Jump to content

Gregory Hecht

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Gregory Hecht

  1. I took your suggestion and posted it on Slack so that Pete will see it.
  2. But Marvel has been incrementally downgrading the paperstock for the covers of their periodical comics for years now. While I understand that this latest round has been a step too far, is it so different (other than the social media outrage) from what Marvel has been doing over the last few years that it warrants database tracking?
  3. BTW, it looks like all of the Action Comics #1000 issues list "Butch Guiche" as an inker. That should of course be corrected to "Butch Guice."
  4. My CB database matches what is shown on Atomic Avenue for the specific variants that you list in your most recent post. When you do your content updates, do you have the radio button for locking the notes field contents checked or unchecked?
  5. It probably is the same paper as the interior pages. I assume that you are asking so that you can track this in your own custom fields? The reason I ask is that I doubt that this is the sort of thing that HC is particularly worried about tracking in the master database.
  6. Maybe I am missing something here, but won't the settings shown in Don's screenshot result in reducing the price of his inventory by another 25% every day? Also, what happens if he wants to end the reduced price sale? Is there a way for him to bump up his prices by 133.33% (which is what it would take to restore his original prices prior to dropping them by 25%)?
  7. Jeez, this fell off my radar screen for way too long. Just submitted it this evening.
  8. A late addition to the Grim Reaper Report: DC has cancelled all orders for their Sandman #1 Facsimile Edition (located in ComicBase as Sandman #1/A). It will presumably be resolicited, but for now it has been cancelled and should be removed from the database.
  9. This week's content update re-created the 2020 Iron Manual comic book title (the correct magazine title remains in the database).
  10. And just like Dark Phoenix, they're back! This week we have new comic title versions for Back Issue and Comic Book Creator. @Mark J. Castaneda @Peter R. Bickford Any chance you can give the ComicBase editorial department a reminder on this one? (see my original post in this thread, thanks)
  11. Marvel has also cancelled Deadly Neighborhood Spider-Man (to be resolicited in the future, evidently) even though it will be in the forthcoming April 2022 catalog (for items shipping beginning in June 2022). I don't think that it is in the database yet, but the ComicBase editorial team should hold off on that title when they add the comics from the April 2022 solicitations.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. "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.
  21. 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! 😂 )
  22. 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.
  23. 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).
  24. 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.
  • Create New...