BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Catalog, Mistress_Lisa writes:

Hello,

I have several stickered parts that I would like to add to the catalog. It has
been ages that I have done this, so I forget how to do it. Is it adding or changing
to the catalog? Is it a change or addition to the item or the inventory? In other
words, I am not even sure where to start any more! Anyone have a link and some
advice, please?

Lisa

Add the item as a new part.

After the part is approved, request a change to the set inventory.
The stickered item is a counterpart (matched to the corresponding item without
sticker).

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Mar 11, 2019 17:10

Subject:

Re: 3001: maybe a "new" color to colect?

Viewed:

77 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

Thank you both for your answer.
I'm lucky to find this brick...

Yes, congratulations.
And now we all know that we have to search for it

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Mar 5, 2019 19:02

Subject:

Re: 3001: maybe a "new" color to colect?

Viewed:

106 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

Hi everyone. few weeks ago i recieved light orange 2x4 brick.
i'm almost sure that the color of the brick is: Medium Yellowish Orange (lego
no. 121)
this is an unknown color so far for 2X4 bricks.
there is another light orange color: Warm Yellowish Orange (lego no. 225). maybe
some people have 2x4 brick in that color, i don't.
i took a picture of the 2x4 brick i got with the part 3898pb01 made only in Medium
Yellowish Orange (lego no. 121):
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3898pb01#T=C

what do you think?

I agree it seems to be a perfect match!

Now we need to find more of these bricks... I want one!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Feb 7, 2019 17:25

Subject:

Re: Please help identify color

Viewed:

36 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

Thank you!
You are the man behind the list? I didn't know that. great work!

Yes I am, that is my Flickr page.
I think that Pikachu3 has the only complete collection of 3001 in all the known
colors.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Feb 6, 2019 16:23

Subject:

Re: Please help identify color

Viewed:

67 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

I think the 2x4 brick is really light orange , but it's not warm yellowish
orange (color no. 225). the corect color is Medium Yellowish Orange (color no.
121). it's defently not Flame Yellowish Orange (color no.191)
I'm looking for a 3001 master who can tell the exact color.

I can make a photo of all your reference colours with added Medium Yellowish
Orange and Warm Yellowish Orange. It will probably be a few days before I can
make time for that.

Also, the list only contains known colors for 3001. It is possible that more
colors were made. The list is updated when new colors are confirmed.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 29, 2019 11:58

Subject:

Re: A Smidgen of Lego History

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Catalog, elias3 writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

btw of Duplo

Duplo is 50 years old today

https://brickset.com/article/41914/happy-birthday-duplo

right, Duplo is 5y older as 'moi'

I guess that means: Happy birthday elias3!

I see that I had Duplo's first push train

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 29, 2019 11:19

Subject:

Re: A Smidgen of Lego History

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog, jodawill writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Today we added a somewhat historic entry to the BrickLink catalog:

4538 Duplo, Plate 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin)
Parts: DUPLO, Plate

(...)

That's really interesting. I've never seen a thin one. Any idea what sets it came in?

I was hoping for an answer on this question. Any ideas?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 24, 2019 15:03

Subject:

Re: A Smidgen of Lego History

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Today we added a somewhat historic entry to the BrickLink catalog:

4538 Duplo, Plate 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin)
Parts: DUPLO, Plate

At first it looks like a normal Duplo plate, but it's not:

40666 Duplo, Plate 2 x 4 x 1/2 (Thick)
Parts: DUPLO, Plate

The first Duplo plates and tiles were based on the regular Lego plate/brick ratio
of 3:1 (that is, it takes 3 plates stacked on each other to reach the height
of a single Lego brick).

Somewhere around 1992, these "thin" plates and tiles were abandoned for the "thick"
type, which have a 2:1 ratio. These are what we find in modern Duplo sets.

What prompted the change? It could have been the advent of the 6309 printed tile:

6309p01 Duplo, Tile 2 x 2 with Shape Black Isosceles Triangle Pattern
Parts: DUPLO, Tile, Decorated

6309pb001 Duplo, Tile 2 x 2 with Black Number 1 Pattern
Parts: DUPLO, Tile, Decorated

Here are some other early "thin" Duplo parts:

duptile2x4 Duplo Tile 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin)
Parts: DUPLO

duptile2x4modhc Duplo Tile, 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) Half Circle
Parts: DUPLO

3808 Duplo Tile, Modified 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) Half Circle with 2 Studs
Parts: DUPLO

4121 Duplo Tile, Modified 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) with 4 Center Studs
Parts: DUPLO

and maybe even this:

4375 Duplo Support Sign Post Short - Thin Base
Parts: DUPLO

Oops

Please also rename 40666 to avoid confusion about the thickness of that
plate.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 24, 2019 14:59

Subject:

Re: A Smidgen of Lego History

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Today we added a somewhat historic entry to the BrickLink catalog:

4538 Duplo, Plate 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin)
Parts: DUPLO, Plate

At first it looks like a normal Duplo plate, but it's not:

40666 Duplo, Plate 2 x 4 x 1/2 (Thick)
Parts: DUPLO, Plate

6309p01 Duplo, Tile 2 x 2 with Shape Black Isosceles Triangle Pattern
Parts: DUPLO, Tile, Decorated

6309pb001 Duplo, Tile 2 x 2 with Black Number 1 Pattern
Parts: DUPLO, Tile, Decorated

Here are some other early "thin" Duplo parts:

duptile2x4 Duplo Tile 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin)
Parts: DUPLO

duptile2x4modhc Duplo Tile, 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) Half Circle
Parts: DUPLO

3808 Duplo Tile, Modified 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) Half Circle with 2 Studs
Parts: DUPLO

4121 Duplo Tile, Modified 2 x 4 x 1/3 (Thin) with 4 Center Studs
Parts: DUPLO

and maybe even this:

4375 Duplo Support Sign Post Short - Thin Base
Parts: DUPLO

Please also rename 4538 to avoid confusion about the thickness of that plate.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 17, 2019 14:24

Subject:

Re: Color Guide- non exist colors

Viewed:

52 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

Why the colors NEON GREEN & NEON ORANGE appears in the color guide?
Why it has a color id?
This colors not really exist anywhere...

