ComicBase. (I would also say that this is an odd case, and usually the printing with the most variants is the first printing.) I can also see how one could look at a group of covers and say that each different cover is a variant, and each variant could then possibly have subsequent printings of its own. That's kind of what the CB numbering implies when it shows 1/A-2 instead of 1-2/A. But I don't think that's the reality of variant production. These days, new issues are solicited with a whole slew of variants. And then when they go into subsequent printings, each printing often has different covers and variants of its own. It does not make sense to me to disregard that they are different printings and just add them as new variants of the same issue. Nor do I think it logical to list a reprint issued years or decades later as simply a new variant. To me, something printed years later is first and foremost a later printing (regardless of whether it has the same cover as the first edition), and then possibly a variant if that particular printing has multiple versions available, as with Sengi and Tembo. You're right that the database contains plenty of examples of reprints classified as variants. Two of the titles you cited, Action Comics and Fantastic Four, contain reprints listed both ways--as variants and as subsequent printings. For example, I wouldn't call the new Action Comics #1/D a variant of the 1938 original but a new printing (same with 1/A through 1/C). What makes the one listed under 1/D different from the other replicas and reprints listed as 1-2 through 1-10? Nothing that I can see, except that they were added by different people following different logic. But when I see it listed as 1/D--as "just" a variant and not the 14th printing--it initially implies that it was published as a variant of the original back in 1938, not that it's a new printing in 2022. It seems to come down to whether one's logic says the printing or the variant cover has primacy. I think the printing should take primacy. Otherwise, items like the second and third printings of Captain Marvel (11th Series) #1, which have different covers than the regular #1, and which are currently listed as 1-2 and 1-3, would have to instead be listed as additional variants (and there are already 31), not as second and third printings. There are thousands of other issues like this. Perhaps the CB editors could weigh in on what the logic should be, despite the contradictory examples we'll find in the database. I also wonder whether it would be helpful (or even possible) to switch from 1/A-2 to 1-2/A and the like.

Actually, Sengi and Tembo 1-2 and 1/A-2 are the correct ones. These are second printings, as indicated in the indicia. (They were also published almost two years after the first printing.) Further, "Millcreek" in those item descriptions should be "Mill Geek." "Mill Geek" could be added to the 1-2 and 1/A-2 descriptions. 1/A and 1/B should be deleted. As for Gambit... Gambit (8th Series) 1/L should in fact be deleted. The cover under 1/L should be moved to 1/K, the virgin variant. The print count for 1/J should be changed from 2000 to 3000. Details can be found here: https://www.comictom101.com/post/august-mmc-print-counts

My last attempt to send the message was at 7:54 AM and I got the bounce message at 10:58 AM (CDT). The "Submit New or Corrected Data" feature appeared to work after some downtime last night. I have not used it yet today.

Last night and today, my email to support@comicbase.com has been bouncing back as "unable to deliver." I also had some problems with the "Submit New or Corrected Data" feature within ComicBase last night--the server was unreachable for a while. Is something happening over there? I've noticed no issues with anything else on my end.

I was also having issues when entering comics in my database last night. Many, many problems with cover images and error messages.

I tried to download the latest ComicBase content and price update last night. The update ran all night and still wasn't finished this morning, taking all that time to download about 75 book covers (apparently). I finally had to cancel it. Something's off.

What is New X-Men #153/A? From the cover image in ComicBase, it looks like someone's signed copy, not a true variant. It's possible that it could be one of those official signed copies from Dynamic Forces or whatever, but there's no info listed about that. And unlike #152/A, it's not a price variant. I suspect it doesn't belong.

Have you opened that up? I think what you might be showing us is the back cover, bagged so that the UPC code is visible.

From the cover it's surely a Forbidden Planet/Jetpack Comics exclusive variant. I've encountered other titles and issues that were exclusive to that pair. Store exclusives can be some of the hardest variants to find info about, or even to know that they exist. I add them when I can.

More than two titles like that were changed. Besides Avatarex, I had two other titles change in the same way. It's not that I don't think they should have been changed, but I'm baffled as to why making minute, hard-to-discern changes to these titles was deemed a necessary inconvenience to the installed user base, while other plainly inaccurate or disorganized titles "can't" be fixed because of the same installed user base. Those extra spaces after the ellipsis weren't going to confuse anyone, but this and other threads are full of examples of far more problematic titles that we are seemingly stuck with. I don't get it, either.

I only have one issue of Inside Image and I don't plan to get more. This title is in ComicBase in the Comic Books category, but the issue I have does not contain any actual comics--instead, it has articles and advertisements promoting Image titles. By this measure, it belongs in the Magazines category, if other issues are of similar composition. Can anyone confirm whether other issues contain any actual comics? I'm also wondering about Marvel Age. I don't remember seeing any of those that actually consist of comics. I have a few of these somewhere that I can look at, but perhaps someone already knows. Mind you, I'm personally on the record as being OK with these comic-book-sized and comic-book-shaped titles being in the Comic Books category, perhaps with some additional designation. Their physical properties practically ensure that just about everyone will file and store them with comic books. But the editorial line at ComicBase has been that if they don't actually consist of comics, they don't go in the Comic Books category. I'm just looking at these for the sake of consistency.

