I've noticed DC mostly didn't seem to follow volume numbering for series that were published consecutively. It looks like they started numbering in the 1970's and began with numbers dating backwards to year it started. So instead of vol 1 for Action Comics it has numbers like vol 39. It's confusing and doesn't really match when series stops and starts again. I am following the volume numbering from the wikia pages and putting the DC indices in parenthesis.
Thoughts???
Matt

Hi Matt,
Thanks for noting this, that sounds really weird and inconvenient. I'll do a bit more research on what's going on there and how we can handle that in the database.
Does anyone else have any knowledge about this? Thanks

Without extensive specific knowledge about the history of each series, I don't think there's a way to make database entry consistent except by simply entering the information as printed in each issue.

So a specific example of this is The Phantom Stranger series.
Phantom Stranger (Volume 1) was an ongoing series, published by DC Comics. It ran from 1952 until 1953. It starred Phantom Stranger.
Then, Phantom Stranger (Volume 2) was published from June of 1969 to February of 1976 spanning a total of 41 issues.
Except DC began numbering the volumes differently such as issue # 32 is volume 6 (1974). It looks like they use a number for calendar year then go up to the next number 7 for (1975). etc, etc. Some of the other titles have higher numbers like 36 and subtracting that number from that comic book year takes it back to the 1930's or so when the comic started.
Really arcane and I suppose the people back then didn't really consider how long comic series were going to run for 50, 60, 70 years.

Relatedly, I notice the recent trend for starting a new series each year. For example, what I have called Catwoman (2018) is simply referred to as 'Catwoman' in the comics. Not just DC though, the same happened with Ms Marvel in Marvel-land. Ms. Marvel (2014), Ms. Marvel (2015). I've included the year in the series name but I have wondered (and not asked, tut) whether the year should be the volume number instead (and have one all-encompassing series).

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.