It is used in watch links. For some reason, those are considered to be gear and
not parts, so they are not shown in the parts column.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 9, 2019 13:55

Subject:

Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral"

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Colors, StormChaser writes:

In Colors, Classicsmiley writes:

I know the official names are pretty weird sometimes, but I do think it helps
to have the same names whenever possible.

The community has soundly rejected this approach, as evidenced in a forum discussion
not too long ago. You want it, most don't.

I think the community rejected renaming colors (that were named before the official
color names were known). I do not think the community rejected following LEGO
on new (known) color names.

I do not object to using a shortened version on BrickLink (Coral instead of Vibrant
Coral), but we should not use something completely different.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 8, 2019 16:59

Subject:

Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral"

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

In Colors, StormChaser writes:

In Colors, Classicsmiley writes:

I'm not sure who to address this to, but could the color "Coral" please be
renamed to the official "Vibrant Coral"?

If anyone knows the hex which properly matches this color, then I could use that
information. The official coral hex doesn't appear to match LEGO renders.
Also, where would you put it on the color guide? Down with the pinks has been
suggested.

They probably use different values for different applications (renders, printed
media etc.)

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 6, 2019 06:37

Subject:

Re: Part 35442 and 35449 name - flower or gear?

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

If you look at how these parts are used, then they are actually gear wheels.
Should the name not be "Plate, Modified [size] with [amount] Gear Tooth"?

Sure, why not. It was an easy fix. Some people in the future might not realize
they're gears and think they're flower petals, so now the titles include
both terms.

Thanks

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 6, 2019 06:33

Subject:

Part 35442 and 35449 name - flower or gear?

Viewed:

74 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Parts 35442 and 35449 were just added to the catalog. They are currently named
"Plate, Modified [size] with [amount] Flower Petals".

35442 Plate, Round 2 x 2 Gear 6 Tooth
Parts: Plate, Round

[p=35449]

If you look at how these parts are used, then they are actually gear wheels.
Should the name not be "Plate, Modified [size] with [amount] Gear Tooth"?

See https://youtu.be/o0I6SgQSMMQ?t=282

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Jan 1, 2019 17:53

Subject:

Re: 2 versions of dino tail end #40379

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, tEoS writes:

There are two versions of this part where the small hole by the base varies
in location, mirrored left or right side.

If you'll post a comparison picture, then I'll add an additional note
to the part mentioning the difference and also add this part to our list of known
variants.

I don't know what happened here, but the website is responding very slow
and all my text is gone...

The different versions could simply be different cavity positions in the mold.
If those are evenly distributed in the mold, then we could expert to find approximately
equal amounts in sets.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 21, 2018 16:59

Subject:

Re: 3299miB

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, runner.caller writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

Is part 3299miB really a Minitalia part?
It looks like a LEGO System part with split tubes from the 1970s.

3299miB Minitalia Slope 33 2 x 4 Double with Bottom Tubes
Parts: Minitalia

Kind of looks like

3299 Slope 33 2 x 4 Double
Parts: Slope

to me

I just checked my slopes.
The blue slope on the left is a Minitalia slope (recessed/hollow stud).
The red bricks on the right are LEGO System slopes (LEGO logo on solid stud).

Part 3299miB could be a Minitalia part, but it could also belong to the LEGO
system series. I am just not sure about them.

I did not find a 3299miB between my 3299, but I do not have enough to draw any
conclusions from that

A bit more background information...

I think that there were 5 LEGO system parts with a variation with split tubes:

3001old Brick 2 x 4 without Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

3297 Slope 33 3 x 4
Parts: Slope

3298 Slope 33 3 x 2
Parts: Slope

3299 Slope 33 2 x 4 Double
Parts: Slope

3300 Slope 33 2 x 2 Double
Parts: Slope

LEGO experimented with this design with molds made around 1973-1976 (and used
for several years after that). The weight-saving design might be related to rising
cost during the oil crisis, or it could have been inspired by their efforts to
keep Minitalia (1970) cheap to conquer the Italian market. The experiment was
not very successful and LEGO basically reverted to their previous designs (with
a few changes such as the mold pip location).

Currently, none of these 5 part variations have a separate catalog entry
(but maybe they should have....)
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=210072
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=224110
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=246083
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=201144
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=234313

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 21, 2018 16:25

Subject:

Re: 3299miB

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, runner.caller writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

Is part 3299miB really a Minitalia part?
It looks like a LEGO System part with split tubes from the 1970s.

3299miB Minitalia Slope 33 2 x 4 Double with Bottom Tubes
Parts: Minitalia

Kind of looks like

3299 Slope 33 2 x 4 Double
Parts: Slope

to me

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 21, 2018 16:21

Subject:

Re: 3299miB

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Catalog, runner.caller writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

Is part 3299miB really a Minitalia part?
It looks like a LEGO System part with split tubes from the 1970s.

3299miB Minitalia Slope 33 2 x 4 Double with Bottom Tubes
Parts: Minitalia

Kind of looks like

3299 Slope 33 2 x 4 Double
Parts: Slope

to me

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 21, 2018 15:49

Subject:

3299miB

Viewed:

93 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Is part 3299miB really a Minitalia part?
It looks like a LEGO System part with split tubes from the 1970s.

3299miB Minitalia Slope 33 2 x 4 Double with Bottom Tubes
Parts: Minitalia

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 16, 2018 19:25

Subject:

Re: Slight variation on book cover to catalogue

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:

Could there be a difference in the bookbinding?

Yes...

9780241314227 is Hardback
9781465467140 is Paperback

Are you certain about that?
Does anyone have a paperback edition?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 16, 2018 19:07

Subject:

Re: Slight variation on book cover to catalogue

Viewed:

19 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Stuart9 writes:

Existing entry :

9781465467140 (Inv) The LEGO Book New Edition: with exclusive LEGO brick
Books: Informational Book

Variation has different id number, see photo's.

If you read the text at the bottom of the current catalog image, it says "NOT
FINALLY APPROVED BY LICENSOR - FOR SALES MATERIAL ONLY"

That makes me think that the current catalog image is a prototype image and not
the actual book cover that made it to publishing.

