Randall J. Paske

I ran Rebuild Lists and did another content update. Unfortunately, both ComicBase and Sidekick still say that my last update was October 27. But I'm getting new log files each time.

OK, today I downloaded and installed the current build, just to be sure I was on the right one. Then I did a content update via Sidekick. Both Sidekick and ComicBase (in the Collection Statistics window) still show my last update as October 27. ComicBase also indicates that new content is available, even though I just did a content update. Would this have anything to do with the renewal nag box that has started popping up? I'll be renewing later on, so I keep declining. They are probably unrelated, but it seems like this started when that started.

Yes, I believe so.

Meanwhile, I updated last night (November 2) via Sidekick, and now both Sidekick and ComicBase (in the Collection Statistics window) show my last update as October 27. I do have an update log from November 2, though. I've never seen this problem before, or at least never noticed it.

I suggested in an email once that the Description field should be made read-only or labeled in some way if it is ignored during the normal submission process. I wasted time writing a number of descriptions before learning that they went nowhere and then got wiped out when I did a content update. I still think this is a valid suggestion.

That first Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man series is just Spectacular Spider-Man in the indicia for the first 48 issues, despite what it says on the cover. So the key words in this case are Spectacular Spider-Man. Searching for that will get you the '70s series. Perhaps "Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man" should be in the new Item Title field to aid with search results. I'm not sure if that's the intent of that field, though.

D'oh! I just went back to one of my problem images, and its dimensions were smaller than the existing image. I dropped it as-is and it was quickly replaced by the existing image, as usual. Then I resized my image to be slightly larger in dimension than the existing one, and I was able to to drop it in and send it without issue. Before, I was looking at file size, not image dimensions. My replacement image was of a larger file size than the existing image, but its dimensions were smaller. That has probably been the difficulty with the few other images that have given me this problem. I haven't even done the Rebuild Lists thing yet. Glad to know this!

I run into this on occasion. Most of the time I can drop a cover in the grid and upload it, but once in a while the replacement I've dropped in is immediately replaced by the existing (smaller, inferior) cover and I can't do anything to make my new one stick (and thus I can't submit it in the usual way). I have not been able to figure out why this happens every now and then. In these few cases, I've resorted to sending the new image to CB support via e-mail.

When I first upgraded to CB 2023, I had this problem, with the agonizingly slow loading of grids as I scroll down. My laptop is 2 years old. The problem seems to have been mostly alleviated with the fix in a newer update that Pete mentioned in yesterday's livestream. I still encounter short delays from time to time, but nothing like I was experiencing before.

Also, these two titles were both added, but they appear to be the same comic: Health and Wealth Health and Wealth, A Graphic Guide to the US Healthcare System

Thanks! I'll hold off on any potential bombardment of resubmissions (though there have been a handful already).

I've had a great many corrections and additions get wiped out in the last few weeks. While I suppose a minority of them could have been rejected at editorial discretion, I'm confident in the overall accuracy of my submissions, and there are so many going missing that I've wondered if something was going on either technologically (submitted corrections not reaching HC HQ for some reason) or administratively (perhaps a backlog of submissions because of all the other activity surrounding the new release of ComicBase). It is dismaying to see them get overwritten by less complete or less accurate records.

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.