Gregory Hecht

Or perhaps even Hawkeye Omnibus (Panini) Using that title would save Hawkeye Omnibus just in case Marvel ever decided to make a generically named omnibus for that character.

Marvel has apparently cancelled Secret Invasion (2nd series). Smart money is that this will get resolicited when the MCU show is closer to release on Disney+, but for now this title is cancelled and should be removed from the database.

2M might not be impossible. Comics.org (aka the GCD) says that they have >1.8M issues listed. They also claim >156K variant issues, but I don't know if that figure is separate from or a subset of the 1.8M figure. I am sure that some of the items included at GCD (such as OHOTMU, Who's Who, index titles, etc) are classified as something other than comics in ComicBase, but surely that only accounts for a tiny fraction of the difference of hundreds of thousands in item count.

Somehow the recent Iron Man Epic Collection #20 got conflated into two database entries, one for issue #20 and another for issue #19. The correct listing is for #20, so the #19 entry should be deleted.

The Demon (1st series) Book #1/HC and The Demon Omnibus (Jack Kirby's...) #1/HC appear to be the same thing. The indicia of the book does not include "omnibus" in the title (IIRC, it was solicited with omnibus in the title, but the actual publication is "Jack Kirby's The Demon" in the indicia). The separate Omnibus title should be deleted. The database also lists The Demon (1st series) Book #1 (not hardcover) with the same cover date as the hardcover. I am pretty sure that listing is supposed to be this trade paperback. If so, then the publication date needs to be fixed.

The database includes two listings for DC's hardcover reprint of New Fun Comics #1. Both are listed under the Famous First Edition title (which is appropriate, given the indicia of the book). #62 is listed with a cover date of 4/1/1979 and #63/HC is listed with a cover date of 7/1/2020. Based on the indicia of the book, the listing for #63/HC in the database is correct and that listing should be retained in the database. I am not able to find anything verifying that a #62 (or a #C-62, for that matter) exists for this title, nor am I able to find anything verifying that there was a reprinting of New Fun Comics #1 in 1979. The listing for #62 should be deleted.

There are three entries under the title Kull the Destroyer: The Original Marvel Years Omnibus. Issue #1/HC is a duplication of Book #1/HC. Since the DM variant is listed as Book #1/A, I suggest deleting #1/HC and keeping Book #1/HC. Before deletion, however, please move the scan for #1/HC over to Book #1/HC.

The original plan for Lost Girls was to publish it in periodical form, and that is what generated the publication of Lost Girls #1 and #2. Then that plan was set aside midstream in favor of the publishing the whole thing all at once. The deluxe set is three volumes sold together in a slipcase. It is the entire story. (The one volume edition, which is what was recently added to the database, was published later.) Lost Girls #1 contains chapters 1-3 and #2 contains chapters 4-6. Volume 1 of the slipcase set includes chapters 1-10, so it contains all of the story in Lost Girls #1 and #2 plus four additional chapters. Volumes 2 and 3 of the slipcase were entirely new.

"Generating a warning message" as you describe in your first paragraph is probably not going to have the positive reaction. At best, sellers will ignore it. At worst, they will think that they are being told that they need to go through their individual listings and manually move info from one field to another, and to the extent that they believe that is what they are being told, they will get upset. And that doesn't do anybody any good. Presumably a tool could be devised as you describe in your second paragraph. But I don't know if this is in any way high priority for Pete & co. at the moment (maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I honestly don't know... it could very well be that Pete isn't concerned at all about people using both Notes and Grading Notes to get pertinent info up onto Atomic Avenue). But to go all of the way back to your OP, I think that the implication from Michael Wagner's post is that you're overthinking a problem that most folks aren't sure actually exists b/c of the presence of custom fields (and a few others, such as Grading Notes) that are already available to users.

I have no idea. Pete would know, but I would not. (Alas, my magic wrench only grants me very specific super-powers, and reading Pete's mind is not one of them! 😂 )

Not sure that this is really much of an issue with sellers since the display on Atomic Avenue won't really distinguish between unique info in the Notes field and info in the Grading Notes field. That is to say, all of the info will be displayed on the Atomic Avenue page so it doesn't really matter whether the seller is a "lumper" (i.e., puts everything they want to communicate in a single field) or a "splitter" (i.e., separates certain types of information into the Notes field and the Grading Notes field), it will all end up in the same place on the AA screen. Unless you're trying to say something that I'm not picking up on.

Yes.