Cheers,
Randy

That could be it, but where does the different number come from? Is that also
related to a prototype?

For some reason I can find two versions on a popular Dutch online store. The
description seems to be nearly identical, but the price is not...

1)

The LEGO Book New Edition
with exclusive LEGO brick

Auteur: Daniel Lipkowitz
Uitgever: Dorling Kindersley Ltd

Engels
1e druk
9780241314227
oktober 2018
Hardcover -- Binding "Hardcover"
280 pagina's

Euro 17,99

2)

The Lego Book, New Edition
With Exclusive Lego Brick

Auteur: Daniel Lipkowitz
Uitgever: Dk Publishing (Dorling Kindersley

Engels
1e druk
9781465467140
oktober 2018
Bindwijze overig -- Binding "Other"
280 pagina's

Euro 22,99

---

Could there be a difference in the bookbinding?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 16, 2018 18:31

Subject:

Re: Slight variation on book cover to catalogue

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, Stuart9 writes:

Existing entry :

9781465467140 (Inv) The LEGO Book New Edition: with exclusive LEGO brick
Books: Informational Book

Variation has different id number, see photo's.

That could be it, but where does the different number come from? Is that also
related to a prototype?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 15, 2018 17:25

Subject:

Re: Slight variation on book cover to catalogue

Viewed:

15 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, Stuart9 writes:

Existing entry :

9781465467140 (Inv) The LEGO Book New Edition: with exclusive LEGO brick
Books: Informational Book

Variation has different id number, see photo's.

In General, Stuart9 writes:

Appears to be the approved version, it's missing the bottom print, but has
the registered mark and the 6+.

I received the same version in the Netherlands.

ISBN 978-0-24131-422-7
EAN 9780241314227

No text below the LEGO logo on the front side.

Also:

Exclusive LEGO(R) brick [6+]

instead of

Exclusive printed brick.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Dec 15, 2018 17:23

Subject:

Re: Slight variation on book cover to catalogue

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Stuart9 writes:

Existing entry :

9781465467140 (Inv) The LEGO Book New Edition: with exclusive LEGO brick
Books: Informational Book

Variation has different id number, see photo's.

In General, Stuart9 writes:

Appears to be the approved version, it's missing the bottom print, but has
the registered mark and the 6+.

I received the same version in the Netherlands.

ISBN 978-0-24131-422-7
EAN 9780241314227

No text below the LEGO logo on the front side.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 28, 2018 17:08

Subject:

Re: Finally! An Image of 9978-1

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:

Remember too, there's a couple polybags for parts that came with books that
were recently rejected that I submitted because neither I nor you were able to
locate a photo.

Yes, I remember. There's really only one fix for that: someone will have
to buy the books and photograph the bags. These kinds of sets wouldn't appear
in any catalog because the book must be opened to see them. Once we have photos,
then the sets will be quickly approved.

We're moving away from approving any submission which is not accompanied
by an image and I expect that will become firm policy within the next six months
or so.

There are simply too many items in the catalog completely missing images:

3 minifigures
29 sets
106 catalogs
108 books
133 gear
575 parts

Of the parts, over 200 of them are from the Modulex Decorated Tile category.
If we can't find images for those and there are no listings or wanted list
entries, I suggest we do a little pruning.

Why would you want to do that?
I agree that it would be better to have images, but why would anyone want to
remove information from our database unless the parts do not actually exist?

There are better solutions than deleting items.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 28, 2018 17:06

Subject:

Re: Decorated V Pattern

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In General, WhiteVanMan writes:

Ah yes, thank you Paul for giving me my opening. I actually have submitted things
only to have it rejected. I'm sure I didn't fill out the form correctly,
not for a lack of effort, I just find the form to be convoluted as heck. If
it were a bit more user friendly, I think it make a huge difference in soliciting
volunteer submissions.

It's fairly easy.

For any part that is stickered, you will need to find the numerical identifier
of the last one to be issued, and for that, I use the add an image section to
find it.

Have 3 tabs up,

1st is the catalogue.
2nd is Add an image section
3rd is Add a Part section.

Say that you want to add a stickered 45deg 1x2 slope.

This can be done easier using the * search wildcard.

Find the highest number of that particular part you can quickly find.

input that number in the add image box, and it should show that part in a description.

Cycle through numbers by 10 until you get an error, and then decrease the numbers
until you then get a description, and you can then increase by 1 to get the next
sequential number.

The undecorated slope has part number 3040.
Decorated slopes will have an additional number, all recent numbers will use
pb to indicate the "pattern numbered by BrickLink" like 3040pb000.

Knowing this, I would search the catalog for 3040pb*.
Then imply sort by item number.
That will make it easy to find the highest number currently in the catalog.

A search for that number +1 will show if that part is available, or if a part
with that number is pending approval.

Take a reasonable good picture of the part, preferably in daylight, or under
multiple lights, to eliminate shadows, and resize the pic to a Thumbnail on the
PC. (upload the picture, but don't submit the image yet)

Go to the add part section.

Add the number and identifier to the necessary boxes, along with the dimensions,
weight and such.

Use the same description(s) that other like parts have been added to the catalogue
before, and try to be accurate as possible.

Add the part to the catalogue.

Go back to the image section, and when you click on the verify , it should bring
up the item that you have just submitted, and you can then submit the corresponding
image.

I've done this with some of my mug collection, and will be doing others soon.

Have fun!

Paul

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 26, 2018 05:50

Subject:

I just wanted to show this image - thanks!

Viewed:

153 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

This screenshot shows how much work was done on the Seventh Catalog Project yesterday,
and it is continuing today.

Thanks everyone!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 13, 2018 17:19

Subject:

Re: 3001: what is the color of this brick

Viewed:

62 times

Topic:

In Colors, yoavheskia writes:

please help to identify the color of the right brick

Trans-Neon Orange, Current Trans-Orange, Older Trans-Orange

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 12, 2018 04:55

Subject:

Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

The next catalog project

I apologize that this group of projects has not gone so well.

I think it did go well enough. There was a list of ideas, there was discussion,
and now there is a plan on how to move forward.

I will not bundle so many projects together in the future.