Beautiful Stories for Ugly Children was published by a comic book publisher and shares physical properties with comic books (standard comic book size and construction), and I personally file it among my comics for ease of storage. But it consists of text stories with illustrations, like standard storybooks. It does not combine or mix words and pictures in the way that a comic story does. The illustrations also do not form a silent narrative. They just illustrate random scenes of the stories. As with titles like Who's Who and The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, the ComicBase editors decided that "not actual comics" publications like these are technically not Comic Books and need to go under Magazines or Books. Given that, I think Beautiful Stories for Ugly Children is better classified as a magazine than as a book. Those issues are not TPBs, which have a little more heft. But I'm not sure what to call them. I have found a number of other titles that look, outwardly, like comics, but which actually contain text and illustrations that, while they complement each other, do not constitute comics. Specifically, most of the titles published by Caliber under the Tome Press imprint look like standard floppy comics on the outside but don't contain any comics. (I have found one Tome title so far that actually had comics inside. I forget what it was.) I've been reporting these to Support as I run into them, and leaving it to them to determine where they get moved in the database. These have included The Donnelly Tragedy, The Absurd Art of J.J. Grandeville, Plague, and A Modest Proposal. I also reported The Vampire Companion from Innovation. Despite being responsible for some items getting moved, I can buy an argument that all of these things could still be classified as comic books even without containing comics. They're all published by comics publishers, they all look like comics on the outside, and they all fit into standard comic sleeves and boxes. I'm keeping my own copies filed with my comics, not separating them out as pseudo-comics. But the editors' current ruling is that if they don't contain comics, they don't belong in the Comic Books category of ComicBase, and I'm reporting such items as I find them for the sake of consistency. I also keep standard-floppy-comic-sized magazines like Amazing Heroes and Musings filed among my comics, despite the distinctions in the database.

Thanks. Must keep my cursor away from the links.

I think this falls under the general rule in ComicBase that annuals, specials, etc., are listed under the main title, following the philosophy that if you were looking for them in a shop, you would find them with the main title. It's not my own preference (I'd rather have separate title listings), but I'm learning to live with it. It does make things hard to find sometimes, especially when there are multiple iterations of a series (Justice League, for example) and you don't know for sure which one the annual/special/spectacular is associated with.

On occasion I make a stray click in the program and start an unintended search, which sometimes takes several minutes to complete. Is there a way to cancel a search once it has started, or do I have to wait for it to finish? I just accidentally got a list of all comics edited by Scott Dunbier, which, sure, that's a cool feature, but I wanted to keep entering my collection instead.

This de facto inability to change titles bothers me more than any other quirk of ComicBase. The previous thread in another section of the forum (https://forums.comicbase.com/index.php?/topic/1332-consistency-in-multiple-series-titles-eg-metal-men/) contains numerous examples of problematic titles and reasons why they are problematic, but so far we've kind of been met with a shrug. I agree that it would be good to know that the folks at Human Computing are thinking about this or any other solution to the problem.

I'm wondering if newspapers could be spun off to their own section, separate from the Magazines section. As I mentioned earlier, I don't want to exclude magazines entirely. I would, however, exclude newspapers if I could. I can see where tracking all of that stuff in Human Computing's master database might be worthwhile for them, but I doubt many of us want to house a mega-database on our own systems. As ComicBase grows and expands well beyond comics, there may be a need to devise more ways for users to select the portions that meet their needs and exclude those that don't. I've got plenty of magazines related to comics and entertainment, but I don't need a newspaper index. I've got plenty of books, but I don't need an index of romance paperbacks or theological volumes.

Was there a bit of a backlog this week, maybe? I think some of my recent data submissions didn't make it into the newest update as quickly as usual, but based on when points accumulated on the contributors list, they'll probably be included next time.

I don't know, how different is that from an annual or special, which are listed under their parent titles? I don't think it should be 1/Q, but maybe it should be SE 1 or something. I'd personally prefer that annuals, specials, and the like all had their own titles, but that's not how ComicBase has been structured.

Yes, adding magazines related to comics and related interests like science fiction and horror is one thing, and I'd even be fine with something like Entertainment Weekly. But I don't need my database to contain thousands of records for daily newspapers or obscure scientific journals. I don't want to exclude magazines en masse from my database, but I would like to be able to exclude the newspapers, academic journals, etc.

Huh, I don't have that badge, either, and I've definitely submitted a handful of new titles.

Thanks. I had Sidekick send up a new backup, and it is indeed showing on the website.