feature requests

Indexing standard (Comic Book Forums)



Author Indexing standard
Posted: January 30, 2017 2:12:42 pm
It has come to my attention that ComicBookRealm is in severe need of an indexing standard when it comes to the "description" field of any given comic.

I have seen some changing 1: to First appearance and others changing First to 1st. I have seen others even doing wholesale changes to descriptions.

Because of this I have instituted a temporary ban on providing descriptions for items. I will email out to everyone who has done any sort of indexing over the last year to have them come weigh in on the topic here.

All that being said, what should be included in the description? Personally I make it:

"Story Title", story part

"Description" (usually the solicitation text)

"Cover information (e.g. XYZ Cover)"


I have seen some adding characters to the description. I am not a fan of considering we have a Characters tab and it can create discrepancies, and also make it to where we don't have fielded data.

I have also seen some copying and pasting from other sites (giving credit). I am not really a fan of this as how hard is it to write up a description if the book is in front of you.

But everything is fair game. Please provide your feedback on what should be in the description field and how things should be formatted.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: January 30, 2017 2:24:48 pm
being a mod and adjusting prices, adding books, etc. for me it is waaaay easier to use the preview (scroll over) feature when guaging where i am in the price update lists. for this reason i WAS editing the descriptions to include characters and other key information about the books (origin, death, 1st cover app, etc.) when i scroll over a book or set of books, its easier to say ok there the carnage 1st app, heres the updated price...

the way ive been doing it since prior to 2014 was as follows

1st appearance of... / death of... / 2nd appearance of...etc.etc.etc.

then other important info like

limited to 2000 copies, XX joined the XX team...etc.etc.

from there story

Tie-In/part/chapter
"Title"
book overview


all kept tight, clean, and easy to scan (visually) so my job is that much easier

with SOOOOOOOO much to do on the site, every saved second helps alleviate stress on us as mods. We do ALOT...and i'm sure our customer service reflects that

now i understand that there will always be special circumstances or deviations but my ultimate secondary goal would be unifying the information (which is what you are trying to do here with this post) Smile

Last edited January 30, 2017 2:45:20 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: January 30, 2017 3:52:05 pm
Here's my suggestions for basic guidelines ...



1. THE KEY INFORMATION GROUP

• Is the book scarce, rare, or very rare (define with numbers), a cover variant (include ratio, artist, etc.), a limited distributed price variant (display price in $ or ¢), a misprint, or something similar?
If so, include a brief and accurate description – i.e., • Very Rare (1-10 copies estimated to exist), or • 35¢ cover price (limited distribution).

• Are there significant key appearances (first, second, third, etc.) of prominent characters?
If so, include character's name along with the key appearance description – i.e., • First appearance of Batman (Bruce Wayne).
If the character has several key appearance items, list them as needed – i.e., • Second appearance but first full appearance of Wolverine (James 'Logan' Howlett).
If the character has a confusing appearance history – like the Marvel character Him/Adam Warlock/Warlock – consider writing see note below after the character's name and try to provide a brief as possible explanation at the bottom of the index.

• Is there a significant event in the issue that makes this book sought out by collectors?
If so, include event with a brief description – i.e., • First Justice League/Justice Society crossover, or • First time Power Man and Iron Fist meet.

• Does the comic itself have significant historical value? For example, is it the first published horror comic? Is it the first female superhero title? Was it used in Seduction of the Innocent (SOTI) book? Was it printed without the Comics Code Authority (CCA) stamp of approval?
If so, include a brief and accurate description – i.e., • First ongoing female superhero title, or • Used in SOTI, pages 387, 388.

• Was the cover drawn by a prominent or highly collectible artist or artists?
If so, include names – i.e., • Alex Schomburg cover art, or • Neal Adams and Dick Giordano cover art, or • Wally Wood cover art (inks only).

––––––––––

2. THE STORY CONTENT GROUP

• Please include title (if applicable), number of story pages (not necessary, but helpful), and a brief synopsis when possible. Here are a few examples to use as a template for indexing if needed ...

• "The Apollo Eclipse!" – (20-page story) – Apollo is revealed to be a New Man in the form of a Warthog, his real name is revealed next issue. Apollo takes Eddie and Ellie Roberts hostage and offers Warlock to trade himself for the twins.

• "Wonder Woman Goes To The Circus!" – (13-page story, no synopsis written).

• (Untitled 1-page Fast Facts article, no synopsis written).

• If you copy-and-paste whole or partial passages from another source, you must include proper attribution in the source line at the bottom of the index. Please try to edit those passages down if you have the time.

• You can also request for a moderator to review your indexing and have it edited for you if time allows.

––––––––––

3. NOTATIONS AND ATTRIBUTIONS GROUP

• If notations are needed, please be as concise and accurate as possible.
For example, if notating Fantastic Four #66 (Sept. 1967), one might write the following – NOTE: Although this issue begins a 2-part origin of Him, he does not fully emerge from his cocoon until the next issue (Fantastic Four #67).

• Notes can be used to clarify misprinted cover dates or other known abnormalities or inconsistencies.

• Notes can be used to inform members that a book's storyline jumps to another one under a different title – i.e., for Avengers Annual #7 one could include NOTE: Story concludes in Marvel Two-in-One Annual #2 (1977).

• Notes should be used if a creator uses a pseudonym in the credits – i.e., NOTE: Mike Esposito is credited as Mike DeMeo.

• Notes should not be used for notating individual flaws in a member's own book or other similar items.

• Use separate notation text blocks if needed.

• Attributions must be included when using information or data obtained from any reference source. This includes other comic book websites, price guides, magazines, or publications about comic books, etc.

• If needed, please copy and use the following text for sources when applicable –
DC Database (dc.wikia.com)
Marvel Database (marvel.wikia.com)
Grand Comics Database (comics.org)
The Comic Book Database (comicbookdb.com)
Comic Vine (comicvine.gamespot.com)
The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide (46th edition, 2016-17)
. Change edition and years when needed.

• Please add other sources in the same format as shown above.



... Maybe this can be a jumping off point where everyone begins with a common framework that can be debated on before a consensus is made. Thanks.

Last edited March 6, 2017 1:47:24 pm
Posted: January 30, 2017 4:14:24 pm
I should have added that there is no obligation to any member to index a book, or index it as completely as my suggested guideline states.

Please consider my suggested guidelines as how I index books here at CBR. My fundamental reason is that when writing, editing, and presenting information to a large group of people is that it needs to be informative, readable, and understandable to everyone, not to just myself as I am indexing it. That's why I try to avoid abbreviations, as they may be confusing if improperly used. Spelling things out is a good way of avoiding that.

Also, my apologies to any and all who I might have irked or aggravated by re-indexing previously indexed books. It's not personal. For me it's about clarity, consistency, and communicating information.

And if anyone is wondering, I have had over a quarter-century of providing graphics and visual presentations in print and online for tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of readers and viewers on a daily basis. I've also written a few guidelines on presenting graphics and instructions for off-site vendors in constructing graphics.

Last edited January 30, 2017 7:33:53 pm
Posted: January 30, 2017 4:56:32 pm
My 2 Cents...

Only thing that should be in the "About" Section is a brief synopsis/description of the story and the title.
Everything else should go in't it's appropriate section.
Maybe we can add a "Note" Section for weird and obscure stuff.


Last edited January 30, 2017 4:56:58 pm
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: January 30, 2017 5:48:27 pm
This is the basic template I copy into the "About" window as I start indexing ...



• Xxxxxxxxxx

––––––––––

• "Xxx" – (00-page story, no synopsis written).

––––––––––

SOURCE: Xxxxxxxxxx




... I add and remove items as necessary, If a book has three stories, I copy and paste • "Xxx" – (00-page story, no synopsis written). two additional times and type in the appropiate information. I start small and let the contents of that issue determine how much needs to be added.

Last edited January 31, 2017 2:03:44 pm
Posted: February 1, 2017 9:00:27 pm
I think I should display the characters like below. Maybe if more than 5 it scrolls. Fix it so a character can have multiple designations, etc.

Image
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: February 1, 2017 10:05:50 pm
Dancing
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 2, 2017 12:03:57 am
Will that happen for every character appearance or just the ones with special note designations? There are events books and story lines like DC's Crisis On Infinite Earths or Marvel's Secret Wars where there are dozens if not hundreds of characters appearing.

Or is there a way to designate certain character special notes as keys where they are the only ones showing up in the "About" window with the rest remaining in the character listing window?
Posted: February 2, 2017 1:49:44 am
I was wondering about this subject myself. I've been indexing and reviewing a few comics here lately and noticed there was no standard "Description" format.

I started off doing my own thing, but then I saw that for the most part, people were just copying the official solicit blurbs, and so I decided "When in Rome. . ." and have been doing the same.

This seems to me the easiest way. Unfortunately, solicitation blurbs aren't always accurate as to what the story actually is. Sometimes I've found they are downright misleading. A set of standard guidelines would be nice.

Last edited February 2, 2017 1:50:52 am
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: February 2, 2017 2:21:24 am
I like what Doughboy is saying about multiple designations. I think there should be some sort of guidelines for some of the categories. First appearances and such can often be tricky (like Wolverine in Hulk 180 or 181) and there are two categories called cameo and appearance. What is the difference and what defines which should be used. This question is rhetorical, so no need to get into a debate on it here and now, but I hope you catch the point. We need clarity when indexing these comics.
Tenzil
Posted: February 2, 2017 8:51:05 am
FYI - The solicit blurbs are added when we add the new releases each week, as if that isn't added then the about box will be left blank, this way we at least have something about the book for all the new books. People can go back and add a synopsis if they like.
That age old question dealing with the 1st app of wolverine will never go away. Far as I'm concerned if a character appears in a comic for the first time no matter how brief, that should be his first app...but the buyers and flippers of the industry have changed all that. Just because the demand and price is greater for #181 doesn't mean that's the 1st app IMO, but lwe'll have to decide on stuff like that and when we do we have to find a way to stop people from changing back and forth going forward i.e.....lock it.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 2, 2017 2:25:48 pm
I hope you come to a decision soon as I have found an error (Ancient Dreams mini #4B is not a Mike Krome variant) and I can't fix it.
Posted: February 2, 2017 2:57:46 pm
Canuck said:
... That age old question dealing with the 1st app of wolverine will never go away. Far as I'm concerned if a character appears in a comic for the first time no matter how brief, that should be his first app...but the buyers and flippers of the industry have changed all that. Just because the demand and price is greater for #181 doesn't mean that's the 1st app IMO, ...


Yesterday, a member at the Comic Book Collector's Forum on Facebook was inquiring why some consider Amazing Spider-Man #300 as Venom's first appearance, and not ASM #299 where he posts a full-page appearance of Venom. Obviously, there were numerous comments about this topic, here's my verbatim response –

"I disregard whether it's a cameo or full app. when deciding 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. appearances. I go solely by publication date of the book that character is in, so long as it was the creative team's intent that that is the character in question. I let the market place decide which appearance is the more valuable to own and desirable to have. Therefore for me, Incredible Hulk #180 is the 1st app. of Wolverine, and Incredible Hulk #181 is his 2nd app. but the more desirable and valuable one because of Wolverine's cover appearance and his involvement throughout the story inside. I think there's confusion for some when a character's actual 1st app. – i.e. Hulk #180 – has less market value then a later appearance – i.e. Hulk #181 – because how can a 2nd app. be worth more than a 1st one? Just because it is more valuable doesn't mean it's a character's first appearance."



Last edited February 2, 2017 10:49:45 pm
Posted: February 2, 2017 3:02:25 pm
The Bobarian said:
Canuck said:
... That age old question dealing with the 1st app of wolverine will never go away. Far as I'm concerned if a character appears in a comic for the first time no matter how brief, that should be his first app...but the buyers and flippers of the industry have changed all that. Just because the demand and price is greater for #181 doesn't mean that's the 1st app IMO, ...


Yesterday, a member at the Comic Book Collector's Forum on FaceBook was inquiring why some consider Amazing Spider-Man #300 as Venom's first appearance, and not ASM#299 where he post a full-page appearance of Venom. Obviously, there were numerous comments about this topic, here's my verbatim response –

"I disregard whether it's a cameo or full app. when deciding 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. appearances. I go solely by publication date of the book that character is in, so long as it was the creative team's intent that that is the character in question. I let the market place decide which appearance is the more valuable to own and desirable to have. Therefore for me, Incredible Hulk #180 is the 1st app. of Wolverine, and Incredible Hulk #181 is his 2nd app. but the more desirable and valuable one because of Wolverine's cover appearance and his involvement throughout the story inside. I think there's confusion for some when a character's actual 1st app. – i.e. Hulk #180 – has less market value then a later appearance – i.e. Hulk #181 – because how can a 2nd app. be worth more than a 1st one? Just because it is more valuable doesn't mean it's a character's first appearance."