Good improvement. That will make the discussion better.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 11, 2018 11:38

Subject:

Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

I would use something like:

Print on one side only:
"with X pattern"

Print on both sides:
"with X pattern on front and Y pattern on back"
or maybe
"dual-sided with X pattern on front and Y pattern on back"
because that makes it possible to use a search filter.

Face print on both sides:
"dual-faced with X pattern on front and Y pattern on back"

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 11, 2018 07:52

Subject:

Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

So is there anything you want us to help with?

Not so much at the moment. The catalog is open now to Technic figure parts,
but no entries have been submitted. I'm still looking over the dual-color
molded arms to see how all this is going to work and still thinking about the
other changes.

If you'd like to do something, help me think up a good, brief descriptor
for heads with non-face printing on both sides. I've only gotten one suggestion
so far.

I think a contributing problem is that Dual-Sided is ambiguous. It could be used
for either. Maybe it should be changed to Dual-Faces.

I am also thinking about something like "dual-faced".

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 10, 2018 17:08

Subject:

Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

+1
I also think that these parts should be split.

In Catalog, axaday writes:

If it helps, you can change me to agreeing with Skylark now that I know what
we are talking about.

In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:

Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.

No one knew what was going on with this one. Nine people had no opinion, two
said maybe, two said yes, and one said no. If it's so obscure of an issue
that no one even knows about it, then I don't believe it needs to be addressed
(at least not by new catalog entries). However, I will be happy to add additional
notes to any parts affected by changes in molding process if someone will give
me a list of such parts and suggestions on wording.

I will restate that this needs to be done.
Most people probably do not deal much with friends parts.
These are ENTIRELY different parts. THey even have ENTIRELY different part numbers.

The one type of legs are printed.
The other type of legs are dual-molded.
The printed legs look much worse than the dual-molded ones.
This seems more serious to me than some of the other entries with multiple variants.

Andrew

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 7, 2018 10:33

Subject:

Re: Second Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?

I agree. I do not associate these figures with Halloween at all.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 3, 2018 18:24

Subject:

Re: We have a new Inventories Admin

Viewed:

49 times

Topic:

Inventories

In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:

Hello again everybody,

We mentioned last week that we were looking for a new Inventories Admin, and
I'm announcing today that we have appointed Randy (user randyf) to this position.

Randy is a very well-known contributor to the catalog, a frequent participant
in Forum discussions, and pretty much a person we couldn't imagine BrickLink
being without. He has contributed a large number of color-adjusted Lego part
renders which have helped define the look of BrickLink for the next generation.
And his work with PCCs is unmatched.

We are pleased and excited to extend these admin privileges to Randy and to welcome
him to our admin team.

Russell

Congratulations to Randy and BrickLink, another great addition to the team of
volunteers!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Nov 1, 2018 13:30

Subject:

Re: New Catalog Roadmap

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, randyf writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

Have we ever considered making the jump to using Lego official color names?

Yes, in fact I suggested it once myself. Then someone pointed out that some
of these names are rather convoluted and silly. Our names are better, but I
would like to include the official colors names on or color chart for cross-reference.

Please do not ever consider switching to using the official LEGO color names
here. They are indeed *very* convoluted and silly. For examples: BL Tan is LEGO
Brick Yellow, BL Magenta is LEGO Bright Reddish Violet, and BL Brown is LEGO
Earth Orange. Just those three alone make me wonder what TLG was thinking (or
smoking?) when naming colors.

Cheers,
Randy

I still think my suggestion would work:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=635575

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 31, 2018 17:46

Subject:

Re: Second Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Here's the plan: I'm going to post back here later today with all my
proposed changes (I may have to take this in steps) and give people a chance
to comment.

If you do have a comment/suggestion on where these parts are going, please suggest
an alternative location. Before you comment, look at the situation carefully
and present a good argument about why the proposed category is inappropriate.

Parts:

Beehive - move to Cone

I think 'Animal - Air' might be better for this, but that's just
a thought.

Or Minifigure, Utensil

Could be if it was beehive made by human like this on photo. This one is definitly
made by bees themselves.

To me, it looks most like something that Disney uses in their cartoons. I have
never seen a natural bee colony looking like these.

I assumed that they were based on some idea of the older straw hives mixed with
a wasp nest. If there is any species building these, I'd like to see an image

Attached images:
- straw beehive
- honeybee colony
- wasp

LEGO calls part 35574 "MINI HAT, NO. 54" so that would be Minifigure, Headgear

We might need to rename the part after its completely different use in set 10261-1

35574 Cone 2 x 2 x 1 2/3 with Stacked Rings (Beehive / Cotton Candy)
Parts: Cone

10261-1 (Inv) Roller Coaster
4080 Parts, 11 Minifigures, 2018
Sets: Creator: Creator Expert: Fairground Collection

60171-1 (Inv) Mountain Fugitives
70 Parts, 4 Minifigures, 2018
Sets: Town: City: Police

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 31, 2018 17:42

Subject:

Re: Second Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Here's the plan: I'm going to post back here later today with all my
proposed changes (I may have to take this in steps) and give people a chance
to comment.

I think 'Animal - Air' might be better for this, but that's just
a thought.

Or Minifigure, Utensil

Could be if it was beehive made by human like this on photo. This one is definitly
made by bees themselves.

Attached images:
- straw beehive
- honeybee colony
- wasp nest

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 31, 2018 16:42

Subject:

Re: Second Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Here's the plan: I'm going to post back here later today with all my
proposed changes (I may have to take this in steps) and give people a chance
to comment.

I think 'Animal - Air' might be better for this, but that's just
a thought.

Or Minifigure, Utensil

Spiral Pole - move to Hose

My first thought on this was that it should go to Axle, but Hose is probably
a better fit.

Waves - create new category titled Wave

This one has me conflicted. There's a number of these Wave items that should
be in 'Minfig - Utensil' but others should not. Is it better to keep
them all together in a new category, or split them based on common usage?

Josh

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 29, 2018 18:43

Subject:

Re: Some recessed studs are recessed.

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, mfav writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Give me some more information including comparison photos which show the actual difference

I don't know how to better show the difference than in the photo I provided
above. If you have some idea how to better illustrate the difference, share,
and I can attempt another photo.

