Michael R. Wagner

Thanks for the quick reply, Mark. I installed build 2226 earlier on Friday; it doesn't appear to have fixed the problem. -Mike

I spoke too soon - the original problem that is the subject of this message string still occurs.

I'm not nearly fast enough...

Sandro, the series is in the database as "First Issue Special" and includes the four issues you have. r/Mike

Build 2217 seems to have fixed both issues for me, based on a couple of ussue checks. I'll update this if either issue repeats.

Update: since restarting my computer, the original problem persists, tho' somewhat less(?) irritating because the automatic repeat pop-up of the F3 window allows me to quickly re-enter the same issue number, which then corrects the cover display to the correct cover. If we can put a man on the moon... r/Mike

I'm encountering a slightly different issue - the F3 window re-opens the first time it's used for a Title as well as subsequent times within the same Title.

I upgraded to the more recent build and restarted the program. So far, the problem I described seems to have been fixed, but now the pop-up window that opens with the F3 key repeats itself when entered, i.e., I press the F3 key, the pop-up opens, I enter an issue number and then press the [enter] key; the cursor jumps to that issue and highlights the row - as expected - but then the pop-up window immediately reopens. It only repeats once until the next time I use the F3 function key. On the repeat, I've entered the same issue number and also entered a different issue number - in both cases it jumps to the designated issue and doesn't repeat a second time. But, the next time I use the F3 function, it repeats.

Thanks, Steve. I'm running Archive v25.5.0.2076 on a desktop with a 24" monitor set at 1920 x 1080 resolution. I should add that this problem doesn't occur 100% of the time, probably more like 75%. It also occurs most often when I've changed a single cell in a highlighted row versus opening the row to make a change. r/Mike

This has been happening to me for several weeks. When I use the F3 function to jump to another issue, the picture that displays is the cover that is two issues past the issue previously displayed. For example, if I have Teen Titans (1st series) #19 open, then close it and use F3 to jump to issue #27, the active row correctly jumps to issue #27, but the cover displayed is issue #21. I have to repeat the action - using F3 to jump to issue #27 - to get the correct cover to display. Any thoughts about why this is happening? r/Mike

Got it - thanks!

The indicia for this book includes the word "Special" in the book's title, so the proper title is Superman: House of Brainiac Special. Any particular reason it wasn't included? r/Mike

If memory serves, there are crossover entries of the type you describe in the Notes field (where applicable), usually with "tie-in" at the end of the crossover name; e.g., "War of the Gods tie-in" - quotation marks aren't used, I just used them to illustrate my example. For issues that are directly part of the crossover, the title of the crossover would also be in the Notes field, albeit without the "tie-in" reference. r/Mike

When I upload information, I get the usual "successful" pop-up window acknowledging my upload. However, if I also have cover scans to submit, when I click "yes" when asked if I want to upload them, I get an error message and it's unclear whether it's just the cover scan(s) that failed to upload, or the issue information, too. Upon closing that error pop-up, I also get another error message saying that the program is unable to assign points to my profile for the data/cover(s) that I submitted. This just started on Jan 1, but continues today (Jan 2). Any thoughts on what's happening? r/MikeW

I concur with Steven's assessment. I had a subscription to the old CBG, too. That weekly newspaper was always a high point of the week. r/Mike

I found some separate entries for issues with the Mark Jewelers insert, but there are a lot of titles that do not include them. Should these issues really be listed separately in the database as variants? Doesn't seem like a valid reason for a separate listing. I ask because I have a lot of issues with the MJ insert (purchased when I was living on overseas military installations). Before I change my database to add so many variants, I'd like to hear confirmation that they are, in fact, desired to be in the central database. r/Mike

Whitman published both series, starting in the 1930s. My (so far) limited research tells me that Better Little Books came second, and possibly as a continuation of Big Little Books, i.e., the name of the series simply changed from "Big" to "Better" - and supposedly the numbering continued without a break. I have some Better Little Books, but they seem to have been publsihed while the Big Little Books were still being published, not later. For example, I have a Better Little Book #1436, "Maximo the Amazing Super-Man" published in 1936. However, the db already has a Big Little Book #1436 and it's "Jack Armstrong and the Ivory Treasure." A review of the books in the db seems to indicate that a Big Little Book is assigned its issue number (e.g., 1436), and a Better Little Book is assigned its issue number with the /A addition. I'd like to get confirmation of this before I add my Better Little Books into the Big Little Book title in the db. r/Mike

With that in mind, I've just uploaded my cover. It's not 100% complete (book is too big to fit within the edges of my flatbed scanner). I'll upload a more complete version if I can. r/Mike

The cover of this hardcover one-shot from Dynamite Press that the database has is different from my copy. I have a first printing edition; it's in full color and the background consists of comic book panels that she created. The db copy has fewer background panels, all the panels are in various shades of red, and the lower left corner includes "Overview by Howard Chaykin." My copy doesn't have that overview. I'm wondering which is "HC" and which is a subsequent(?) printing, which would be identified accordingly. I scanned and attached an image of my copy for comparison and hopefully some assistance. This title entry also has a separate listing for a signed, numbered edition, which I think is a separate issue, as such editions are not consistently entered in the db as separate entries. r/Mike

Greg, you didn't, by chance, create variant covers for them, did you? 🙂

Thanks for the info.

I see that every DC cover is now a variant, e.g., there is no Batman (3rd series) #136 - closest to it is #136/A. Same for other titles I checked. I guess I missed that announcement. I hope older issues w/ variant covers aren't going to be renumbered to reflect this new numbering preference.

Agreed, if that matches the indicia of the new reprint. The first two sentences of your original post led me to believe the indicia of the new reprint is Marvel Masterworks. I apologize if my misunderstanding contributed to any confusion. r/ Mike

Greg, the series you propose using was established in the database separate from the Marvel Masterworks series presumably because the indicia was different from the original Masterworks series. It included the name of the character who's stories were reprinted. It made sense to give it its own database entry because of the different indicia. The original series started in 1988, but the second series that is Spider-Man-specific started in 2002. Both series have been there for years - 35 and 21 years, respectively. The current run of Marvel facsimile editions are being correctly placed under the titles they reprint, which are decades old. Starting age of the series shouldn't be any more of an issue than how the cover is presented when it comes to where to list it in the database. Indicia is supposed to be the driving factor. The new reprint volume should go under whichever of the two series has the matching indicia. r/ Mike

The Marvel Masterworks (w/o further identification) volume #1 is a Spider-Man volume, reprinting Amazing Spider-Man #1-10 and Amazing Fantasy #15. Is the new volume a reprint of this book? If so, the title should be "Marvel Masterworks" without the ": The Amazing Spider-Man" and it would be appropriately listed under the Marvel Masterworks series of hardcover books, since it's a reprint of the first volume of that series. r/ Mike