Applause
Posted: February 2, 2017 3:08:10 pm
Tenzil said:
... there are two categories called cameo and appearance. What is the difference and what defines which should be used. This question is rhetorical, so no need to get into a debate on it here and now, but I hope you catch the point. We need clarity when indexing these comics.


I would consider removing "appearance" as a special notes option. Just listing the character means he or she appears in that book, giving it an "appearance" designation is redundant and unnecessary. Keep the "cameo" designation as I think there is a general consensus that a cameo appearance means a brief, non-storyline changing involvement of a character. I'm open to a better definition of a cameo appearance from anyone, mine seems a little clunky to me.

Last edited February 2, 2017 10:55:40 pm
Posted: February 3, 2017 10:39:48 am
I think we need to add a "1st Full Appearance" to go along with just "1st Appearance" and save cameo for what it was meant for, any brief app by any character...or just get rid of cameo altogether.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 3, 2017 11:17:16 am
unknown if possible but along with what canuck said adding something to the effect of

example...

1st appearance of Cindy Moon as Silk...not really sure how to word that

but i def agree with canuck, bobarian and tenzil about the appearance...having appearance and cameo seems redundant. esp if they are both supposed to mean the same thing...i always thought cameo meant 1st app of a character but brief (like incredible hulk 181...cameo of wolverine...) appearance i always thought to use with outside characters like donald trump, obama, david letterman, etc...that arent really part of any actual story, but make a book appearance

Last edited February 3, 2017 11:21:06 am
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 3, 2017 2:25:43 pm
Canuck said:
I think we need to add a "1st Full Appearance" to go along with just "1st Appearance" and save cameo for what it was meant for, any brief app by any character...or just get rid of cameo altogether.


I can go along with this. To get the ball rolling, here's my first draft on defining what a first full appearance could mean here at CBR ...

First full appearance

1. The earliest appearance of a character in multiple panels on multiple pages in a single publication (comic book, graphic novel, magazine, etc.) where that character may have significant involvement on the storyline within that publication, or ...

2. A consensus among most comic book historians and publications – i.e., the most recent edition of The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide – that that is the first full appearance of the character in question, or ...

3. A sourced statement from the book's creative team – editor, writer, artist – that confirms that this is that character's first full appearance.

... I know it's a little wordy but it's a start to work from.

Also, Canuck is right about saving cameo for what it means – a brief appearance of any character in a book. An example would be Oracle in a panel or two when she's contacted for information. She cameos in that book but it's no where near being a first, second or third appearance. It's like her 123rd appearance.

Last edited February 3, 2017 2:33:56 pm
Posted: February 3, 2017 2:40:16 pm
i really do enjoy this topic and the possible progress we can make from this discussion. i think this will make everything easier for both mods and members as far as asthetics, clarity of definitions, and squash this dumb arguement. i agree that it went too far, but i think to get the point we are at it may have been necessary. in the end i think this will greatly benefit the site as far as accuracy and will make it easier for everyone in their roles. granted it doesnt really solve the initial reason i started adding characters to the about section, but i'm def okay with that...
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 3, 2017 2:48:57 pm
Also just get rid of "Appearance" like the guys said if we list the character then we know they made an appearance in the book.
What we should do is make a list of of terms we want to use as tags to characters and if it we end up with 10 or even 20, if needed to cover everything that would be of use to collectors then so be it.

Getting back to the problem of the description box, what DB posted would be fine, but if we could only have certain tagged characters appear on it like... 1st app, 1st full app, etc......that way we are not over populating the about page but can see in the about page the importance of the issue character wise without having to open another box.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 3, 2017 2:57:11 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
unknown if possible but along with what canuck said adding something to the effect of

example...

1st appearance of Cindy Moon as Silk...not really sure how to word that


This makes perfect sense to me as it states that this is the first appearance of Cindy Moon as Silk and not Cindy Moon's first appearance as herself. For me, ideally the wording would be as follows ...

• First appearance of Silk (Cindy Moon), see note below.

––––––––––

NOTE: Cindy Moon first appeared as herself early in this series – Amazing Spider-Man #1 (vol. 3, June 2014) – and this issue is her fourth appearance overall.




We are in half-agreement as for the following part high-lighted in bold text ...

AmZoMBiE said:
but i def agree with canuck, bobarian and tenzil about the appearance...having appearance and cameo seems redundant. esp if they are both supposed to mean the same thing...i always thought cameo meant 1st app of a character but brief (like incredible hulk 181...cameo of wolverine...) appearance i always thought to use with outside characters like donald trump, obama, david letterman, etc...that arent really part of any actual story, but make a book appearance


... as I stated earlier, I believe having appearance as a special note character designation is redundant and should be removed. Keep cameo as a special note character designation as I and Canuck stated in earlier posts.
Posted: February 3, 2017 3:10:01 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
i really do enjoy this topic and the possible progress we can make from this discussion. i think this will make everything easier for both mods and members as far as asthetics, clarity of definitions, and squash this dumb arguement. i agree that it went too far, but i think to get the point we are at it may have been necessary. in the end i think this will greatly benefit the site as far as accuracy and will make it easier for everyone in their roles. granted it doesnt really solve the initial reason i started adding characters to the about section, but i'm def okay with that...


Something else we can agree on. Giving CBR members a unique, informative, accurate and positive experience as can be accomplished should be all of our's primary concern.*


* So long as it's copy edited. Laughing

Last edited February 5, 2017 4:29:41 pm
Posted: February 3, 2017 3:19:51 pm
dough boy said:
I think I should display the characters like below. Maybe if more than 5 it scrolls. Fix it so a character can have multiple designations, etc.

Image


For this, I would keep the Grendel (Hunter Rose) first appearance presented like this. The other characters being less prominent would remain listed in the Character window only.

However, I still think my earlier examples of presenting key information here is the simplest option ...

• First appearance of Grendel (Hunter Rose).

Nice and clean, easy to read. And the character mug shots and all other character appearances stay in the Characters information window. I imagine the About window would load faster without the mug shots anyway.
Posted: February 3, 2017 3:25:49 pm
Canuck said:
Also just get rid of "Appearance" like the guys said if we list the character then we know they made an appearance in the book.
What we should do is make a list of of terms we want to use as tags to characters and if it we end up with 10 or even 20, if needed to cover everything that would be of use to collectors then so be it.

Getting back to the problem of the description box, what DB posted would be fine, but if we could only have certain tagged characters appear on it like... 1st app, 1st full app, etc......that way we are not over populating the about page but can see in the about page the importance of the issue character wise without having to open another box.


I whole-heartedly second this.
Posted: February 3, 2017 3:27:17 pm
I think if the tag 1st app or whatever is linked to a character it will have to appear on the about page, it would be to difficult to start distinguishing who is popular and who is not and by that I don't mean the obvious, I mean as writing the program.

Also to avoid long charater listing like First appearance of Silk (Cindy Moon), see note below.
––––––––––

NOTE: Cindy Moon first appeared as herself early in this series – Amazing Spider-Man #1 (vol. 3, June 2014) – and this issue is her fourth appearance overall.


Appearing in the about box we need to just create an alter ego character for any/all characters for when the just appear as a normal person i.e... Cindy Moon (Silk) and have any info needed linked to the person on there character page no mucking up the about page....IMO. This way people would know Cindy Moon was in it but not as Silk

Last edited February 3, 2017 3:38:56 pm
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 3, 2017 3:45:42 pm
honestly its the long hand that defeats the reason i added characters in the first place (making it easier to find my spots while price adjusting). yes long hand is the "MLA Documentational Standard" and "Proper" way to do things. this i think everyone can agree from those horrible English papers waaaaaay back in high school. But the problem is...MAYBE 10% of the CBR community actually indexes, of that 10% only 2 people Myself and Bobarian really care about the aesthetics and verbage (as far as we know to date lol). reading paragraphcs for the purpose i was doing it completely defeats the purpose...lol. there is a character section for characters. of the other part of the 10% just want accurate info and easy ways to distinguish their books...but i dont know how many of them care or know of the MLA doc way...i do...but deem it unnecessary in this setting. I feel the tighter the better, easier to skim, faster to adjust pricing. we are very close to a compromise becuase there are no personal hard feelings involved. just a matter of egos & verbage...

you see i got a degree in design and layout as well. i dont use that in my arguements because to me it was never a matter of qualification versus use on the site for a mod to do his job easier. Every day i log in...i approve covers, i fix mistakes, i add books and series, i service the members first, then for my wind-down i go and price check or i go edit stuff...its relaxing for me in knowing that i am helping complete a very awesome website. Ive prob logged thousands of hours performing site maintenance (not mechanics but what i am able to do). so every second counts that i can save...theres lots to do.

Last edited February 3, 2017 3:51:36 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 3, 2017 4:18:34 pm
Just a thought...what are the implications if we just posted a link in the about box that would take it to for example Marvels Wiki page? So instead of copying and pasting you would just insert the link.
I think DB is not a fan of taking info from other sites and just pasting them here, he would prefer we write up our own synopsis.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 3, 2017 5:58:33 pm
Canuck said:
Just a thought...what are the implications if we just posted a link in the about box that would take it to for example Marvels Wiki page? So instead of copying and pasting you would just insert the link.
I think DB is not a fan of taking info from other sites and just pasting them here, he would prefer we write up our own synopsis.


Sorry Canuck, but I whole-heartedly disagree with this. If you provide hyper-links that take a member or user to other sites, then why would they continue to visit CBR? Or, at the very least, you are giving them a reason not to stay at CBR. Besides, as far I can tell, proper attributions when using sourced material and information comply with the Creative Commons Licensing – https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. I'd be more worried about those that do not attribute information when indexing than those that do.

Last edited February 3, 2017 7:27:15 pm
Posted: February 3, 2017 8:26:03 pm
True.
And thanks for the info
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 3, 2017 8:50:03 pm
The Bobarian said:
dough boy said:
I think I should display the characters like below. Maybe if more than 5 it scrolls. Fix it so a character can have multiple designations, etc.

Image


For this, I would keep the Grendel (Hunter Rose) first appearance presented like this. The other characters being less prominent would remain listed in the Character window only.

However, I still think my earlier examples of presenting key information here is the simplest option ...

• First appearance of Grendel (Hunter Rose).

Nice and clean, easy to read. And the character mug shots and all other character appearances stay in the Characters information window. I imagine the About window would load faster without the mug shots anyway.

My problem is that it is all or nothing...There is no way for the site to know which characters you really want to "feature".

Also of course I want people to "cite" when they use other information, but I would prefer they just make their own. The original intent was to index when you have the comic in front of you.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: February 3, 2017 10:56:22 pm
dough boy said:
My problem is that it is all or nothing...There is no way for the site to know which characters you really want to "feature".


If it's all or nothing, then it seems we are probably better off with just using bulleted items to high-light key appearances and other notable information for now. We just have to come to an agreement on what those items should be.

dough boy said:
Also of course I want people to "cite" when they use other information, but I would prefer they just make their own. The original intent was to index when you have the comic in front of you.


I think the proverbial genie is out of the bottle on this one. I've indexed numerous Golden and Silver Age books that I will never have in front of me to open up, read, enjoy, and index here. I wish i had them but it ain't gonna happen. Besides, I've indexed books that are listed in Overstreet as Very Rare (1-10 copies estimated to exist) that even if I had one, I'd be too scared to open up in case I damaged it. Well I might open it once to read and make sure it was intact but not for indexing. Using multiple reliable sources works fine for me to do that.

Last edited February 3, 2017 11:01:06 pm
Posted: February 4, 2017 12:04:04 am
AmZoMBiE said:
...MAYBE 10% of the CBR community actually indexes, of that 10% only 2 people Myself and Bobarian really care about the aesthetics and verbage (as far as we know to date lol).


Hopefully we're not the only two or we'll be going at this for years. d'oh!

AmZoMBiE said:
... I feel the tighter the better, easier to skim, faster to adjust pricing. we are very close to a compromise becuase there are no personal hard feelings involved. just a matter of egos & verbage...


An ampersand?! How could you use an ampersand like that? Brick wall

Good news is that I can agree that using numerical abbreviations – 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. – is no different from using first, second, and third for character appearances.

However, I would still prefer to spell out most of the remaining special note character designations – i.e., origin, death, identity revealed, etc. – as their abbreviations – O:, D:, and IR: – I believe are not as easy to interpret to all members as numerical abbreviations.

So instead of writing ...

• Second appearance, origin, and death of The Bobarian.

I'd be fine with ...

• 2nd app., origin, and death of The Bobarian.

But not with ...

• 2&O&D of The Bobarian.

Last edited February 4, 2017 12:19:56 am
Posted: February 4, 2017 12:37:12 am
Canuck said:
... Appearing in the about box we need to just create an alter ego character for any/all characters for when the just appear as a normal person i.e... Cindy Moon (Silk) and have any info needed linked to the person on there character page no mucking up the about page....IMO. This way people would know Cindy Moon was in it but not as Silk


I also think this is a good idea.