The problem with your photo is it’s just lines you drew. Not easy to see for
oneself.

Try a close-up of both studs from an angle so we can see how deep they are?
If the parts are side by side or the same relative size and if you manage to
show the inside border of the studs…

Or maybe insert a common LEGO part and show how far it goes?
This way, anyone could easily do the same.
(A nozzle? They have grips that can help see the length. Better than plain
bars.)

I think the image is pretty good. The hole is the same, but it starts from a
lower stud.

I suspect that this is a mold error/variation. Interesting, but I do not know
if this is a functional difference that needd a new catalog entry.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 29, 2018 06:01

Subject:

Re: New Catalog Roadmap

Viewed:

56 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Want to know where we're going with the catalog? Hard to do without a map,
isn't it?

I'm excessively pleased to announce the all-new Catalog Roadmap in the Help
Center:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473

If you lose that link, you can always find the page in the Help Center for the
catalog:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?topicID=21

This is an effort to increase transparency about what is happening with the BrickLink
catalog and to make it feel more like a community effort. And, of course, to
get some stuff done.

And no, before anyone asks, I don't know what's going on with the site
roadmap. I thought it was a fantastic feature and I'm quite excited to finally
have something similar for the catalog.

Feedback? Ideas? Comments?

I think there still are some inconsistencies in the catalog:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=202697
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=235406

I think those issues were never solved.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 28, 2018 02:22

Subject:

Re: Another New Catalog Thing

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

I am wasting no time in making your lives marginally better, my friends.

For your convenient reference, we now have a list with links and descriptions
of known part variants which are not distinguished by BrickLink:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=940

This list is majorly incomplete and I could use some assistance in completing
it. If you're bored and want to gather additional variants not yet shown
on the list, please respond to this message with your list of variants (macro
tags appreciated, but not absolutely necessary).

To save others duplicating work, you might reply first saying you're going
to be working on it.

4229 Engine, Strakes, 2 x 2 Thin Top Plate
Parts: Aircraft

2547 Shark Body
Parts: Animal, Body Part

I would prefer to have an alternate large image showing the variations for all
of these items in our catalog. The shark body is a good example for that.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 27, 2018 14:50

Subject:

Re: New Catalog Roadmap

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

Should this be included?
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1101957

Yes, and it is now added.

Thank you!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 27, 2018 14:19

Subject:

Re: New Catalog Roadmap

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

Should this be included?
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1101957

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Oct 25, 2018 19:59

Subject:

Re: We have a new Catalog Admin!

Viewed:

58 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

Hello everyone,

We are pleased to announce that we have made another appointment. StormChaser,
who was appointed as Inventories Administrator last year, has now been promoted
to Catalog Administrator.

This is an important step for BrickLink. We haven't had a Catalog Admin appointment
for over nine years, and this is the first time someone has moved from the Inventories
side of the system to the Catalog side.

We believe StormChaser is highly qualified for this position. In addition to
an outstanding year as an Inventories Admin, he has had years of intense experience
with every area of the BrickLink Catalog. He has made many thousands of corrections,
uploaded an enormous amount of new data, and has solved a number of LEGO mysteries
over the years. So we're very pleased he has agreed to accept this position,
and we look forward to his activity in this new area.

We will be be making another appointment soon to fill his former position as
Inventories Administrator.

Russell

Congratulations StormChaser!

I am happy to see a new Catalog Admin added to the team, especially because the
workload seems to be increasing every year.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 30, 2018 09:36

Subject:

Re: Is this classed as a different brick?

Viewed:

47 times

Topic:

In Help, CraftHouseBrick writes:

I’ve had a look and can’t find an old variant.

Is it worth asking about getting such a variant added to the database?

In Help, CraftHouseBrick writes:

Hi, thanks for your immediate reply!!

I’ll have a look for a variant piece listing for it. I’ve actually got about
6 or 7 floating around in a box of my stuff from when I was a child!
Thanks again

In Help, jblock writes:

In Help, CraftHouseBrick writes:

Hi, I’m new(ish) to BrickLink - certainly selling on here x and I had a question...

This is a regular “slope 33 4 x 3” piece which appears to me to be very old,
as it is unlike a lot of other bricks of the same appearance in that the tubes
underneath are split and has “PEND” in place of it’s part number.

I can’t find any evidence of this brick in the catalog... does it just class
as a regular “33 4x3” brick or is it special/rare in any way?

Thanks for any help you can give

Bricks with the split tubes like this are older, usually from the 60's/70's.
I'm not sure if this part number has an "old" variant, but for the 3001's
and 3002's, these split tubes are classified along with the other 3001old
and 3002old parts. You have a very vintage piece there!

Probably something fromn the mid 1970s. The 3001old with these tubes were introduced
in 1973. Sellers usually list them separately with "with split tubes" in the
comments.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 26, 2018 15:15

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Gear 8020332

Viewed:

22 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, Redhawk_Kevin writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8020332 (Inv) Watch Set, SW Darth Maul
Gear: Watch: Star Wars

* Change 8 Gear Black {bbw001 Watch, Link without rectangular holes (makes slightly shorter band) to bbw083 Watch, Link without rectangular holes, Oval-Shaped}
* Change 6 Gear Flat Silver {bbw001 Watch, Link without rectangular holes (makes slightly shorter band) to bbw083 Watch, Link without rectangular holes, Oval-Shaped}
* Change 4 Gear Red {bbw001 Watch, Link without rectangular holes (makes slightly shorter band) to bbw083 Watch, Link without rectangular holes, Oval-Shaped}
* Change 2 Gear Trans-Red {bbw001 Watch, Link without rectangular holes (makes slightly shorter band) to bbw083 Watch, Link without rectangular holes, Oval-Shaped}

Comments from Submitter:
Updated with new watch link variant.

Thanks for the quick work on these!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 23, 2018 18:59

Subject:

Re: White brick with holes?

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I found this in my spare parts. Which part is it? It seems not to neither

3709a Technic, Brick 2 x 4 with Holes on All Sides
Parts: Technic, Brick

3709c Technic, Brick 2 x 4 with Holes on All Sides - Solid Studs
Parts: Technic, Brick

Why not 3709c?

