This cover features the Prince of Fogs. I think it should be listed among the characters along with Mickey.
On a side note, the Prince of Fogs (originally "Principe delle Nebbie") has been called by two different names in French. He is "Prince des Nuées" in the first three episodes but becomes "Prince des Ténèbres" in the fourth episode.
This cover features the Prince of Fogs. I think it should be listed among the characters along with Mickey.
On a side note, the Prince of Fogs (originally "Principe delle Nebbie") has been called by two different names in French. He is "Prince des Nuées" in the first three episodes but becomes "Prince des Ténèbres" in the fourth episode.
I'm going to continue indexing early Lithuanian Mickey Mouse issues since I've been collecting them for a while. Does anyone know how can I upload scanned covers there? Also, there's a Christmas special and Mickey Mystery issue which are not there.
I'm not sure if this question was asked before, but I'm really interested to know what about those stories at Inducks that didn't receive any publications? As for example this one? Does it mean that they're in unfinished state, or were there any other reasons they didn't get published? Maybe someone has any insights?
They indeed have been rejected (either the art or story).
This happens all the time, for most publishers, but we only get to know about very few of them.
Most will actually never be published (in the near future at least).
Re: stories on Inducks that were never published. I wonder how many older Disney comics there are out there that were not only written, but also at least pencilled. I mean such as this Murry story that was finally published a couple of months ago: inducks.org/story.php?c=D+2003-308
On a different note yet again, on this page Scrooge is listed to appear in I TL 2966-02 (with voice only), but on the story's page Scrooge isn't listed. Why?
Finally, I noticed that the indexing of characters who appear in stories without being visible is inconsistent. In some cases such appearances are not listed at all (example: ZX 77-11-20), while in others they are listed but with special appearance comments such as "voice only" (example: ZW 87-03-22). I recommend making these cases more consistent while keeping the not visible character appearences easily searchable.
Re: stories on Inducks that were never published. I wonder how many older Disney comics there are out there that were not only written, but also at least pencilled. I mean such as this Murry story that was finally published a couple of months ago: inducks.org/story.php?c=D+2003-308
For what it's worth, I don't know of any other unpublished Murry stories. Egmont acquired several of them in the early 2000s and simply waited forever to publish that one; but as of now, I believe they've published them all.
Re: stories on Inducks that were never published. I wonder how many older Disney comics there are out there that were not only written, but also at least pencilled. I mean such as this Murry story that was finally published a couple of months ago: inducks.org/story.php?c=D+2003-308
You can search using the advanced search page for stories that are not published in any country and are not drawn by 'no one' (alias -). This will give you stories for which Inducks does not list any publications that are not not drawn, and thus possibly drawn (if the artist credit is empty, that could mean that the story is not drawn of that the artist info is simply not listed in Inducks; one cannot differ between those cases).
No, there is no way to view this Inducks scan in full size. This material is protected by copyright (and this forum (E) seems not to be the place to discuss policies on this).
On a different note yet again, on this page Scrooge is listed to appear in I TL 2966-02 (with voice only), but on the story's page Scrooge isn't listed. Why?
That is because the information on this page shows the information about reprints and not about stories: when following (the previously defunct) link, you while get on the page of Topolino 2966, to notice that Scrooge is listed their with the comment 'voice'.
Finally, I noticed that the indexing of characters who appear in stories without being visible is inconsistent. In some cases such appearances are not listed at all (example: ZX 77-11-20), while in others they are listed but with special appearance comments such as "voice only" (example: ZW 87-03-22). I recommend making these cases more consistent while making the not visible character appearences easily searchable.
Only characters that make a visual appearance are listed in the standardised Inducks appearance field (see also the FAQ at the second part of this page). Consecutively, I have removed Sir Brian from the standardised list of appearances, but mentioned him in the newly written description (this information will be visible from tomorrow on).
The rationale for not adding characters that do not make a visual apperance was to make it possible to identify stories without having the need to read them carefully but by quickly glanching at them, and since the characters being mentioned can differ much more easily from translation to translation, while visual characters are less likely to be cut out.
Thanks Pim ! I have found another case that is similar to ZW 87-03-22: YX 88-06-22 Scamp is listed even though he isn't visible in the strip.
And how about this one? YD 83-04-29 Ludwig Van Drake is there in the panel but invisible. His appearance should stay on the story's Inducks page, right?
The story nominally stars Ellsworth, but we never actually see him: he is playing Santa at a Christmas dinner for Goofy, Mickey, and Minnie, and got stuck in the chimney, out of sight.
Unfortunately, the artist drew the fireplace/chimney large enough that it seems unbelievable that Ellsworth, the smallest of the gang, would really get stuck!
I was present at the Egmont office when we decided to reprint this French story in our comics, but we got a complaint from one publisher: "Why did you send us this impossible gag? Our readers won't believe Ellsworth could get stuck in that large space."
We realized that the gag doesn't really require the caught character to be Ellsworth! Our office sent out a revised version where the character specified as being stuck in the chimney was Butch, who we agreed was wide enough to get stuck.
So some Egmont editions say the character is Butch, and at least one country made it Horace for reasons unknown to me... I suspect very few versions of this Ellsworth gag actually use Ellsworth.
So some Egmont editions say the character is Butch, and at least one country made it Horace for reasons unknown to me... I suspect very few versions of this Ellsworth gag actually use Ellsworth.
Yeah, it's Horace in the Norwegian translation. My guess would be that Butch was still considered just obscure enough (especially in 2002) that some readers might not remember who the character was when just presented with the name.
There are three ZT-coded Winnie the Pooh stories that have two versions: an older one and one completely redrawn in newer stlyle. Here is a comparison pic from Disney Comics Randomness. But in each of the three cases, the new versions are not indexed separately on Inducks (instead, the publications of the new versions are simply marked with "[reinked in modern style]").
Shouldn't the new versions be indexed separately, with separate story codes? As you can see in the comparison pic I linked to above, these were completely redrawn. There are several other similar kind of remakes that are indexed separately from the originals on Inducks.
And on a different note, can someone at Inducks please make it possible that the special descriptions are included in the keywords search too? Example: In the case of this story the story description ("After eating a ton of Parsnip and Banana Oil ...") is included in the keywords search, but the special description "frame story" is not.
In Alessandro Barbucci's bio, it says that he and Paola Mulazzi "created the new version of Paperinik [...] in 1997." Surely that's not right, though, is it? As far as I can tell, Mulazzi didn't even write a single Paperinik story. Besides, as far as I can tell, Paperinik was revived in 96, not 97, and it was (mainly) due to Alessandro Sisti, not Barbucci.
In Alessandro Barbucci's bio, it says that he and Paola Mulazzi "created the new version of Paperinik [...] in 1997." Surely that's not right, though, is it? As far as I can tell, Mulazzi didn't even write a single Paperinik story. Besides, as far as I can tell, Paperinik was revived in 96, not 97, and it was (mainly) due to Alessandro Sisti, not Barbucci.
Funnily enough I just read her first published Disney story! But you're right, of course. She only wrote one PKNA side story (Angus Tales).
What they did create and what I think should be shown there instead is the Donald Duckling series, although I'm still not sure about the year.