Recent messages

I do find genre an interesting fact, for the reason mentioned by Experiment626. And I agree with Arco that religious and manga are sort of in the wrong place.
The best thing would be if each user could "tag" a species, with frequently used tags getting a higher value. For example, a certain comic is called a thriller 10 times, 1 time horror and 1 time humor. If you then search for "horror" by genre, a series that is often tagged as horror appears higher in the list than a thriller series that was also once called horror. You could then let users "tag" when they add a comic to their collection.
A few more strains that may actually be more genres:
Amateur
Dialect
Educational
Occasional publication
Illegal publication
Advertising publication
Self-published publication

While reviewing, I came across “Harry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix”. That is a sticker book from Panini, which at first glance does not contain any comics / illustrations / drawings. To what extent does such a thing belong in the comics category?

Is it also possible to show in the administrator panel which reviews are open in a certain series, and that I can then click and review them? I have absolutely no understanding of certain series, and I have to click through that now ... I would like to see at a glance what has changed in a series that I know about.

It is sad that Marten Toonder's heritage is being treated in such a way, it actually started with the red spine books, with the story about the northern lights. A story with which Marten Toonder was really not interested. (See foreword Panda series)

The performance is indeed much worse than Panda's. There are again mistakes that were made at Panda. In the giant edition I even missed one of Bommel's ear, in a place where he sticks his head out of the frame. Sloppy.

No, that is a mistake that will be corrected shortly. I think Jilles is working on it.

No, M = M and L = L.
As Oberon used to be no VNU , Lombard and Dupuis no Média Participations, and Smooth Ice no Casterman.
They are autonomous publishers (imprints) within larger groups.
M-L releases are only used for a few series and should in my opinion just be split, as has happened in other places. See eg Agent 327. Publisher M and L have nothing to do with each other, except that one has taken over series from the other.

I see several albums entered twice. E.g. No. 5, 6 No. 7., etc. They both already have collectors.
Perhaps has an intention that is not clear to me yet?

I took this literally from the book itself.
quote:
The images have been re-digitized and restored when necessary. (the rest is described with the album)
Last is mentioned:
The basis for the texts is the latest version in which Marten Toonder was able to make corrections. For the introductions to each story, the Foundation gratefully drew on the memories of Eiso Toonder.
I also learned from an email message from De Bezige Bij that this collection will be published over ten years.
I don't know whether it is a commercial talk. I just copied (partially and where can be summarized in my own words) what is described in the book. Because I thought it said something about the release of this book.

I also want to work with sub-series at Boeken, a la the album series at Comics. This is really necessary for larger book series.

Of the latest editions of De Bezige Bij (with the blue back), it is stated in the details field that this has given the stories their final form. However, the "final form" the Bearer authorized in the Panda releases does not appear to be the basis for this release. In other words, is this comment correct or is it too easily taken from the publisher's commercials?

Moreover, publishing house M is called Muelenhoff. And not M.
And I think L is Lutingh?

The books are listed under series: M-L issues.
Isn't it better to keep the series separate, so Series M, and series L?
This series concerns a small series of books, but with Agent 327 there was already confusion and this had to be corrected.
For uniformity it seems to me better to name the series separately.
What is your opinion on this?

Hi Rene,
Are you still planning to implement that option?
In any case, I would like to go through the music department and then want to separate the LPs from the CDs and perhaps DVDs into the so-called "series".

But how do you think what is best to do with the Tolkien books?
Your comments please.

It seems terribly complicated to me to also know from which country an album has been released. I myself have no knowledge of that at all.
But if something like that does appear in Catawiki, I am in favor of completeness, so to be able to import all countries. So don't skip Belgium and the Netherlands.
I just don't really understand the need to use this data.

If a genre has to be mentioned, How can you make this uniform? Sometimes someone says, this is a thriller, but a thriller can also look like horror. Or do you say adventure? With or without humor? Detective?
I think opinions may be divided, in which genre you classify a book.
Or will that be better than expected?

The catalog contains an item under this title, being the annual report of the Scheepvaart Vereniging Noord Amsterdam, published in 1991. An edition from 1972 by the same publisher intended to interest young people in the profession was missing and was recently added by me . With the same title, by the way. I suspect that it is only 1 edition, the 1972 edition and that the 1991 edition is based on a misunderstanding. Who has the answer?

Arco, we only automatically approved items where you were the last person to change. So not if someone else had done something to the item afterwards. By the way, you can just review it. It's more about not reviewing yourself right away when you've entered a new item yourself, because that doesn't add anything, of course.

I have indeed done it several times, but mainly because Marco had said that everything from the administrators would be "clean" and that it turned out not to be the case.
I must have misunderstood.
What will continue to happen is that if I review and see something wrong, I first change it and then approve the entire bups at once, including my own change. There is no other way.

Luckily we are not the only ones (even Arco does it!), so that makes a difference, although I only started to show “remorse” after several reviews to be honest! ;-)

I had already reviewed myself once as a test, but shortly after that it occurred to me that this could not really be the intention.

Although I have already reviewed myself as a kind of test (I saw that another administrator had already done that for me, hence) that does not seem desirable indeed. Let's keep it all as pure as possible, I would say indeed.

In itself that is not the intention, no because that of course does not add anything :-)
We will make sure that that is no longer possible. At the same time, there will also be a comments field that must be filled in if you, as an administrator, disapprove something. We will then send that comment to the person who entered it. He also sees why it has been rejected.
By the way, I don't think you'll receive such an email anytime soon, with your Rode Ridder expertise :-)

Tsja, een optie die misschien wel het overwegen waard is. Wie natuurlijk graag bepaalde albums van een bepaald genre leest of albums van een bepaald genre verzamelt (bv.: westernverhalen) kan het natuurlijk wel een nuttige tool zijn (Met één klik alle western- of SF- of … verhalen op een rijtje).
De vraag die uiteindelijk moet gesteld worden is de volgende: zorgt dit voor bijkomende informatie?
Feit is dat deze info nog nergens elders specifiek vervat zit.
Behalve dan datgene wat Arco wist te vertellen dat bepaalde genres al (onrechtstreeks) voorkomen in de rubriek ‘soort’ waar die dan eigenlijk overbodig komen te zitten.

Well, an option that might be worth considering. Of course, those who like to read certain albums of a certain genre or collect albums of a certain genre (eg: western stories) can of course be a useful tool (with one click all western or SF or ... stories at a glance).
The question that ultimately needs to be asked is the following: does this provide additional information?
The fact is that this information is not yet specifically included anywhere else.
Except for what Arco managed to say that certain genres already (indirectly) appear in the category 'species', where they actually become superfluous.