Because 3709c is made from two parts (notice the line in the picture),

Well, I know 3709a is split, but the pictures of 3709c are just bad renders,
so I wasn’t sure 3709c was split too.

It was.

and it doesn't exist in white.

No. The catalogue doesn’t know it exists. It doesn’t know a set where the part
would have appeared, or of one such part sold in the last 6 montths.

Now, as it’s not split, but (as shown on another of your posts) it has a bottom,
maybe it’s a prototype?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 17, 2018 11:03

Subject:

Re: Seeking Opinions on Part Assemblies in Invs

Viewed:

34 times

Topic:

In Catalog, mockingbird writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

The catalog entries would likely remain for any parts removed from inventories
and could still be used for buying and selling just as they are now.

Yes, please

The second route we could go is to include all of the existing part assemblies
in the catalog in inventories. That opens the door to many more part assemblies
being added to the catalog and to inventories. My concern with that approach
is that eventually you fill up inventories (and the catalog) with part assemblies
- especially when you consider stickered/printed assemblies, assembly color variations,
and part variant assemblies.

For assemblies the color combinations and part variants are indeed a difficult
issue. Can't think of an easy solution for that. Something like a 'not
applicable' color and then add a comment to describe the colors (or variants)?
This would work for selling the parts, but I don't know if the comment field
is available in inventories.

Why not create a new option in inventories? Something like 'assembled parts
and pairs' This would include the wheel/tyre combination, the assembled hinges,
stickers over assembly, etc.

Something like this would be my preference also.
This section could work exactly like the current counterparts, but under a different
category heading and with a different definition. All the current exceptions
to the counterparts could go in this category.

This would NOT include full assemblies of subsets (like a train wagon or a car).
These go in the 'special assembly' (or subset) option .

Keep the counterparts option for the stickered parts, strings, hoses as per your
new definition.

And because of the many options in inventories that would be available then.
Make it possible to hide certain of these options when viewing or printing the
inventory.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 16, 2018 16:12

Subject:

Re: sw880

Viewed:

21 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Redhawk_Kevin writes:

There is actually a much larger assortment of watch variants. This may be too
detailed for Bricklink?

I have been supplying a large number of inventories for Star Wars watches recently,
but there are many variants that I have not tried to sort out for the catalog.
I did add the inventory for this watch today.

- Kevin

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, Dino1 writes:

What do you mean with three variants?

I allowed myself to compile your photo with third variant "older" artwork box
(like in first one) but with sw880.
All three have the same number.

Could you check the watch links?
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=241893

[g=bbw001]
[g=bbw083]

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 13, 2018 10:46

Subject:

Re: Return the Catalog tab

Viewed:

54 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, JulieK writes:

Please put it back.
It was the perfect word to describe where it took users.

I came to BrickLink for the catalog first, and started to buy later.

The catalog is not just a tool we use for selling, it is a hugely important way
to draw people to the site. I know that it has been gone for a long time, but
I would still love to have a separate catalog tab back.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 12, 2018 16:43

Subject:

Replying to messages in the NEWS topic

Viewed:

76 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Vote:

[Yes|No]

Every time we reply to a topic in the NEWS section of the forum, we get the error
message:

"Oops! There was a problem processing your request:
1. Topic was not selected."

Please make it possible to reply to the NEWS section without this error.
Possible solutions include:
- allow replies in the NEWS section,
- select one topic by default (instead of asking users to pick one at random,
usually Announce and/or Administrative are used)

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 11, 2018 14:28

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Minifig atl011

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, WhiteVanMan writes:

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, WhiteVanMan writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

Minifig No: atl011 Name: Atlantis Diver 3 - Ace Speedman - With Propeller

atl011 (Inv) Atlantis Diver 3 - Ace Speedman - With Propeller
Minifigures: Atlantis

* Delete 1 Part 6041 Pearl Light Gray Propeller 3 Blade 3 Diameter
* Add 1 Part 6041 Flat Silver Propeller 3 Blade 3 Diameter

Comments from Submitter:
I've got 2 of the sets that this minifig comes from, and both were sealed, and I found that this propellor is actually in the newer colour of Flat Silver more than Pearl Light Grey, hence this change request. (I can't change the set's inventory to reflect this as well)

Here's the thing with PLG/flat silver parts: the catalog's really a mess
right now regarding those colors. It needs to be fixed, but right now the issue
is on hold. Sorry, but we're not going to be changing any PLG to flat silver
or flat silver to PLG for the time being.

OK

Then why not find out WHEN the newer style of Flat Silver that the LEGO group
uses first came in, and then state that all of the sets from THAT time will have
that style colour, so that we shall know WHICH colour is correct for a particular
part?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/15206357186/
The color was introduced in 2010. But parts were made in the old color earlier
than that, and LEGO would have used any old stock before making the parts in
the new color. As a result, both the old and new color could be correct here.

It's well known that there are 2 distinct colours for the Flat silver that
we are aware of, and it can be done in the same way as the Light Grey/Light Bluish
Grey saga came about over 10 years ago....

How can it not be resolved?

Paul

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 11, 2018 07:40

Subject:

Re: Difference between mold types

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Help, randyf writes:

In Help, WoutR writes:

In Help, mfav writes:

It's very subtle, this difference.

Nice image!

Are the clips on the other side different also?

No.

Thanks. The name suggests a difference like

2555 Tile, Modified 1 x 1 with Clip
Parts: Tile, Modified

93794 Tile, Modified 1 x 1 with Clip with Center Cut
Parts: Tile, Modified

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 11, 2018 07:34

Subject:

Re: Difference between mold types

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In Help, mfav writes:

It's very subtle, this difference.

Nice image!

Are the clips on the other side different also?

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 10, 2018 06:58

Subject:

Re: 3001old mold variations

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Catalog, patpendlego writes:

Hello!

So far, I have found 42 bricks 2x4 with differences (and likely there are more).
Curious about your findings

https://www.leggodt.nl/items/lego/parts.php?group=4&withimages=yes&language=en#top

I can't believe how difficult it is to find number 31 on your list

I do have all the others, your list was very helpful when I started my collection.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 9, 2018 17:33

Subject:

Re: 3001old mold variations

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Catalog, kislibricks writes:

Thank you for your reply. My problem here is that my customer opened a NSS because
we didn't ship what he was expecting, that is the exact brick on the picture
with the old logo.