All of that information (custom Notes field info, all contents of the Grading Notes field) gets displayed in the same place on the AA listings for a single issue (for an example, see here).

If I am understanding your statement correctly, then I should point out that it is neither *required* that AA users use the Notes field to convey specifics about their particular item that is being posted on AA nor is it the *only* way for AA sellers to do so. While that was true up until the Grading Notes field was created, now the Grading Notes field is the recommended place for that kind of info. (Although, admittedly, AA sellers can still use the Notes field as in the past to customize their listings.) The bigger issue is that there are a lot of "legacy notes" that AA sellers have in their Notes field. It just isn't practical at this time to expect AA sellers (many of whom have thousands of listings) to comb through each of their listings to manually move their individualized Notes field info to the Grading Notes field. I suspect that is why Human Computing hasn't turned off the ability for custom info in the Notes field from posting onto AA.

I still think that because you are asking for a way to inform the user as to how the ComicBase program works, and I'm not a fan of cluttering up the CB user interface with stuff about the program as opposed to stuff about my collection contents. My opinion is that what you really should be asking for is a CB user manual or a CB wiki. @Peter R. Bickford has indicated in the past that the CB user manual gets read very rarely by CB users. I don't know what his thoughts are about a CB wiki.

It seems to me that what you are really asking for here isn't so much a functionality change but a means of conveying information to the ComicBase user. It might just be simpler to just post a pop-up message to CB users when they elect to undergo a content update. Something along the lines of: The following fields are not be changed by ComicBase content updates: ...blah blah blah blah blah... Depending on the options you select for the content update, the following fields might be changed by ComicBase content updates: ...blah blah blah blah blah.... All other fields in your database will updated by ComicBase content updates. <radio button> Click here to not see this message again. <button> Click here to proceed. [next pop-up is the one that we already get where the user selects various options regarding the content update] Since there isn't really a detailed user manual or wiki for CB, the above would convey the information you're concerned about to CB users without cluttering up the user's database screen during regular day-to-day usage of the program.

Rows for items that a CB user has in stock are already shaded.

I believe that colored font is already used to indicate items that have had increases or decreases in value since the last content update.

If you have run the latest content update (posted yesterday) with the proper settings checked off *and* you have no issues marked as "in stock" for the Comic title versions of these magazines, then the Comic title shouldn't be in your database at all. All bar code entry for issues of those magazines will have only one place to go: the magazine titles.

The most recent content update has deleted the comic book title versions of Alter Ego, Back Issue, and Comic Book Creator. Since we've all been here before (ala Groundhog Day), let's all keep a watchful eye out to see if these titles get re-created in a couple of months.

Comic Book Creator (also from TwoMorrows) experiences a similar problem. Comic book title here and the (correct!) magazine title here.

Newly published TwoMorrows magazines have been showing up in the Comics category with some regularity over the last several months. For example, see these entries for the titles Back Issue and Alter Ego (which have their correct magazine titles listed here and here, respectively). This leads to duplications that eventually get corrected but the process seems to repeat itself as TwoMorrows publishes new issues of their magazines every month or so. Because this happens so frequently, I *assume* that this happens because either...... (1) The HC editorial team enters the magazines in correctly in the first place but then a CB user submits them as comics and the editorial team accepts the (inappropriate) correction; or (2) The HC editorial team incorrectly enters the magazines as comics in the first place and then a CB user submits them as magazines and it takes the editorial team some time to discover the original incorrect listing. Either way, I'm posting this here to request that the HC editorial team get a "heads up" on this *and* to alert CB users who submit newly published TwoMorrows magazines to be sure that their database has the TwoMorrows titles under the appropriate category.

Ordinarily I would submit via the "Request Price Check" function, but I honestly wasn't sure if there was something that I wasn't aware of that was legitimately pushing up the values of the issues in this series.

What's up with the valuations for the regular issues of Uncanny Avengers (2nd series)? They seem really high in comparison to mycomicshop. Is there some movie character/concept showing up in that series that I am not remembering and mycomicshop has been slow to adjust their prices upward? Or is this a case where ComicBase needs to do an adjustment downward? Is Atomic Avenue actually seeing sales at the listed prices?

This week's update added the title Lost Girls (Top Shelf). The various printings of the Top Shelf three book set for this title have to date all been cataloged as Deluxe Set Hardcover under the Lost Girls title. I think that the Hardcover entry under the new Lost Girls (Top Shelf) title is supposed to be for the single volume edition. Is there a particular reason why that edition warrants its own title? Could it be moved to the existing Lost Girls title?