Talk:Fantomen
ISSN numbers
I am not familiar with how the ISSN-numbers are used, but I have noticed that Fantomen 17/1991 has the same ISSN-number as Fantomen 26/2007 as all from that time appear to have. Is it not then so that one magazine has one ISSN-number and then always uses it, which mean that we do not even have to check what ISSN-number that each issue have; we only write ISSN 0345-3243. Is this correct? Karl MAN--130.236.60.35 19:52, 26 January 2008 (CET)
- Correct, ISSN numbers are given to a publication as a whole and not individual issues, unlike ISBN which is unique for every book. This makes ISSN slightly less helpful if you're trying to find a particular issue, but if the information is available we should add it. I'm not sure which Fantomen issue is the first where the ISSN number appears, but ISSN wasn't created until 1974 so we shouldn't add it for every issue from 1/1950 and onwards. Member 7 20:07, 26 January 2008 (CET)
- I have now fixed so that it does not show Template:Isbn at the bottom of the issueboxes for those issues printed before 1974. (I did it by adding the line "|isbn= " within the issuebox.) Karl MAN--130.236.60.34 16:22, 28 January 2008 (CET)
- I have checked those issues that I own and found out that the ISSN-number does not exist in Fantomen 18/1978 but it exist in Fantomen 4/1979, I therefore hold it as most likely that Fantomen got its ISSN-number with Fantomen 1/1979 though anyone who owns it could check. By the way, I have checked in issues of Fantomen Krönika and found out that during the first years of its publication, it was stated that the issues had ISBN-numbers, not ISSN-numbers. However, it was always the same number and in the latest issue it is the same number, though it is stated that it is an ISSN-number. I think it might be correct to call the numbers in the early issues for ISSN-numbers, even though it is not called that in those issues. Karl MAN--130.236.60.37 12:54, 30 January 2008 (CET)
- Really? Yes, that must have been a mistake in the first issues then, since ISBN and ISSN numbers don't look the same way. Member 7 13:52, 30 January 2008 (CET)
- I have checked those issues that I own and found out that the ISSN-number does not exist in Fantomen 18/1978 but it exist in Fantomen 4/1979, I therefore hold it as most likely that Fantomen got its ISSN-number with Fantomen 1/1979 though anyone who owns it could check. By the way, I have checked in issues of Fantomen Krönika and found out that during the first years of its publication, it was stated that the issues had ISBN-numbers, not ISSN-numbers. However, it was always the same number and in the latest issue it is the same number, though it is stated that it is an ISSN-number. I think it might be correct to call the numbers in the early issues for ISSN-numbers, even though it is not called that in those issues. Karl MAN--130.236.60.37 12:54, 30 January 2008 (CET)
- I have now fixed so that it does not show Template:Isbn at the bottom of the issueboxes for those issues printed before 1974. (I did it by adding the line "|isbn= " within the issuebox.) Karl MAN--130.236.60.34 16:22, 28 January 2008 (CET)
Fantomen Images
This is probably the best place for me to put this i have been looking through the Fantomen articles and noticed that the majority of the Cover Images were like with the other Cover images a .jpg at 200px however i noticed alot of the newer issues are very small .gif images which don't fit in with all the other articles on the wiki so i have started to replace them with the correct size --Dark Lord Xander 08:52, 27 January 2008 (CET)
Issue overview
I've put up a suggestion. Reactions? Pjär 05:17, 26 March 2008 (CET)
- Bravissimo! This looks great. The only thing I suggest is a (dark) grey color instead of the black boxes, because they draw a lot of attention to them. Member 7 08:25, 26 March 2008 (CET)
- Defiantly Grey if not the same colour as the other boxs --Dark Lord Xander3 08:46, 26 March 2008 (CET)
- Better now? Pjär 14:18, 26 March 2008 (CET)
- Yes --Dark Lord Xander3 03:58, 29 March 2008 (CET)
Back-up comics
While a secondary project for the PhantomWiki, I think I have managed to identify just about every back-up comic published in Fantomen, save from one-shots and some gag series from the first 25 years of the magazine. My main failure is "Fantommålvakten" from #21-23/1973. Since the © is IPC, it's safe to assume that it was produced by UK's Fleetway Publications, assumedly for its sports comics magazine Tiger. But beyond that, I'm lost.
While it is a small matter, I can't help to be bugged by this... Anyone got any suggestions, in regards to its identity? --Keffy (talk) 12:28, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- As I don't have those issues close by, can you give any more clues? Character names? Team names? Also, what is "T.H.E. Cat"? What was the name in Fantomen? Andreas (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- yeah, I will check later today.
- T.H.E. Cat is based ob a shortlived TV series, which had an equally shortlived comic book series published by Dell Comics. It was called Cat Cooper in Fantomen. --Keffy (talk) 13:29, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- Very interesting, I need to add that info to Seriewikin. Andreas (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- I'm thinking of putting together a List of Fantomen back-up comics, partly because of the general intrest, and partly because it would serve as an pretty handy overview of several Phantom creators' other comics. Would that be allright, despite the rather weak Phantom connection? --Keffy (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- I'm hesitant about this. If we create such a list, similar lists for other publications could (or maybe even should) be created. It quickly becomes a whole lot that must be maintained. To me, what we have in the general Fantomen article now along with the annual overviews and issue contents is more than enough for this Wiki. Such a list would be better suited for Seriewikin, I think. Andreas (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- I'm thinking of putting together a List of Fantomen back-up comics, partly because of the general intrest, and partly because it would serve as an pretty handy overview of several Phantom creators' other comics. Would that be allright, despite the rather weak Phantom connection? --Keffy (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2015 (CET)
- Very interesting, I need to add that info to Seriewikin. Andreas (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2015 (CET)
The use of Serial commas
For most of this Wiki we have used Serial commas (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma for definition) and I think that we should be consistent in that usage. Except for those cases when it will create ambuguity. --MiGi (talk) 11:22, 14 October 2017 (CEST)