That's why it would be great if we could add a note on the page and/or some
more pictures of the different variations. What do you think?

One more thing... just to be clear.

This problem seems to be a misunderstanding about the catalog item on the buyers
side.

If you sent 2x4 bricks without cross-support then the NSS is not justified. BrickLink
does not recognise all the minor mold variations, and it would not be reasonable
to expect that level of detail from a seller. If a buyer needs a specific version,
then he/she needs to ask the seller about those details before ordering.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/111441268@N03/albums/72157648936541745

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 9, 2018 17:20

Subject:

Re: 3001old mold variations

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Catalog, kislibricks writes:

We would need a dozen photos....

To find those exact bricks the buyer would need to buy bricks with the "Samsonite
Open O" logo. They can be found in the USA and Canada... This logo was never
used on bricks in Europe.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 9, 2018 14:05

Subject:

Re: 3001old mold variations

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Catalog, kislibricks writes:

Hello!

It seems there exists several variations/molds of the 3001old part (at least
2), which are neither 3001special, 3001f1, bhol04, 3001oldf1 or 3001oldb.

3001old Brick 2 x 4 without Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

The 3001old we have are without Cross Supports, but seems newer than the one
pictured, as they don't have the old LEGO logo. They come from old sets from
the 70's that we part outed. The 3001old period ranges from 1954 to 2006
(though I doubt for the last year, I think it ended sooner).

We had an issue with a customer, who already owns some 3001old with the old logo,
and newer 3001old he ordered in our store.

Should we put a notice on the item page? Should the 3001old reference be splitted
into 2 references?

Opinions welcome!

Vincent

There are many different versions of 3001old. They were used from 1958 to the
early 1980s so it not strange that there are many different versions and stud
logos. The 2006 date in our catalog is correct because Maersk blue 3001old were
used in that year.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 15:44

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

[…]

According to the part I emphasized, I’d say it’s because 3830c01 doesn’t break
when one tries to get them apart.

Maybe...

Well, I didn’t break either but, when a kid and when brick separators didn’t
exist, I had to use a butter knife to disassemble 3937c01 while I always could
disassemble 3830c01 easily by hand.

I remember using a knife to separate plates, I do not remember separating either
of these hinges as a kid.

Next question:

How much sense does it make to mark this part for deletion after stating to be
on the sidelines of this discussion, after the discussion in this thread concluded
that we need a better definition for counterparts, and after the inventory admins
decided to add these parts to inventories for now.

No sense at all, but the two hinges are still different.

looking at https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1562 I am not sure if that
difference is relevant.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 14:52

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

56 times

Topic:

In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

[…]

I've been on the sidelines of this issue this time around (I have previously
been right in the middle of it) but I have to mention that this little 1 x 2
hinge is something I've long thought was a worthy counterpart, because of
how many of them I have destroyed trying to get them apart:

3937c01 (Inv) Hinge Brick 1 x 2 with (Same Color) Top Plate (3937 / 3938)
Parts: Hinge

Could you explain why 3830c01 is different?

3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel
Parts: Hinge
Marked for Deletion

According to the part I emphasized, I’d say it’s because 3830c01 doesn’t break
when one tries to get them apart.

Maybe...
Next question:

How much sense does it make to mark this part for deletion after stating to be
on the sidelines of this discussion, after the discussion in this thread concluded
that we need a better definition for counterparts, and after the inventory admins
decided to add these parts to inventories for now.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 12:27

Subject:

Re: Bricktober sets: still pending?

Viewed:

53 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Reki_Lobsheek writes:

I was wondering why the Bricktober sets (HP and Jurassic World) are still pending
to be added to the BL catalog?

Seems they are being sold on Ebay and other venues for quite a while now and
in serious quantities, so they must be released in some countries.

Even on BL they are already being sold:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=5005254#T=A

As we have no Toys'r'Us in Belgium I have no idea whether they were already
in the stores last week (perhaps some German members can fill in?).
Is BL awaiting some kind of "official" release or waiting for the US release?

Reki

I think they are waiting on any official release.

I found a Dutch website showing an image from Promobricks stating the dates of
release:

5005254 - August 27 to September 02
5005255 - September 03 to September 09
5005257 - September 10 to September 16
5005256 - September 17 to September 23

https://www.bouwsteentjes.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/LEGO-Bricktober-2018-sets.png

Not sure why these sets are called "Bricktober"

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 11:31

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

46 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
For the instances of this assembly where the top color is different than the
base, do these all need to be added to the catalog individually? For example:

Please go here and look at the catalog items pending approval from me and the
images pending approval from me:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogPend.asp

If you (or anyone else) can provide images for the ones I couldn't, then
please do.

Looking at it a bit further, I guess it's actually not too bad. Since the
top would be the only fixed color, there's only a max of 16 new entries that
would (currently) need to be added.

I only counted 14 new entries. After you take a look at what I have pending,
please let me know which two I missed.

I always forget about the pending catalog page. I should have realized you were
already on top of things! There's a few of them I can probably take pictures
of. I'll try and do that tonight if I can find them. I know I can at least
do the Brown one if nothing else.

I came up with 16 possible new items just by looking at the number of different
colored top plates there are. Upon further review on my part (which I should
have done originally), the Maersk and Sand Green colors are matched, so that
just leaves the 14 that you already came up with.

Josh

3937c01 (Inv) Hinge Brick 1 x 2 with (Same Color) Top Plate (3937 / 3938)
Parts: Hinge

Could you explain why 3830c01 is different?

3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel
Parts: Hinge
Marked for Deletion

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 09:42

Subject:

Re: Modulex baseplate 8x8 ?

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

Modulex

In Modulex, novabrick writes:

In Modulex, WoutR writes:

I frequently see Modulex baseplates 8x8 in used lots.

They seem to be so common in different lots that I would be surprised if they
were all custom made from larger baseplates by the users.

Does anyone know:
- If these were actually made by Modulex?
- How these were used?