So for any character, I'll use Catwoman (Selina Kyle) as an example, there should be the following two character listing options – Catwoman (Selina Kyle) and Selina Kyle (as herself) – to choose from, correct?
Posted: February 4, 2017 12:45:04 am
in handwriting i write in all uppers too...i dont care enough to be gramatically correct or at least to the extent of the rules you are assuming i know. but saying egos & verbage shouldnt be confusing as opposed to egos and verbage....this is piddly and beneath both of us to make this kind of arguement. i really dont want to argue and never intended that this be some huge dramatical presence on the website, but it was forced to this so i am responding with exactly how i feel and think...if to you this makes me look dumb, unknowledgeable, or childish in any way, i assure you the latter on all...
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 4, 2017 2:09:16 am
And now for something completely different ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
Posted: February 4, 2017 11:45:59 am
The Bobarian said:
dough boy said:
My problem is that it is all or nothing...There is no way for the site to know which characters you really want to "feature".


If it's all or nothing, then it seems we are probably better off with just using bulleted items to high-light key appearances and other notable information for now. We just have to come to an agreement on what those items should be.

Point made. I guess indexing and citing are fine.

I think part of the problem on the characters is that we are not forcing integrity. e.g. you could add one to the description but not the actual character list.

I could only show characters that have a certain designation (e.g. 1st), but that might not be the reason the book is worth so much. It could be the first time a contributor was on a book, or a character died, etc.

Do we need to add in the ability to set when a book is "key"? Who can make that determination, etc?
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: February 4, 2017 11:53:31 am
For most known characters that wont be an issue...but id think characters thatve made real life appearances should be listed as key because those are the characters people are coming to know. Characters listed in overstreet should also be prob added as in golden age n prior. Book pricing and popularity are also factors
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 4, 2017 3:21:22 pm
Not really saying that a 1st app of a character is the reason the book is valuable, just saying a 1st app of any given character may be of interest to collectors so having them appear on the about page may be a benefit to collectors and a way for us to list a smaller amount of characters on the about page...
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 5, 2017 2:54:13 am
Lots to read through and digest here. My two cents: First, my gratitude to AmZombie, Canuck, Doughboy and all of the moderators for the great job you do on this site. It is easy to take you for granted and simply enjoy this place, but it would be nothing without all your hard work and dedication and it is appreciated. Second, imo, the about page should be just that - what is the story about. Fine to use outside sources if they are given credit. About section should not include a list of all or most of the characters in the book. Only first appearances or significant events - ie first time Peter Parker proposes to MJ. The characters section should be simplified a little (get rid of appearance. If a character is listed as being in the book they made an appearance. We will assume they are basically in the story unless they are tagged as making a cameo). For me the biggest challenge you face in making these decisions is about first appearance. I am confident in saying that not only is their not consensus on this site there is not consensus anywhere on this topic. Going back to Wolverine, some people would say Hulk 180, some 181, and if Marvel Age was being printed at that time and he had appeared as a tease there some people would say that was his first appearance. I won't pretend to have the answer but in order to maintain consistency on this site at least we will need to make a determination about this.
Tenzil
Posted: February 5, 2017 12:53:10 pm
I would also like to thank the mods for doing an endless, thankless and difficult job here at CBR. The casual user here has no idea how many hours of work you all put into this site. Youse guys are my heroes!
Posted: February 5, 2017 3:46:58 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
For most known characters that wont be an issue...but id think characters thatve made real life appearances should be listed as key because those are the characters people are coming to know. Characters listed in overstreet should also be prob added as in golden age n prior. Book pricing and popularity are also factors


Just to be sure, you are referring to comic book characters that are or have had appeared on live-action TV shows and in the movies but not cartoons or video games, correct?
Posted: February 5, 2017 3:48:09 pm
Canuck said:
Not really saying that a 1st app of a character is the reason the book is valuable, just saying a 1st app of any given character may be of interest to collectors so having them appear on the about page may be a benefit to collectors and a way for us to list a smaller amount of characters on the about page...


Agreed.
Posted: February 5, 2017 3:59:41 pm
Tenzil said:
Lots to read through and digest here. My two cents: First, my gratitude to AmZombie, Canuck, Doughboy and all of the moderators for the great job you do on this site. It is easy to take you for granted and simply enjoy this place, but it would be nothing without all your hard work and dedication and it is appreciated.

Agreed.

Tenzil said:
Second, imo, the about page should be just that - what is the story about. Fine to use outside sources if they are given credit. About section should not include a list of all or most of the characters in the book. Only first appearances or significant events - ie first time Peter Parker proposes to MJ.

Agreed.

Tenzil said:
The characters section should be simplified a little (get rid of appearance. If a character is listed as being in the book they made an appearance. We will assume they are basically in the story unless they are tagged as making a cameo).

Agreed.

Tenzil said:
For me the biggest challenge you face in making these decisions is about first appearance. I am confident in saying that not only is their not consensus on this site there is not consensus anywhere on this topic. Going back to Wolverine, some people would say Hulk 180, some 181, and if Marvel Age was being printed at that time and he had appeared as a tease there some people would say that was his first appearance. I won't pretend to have the answer but in order to maintain consistency on this site at least we will need to make a determination about this.

This was my response on this, in this thread, four days ago ...

"I disregard whether it's a cameo or full app. when deciding 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. appearances. I go solely by publication date of the book that character is in, so long as it was the creative team's intent that that is the character in question. I let the market place decide which appearance is the more valuable to own and desirable to have. Therefore for me, Incredible Hulk #180 is the 1st app. of Wolverine, and Incredible Hulk #181 is his 2nd app. but the more desirable and valuable one because of Wolverine's cover appearance and his involvement throughout the story inside. I think there's confusion for some when a character's actual 1st app. – i.e. Hulk #180 – has less market value then a later appearance – i.e. Hulk #181 – because how can a 2nd app. be worth more than a 1st one? Just because it is more valuable doesn't mean it's a character's first appearance."
Posted: February 5, 2017 4:18:55 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
in handwriting i write in all uppers too...i dont care enough to be gramatically correct or at least to the extent of the rules you are assuming i know. but saying egos & verbage shouldnt be confusing as opposed to egos and verbage....this is piddly and beneath both of us to make this kind of arguement. i really dont want to argue and never intended that this be some huge dramatical presence on the website, but it was forced to this so i am responding with exactly how i feel and think...if to you this makes me look dumb, unknowledgeable, or childish in any way, i assure you the latter on all...

I have to disagree with this. The way I look at it – beyond being the way I believe information should be presented in this format* – is that with the care and effort that Dough Boy and everyone else put in to create this site, that I should at the very least make a similar effort into indexing it to the best of my capability in the time I have allotted. And for me, that means using proper grammar, spelling, cross-referencing information, and trying to copy edit it all. Why would Dough Boy and all CBR members expect any less effort from me? Like I said, that's the way I look at it.

*For now as things may change later on.

Last edited February 14, 2017 10:57:52 pm
Posted: February 5, 2017 9:41:45 pm
putting my statement back into context...when we are talking here....i dont care to be gramatically correct.. . . . .
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 5, 2017 11:39:31 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
putting my statement back into context...when we are talking here....i dont care to be gramatically correct.. . . . .

The context in which we are talking about here is an indexing standard for all CBR members.

Last edited February 6, 2017 12:07:04 am
Posted: February 6, 2017 12:35:04 am
ok gonna post this as clear as possible so your twisting of my words becomes unraveled once again.........

The Bobarian said:
AmZoMBiE said:
...MAYBE 10% of the CBR community actually indexes, of that 10% only 2 people Myself and Bobarian really care about the aesthetics and verbage (as far as we know to date lol).
Hopefully we're not the only two or we'll be going at this for years. d'oh!
AmZoMBiE said:
... I feel the tighter the better, easier to skim, faster to adjust pricing. we are very close to a compromise becuase there are no personal hard feelings involved. just a matter of egos & verbage...
An ampersand?! How could you use an ampersand like that? Brick wallGood news is that I can agree that using numerical abbreviations – 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. – is no different from using first, second, and third for character appearances.However, I would still prefer to spell out most of the remaining special note character designations – i.e., origin, death, identity revealed, etc. – as their abbreviations – O:, D:, and IR: – I believe are not as easy to interpret to all members as numerical abbreviations.So instead of writing ...• Second appearance, origin, and death of The Bobarian.I'd be fine with ...• 2nd app., origin, and death of The Bobarian.But not with ...• 2&O&D of The Bobarian.


This is what was said.... . . . . . .. .. . . ..

AmZoMBiE said:
in handwriting i write in all uppers too...i dont care enough to be gramatically correct or at least to the extent of the rules you are assuming i know. but saying egos & verbage shouldnt be confusing as opposed to egos and verbage....this is piddly and beneath both of us to make this kind of arguement. i really dont want to argue and never intended that this be some huge dramatical presence on the website, but it was forced to this so i am responding with exactly how i feel and think...if to you this makes me look dumb, unknowledgeable, or childish in any way, i assure you the latter on all...


This was the response... .. .. . .. .. .


SO.... . . .. . . .. . .. .. . .

AmZoMBiE said:
putting my statement back into context...when we are talking here....i dont care to be gramatically correct.. . . . .


This Stands True Once again...... .. .. .. . . .

Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 6, 2017 2:12:19 am
Let us accept for a moment that there is no one answer that will satisfy every comic book reader/fan/collector regarding first, second and subsequent appearances. There are many ways to look at it but I have to say I completely agree with the Bobarian. If collector's feel that Hulk 181 is worth much more than 180 and is more desirable and more collectible, that is their right. A book is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it, after all. The first appearance is the first appearance, even if a one panel cameo. The appearance of certain characters in publications like Marvel Age still trouble me as you will have to decide if an appearance of a comic book character in a publication that is not a true comic book counts as a first appearance. You may also have to do a little bit of work with characters like Scott Lang who first shows up in Avengers 181 (there's that number again!) but does not don the mantle of Ant Man until Marvel Premiere 47, so really has two first appearances. First of Scott Lang and first of Scott Lang as Ant Man. Over to you!
Tenzil
Posted: February 6, 2017 12:47:40 pm
I try to do my fair share of "Editing" I suppose, but only as a modifier. I'm a fan of less common books that artists/writers work on and as such when I come across something of that nature, I make an edit. I also try and update incorrect publication dates or cover prices.

Periodically I'll be working on something and come across a book I feel could benefit from a piece of information that may benefit others, so I'll make a note. For example, I found a Betty & Veronica Spectacular #14. Cheryl Blossom appears in it and thought that was worth a noting. I don't tend towards the "About" or synopsis stuff, I want the key information and quick access.
Posted: February 9, 2017 1:48:53 am
Since we're on the subject of first appearances (among other things), I have a question. . .

If I'm indexing the full run of a series, like, say. . .Dynamite's 2006 26- issue run of Lone Ranger (which is pretty much a blank slate, BTW), do I indicate (for example) Tonto's first appearance on the "Characters" tab as a first appearance for THAT series, even though it isn't his first appearance in general?

I guess what I'm asking is how are character appearances, deaths, etc. . . in "reboot" series like the example above done correctly for this site?
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: February 9, 2017 2:15:57 am
first appearance means just that first appearance...in a series that isnt his actual first appearance you log as return of (R: ) or Joins (J: ) but not first app. as for deaths, origins being retold, etc. yes those should be added for important characters. no one will care when g.i. joe no name guy in the background #5 with blue pants just died...but snake eyes obviously would be listed

Ideally in a perfect world there is only 1 first appearance. but there are possiblities of more (ex. 1st venom symbiote theres like 8 first apps (may not be really that many, but seems so lol))

Last edited February 9, 2017 2:24:35 am
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 9, 2017 12:49:41 pm
atom said:
Since we're on the subject of first appearances (among other things), I have a question. . .

If I'm indexing the full run of a series, like, say. . .Dynamite's 2006 26- issue run of Lone Ranger (which is pretty much a blank slate, BTW), do I indicate (for example) Tonto's first appearance on the "Characters" tab as a first appearance for THAT series, even though it isn't his first appearance in general?

I guess what I'm asking is how are character appearances, deaths, etc. . . in "reboot" series like the example above done correctly for this site?

Unless it's a newly-created character taking up the mantle of The Lone Ranger or of Tonto, then no, it is not a first appearance. But if it is a brand new character becoming the Lone Ranger, then a notation appearing in the "About" window could read as follows ...

• First appearance of New Guy as The Lone Ranger.

... and in the "Character" window, you would select 1: and then in the "Name" box write The Lone Ranger and then in the "Real Name" box write in New Guy.

