Kennedy Guide Numbers

dr_s · March 19, 2008, 08:10:16 PM

The idea of using a Kennedy number is very useful. If you are going to eBay a copy the info is there. Using a non Kennedy reference doesn't help since know one knows what is out there or what we will define as an ug in the future. If you must have a homemade numbering system, add a Kennedy number as well and maybe even a ICL notation for an item in the Illustrated check list. Arguing over JKG or KG# or JK is silly. Just flip a coin other wise it will never get done.

Visitor Q · March 19, 2008, 10:35:14 PM

Ahhhhhh... I like the "JK" idea.

Jason

Reverend · March 19, 2008, 11:12:29 PM

Quote from: Comix Junky on March 19, 2008, 07:47:12 PM
I've been thinking about this for several years, so i got a few suggestions ready:

How about 4 diget numbers, and something as a placeholder. so the titles all line up.
So it's easy for those who don't know what the numbers mean, to ignore them.

Wow, and I thought I was the only anal freak here. I was going to suggest four digits so everything would align properly thus be aesthetically pleasing.

50Cent #II (1st print) · March 20, 2008, 01:37:35 AM

You could add "." for issues and printings, ie 0001.2 for (2nd print) also?

Visitor Q · March 20, 2008, 08:27:00 AM

Jay's guide is the only guide that has numbers, Fogel's does not. It only makes sense to add the JK numbers. The problem is this, we are constantly adding to our guide so one entry could fuck up everything that follows since we are always adding. With Jay's guide it is said and done, the numbers will never change... See what I am saying?

Jason

ps. Updated the one entry, I think it looks good. More thoughts?

Sir Real · March 20, 2008, 02:38:32 PM

Where did Kennedy get his numbers, eh? Just a sequential numbering of the list that he had. We know there are items that are missing from the Kennedy guide. Who's to say that a new numbering system that we develop won't be the next "standard" for the coming decades? Consider this fact: The Wiki is only covering a specific period of time. That means that there is a finite number of comix & related items to account for. I don't doubt that a new addition/discovery could throw everything outta whack if we don't have a system that can accommodate new entries. I suggest a most careful think of what we could do here.

That said, I'm liking CJ's thoughts on the matter. Specifically his "Doobie Decimal System" (doobie, not dobbie). If you were to ask me, I'd say to develop a key (damn, I'm getting more verbose than I had intended)...

XX-X-0000.000

XX = type (CO=comix, BK=book, TB=tabloid, MC=mini-comix?, PO=poster?, PC=postcard?, etc.)
X = Alpha designation (A, B, C...1, 2, 3 for numerics)
0000 = Sequential numbering of what we have now! This would be a break-point in time to signify the creation of the DDS. Kinda like saying B.C. & A.D. for years (301 B.C.)
.000 = Additions after the break-point. This will require more thought. Maybe make it four digits, too.

I know it looks overly complicated on the surface, but we could be setting a standard that would be used and accepted for many years.

If you were to ask me, that is.

dr_s · March 20, 2008, 03:16:00 PM

We are losing track. Do we want to indicate that a comic is referenced in a certain guide, most notablely Kennedy (there are the Weist, Illustratrated Checklist, Malloy, or Fogel for example) or do we want our own numbering system. They are not incompatable but not the same thing. Since some of us collect and sell by the ICL or by Kennedy, it would be nice to have the K# and a yes or no for the ICL. This is a simple thing to do. If I can figure how to add to the WIKI this weekend I will add to it. (Expect a call Jason) It is easy for me to add the K# and the ICL yes/no. But I aint (because of time and sanity reasons) going to start learning new stuff to do a Dewey Decagon number in Hilbert space.

Rick Bradford · March 20, 2008, 03:21:34 PM

Quote from: Comix Junky on March 19, 2008, 07:47:12 PM

Try to create a universal or difinative numbering system? (Dobbie Decimal System? )
With plenty of gaps to fill in.

But then you'd end up reassigning numbers all the time, wouldn't you?

Reverend · March 20, 2008, 03:53:29 PM

This is getting hairy!

I figured I'd start adding items that are in Kennedy but missing from the Wiki. I just added 20 titles (not subpages just yet) beginning from A, so if you start seeing a lot of red, that's why.

dr_s · March 20, 2008, 06:01:12 PM

Actually if you used Hilbert space you would have to include Kennedy numbers for parallel universes for undergrounds that don't exist in ours.

Visitor Q · March 20, 2008, 06:28:09 PM

I think we should just stick to adding all the Kennedy guide numbers for now and worry about the rest later. If we can get everything listed in Jay's Guide and numbered, then we can move on from there... It was my main intent of this post.

Jason

Comix Junky · March 20, 2008, 08:32:52 PM

Quote from: Sir Real on March 20, 2008, 02:38:32 PM
..."Doobie Decimal System" (doobie, not dobbie). ...

Yeah, well... Spill Chuck kept contradicting me, so i fired it (out of a cannon).
And some of my keys stick, like "" for eample.

Quote from: Rick Bradford on March 20, 2008, 03:21:34 PM
But then you'd end up reassigning numbers all the time, wouldn't you?

But i said: "With plenty of gaps to fill in." Check my exsample.

Visitor Q · March 20, 2008, 09:07:50 PM

Ahhh... Yeah. So can we move forward with just the "JK" thing for now, then work our way from there? Cool?

Jason

Reverend · March 22, 2008, 01:08:15 PM

Being that Kennedy's guide goes up to four-digit numbers, I think it would be best, as suggested somewhere above, to start the numbering at 0001, so everything lines up nicely. I also think it would look better if we were to put a decimal after JK. These are just my aesthetic observations and are neither right nor wrong.

I edited the first three entries as such, so you could see what it would look like.

Edit: Kennedy's groundlevel section just occurred to me. The numbering starts anew there. Off the top of my head, I don't know if any of those books are listed here, but if they are, or will be, that will pose a problem to our numbering system.

Many of those books are what I would term "early independents," like Cerebus, for example. Do we even want to include such items here? Then again, there are a smattering of books in the underground index that would have been better labeled as groundlevel (e.g., Chris Corona, Cole Black, Quirk, Ultra Klutz), so who knows.

Visitor Q · March 22, 2008, 01:21:21 PM

Quote from: Reverend on March 22, 2008, 01:08:15 PM
Being that Kennedy's guide goes up to four-digit numbers, I think it would be best, as suggested somewhere above, to start the numbering at 0001, so everything lines up nicely. I also think it would look better if we were to put a decimal after JK. These are just my aesthetic observations and are neither right nor wrong.

I edited the first three entries as such, so you could see what it would look like.

Edit: Kennedy's groundlevel section just occurred to me. The numbering starts anew there. Off the top of my head, I don't know if any of those books are listed here, but if they are, or will be, that will pose a problem to our numbering system.

Many of those books are what I would term "early independents," like Cerebus, for example. Do we even want to include such items here? Then again, there are a smattering of books in the underground index that would have been better labeled as groundlevel (e.g., Chris Corona, Cole Black, Quirk, Ultra Klutz), so who knows.

That looks great, now get hoping and finish the rest!

Reverend... You are clear for take off.

Jason