Talk:Battle Picture Weekly

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Comics: British Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by British comics work group.

G.I. Joe (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject G.I. Joe, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.G.I. JoeWikipedia:WikiProject G.I. JoeTemplate:WikiProject G.I. JoeG.I. Joe articles

Untitled

I seem to remember the comic being retitled Battle Action after the merger with Action. Can anyone confirm? Deadlock 11:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was called Battle Action Force from 1983 until 1988.Konczewski 17:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battle Picture Library

Is Battle Picture Library related to Battle (in any of its forms)? I presume it just a title IPC used for reprinting old war stories in a handy format? Does anybody know? Mrstonky (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle Picture Library Is NOT Battle Picture Weekly

The word "battle" is short, to the point and people generally know what it means, making it a good choice for a title. :)
Battle Picture Library ran for 1706 editions, published between Jan 1961 and Dec 1984.

The article confused the two publications, by claiming the following:

   Collected editions


   Some of the stories have been collected into trade paperbacks, published by Carlton Publishing Group imprint Prion and edited by Steve Holland


   * Battle Picture Library:
        o Death or Glory (776 pages, September 2007, ISBN 1-85375-630-X)
        o Let 'em Have It (776 pages, October 2008, ISBN 1-85375-671-7)
   
   Charley's War has also been collected into their own volumes.

Death or Glory and Let 'em Have It are actually collections of reprinted editions of Battle Picture Library - NOT collected material from Battle Picture Weekly.

In my first solo mission for this unit - bravely enduring heavy fire and the threat of snipers - I removed this claim.
I am now reporting back to ask whether it would it be appropriate to create a new article for Battle Picture Library to clarify these are two different publications ?
And/Or mention the potential confusion in this article ?
A sister publication to Battle Picture Library that does have a Wikipedia article is War Picture Library.
That article at present also seems to make the mistake of implicitly assuming the two Battle publications to be a single one.

A late reply but yes, go for it, handy redlinks to other articles along these lines that need creating are at War Picture Library#See also. Although they both need expanding these might also prove useful [1], [2]. (Emperor (talk) 03:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Battle Editorial Staff Errors

Much of the detail on the editorial staff at IPC and their respective roles on the various Battle Picture Weekly derivatives is incorrect. Steve MacManus was the sub/deputy/assistant editor for much of the early run. Doug Church was art editor, but left the title in 1976 to work on Action and later, 2000AD.

The unfinished list of writers and artists is also riddled with errors. Admittedly, in the early days of the title, writers and artists were not credited, but in later issues they were, yet still, in cases where both writer and artist were credited in the published comic, the information provided here is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooseharris (talk • contribs) 21:53, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Battle Picture Weekly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928142822/http://bestofbattle.sevenpennynightmare.co.uk/features/history1.htm to http://bestofbattle.sevenpennynightmare.co.uk/features/history1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Battle Picture Weekly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I cut the following: -

Assistant Editor (for most of Battle comic's life): Jim Storrie
Art Editors included Roy Stedall-Humphrys and Peter Downer Editorial assistants included Barrie Clements, Roy Preston, Ron Cooper, Richard Burton
Art assistants: Tim Skomski, Martin Goldring

as without citations or context it was hard to work into the article. I've also chopped the various fan-sites from the external links; Blood for the Baron is awesome but is also hosting a ton of illegal scans, and aside from that it was archived versions of some half-complete pages that didn't seem to add much. Happy to discuss any returning. Good grief GCD's way of handling British titles is dreadful. ICYMI, most of the story summaries have been salvaged at List of Battle stories. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:59, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]