Right now, the earliest appearances I can find of both The Lone Ranger and Tonto are in Large Feature Comics #3 published by Dell in 1939 – http://www.comicbookdb.com/issue.php?ID=85657, https://www.comics.org/issue/206600/, and the current Overstreet Price Guide – However, I can not confirm if these are both of their comic book first appearances but it seems likely.
Posted: February 10, 2017 1:00:51 am
I was just using Lone Ranger as an example of a "reboot" series, but thanks for some good answers before I made the mods grit their teeth and mutter "Why, Atom. . .WHY?!" Very Happy
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: February 10, 2017 2:47:29 am
Further to the subject of first appearances. Hopefully the mods here will agree that the first comic book appearance, even in a one panel cameo, will count as a character's first appearance. Or, at least they can clarify how they would like us to document first, second appearances and so on. But as to things like appearances in Marvel Age or the Previews books, or Dark Horse Insider or whatever, maybe we could add a category called First Appearance Promo, only to be used if a character's first appearance is in that form. For example, Reed Richards made his first appearance in FF #1 as we all know and that would be listed as his first. Years later he appears in a FOOM magazine or Marvel Age or whatever and he would not get a designation there as first app - promo. That designation would only be for characters who are introduced in a fanzine or promo book prior to their first comic book story appearance. How would that work do you think?
Tenzil
Posted: February 12, 2017 4:50:51 pm
Tenzil said:
Further to the subject of first appearances. Hopefully the mods here will agree that the first comic book appearance, even in a one panel cameo, will count as a character's first appearance. Or, at least they can clarify how they would like us to document first, second appearances and so on. But as to things like appearances in Marvel Age or the Previews books, or Dark Horse Insider or whatever, maybe we could add a category called First Appearance Promo, only to be used if a character's first appearance is in that form. For example, Reed Richards made his first appearance in FF #1 as we all know and that would be listed as his first. Years later he appears in a FOOM magazine or Marvel Age or whatever and he would not get a designation there as first app - promo. That designation would only be for characters who are introduced in a fanzine or promo book prior to their first comic book story appearance. How would that work do you think?

OK. Here are the possible types of first appearances that I can think of:


• 1st appearance of ...

• 1st appearance and origin of ...

• 1st appearance and death of ...

• 1st appearance, origin and death of ...

• 1st appearance (as a cameo) of ..., see note below.

• 1st appearance (as a cameo) and death of ..., see note below.

• 1st cover appearance of ...

• 1st appearance (on cover only) of ...

• 1st full appearance of ...

• 1st full appearance and origin of ...

• 1st full appearance and death of ...

• 1st full appearance, origin and death of ...

• 1st promotional appearance of ..., see note below.

• 1st mention or reference of ..., see note below.


That's more than a dozen possibilities off the top of my head. How many should be kept, or others added, would be up for discussion. The "see note below" would be used to limit the amount of text in the Key Information group up top, so members wouldn't have to read a possible lengthy amount of explanation text unless they choose to by skipping to the bottom where the Notations and Attributions group would be.
Posted: February 19, 2017 10:51:11 pm
So any movement on this?
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: February 20, 2017 2:12:59 am
I don't know if this is even possible, but I will throw it out there anyway. Is it possible to have more than one tag per character for a given book? Pretend a new character called the Unstable Mass is introduced in JLA and joins the team in the same issue. Could UM be given a "First appearance" tag and a "Joins" tag both as opposed to the massive laundry list that Bobarian came up with off the top of his head? Not saying this would work better or not but since we are tossing around ideas I was just wondering . . . . . . .
Tenzil
Posted: February 20, 2017 2:49:29 am
I was wondering the same thing. . .maybe a "CTRL/Click" sort of thing where more than one thing can be chosen.
I just hit this question in Warrior Nun Areala #3 with the first appearance of The Crimson Nun, but it's a cameo. She's just in one panel and doesn't say anything, so (to me) it's a first appearance AND a cameo. I went with first appearance because the info on Crimson Nun I could find said that's what it was. . .
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: February 20, 2017 7:52:56 pm
I think "first appearance cameo" should be dumped. Take a look at Incredible Hulk #180 (noted as a cameo first appearance) and Invincible Ironman #7 (noted as first appearance of Riri Williams). Both occur on the last page except Wolverine is much larger, clearer and named. Riri is shown sitting in the dark with her back to the audience. One is a cameo and one isn't? Really?
Posted: February 20, 2017 8:00:04 pm
I think if we can add multiple tags to characters like we can do with creators would be the way to go...
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 20, 2017 8:21:44 pm
Canuck said:
I think if we can add multiple tags to characters like we can do with creators would be the way to go...

Me too.
Posted: February 20, 2017 9:48:56 pm
Ask and ye shall receive...

https://comicbookrealm.com/series/113/1399/marvel-comics-the-amazing-spider-man-vol-1-issue-1

Check out Spider-Man.

So next steps on this are to redo the designations, map old to new and then to add new ones.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: February 20, 2017 10:01:37 pm
dough boy said:
Ask and ye shall receive...

https://comicbookrealm.com/series/113/1399/marvel-comics-the-amazing-spider-man-vol-1-issue-1

Check out Spider-Man.

Dancing

dough boy said:
So next steps on this are to redo the designations, map old to new and then to add new ones.

I'm not sure what "map old to new and then add new ones" means.
Posted: February 21, 2017 7:22:36 am
I think it is pretty simple. Right now we have 1&O. Well, we would remove one of those and have two, 1 and O.

We could choose to lose Appearance, add in new ones like 1 Team, etc.

In the case of the 1&O since it is one option now, I would need to programatically alter it in the database to either rename the 1&O to be just 1, or create two new items.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: February 21, 2017 8:25:40 am
I would just drop appearance, as if the character is listed we already know he's made an appearance.
The more options the better IMO, but this is a good start.
Could add a "New Costume" tag and probably a "Return to Original Costume"


Last edited February 21, 2017 8:34:55 am
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: February 21, 2017 4:57:37 pm
Just wondering if there should be an appearance designation when a character has only one known appearance in their existence? It could be worded like this ...

• 1st and only appearance of ...

... or like this ...

• 1st and only known appearance of ...

... or just ..

• Only appearance of ...

... or ...

• Only known appearance of ...

Last edited February 21, 2017 6:16:53 pm
Posted: February 22, 2017 2:41:24 am
I almost hate to bring this up as I am pleased that the mods are really trying to make this all work better, but I had another thought. For many characters the designation second and third appearance are really easy but what are we going to do when the first appearance is just a cameo or one panel or whatever? Hulk 180 is Wolverine's first appearance, cameo. Number 181 is his first full appearance. Is 181 also his second appearance or is Hulk 182 his second appearance? Or do we just skip over second and make 182 his third appearance?*

* At least I think I remember Logan appearing in 182. If he's not in that book just substitute Giant Size X-Men #1.
Tenzil
Posted: February 22, 2017 12:06:40 pm
personally i think the whole idea of cameo n appearance dont really make sense..if a character is in the book he already made an appearance and should just list the character as normal...the whole cameo/1st app debate realistically should be 1st actual in book appearance is the actual 1st appearance. cases like wolverine or gambit...hulk 180 and uncanny annual 14 should be listed as 1st app...181 and 266 1st storyline...again just my opinion

also the whole only appearance thing...if the character has only made 1 single appearance in comics for the last 150 years...he/shes not important and should not be listed separately anyway...theres nothing significant about them or their character wouldve been more developed through other stories

back to the original quest for a minute tho...we need to get this handled. i am running out of notecards to write info on that needs to be added to many different runs of books.

Side Note: was wondering about a story run note section...a place to signify things like this series was only avaiable thru mail order or Post cereal...yes you can include this info via each book, but a blanket notes section seems simpler.

Last edited February 22, 2017 12:11:48 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: February 22, 2017 2:23:31 pm
Tenzil said:
I almost hate to bring this up as I am pleased that the mods are really trying to make this all work better, but I had another thought. For many characters the designation second and third appearance are really easy but what are we going to do when the first appearance is just a cameo or one panel or whatever? Hulk 180 is Wolverine's first appearance, cameo. Number 181 is his first full appearance. Is 181 also his second appearance or is Hulk 182 his second appearance? Or do we just skip over second and make 182 his third appearance?*

* At least I think I remember Logan appearing in 182. If he's not in that book just substitute Giant Size X-Men #1.


I posted this here on Feb. 2 –

"I disregard whether it's a cameo or full app. when deciding 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. appearances. I go solely by publication date of the book that character is in, so long as it was the creative team's intent that that is the character in question. I let the market place decide which appearance is the more valuable to own and desirable to have. Therefore for me, Incredible Hulk #180 is the 1st app. of Wolverine, and Incredible Hulk #181 is his 2nd app. but the more desirable and valuable one because of Wolverine's cover appearance and his involvement throughout the story inside. I think there's confusion for some when a character's actual 1st app. – i.e. Hulk #180 – has less market value then a later appearance – i.e. Hulk #181 – because how can a 2nd app. be worth more than a 1st one? Just because it is more valuable doesn't mean it's a character's first appearance."

– Therefore, Hulk #180 is Wolverine 1st app., Hulk #181 is his 2nd app., Hulk #182 is his 3rd app. And if you carry this forward, Giant-Size X-Men #1 is Wolverine's 4th app., and X-Men #94 is his 5th app.
Posted: February 23, 2017 2:29:09 am
Again, not wanting to complicate things, but hopefully bring us closer to clarity and consensus: I like what The Bobarian says regarding publication dates (that he posted three weeks ago). What bothered me slightly about it then was the whole cameo first appearance thing. But, and you knew there had to be a but, if we adopt the "more than one category" rule per character, then Hulk 180 could read "Wolverine - 1st appearance, Cameo". In Hulk 181 it could read something like, "Wolverine - 2nd appearance. 1st full appearance." Or maybe just "Wolverine - 2nd appearance, and in the notes section it would be noted this is his first full appearance and could note where his first cameo was.
To me if it worked something like this it would make a lot of sense. The only fly in the ointment that I can see is the old "First appearance - Promo" thing, where the first time we see a character is in Marvel Age or some other type of publication. In that case I believe we go with the first appearance promo designation there and then the first time they actually appear in a comic story we call it "first appearance" and in the notes section point out that the character had already appeared in a promotional ad, and where it is. How does that sound?
Tenzil
Posted: February 23, 2017 2:03:56 pm
Tenzil said:
Again, not wanting to complicate things, but hopefully bring us closer to clarity and consensus: I like what The Bobarian says regarding publication dates (that he posted three weeks ago). What bothered me slightly about it then was the whole cameo first appearance thing. But, and you knew there had to be a but, if we adopt the "more than one category" rule per character, then Hulk 180 could read "Wolverine - 1st appearance, Cameo". In Hulk 181 it could read something like, "Wolverine - 2nd appearance. 1st full appearance." Or maybe just "Wolverine - 2nd appearance, and in the notes section it would be noted this is his first full appearance and could note where his first cameo was.
To me if it worked something like this it would make a lot of sense. The only fly in the ointment that I can see is the old "First appearance - Promo" thing, where the first time we see a character is in Marvel Age or some other type of publication. In that case I believe we go with the first appearance promo designation there and then the first time they actually appear in a comic story we call it "first appearance" and in the notes section point out that the character had already appeared in a promotional ad, and where it is. How does that sound?

I think that's a good idea. If it gets agreed upon, then just the actual wording needs to be worked on. That could be something like the following options ...

• Promotional appearance of ... that pre-dates canonical first appearance in Xxxxxx #000 (Month, Year).

• Promotional appearance of ..., see note below.

• Non-canonical first appearance of ..., see note below.

• Earliest known non-canonical appearance of ..., see note below.

... or whatever other wording that better defines this for all CBR members. Mine are just options to get the ball rolling for the moment.
Posted: February 23, 2017 2:36:36 pm
Another character special notes designations that I would like to put up for discussion is to expand the choices for a character's origin. Right now there are two choices available (not including 1 & O: option) – and those are O: for Origin of..., and OR: for Origin retold of ... Here are two additional origin options I would like for all to consider: First, ON: for New origin of ..., and second, OU: for Updated origin of ...

• The New origin of ... special notes designation – ON: or O(N): or O(n): – would be used when the book's creative team decides to change the origin of a character to such a degree that it fundamentally becomes an entirely different, and therefore new origin for that character. An example of this would be Alan Moore's reinterpretation of Swamp Thing's origin in "The Anatomy Lesson" story in Swamp Thing #21 (vol. 2, Feb. 1984).

• The Updated origin of ... special notes designation – OU: or O(U): or O(u): – would be used when the book's creative team adds a new significant detail or details to a character's origin that were not previously disclosed to the reader.

What do you you guys think?

Last edited February 23, 2017 4:48:04 pm
Posted: February 28, 2017 5:42:30 pm
Another possible character special note designation could be for the apparent death of a character for when that character does not really die but appears to and is resurrected later on.
Posted: March 2, 2017 1:26:59 am
The Bobarian said:
Another possible character special note designation could be for the apparent death of a character for when that character does not really die but appears to and is resurrected later on.


In other words. . .just about every major character death? Laughing
I suggest the new notation: "Dead for real this time. No, Really."

Last edited March 2, 2017 1:28:35 am
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 2, 2017 8:39:15 am
So where have we netted out on this? Do we want to add the characters section to the description tab? It seems like the only reason that they were being added to begin with was for an explanation of why the comic is worth what it is. Maybe we should remove that and any other reason and instead put a new section (after the description) that says something like:

Value Reason:
First appearance of Spider-Man
First Marvel work for blah

Also, where did we net out on the character designations. Are we keeping them as is, do I need to add some, split some, etc?
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 2, 2017 2:05:37 pm
The mods might have to look at who can designate first appearances, or even appearances. Due to TV casting news I was looking at Blink's first appearance. It's listed here and elsewhere as Uncanny X-Men #317 but we also have her listed as appearing in X-Men #36, which came out a month earlier. Also, X-Men Alpha #1 is also listed here as her first appearance.
This adds a lot of confusion to the character.
Posted: March 2, 2017 2:44:40 pm
can we get back to the actual issue at hand as opposed to 50000000 posts on what character designations should be...i would like to start logging again

the character designations may evolve but id like to be able to enter these 500 note cards worth of info before i need to return to work lol

Last edited March 2, 2017 2:47:18 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 3, 2017 2:00:04 am
AmZoMBiE said:
can we get back to the actual issue at hand as opposed to 50000000 posts on what character designations should be...i would like to start logging again

the character designations may evolve but id like to be able to enter these 500 note cards worth of info before i need to return to work lol


Yeah. I'm running across errors I can't fix. EXAMPLE: Suicide Squad #11 says "Regular Philip Tan Cover" in the index box, but the cover was actually done by John Romita Jr.
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 4, 2017 1:19:47 pm
Any thoughts about creating a special note character designation for when a character appears only as an illusion, as a hallucination, or in a dream? Sometimes when this happens it's as a flashback so that's easy to designate, but when it's a straight up illusion or a dream that foreshadows future events, there currently is no specific designation for that.
Posted: March 6, 2017 4:41:23 pm
dough boy said:
So where have we netted out on this? Do we want to add the characters section to the description tab? It seems like the only reason that they were being added to begin with was for an explanation of why the comic is worth what it is. Maybe we should remove that and any other reason and instead put a new section (after the description) that says something like:

Value Reason:
First appearance of Spider-Man
First Marvel work for blah

I think keeping the About window as is would be the best option. Separating the potential information that could be kept in one location makes it convenient for members to read and provide content for CBR. And it makes it easier to edit when errors or inconsistencies arise.

dough boy said:
Also, where did we net out on the character designations. Are we keeping them as is, do I need to add some, split some, etc?

I like the idea of splitting all the character designations that are currently combined – like 1&O – if you make the option available to select multiple special note designations for individual characters.

Also, after going through the posts on this thread, it seems the removal of the appearance designation has merit.
Posted: March 7, 2017 2:32:43 am
I'm here to second the esteemed Bobarian's suggestions (and possibly to throw more wood on the fire). To wit:
1. Remove the designation "appearance" in the characters section. If someone is mentioned they obviously appeared.
2. Give multiple options for each character and keep each option separate. So after I list the Incredulous Dough Boy in "Zombie Apocalypse Redux" #181 I can list this as First appearance, origin and, sadly, death (each separately)as opposed to a single designation of first app, origin, death.
3. Totally agree the About window is where practically any information, aside from characters and creators should be kept. People who care should be able to find out the pertinent info without scrolling around through all the pages, and those who want to dig deeper into character or creator would then have the ability to do so.
4. I know it's a lot of work and I appreciate the fact you are even listening to us, but I really believe it is best to have as complete and comprehensive a list of categories for the characters, as per many of the suggestions in this forum. Maybe even a definitions dictionary, if that makes any sense, so new users would know what is meant by dream sequence appearance or all the first appearance designations we have discussed. Make your choices, make them clear for those using them and we will all live with the results. Until we start complaining again. Cheers!
Tenzil
Posted: March 7, 2017 2:11:56 pm
Tenzil said:
I'm here to second the esteemed Bobarian's suggestions (and possibly to throw more wood on the fire).

Esteemed? Laughing Thanks, Tenzil!

Tenzil said:
To wit:
1. Remove the designation "appearance" in the characters section. If someone is mentioned they obviously appeared.

Agreed.

Tenzil said:
2. Give multiple options for each character and keep each option separate. So after I list the Incredulous Dough Boy in "Zombie Apocalypse Redux" #181 I can list this as First appearance, origin and, sadly, death (each separately)as opposed to a single designation of first app, origin, death.

Agreed. And hopefully Dough Boy gets resurrected in a future storyline.

Tenzil said:
3. Totally agree the About window is where practically any information, aside from characters and creators should be kept. People who care should be able to find out the pertinent info without scrolling around through all the pages, and those who want to dig deeper into character or creator would then have the ability to do so.

Agreed.

Tenzil said:
4. I know it's a lot of work and I appreciate the fact you are even listening to us, but I really believe it is best to have as complete and comprehensive a list of categories for the characters, as per many of the suggestions in this forum. Maybe even a definitions dictionary, if that makes any sense, so new users would know what is meant by dream sequence appearance or all the first appearance designations we have discussed. Make your choices, make them clear for those using them and we will all live with the results. Until we start complaining again. Cheers!

Not a bad idea. At least every member would have a common reference point of what the meanings of all these designations being used here at CBR mean.
Posted: March 7, 2017 3:05:58 pm
With 1,500+ views on this topic, I was hoping there would be more CBR members who would respond with their insights, wants, preferences, etc. on an indexing standard. So far all the posts up to this one have been done by only nine members. So if you're a member who is viewing this and have yet to comment, please take some time and leave any input you feel you would like to make. Thanks.
Posted: March 7, 2017 3:32:42 pm
I think I mentioned to DB before we even put this out that there would only be a handful of users that even care.
I think DB will have to filter through this thread and try to make something that works. As I'm not a tech guy I know it's easy to say do this or that when in reality the tech is is going are you f@king nuts!! Do you know the amount of time and work it would take to do that?...so I'm fine with whatever as I'm not OCD like a few guys Laughing
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 7, 2017 4:11:31 pm
Canuck said:
I think I mentioned to DB before we even put this out that there would only be a handful of users that even care.
I think DB will have to filter through this thread and try to make something that works. As I'm not a tech guy I know it's easy to say do this or that when in reality the tech is is going are you f@king nuts!! Do you know the amount of time and work it would take to do that?...so I'm fine with whatever as I'm not OCD like a few guys Laughing

I figure that we are probably getting closer to the end of this topic and decisions will have to be made soon. So if there's anyone out there who would like to contribute their proverbial two cents on an indexing standard, better to do it now before things get finalized. I've worked on projects in the past where there's someone who has an 11th hour request and you wish they made it earlier because it could be brilliant or lead others to having ideas based off of it that are brilliant and should be implemented. No need for Dough Boy to make changes in bits and pieces when he doesn't have to.
Posted: March 8, 2017 2:43:31 am
The Bobarian said, regarding the sad and untimely death of the Incredulous Dough Boy, "Agreed. And hopefully Dough Boy gets resurrected in a future storyline."
Obviously. This is comics we're talking about, right? Very HappyVery HappyWink

Last edited March 8, 2017 2:44:12 am
Tenzil
Posted: March 8, 2017 6:19:34 am
The Bobarian said:

I figure that we are probably getting closer to the end of this topic and decisions will have to be made soon. So if there's anyone out there who would like to contribute their proverbial two cents on an indexing standard, better to do it now before things get finalized.


I'm thinking that to keep the index box more in line with how the mods want it, changes to the index box should probably be moderator-approved in the same way that cover submissions are. That might be a dime's worth of work for two cents worth of opinion, but it would possibly be the best and most simple solution of them all.
After all. . .it seems to work fine for the covers.

Last edited March 8, 2017 6:22:31 am
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 8, 2017 2:49:37 pm
atom said:
[I'm thinking that to keep the index box more in line with how the mods want it, changes to the index box should probably be moderator-approved in the same way that cover submissions are. That might be a dime's worth of work for two cents worth of opinion, but it would possibly be the best and most simple solution of them all.
After all. . .it seems to work fine for the covers.

That's a lot more work for the mods who have stated that they already have a lot on their plates. It takes time to copy edit somebody else's text and check their work to see if it's been cross-referenced properly. I know for me, it's a lot easier to index an unindexed comic than one that has already been indexed where I've spotted errors and inconsistencies. You have to double-check everything when that happens – the date, page count, contributors, characters and their designations. It wouldn't surprise me if it took at least twice as long to do that than indexing a blank issue.
Posted: March 9, 2017 1:05:26 am
Like I said, 10 cents worth of work for 2 cents worth of opinion.

But if the mods want it EXACTLY the way they want it, then some sort of approval method would be the way to go, even if it's just a message to go back and do it right, like with a bad cover submission.
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 9, 2017 2:14:27 am
It's really up to the mods to decide if they want to edit all the work before it goes live but I have to agree with The Bobarian that it is much easier to index an issue that has not been done than to correct the errors and omissions that others have left in their wake.
Tenzil
Posted: March 10, 2017 9:18:12 am
The point of this thread was to come up with a standard. Then everyone can follow it, and if some don't others can correct to the standard.

I have already setup the ability to have multiple designations for the characters. I need someone to take the list and modify it. For instance:

1&O (Split into First, Origin)
Appearance (Remove)
Power Loss (Add)

In addition what will and will not be in the description. I would suggest:

Description:

blah, blah, blah

cover description

Special Note:

Character, Contributor, Short Print, etc (this would not be all characters, etc)

Can someone make a proposal and the rest of us can approve it so we can move forward?
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 10, 2017 9:44:47 am
Well the 2 guys(Bobarian & AMZombie) are the 2 that seem to have the biggest issue with this so they should be the ones to come up with something simple, because if it's to confusing most users (myself included) won't bother with it.

DB, when we are adding new releases will it auto format or are we going to have to manually format the new info?
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 10, 2017 9:56:44 am
There is no "auto formatting". We are just agreeing on how we think it should be displayed/formatted.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 10, 2017 11:26:04 am
The Bobarian said:


This is the basic template I copy into the "About" window as I start indexing ...


• Xxxxxxxxxx

––––––––––

• "Xxx" – (00-page story, no synopsis written).

––––––––––

SOURCE: Xxxxxxxxxx



... I add and remove items as necessary, If a book has three stories, I copy and paste • "Xxx" – (00-page story, no synopsis written). two additional times and type in the appropiate information. I start small and let the contents of that issue determine how much needs to be added.


I still think this basic template works. And I think it will work for everyone else if they give it a chance.
Posted: March 13, 2017 1:32:29 am
AmZoMBiE said:
first appearance means just that first appearance...in a series that isnt his actual first appearance you log as return of (R: ) or Joins (J: ) but not first app. as for deaths, origins being retold, etc. yes those should be added for important characters. no one will care when g.i. joe no name guy in the background #5 with blue pants just died...but snake eyes obviously would be listed

Ideally in a perfect world there is only 1 first appearance. but there are possiblities of more (ex. 1st venom symbiote theres like 8 first apps (may not be really that many, but seems so lol))


Well. . .not to open THIS can again. . .

You answered the question for me perfectly, BUT, now comes along DC's new "The Wildstorm" series.
The characters in the new series have the same names as their 90's counterparts, but they are not the same characters.

FER EXAMPLE: Miles Craven is no longer a sketchy old guy who is part alien. Now he's a stylish 30-something who is openly gay and married to a black guy. Same thing with Michael Cray (Deathblow in the old continuity). He was a white former black ops guy who killed himself saving the world, then was resurrected as a female clone. In "The Wildstorm" he's a black hitman who seems (?) to have alien DNA.

And so on and so forth. . .Voodoo is different. Zealot is different.
It seems the only thing carried over were the names. And in the back, there's some creator notes that let us know that except for overall themes, there's no connection with former continuity.

The question here is, are these first appearances?



Last edited March 13, 2017 1:36:59 am
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 13, 2017 1:27:37 pm
They should be classified as 1st appearances, but we will have to make up another Deathblow with the new secret identity to make it different..same would go for all characters.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 13, 2017 1:38:16 pm
atom said:
AmZoMBiE said:
first appearance means just that first appearance...in a series that isnt his actual first appearance you log as return of (R: ) or Joins (J: ) but not first app. as for deaths, origins being retold, etc. yes those should be added for important characters. no one will care when g.i. joe no name guy in the background #5 with blue pants just died...but snake eyes obviously would be listed

Ideally in a perfect world there is only 1 first appearance. but there are possiblities of more (ex. 1st venom symbiote theres like 8 first apps (may not be really that many, but seems so lol))


Well. . .not to open THIS can again. . .

You answered the question for me perfectly, BUT, now comes along DC's new "The Wildstorm" series.
The characters in the new series have the same names as their 90's counterparts, but they are not the same characters.

FER EXAMPLE: Miles Craven is no longer a sketchy old guy who is part alien. Now he's a stylish 30-something who is openly gay and married to a black guy. Same thing with Michael Cray (Deathblow in the old continuity). He was a white former black ops guy who killed himself saving the world, then was resurrected as a female clone. In "The Wildstorm" he's a black hitman who seems (?) to have alien DNA.

And so on and so forth. . .Voodoo is different. Zealot is different.
It seems the only thing carried over were the names. And in the back, there's some creator notes that let us know that except for overall themes, there's no connection with former continuity.

The question here is, are these first appearances?



Most likely they are first appearances if they're the second generation of the same hero like there's Robin I (Dick Grayson) and Robin II (Jason Todd) and so on.

Last edited March 13, 2017 3:24:39 pm
Posted: March 13, 2017 2:35:25 pm
They should be noted as first appearances and in brackets "Wildstorm Universe".
ie: The Wildstorm #1 - 1: Michael Cray (Deathblow) (Wildstorm Universe)

Last edited March 13, 2017 2:37:27 pm
Posted: March 13, 2017 5:00:45 pm
heres some food for thought...any chance at making a change to the character lists...possibly a company designation...to make it easier for people to choose the proper character?
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 14, 2017 1:05:46 am
Applause
Thanks for the great answers.
I was wondering what the heck to do with this complete. . .re-envisioning, I guess it would be.
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 14, 2017 2:48:48 am
@AmZoMBIE: I like the idea of a company designation or to organize the characters by company. Of course we know that there are many characters who have switched companies along the way so I don't know how easy that will be. Regarding first appearance, atom, for characters who have been reimagined, or revisioned or whatever, I would suggest that they only get one first appearance as discussed previously and when Magnus Robot Fighter, for example, joins the Valiant universe in 1991 his first appearance there is noted in the about section as his first appearance in this company/timeline/whatever, but that in the character section it is not designated as his first appearance. My two cents.
Tenzil
Posted: March 14, 2017 12:46:37 pm
well thats an easy fix lol... have a character designation for each company...simple fix

example

Darth Vader (Anakin Skywalker) (Marvel)
Darth Vader (Anakin Skywalker) (Dark Horse)

etc.

yes some characters will have no difference, but some will (example: Youngblood). by differences i mean outfit, possible character real name, stuff like that

i think the layout in my head would be in the choose from list the company designation would be there, but when it displays in the cell it wouldnt need the designation...so really just a change to the pick list

Last edited March 14, 2017 12:48:26 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 14, 2017 2:39:22 pm
Back to the real task..Zombie and Bobarian need to come up with a template that DB can set up and get this issue resolved ASAP. LaughingConfused
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 14, 2017 5:33:06 pm
ok heres my suggestion

BLOCK 1

1. Importance: (These can be hashed out in more detail obviously)
- 1st appearance
- 1st appearance as
- Origin
- Death
- 2nd appearance
- 1st cover appearance
- 1st artist work
- 3rd appearance

2. Homage
Example:
- Homage cover of Superman #1

3. Scarcity
- 1-10: Ultra Rare
- 11-100: Super Rare
- 101-1000: Rare/Scarce
- 1001-10,000: Low Print Run/Distribution
- 10,001-100,000: Common
- 100,001+: Very Common
- Limited to XX copies

4. Enhanced Cover
- Holofoil
- Embossed
- Lenticular
- Gold
etc.

5. Additional Important Info
Examples:
NOTE: Used in SOTI, pg. 34-38

NOTE: Mentioned in POP, pg. 44

NOTE: This book was created in less than 12 hours.

NOTE: Northstar reveals that he is homosexual in this issue.

--------------------------------------------------------

BLOCK 2

5. Comic Block Run
Examples:
- Maximum Carnage, pt. 1
- Reign of the Supermen, pt. 3
- Inferno, pt. 6

6. Story Title #1 and Synopsis
Example:
"To Live or to Die..."
ak;djbfajbfasdjnfasdjnfasdn;kasdn;asnd.............

7. Story Title #2 and Synopsis
Example:
Fail to Yield, pt. 2
"Hail to the King"
fa[onf[aong[oandgonadsoga........


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLOCK 3

8. Additional Information (unimportant to value)


9. Credits

This would be for an A cover...1st printing

for Variants i would keep it to the name of the variant, characters and story info isnt necessary only type of variant


Last edited March 14, 2017 5:41:22 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 14, 2017 8:27:51 pm
I guess I cannot understand why we need all of this information when it is already provided (e.g. the scarcity, etc) in fielded data...
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 14, 2017 9:35:46 pm
Shocked
I was thinking the same thing...that's a lot of info.
I thought we wanted to simplify the about boxConfused

Last edited March 14, 2017 9:36:31 pm
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 14, 2017 9:48:54 pm
Canuck said:
Shocked
I was thinking the same thing...that's a lot of info.
I thought we wanted to simplify the about boxConfused
That is what I would like to see happen. We provide the description/synopsis of the comic and possibly the reason why it has a different value. Everything else would be in its place.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 14, 2017 11:09:57 pm
thats fine i was just trying to be thorough...i only wanted the characters there for pricing purposes in the first place lol....then it got rediculous...so im just gonna wait for the results lol...
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 15, 2017 5:44:27 am
dough boy said:
Canuck said:
Shocked
I was thinking the same thing...that's a lot of info.
I thought we wanted to simplify the about boxConfused
That is what I would like to see happen. We provide the description/synopsis of the comic and possibly the reason why it has a different value. Everything else would be in its place.


I would like to keep it simple as well. Over complicating things leaves more room for error. It'll be nice to have the ability to edit the description box soon.
Posted: March 15, 2017 8:15:00 am
I propose:

-----

"Story Title", part X

Description

(repeat above as necessary)

Cover Details (optional, if variant, etc)

Pricing Note: (optional)

Could be first of spider-man, death, first work on a comic, rare, part of SOTI, etc.

-----

It is pretty evident that there are only a few who really care about this and because the data largely exists close by there is no reason to duplicate it or cause more work.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 15, 2017 8:17:57 am
my 2 cents.
1. If trade then the title needs to be listed first.
1a. If a comic then artist/name of variant(s), hologram, foil, etc...
2. Story synopsis
3. Characters of importance.

We have an event box so we can still use that.
Some of the other things Zombie and Bobarian mentioned can be added after the synopsis.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"
Posted: March 15, 2017 8:35:43 am
Canuck said:
my 2 cents.
1. If trade then the title needs to be listed first.
1a. If a comic then artist/name of variant(s), hologram, foil, etc...
2. Story synopsis
3. Characters of importance.

We have an event box so we can still use that.
Some of the other things Zombie and Bobarian mentioned can be added after the synopsis.


I am good with this though I prefer the variant info after the story synopsis but am open to either way.
Posted: March 15, 2017 5:07:26 pm
For Action Comics #1, June 1938, here's what the About window contents looked like before I re-indexed it –



1st appearance of Superman (Clark Kent / Kal El)
1st appearance of Lois Lane
1st appearance of Zatara (Giovanni "John" Zatara)


As a distant planet is destroyed by old age, a scientist places his infant son in a space capsule and launches it toward Earth. The capsule is found by a passing motorist, who brings the baby to an orphanage, where the child astounds the attendants with his superhuman powers. The child, who is named Clark Kent, can jump over buildings, lift enormous weights, and run faster than a freight train. Furthermore, his skin is impenetrable. Realizing that he has powers far beyond normal humans, Clark dedicates himself to serve humanity as Superman, the champion of the oppressed.

Superman learns that an innocent woman named Evelyn Curry is to be executed for murder. He captures the real murderess, and delivers her, bound and gagged, to the governor's mansion. He breaks through the door to confront the governor, and convinces him to call off the execution at the last minute.

At the Daily Star, where Clark works as a reporter, he's given the assignment to cover the stories about a man with amazing strength named Superman. He hears a tip about a wife-beating, and rushes off to cover it -- then changes into Superman, and stops the man before he kills his wife.

Returning to the Daily Star, Superman asks fellow reporter Lois Lane out on a date; she accepts out of pity. A thug named Butch tries to cut in while Clark and Lois are dancing. To protect his secret identity, Clark pretends to be a cowardly weakling. Convinced that Clark is a spineless worm, Lois slaps Butch and walks out. Enraged, Butch and his friends leave the club and take Lois prisoner. Superman spots them and gives chase, smashing the car with his bare hands. He picks Lois up into his arms and carries her to safety. She's astonished, and the next morning, she tells her editor about her experience with Superman -- although she's even more cold to Clark than before.

Clark is given an assignment to go to San Monte, a war-torn South American republic. First, he goes to Washington, D.C., where he spies a slick lobbyist, Alex Greer, trying to convince Senator Barrows to involve the US in a war with Europe. Superman grabs Greer, and demands to know who he's working for. Greer refuses to talk, so Superman jumps up to the top of the Capitol building, and threatens to smash Greer to the ground. To be continued...

http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Action_Comics_Vol_1_1



And here's what it looks like now –



• First appearance of Superman (Clark Kent / Kal-El).

• First appearance of Lois Lane.

• First appearance of Zatara (Giovanni 'John' Zatara).

• First appearance of Tex Thompson (Earth-2).

• Joe Shuster cover art.

––––––––––

• "As a distant planet was destroyed by old age..." – (1-page introduction story) – A space vehicle from a destroyed world lands on Earth, and its occupant becomes Superman. In addition, a scientific explanation for this being's powers is given.

• "The Coming of Superman" – (11 2/3-page story) – Superman delivers a witness to the governor to stop an execution, then stops a wife-beater. Later Superman, as Clark Kent, goes out with Lois, but she earns the wrath of Butch Matson and Superman must save her. Finally, Clark is assigned a story on the South American republic of San Monte. He heads to Washington DC to find out who is behind Senator Barrows pushing legislation which will embroil the United States in a war in Europe by grabbing lobbyist Alex Greer and scaring the truth out of him.

• "The A-G Gang" – (6-page story) – Chuck Dawson begins a vendetta aginst the crooked ranch owners who have, by fraud, acquired the range lands he inherited after his father's death.

• "The Mystery of the Freight Train Robberies" – (12-page story) – Zatara and Tong investigate the murders of several railroad detectives and the theft of over $200,000 in loot.

• "South Sea Strategy, Part 1" – (2-page story) – Bret Coleman and Cottonball seek to rescue one Samuel Newton, whose daughter was carried off into the jungle by a pack of savage natives.

• (Untitled 4-page Sticky-Mitt Stimson story) – Sticky swipes some apples and is pursued by the police. He gets a lucky break to make good his escape.

• "The Adventures of Marco Polo" – (4-page story) – Marco, his father, and his uncle are given an audience with the new Pope, who gives them the mission to seek out the Khan of Tartary, and bring with them priests and men of learning in order to impart that knowledge to his people.

• "The Light Heavyweight Championship" – (4-page story) – When the Boxing Commission runs a dirty fight trainer out of town, he swears his revenge...against Pep Morgan.

• "The International Jewel Thief" – (6-page story) – An international jewel thief arrives in America as a prisoner, but Scoop Scanlon and Rusty James are on hand to witness his escape with the help of his gang lying in wait.

• "Murder in England" – (12-page story) – Tex Thompson is framed for the murder of a man, and, with the help of Betty and Bobby, sets out to prove his innocence.

––––––––––

NOTE: Superman story continues in next issue.

NOTE: Superman story is missing the first four pages which will be included when the story is reused in Superman #1 (Summer 1939).

NOTE: Originally the Superman story was not titled but is known as "Superman, Champion of the Oppressed" as it was reprinted in the Action Comics Archives (vol. 1).

NOTE: Russell Cole is credited as Alger.

NOTE: Tex Thomson later becomes Mr. America in Action Comics #33 (Feb. 1941) and then Americommando in Action Comics #54 (Nov. 1942).

SOURCES: DC Database (dc.wikia.com), Grand Comic Database (comics.org), The Comic Book Database (comicbookdb.com)


For historically significant books, I would like the freedom to index those as I did this one. I believe some of the recent suggestions will prevent as thorough an indexing when called for. I don't want to do every book like this because most books won't need this amount of effort, but some will.

Last edited March 15, 2017 5:10:13 pm
Posted: March 15, 2017 5:46:50 pm
Here are before and after examples of a book with only one story – Strange Tales #169 from Sept. 1973.



Here's the before contents of the About window –


1: Brother Voodoo



And here it is after I indexed it using my template and guidelines –


• First appearance of Brother Voodoo (Jericho Drumm).

• John Romita Sr. cover art.

––––––––––

• "Brother Voodoo!" – (20-page story) – A physician named Doctor Maitland arrives at the airport in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. A man named Willoby comes out to greet him. Suddenly, two Haitian gunmen accost them and hold them at gunpoint. A cloud of smoke rolls in, and from it steps – Brother Voodoo.

––––––––––

NOTE: Also the first appearance and death of Daniel Drumm (Jericho's twin brother who was also Brother Voodoo).

SOURCES: Marvel Database (marvel.wikia.com), Grand Comic Database (comics.org)



Which one do you find more beneficial for all CBR members to read?
Posted: March 15, 2017 7:34:41 pm
Here's an example of the current contents of the About window for Detective Comics #1 (vol. 2, Nov. 2011) regular edition –

Joker, Dollmaker Pt.1
"Batman in Detective Comics"
FACES OF DEATH BEGINS
DC's flagship title is relaunched for the first time ever, with new Batman adventures from acclaimed writer/ artist Tony S. Daniel! A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse. mouse.
1: Dollmaker (Barton Mathis)

Regular Tony Daniel Cover



Here's what I would change it to using my guidelines –


• First appearance of Dollmaker (Barton Mathis).

• Regular edition cover, drawn by Tony Daniel.

––––––––––

• "Batman in Detective Comics" – (24-page story) – With 114 kills to his name, Batman knows that the Joker is likely the most dangerous man he has ever faced, and right now, he's on the loose...

• "Batwing" – (1-page text article) – Interview with Judd Winick and Ben Oliver about the Batwing series.

• "Animal Man" – (1-page text article) – Interview with Jeff Lemire and Travel Foreman about the Animal Man series.

––––––––––

SOURCES: Grand Comics Database (comics.org), The Comic Book Database (comicbookdb.com), DC Database (dc.wikia.com), Comichron (www.comichron.com)



I also would change the page count from 24 to 32, as the story is 24 pages long but the full page count is 32. Then I would change the Est. Print Run from 4,024 – which has to be a error – to at least 100,077 which is the estimated North America sales figure according to Comichron – http://www.comichron.com/monthlycomicssales/2011/2011-11.html

Last edited March 15, 2017 7:35:37 pm
Posted: March 15, 2017 7:50:30 pm
How about everyone show examples of what they would do so we can compare them?
Posted: March 15, 2017 9:32:53 pm
well hang on now...that is your compromised version if you remember...per one of our original discussions i remember mentioning or asking you to at least add the characters real name...which looks great, but your spread out full sentenced version defeats the purpose these were even added here in the fist place for....short and condensed for PRACTICAL purposes...NOT asthetic...

by practical i mean, because i use the preview pop up while editing pricing (which i do ALOT of) so i can keep my spot much easier in the long columns of prices. this is not something i can expect you to understand but the mods do...you havent seen the screenshot of what price adjusting looks like. its a number and a price...nothing more...when i scroll over though it pops the preview and instead of reading 50 paragraphs to find something, id rather use skim mode to quicken this...

Last edited March 15, 2017 9:36:40 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 15, 2017 9:45:27 pm
so i guess as you asked heres how i think it should look:


1st appearance of Dollmaker (Barton Mathis)


DC's flagship title is relaunched for the first time ever, with new Batman adventures from acclaimed writer/ artist Tony S. Daniel! A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse. mouse.


and that joker dollmaker pt. 1 isnt true to the book, its someones personalized numbering, so it doesnt belong. the batman as det... isnt a story title. neither are the other, but personally i dont care how it reads under the important info...the way you listed it clears story confusion and does look good.

Last edited March 15, 2017 9:50:29 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 15, 2017 9:58:52 pm
my response to the variants and trades....

variants dont need any bit of the story or actual book info...they are variants of the "Cover A Proper". The cover A should get all the necessary info that we are dicussing at the moment...the only things need on variants would be...

Variant Example 1:

Midtown Exclusive Virgin Variant

Variant Example 2:

2nd Printing

Variant Example 3:

New York Comic Con 2016 Exclusive Green Brain Color Variant

Trade Example 1:

#5 I Am Iron Man
Direct Market Edition

Trade Example 2:

2nd Printing

Variants should only need the variant "name" cause the only imporant thing to a variant is the "why" its a variant...the characters and contribs flow over and its simple enough to find the alpha book to read a synopsis or to see a first app.

Trades i feel the same about but the need the trade name if they are under a label....for obvious reason lol

Last edited March 15, 2017 10:08:19 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 16, 2017 12:52:37 am
dough boy said:
I propose:

-----

"Story Title", part X

Description

(repeat above as necessary)

Cover Details (optional, if variant, etc)

Pricing Note: (optional)

Could be first of spider-man, death, first work on a comic, rare, part of SOTI, etc.

-----

It is pretty evident that there are only a few who really care about this and because the data largely exists close by there is no reason to duplicate it or cause more work.


My vote probably doesn't count, but this seems pretty good. . .
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 16, 2017 8:27:59 am
The Bobarian said:
Here's an example of the current contents of the About window for Detective Comics #1 (vol. 2, Nov. 2011) regular edition –

Joker, Dollmaker Pt.1
"Batman in Detective Comics"
FACES OF DEATH BEGINS
DC's flagship title is relaunched for the first time ever, with new Batman adventures from acclaimed writer/ artist Tony S. Daniel! A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse. mouse.
1: Dollmaker (Barton Mathis)

Regular Tony Daniel Cover


To play the game...

------

"Batman in Detective Comics"

A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse.

Regular Tony Daniel Cover

------

To me that is ALL that should be in the description/synopsis field for this comic. IF (and I mean IF) the reason it is worth so much is because of it being the first of Dollmaker then we would add that into a "Pricing notes" section.

We are overly complicating things. Also I would rather have NOTHING than to cite sources for information. If you don't have the physical book in front of you, or the ability to review/read it digitally then move on to a book you do have. I don't want someone to cite another source for things like characters, dates, etc. Someone, somewhere has the information. It isn't a state secret. The only thing that should be cited would be the actual description, but then I would argue just write your own.

I also personally do not like comics.org and all of the information they include. To me that is too much for what we need.

Last edited March 16, 2017 8:49:54 am
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 16, 2017 8:37:01 am
dough boy said:
The Bobarian said:
Here's an example of the current contents of the About window for Detective Comics #1 (vol. 2, Nov. 2011) regular edition –

Joker, Dollmaker Pt.1
"Batman in Detective Comics"
FACES OF DEATH BEGINS
DC's flagship title is relaunched for the first time ever, with new Batman adventures from acclaimed writer/ artist Tony S. Daniel! A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse. mouse.
1: Dollmaker (Barton Mathis)

Regular Tony Daniel Cover


To play the game...

------

"Batman in Detective Comics"

A killer called The Gotham Ripper is on the loose on Batman's home turf - leading The Dark Knight on a deadly game of cat and mouse.

Regular Tony Daniel Cover

------

To me that is ALL that should be in the description/synopsis field for this comic. IF (and I mean IF) the reason it is worth so much is because of it being the first of Dollmaker then we would add that into a "Pricing notes" section.

We are overly complicating things. Also I would rather have NOTHING than to cite sources for information. If you don't have the physical book in front of you, or the ability to review/read it digitally then move on to a book you do have. I don't want someone to cite another source for things like characters, dates, etc. Someone, somewhere has the information. It isn't a state secret. The only thing that should be cited would be the actual description, but then I would argue just write your own.

I also personally do not like comics.org and all of the information they include. To me that is too much for what we need.


Couldn't agree more! This seems to have gotten out of hand(complicated) and the current freeze on the description box is limiting the mods ability to enter accurate and clean looking data.I guess the question is how do we get everyone to agree with the plan and follow the rules?
Posted: March 16, 2017 3:57:29 pm
the following part is easy since the mods can edit everything...if theres a set standard, there will be people still adding info...itd be up to everyone to just follow suit...or eventually it will be fixed back to the standard...

this wont be much of an issue with popular books as theres tons of traffic everyday...itd be the offshoot less popular stuff that may slip detection for ahile.

Last edited March 16, 2017 3:58:37 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 16, 2017 3:57:48 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
well hang on now...that is your compromised version if you remember...per one of our original discussions i remember mentioning or asking you to at least add the characters real name...which looks great, but your spread out full sentenced version defeats the purpose these were even added here in the fist place for....short and condensed for PRACTICAL purposes...NOT asthetic...

by practical i mean, because i use the preview pop up while editing pricing (which i do ALOT of) so i can keep my spot much easier in the long columns of prices. this is not something i can expect you to understand but the mods do...you havent seen the screenshot of what price adjusting looks like. its a number and a price...nothing more...when i scroll over though it pops the preview and instead of reading 50 paragraphs to find something, id rather use skim mode to quicken this...

What about creating a "Moderators" window that only moderators have access to for this – and any other site maintenance, pricing updates, etc. – so the current About window can be accessed, updated, and edited by CBR members? Just a thought. I have no idea if this would solves some problems or possibly causes more.

Last edited March 16, 2017 4:06:53 pm
Posted: March 16, 2017 4:26:15 pm
Just wondering where these numbers for scarcity and their definitions come from ...

AmZoMBiE said:

3. Scarcity
- 1-10: Ultra Rare
- 11-100: Super Rare
- 101-1000: Rare/Scarce
- 1001-10,000: Low Print Run/Distribution
- 10,001-100,000: Common
- 100,001+: Very Common
- Limited to XX copies


I've been using these three as defined in the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide when indexing –

• Scarce (20-100 estimated copies to exist).
• Rare (10-20 estimated copies to exist).
• Very rare (1-10 estimated copies to exist).


It seems to me that those three are the accepted terminology for those scarcity terms by most dealers and historians when discussing this topic.
Posted: March 16, 2017 4:57:14 pm
i got those numbers while i was researching CGC stuff...i cannot remember the site i got those numbers from but i wrote them on a notecard (as ive been doing with all info to add to the site) i can try to refind it and repost the link

found it lol...i bookmarked it

http://www.recalledcomics.com/UltraRareComics.php

mustve been a promo and rarities search not CGC...i actively look for rare books and promos to add here...one of my favorite things to do actually lol...ask the mods how many times i ask about if we should add a book or not...lol

personally when it comes to this subject in particular, i trust people that deal with the super rare on a daily basis, then overstreet...based on the fact that this is all they deal with versus overstreet only using supplied data and no actual experience with these rare books...most arent even listed in overstreet. Its kinda like going to a Bell Tire to get Mudding tires...yes they can get them, but id trust a 4x4 or offroad customs shop way more, even though Bell Tire deals with a ton of tires yearly.

Last edited March 16, 2017 5:07:11 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 16, 2017 5:31:53 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
i got those numbers while i was researching CGC stuff...i cannot remember the site i got those numbers from but i wrote them on a notecard (as ive been doing with all info to add to the site) i can try to refind it and repost the link

found it lol...i bookmarked it

http://www.recalledcomics.com/UltraRareComics.php

mustve been a promo and rarities search not CGC...i actively look for rare books and promos to add here...one of my favorite things to do actually lol...ask the mods how many times i ask about if we should add a book or not...lol

personally when it comes to this subject in particular, i trust people that deal with the super rare on a daily basis, then overstreet...based on the fact that this is all they deal with versus overstreet only using supplied data and no actual experience with these rare books...most arent even listed in overstreet. Its kinda like going to a Bell Tire to get Mudding tires...yes they can get them, but id trust a 4x4 or offroad customs shop way more, even though Bell Tire deals with a ton of tires yearly.

I took a quick look at that site and – correct me if I'm wrong – it appears that most of the books listed as Ultra-rare comics: 10 copies or less were manufactured or published to have that limited a press run. It has always been my understanding that Overstreet's three scarcity definitions are for books that had much higher press runs at the time of publication but because of various reasons – like the war effort to recycle paper in the 1940s or book banning and burning in the 1950s – they have become scarce, rare, and very rare over time which effects their collectibility.

Last edited March 16, 2017 7:31:14 pm
Posted: March 16, 2017 7:28:07 pm
dough boy said:
...

To me that is ALL that should be in the description/synopsis field for this comic. IF (and I mean IF) the reason it is worth so much is because of it being the first of Dollmaker then we would add that into a "Pricing notes" section.

We are overly complicating things. Also I would rather have NOTHING than to cite sources for information. If you don't have the physical book in front of you, or the ability to review/read it digitally then move on to a book you do have. I don't want someone to cite another source for things like characters, dates, etc. Someone, somewhere has the information. It isn't a state secret. The only thing that should be cited would be the actual description, but then I would argue just write your own.

I also personally do not like comics.org and all of the information they include. To me that is too much for what we need.

So lets say I come across a book here at CBR and something in the indexing doesn't seem right for one reason or another and it's a book I don't have, but I check multiple other sites I've used for referencing before and find corroborating information among them that my hunch was right about it, you would prefer for me not to do anything? Isn't that a disservice to all CBR members? And if I did make changes to correct the information here, isn't beneficial to include sources so if a moderator or member wanted to check my corrections, they can call up those sites to verify the information is now correct?
Posted: March 16, 2017 8:16:49 pm
The Bobarian said:
So lets say I come across a book here at CBR and something in the indexing doesn't seem right for one reason or another and it's a book I don't have, but I check multiple other sites I've used for referencing before and find corroborating information among them that my hunch was right about it, you would prefer for me not to do anything? Isn't that a disservice to all CBR members? And if I did make changes to correct the information here, isn't beneficial to include sources so if a moderator or member wanted to check my corrections, they can call up those sites to verify the information is now correct?
You only need to cite a source IF you are taking credit for something they "created". The fact that a comic has 32 pages, a cover date, a story title, X characters and Y contributors doesn't mean you need to cite where you found that information. If you are copying a description someone wrote about the book/story then you would, but again I would maintain that you should write your own, or don't write anything.

Also, part of the problem with citing multiple sources is that their information can change and you aren't saying which source provided what data. But since everything other than what you think the description is is public knowledge then you shouldn't need to cite anything.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 17, 2017 1:23:05 am
dough boy said:
If you don't have the physical book in front of you, or the ability to review/read it digitally then move on to a book you do have. I don't want someone to cite another source for things like characters, dates, etc.


The ones I've done here I have right in front of me. I've caught quite a few errors that way in information already listed, especially in dates. Dynamite books in particular seem to have unpredictable publication dates. . .double shipping one month, then 4 months before the next issue. . .and so on (Took them 5 years to get out 26 issues of Lone Ranger, LOL!) So I agree it's better to have the actual copy to work from.
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 18, 2017 2:51:49 pm
First, if the consensus is that sourcing is not needed when indexing then I'll go along with it, too. It
took me some time to come around to that as providing sources and other reference material is what I am accustomed to and prefer to have those around me have the availability to proof, verify, and copy edit any and all data I provide before being published or posted online. It's a good way to prevent – or at the very least limit – errors and inconsistencies.

Second, I think those books that AmZoMBie provided a link to as Ultra Rare, Super Rare, etc., should have their limited number of copies entered in the Est. Print Run: field and not just the About window. Since those books – mostly variants – are a manufactured scarcity unlike the ones Overstreet lists as Scarce, Rare, or Very Rare which initially had much higher print runs but are now very hard to collect due to outside circumstances like paper rationing during WWII or book burnings in the 1950s. However, making a notation that those variants and similar books have a limited press run in the About window after/below a book's title and synopsis should be left as an option for the person indexing that issue just in case anyone who reads the contents of the About window forgets to look at the Est. Print Run field.

Third, I will continue to provide story page counts since they differ from the actual number of total pages in a book that is shown in the Pages field. Here's an example of what I mean (the xyxyxy gibberish is just a place-holder for the story's synopsis) …

• "Return of the Bobarian!" – (21-page story) – Xyxyxyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxy xyxy xy xyxy xyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxy xyxy xy xyxy xyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxyxyxy. Xyxyxyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxy xyxy xy xyxy xyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxy xyxy xy xyxy xyxyxy xyxyxyxy xyxyxyxyxy.

And finally – well for this post at least – I believe aesthetics do matter so I will continue to visually "clean up" the contents in the About window as I copy edit indexed books for content and consistency. By this, I mean to make spacing consistent, fix typos, group and itemize notes together after a book's title and synopsis, etc.

Wait! One more thing. Can we start indexing the About window again? The moderators aren't the only ones who would like to get back to doing that and I've come across a number of errors that need fixing.

Last edited March 18, 2017 3:42:28 pm
Posted: March 18, 2017 4:11:54 pm
Here are the updated guidelines I plan on using in the About window (subject to change if needed) –


• "Title of Book's Story" – (00-page story) – A brief as possible synopsis of the story with addition information if the story is reprinted from a previous publication, or if this story continues from a previous issue, or the story continues in a following issue, etc.

• (Repeat title and synopsis as needed if the book has multiple stories, use the same format as above).

––––––––––

• Appearance notation of a character's 1st, 2nd, or 3rd app. Only use 2nd and 3rd app notations on significant characters.

• Death, origin, marriage of, birth of, or other significant event of a prominent character(s).

• Variant cover information (if applicable). Cover artist and print ratio should be included if known.

• Has historical or collectible significance (if applicable). Example might be that the book was mentioned in SOTI, or it's cover was drawn by highly sought out artist (Alex Schomburg, Frank Frazetta, Dave Stevens, J. Scott Campbell, etc.), or is the first published work of a significant creator, or some other unique fact worth noting.


Does that work for you guys and gals? Any thoughts for discussion would be appreciated.

Last edited March 18, 2017 4:47:00 pm
Posted: March 18, 2017 4:13:20 pm
So my basic template would look like this to copy into a blank About window –


• "Xxxxxxxxxx" – (00-page story) – Xxxxxxxxxx.

––––––––––

• Xxxxxxxxxx
Posted: March 18, 2017 4:41:31 pm
Depends on what the other say.

But my only concern about the "formatting" is trying to figure out how to make it work on the new apps. It works well on the website, but it doesn't display well on the apps right now (gibberish characters).
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 18, 2017 4:44:26 pm
dough boy said:
Depends on what the other say.

But my only concern about the "formatting" is trying to figure out how to make it work on the new apps. It works well on the website, but it doesn't display well on the apps right now (gibberish characters).

I didn't know that. Do you mean the bullet ()?

Last edited March 18, 2017 4:45:42 pm
Posted: March 18, 2017 6:50:47 pm
The Bobarian said:

Third, I will continue to provide story page counts since they differ from the actual number of total pages in a book that is shown in the Pages field.


Now here's ^^^^^ something I was wondering about.

I've seen the same difference where the comic has 40 pages and only 32 are actually story.
Dynamite is a repeat offender. They DO love their ads! But older Image books are just as bad.

Is the standard to list actual pages or story pages?

Last edited March 18, 2017 6:52:53 pm
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 18, 2017 8:21:42 pm
atom said:
The Bobarian said:

Third, I will continue to provide story page counts since they differ from the actual number of total pages in a book that is shown in the Pages field.


Now here's ^^^^^ something I was wondering about.

I've seen the same difference where the comic has 40 pages and only 32 are actually story.
Dynamite is a repeat offender. They DO love their ads! But older Image books are just as bad.

Is the standard to list actual pages or story pages?

Total number of pages (between the covers) has always been my understanding on the number of pages in a book. When a book has more than one story, are you going to list only the number of pages for just one story? And which story will that be – the first story, the longest story, the story that's on the cover, the most historically important one if a major character's first appearance is in a backup story?

Also, this brings up the point of why the covers are omitted in the number of book pages. If you ask people to show you the first page of a comic, what most if not all will do is flip the cover open and point to the first inside page as pg. 1 of the book.

Last edited March 18, 2017 8:37:51 pm
Posted: March 18, 2017 10:13:58 pm
so confused... same info i had just upside down and mine got torn up by everyone lol.....but starting to not really care anymore
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 18, 2017 11:06:44 pm
The Bobarian said:
dough boy said:
Depends on what the other say.

But my only concern about the "formatting" is trying to figure out how to make it work on the new apps. It works well on the website, but it doesn't display well on the apps right now (gibberish characters).

I didn't know that. Do you mean the bullet ()?
Yes, the bullet is one. Also the " and ' are coming through funky. Might be whatever program you are writing in and pasting into the box. The guy I have working on it pointed one out to me and when I searched the database for it it was only in descriptions you had indexed.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 19, 2017 12:23:00 am
To get the bullet, I press the option key and the 8 key if that helps.
Posted: March 19, 2017 9:02:28 am
So you are using a Mac then?

How are you putting in quotes? Just shift+' or are you doing all of this in say word and then copy/pasting?
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 20, 2017 1:21:34 am
The Bobarian said:



Also, this brings up the point of why the covers are omitted in the number of book pages. If you ask people to show you the first page of a comic, what most if not all will do is flip the cover open and point to the first inside page as pg. 1 of the book.


I've never really considered the cover as a page myself, as most books/sites I've seen consider the cover separately. . .and for all intents, the most valuable part of a comic. It's almost like what's inside doesn't really matter at all as long as you have that sweet, sweet variant cover.
Favorite Characters: Lone Ranger, Green Hornet, The Spirit, The Shadow, Zorro, The Rocketeer, Jonah Hex
Posted: March 20, 2017 2:19:12 pm
dough boy said:
So you are using a Mac then?

How are you putting in quotes? Just shift+' or are you doing all of this in say word and then copy/pasting?

I'm using a MacBook Pro I got in 2010 that's still running OS X. For the quote marks, I press the quote marks key for a single quote (') mark, and hold down shift and press the quote marks key for a double quote (") mark.

Last edited March 20, 2017 7:26:06 pm
Posted: March 20, 2017 2:29:23 pm
AmZoMBiE said:
so confused... same info i had just upside down and mine got torn up by everyone lol.....but starting to not really care anymore

I agree. I prefer to have the key info first, then the story or stories content in the middle, with some notes (if needed) at the bottom. But in order to get some of what I feel should be done, I have to comprise. So that's why I'll stop sourcing, and move key collecting info below the story. I don't want to but in order to get key info in the About window, get a consensus on what a 1st appearance is, agree on how pages are counted, etc., compromising has to happen.
Posted: March 22, 2017 1:39:04 pm
dough boy said:
Depends on what the other say.

But my only concern about the "formatting" is trying to figure out how to make it work on the new apps. It works well on the website, but it doesn't display well on the apps right now (gibberish characters).

Just wondering but do the apps really need to have access to the About window information? If not, this would save all of us a lot of time and effort.
Posted: March 22, 2017 2:10:21 pm
the app currently doesnt list any info on the book past the regular book info (the top section on the reg website) nothing from the about or characters or contribs...though i am still running the beta version 1.04 so i dont know if its been updated yet...theres a drop down market tab and a grade pricing tab. and thats it...nice and simple.

its been real helpful at shows and new comic stores i visit when i need to check my wish list...

Last edited March 22, 2017 2:11:25 pm
Doom Pulls the Strings!

Posted: March 22, 2017 2:32:55 pm
The Bobarian said:
dough boy said:
Depends on what the other say.

But my only concern about the "formatting" is trying to figure out how to make it work on the new apps. It works well on the website, but it doesn't display well on the apps right now (gibberish characters).

Just wondering but do the apps really need to have access to the About window information? If not, this would save all of us a lot of time and effort.
This is the new apps (native for devices). I am pretty sure it has most of this information because theoretically you never have to go to the desktop site and can instead manage your collection solely from a mobile device.
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 22, 2017 3:10:39 pm
dough boy said:
This is the new apps (native for devices). I am pretty sure it has most of this information because theoretically you never have to go to the desktop site and can instead manage your collection solely from a mobile device.

I understand that, but you don't really need to see, or be able to change and update the About window information to manage your collection. Right now I'm running version 1.0.4 (I believe) on my iPhone 4s – don't laugh, it still works and can take a beating – and the About window doesn't show up anyway, and I don't need it to manage my collection through my smart phone. So I'm assuming you want the About window info to be displayed on future apps. I'm just wondering if visual and editable access to the About window through a smart phone app is at all necessary. If not having access to that window for the new app could solve some problems or be a work-around to the displaying of gibberish.
Posted: March 22, 2017 3:35:51 pm
It has nothing to do with being able to edit it. If someone never wants to use the desktop site and instead only want to use their mobile phone should they not be able to see the information?

Right now the "app" is read only. But that is largely because you go to the desktop to read/see information. The new apps you will not have to.

So the issue is the app has a hard time displaying what we are entering on the desktop...
Favorite Quote: "You're not just some guy in a bat costume are you? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! - Justice League #1, 2011"

Hunting for (mainly reprints/variants) - Please help! - See My Profile
Posted: March 22, 2017 4:21:42 pm
dough boy said:
It has nothing to do with being able to edit it. If someone never wants to use the desktop site and instead only want to use their mobile phone should they not be able to see the information?

Right now the "app" is read only. But that is largely because you go to the desktop to read/see information. The new apps you will not have to.

So the issue is the app has a hard time displaying what we are entering on the desktop...

Okay. I just thought that as a work-around to get the new apps up and running, that not displaying the About window for those apps would be an option if there are continuing problems with trying to get it to display correctly.

Last edited March 22, 2017 4:22:42 pm
Posted: March 22, 2017 4:58:56 pm
Maybe we should just continue as we were, but this time not correct each others entries, especially if it was just updated.
Because unless there is a set template when an issue is added everyone will get it wrong or just not bother editing issues as it's just to damn complicated.
"Disliking everything is not the same thing as having an opinion"






Newest Covers
  • Rip Off Press's Mother's Oats Comix Issue # 1
  • Graphic India's Shikari Force Hunters TPB # 1
  • DC Comics's Suicide Squad Issue # 14
  • Parents Magazine Institute's Sweet Sixteen Issue # 13
Cool Statues
CBR.com Feature Requests - BE HEARD!