Many early LEGO Base plates appear to be cut to size. Given the many Modulex
letters avialible they might be used as door tags or name tags with changeble
letters. I've also seen huge planing boards with those letters based on modulex.
However I have never actually seen architectual use of Modulex bricks but I can't
see any use for an 8 x 8 square for this use in particular.

Christian

novabrick-team

They could be from the Planning board era, but I am not certain about that.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 5, 2018 09:27

Subject:

Modulex baseplate 8x8 ?

Viewed:

126 times

Topic:

Modulex

Status:

Open

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Sep 1, 2018 16:54

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

48 times

Topic:

https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=241320

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, mhortar writes:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog, paulvdb writes:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In this extreme example, I trust that you can see the part was included for reasons
of commerce. To me, it's no different than the extreme example at the other
end of the spectrum of this part (which never came assembled in any set):

3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel
Parts: Hinge
Marked for Deletion

I see that this part is marked for deletion. Since the counterpart policy has
changed it seems like it should not be.

Great.

I give up.

Yeah. Can't tell if it's just a case of 'left hand doesn't know
what the right hand is doing' or some sort of turf war.

Josh

I did not see any catalog admins taking part in this discussion, but I do not
think it is a coincidence that after 16 years in the catalog, this part is suddenly
deemed a bad "precedent."

Incidentally, looking at just the black version as an example, it appears that
the complete hinge sells at about three times the rate as the individual parts.
It is pretty clear that people prefer to buy this hinge as a unit. It's my
opinion that the number would be even higher if the hinge were in the counterpart
section of inventories.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 31, 2018 16:26

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

40 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:

I am grateful, but also mindful of the resentment that seems to accompany the
decision.

It sounds as though you're saying I should keep my opinions to myself.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "commercial assembly."

I define a commercial assembly as any assemblage of individual parts which did
not come in the package already assembled. The only reason for having catalog
entries for assemblies which originally came unassembled is to facilitate the
ease of buying and selling them. I would make an exception to that definition,
however, for minifigures.

Yes, they fit together. Yes, they were intended to be assembled by the end user.
Yes, they were intended by TLG to be used as one part. Yes, in the wild you're
likely to find them already assembled. Yes, sellers and buyers would prefer
to have the ability to sell them as a unit instead of individual parts. None
of those facts make the reasons for including them in the catalog any less commercial.

Several of those criteria accurately describe this part:

spa0008 (Inv) Jurassic World Gate - Set 10758
Parts: Special Assembly

3830c01 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel
Parts: Hinge
Marked for Deletion

There is one important difference. Parts assemblies like 3830c01 form a "functional
element" that is used in many sets. Part assemblies like spa0008 are a "minibuild"
that is used in one set only. (The names of those categories are not perfect,
but I think you'll understand what I mean.)

I do see the "minibuild" category as commercial only.
I do not see the "functional element" category in the same way, they are suited
for a more intuitive approach to the parts in our catalog and I do see added
value in that. (I agree with you that they should not be in the main inventory,
and that it is an uneasy exception to include them in the counterpart section)

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 30, 2018 12:13

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

Is there any chance of updating the definition? I would prefer a strict definition
with a lot of exceptions over the current vague definition.

Yes, of course it should be updated if the situation is ever corrected. However,
as long as the counterparts section is being used as a catch-all for a variety
of items, then I don't think it really matters. We'll just throw everything
in there and call it good - no definition needed.

I do not agree with you on that.
It is good to know what should be in there, and what are the exceptions.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 29, 2018 17:42

Subject:

Re: Crappy pictures for similar parts.

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

In Catalog, zux writes:

Just found out someone has added two parts that need to be distinguished as they
are slightly different but pictures doesn't provide any visual clue. Basically
pictures are useless since there is no difference whatsoever.

Parts in questions:

44301a Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End with Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

44301b Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End without Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

These are slightly better, but difference is barely visible:
[P=44302a]
[P=44302b]

Why there's no picture with both items placed side by side helping in distinguishing
the difference?

How did this slip into catalog?

Difference is clearly visible.
Some unedited ones
Didn't add them because in both variants on them are in different color.

It is the same difference as in

44567a Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side with Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

and

44567b Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side without Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

Perfect, thanks!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 29, 2018 07:24

Subject:

Re: Update: Part Assemblies in Inventories

Viewed:

42 times

Topic:

In Catalog, StormChaser writes:

There has been inconsistency for many years regarding when part assemblies should
or should not be included as counterparts in set inventories.

Thank you all for the opinions expressed. You made it feel like a community
again.

Together we discovered a good solution which I am quite confident would please
all of us - adding a new section to inventories for commercial assemblies and
creating a strict definition for counterparts. However, getting BrickLink to
implement that solution appears to be troublesome.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Is there any chance of updating the definition? I would prefer a strict definition
with a lot of exceptions over the current vague definition.

These orphan parts have bothered me for years and I have decided to take the
unpopular route of adding them all to inventories as counterparts. From now
on the counterparts section of inventories may be considered a junk drawer into
which everything nonstandard is thrown.

This situation may be fixed at some point in the future. If it is, then there
are many things which are already wrongly classified as counterparts which will
need to be moved. Adding a few thousand moves to the mix won't change much.

I am not happy with what I'm about to do, but it is (and has been for many
years) rather petty to keep these parts out of inventories. Yes, there should
be rules for part assemblies and yes, older assemblies should not be grandfathered
in if they don't fit the rules. There are no rules, though, so whatever
assemblies are added to the catalog will be thrown into the counterparts section
for the time being.

Please do not submit ICRs for now. I don't want to flood the forum with
change requests. I'll simply add these assemblies as I have time and should
be done within a couple of months. After I finish, I will likely ask for volunteers
to look through and see if I've missed anything.

Thank you all again for the lively discussion and I'm sorry that we could
not get the problem properly solved.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 28, 2018 13:18

Subject:

Re: The plight of part 44567

Viewed:

45 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

In Catalog, mockingbird writes:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:

44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge

First we added the definitive non-grooved variant, which turned out to be the
most recent one.

And here is the really important line in this message:

the A and B versions of this part were just switched today

So if you've labeled bags containing this variant you will need to reverse
this numbering.

Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.

Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.

I think it is not wise to put some meaning to an itemID. So the change of the
a and b version should not have happened, in my opinion. Even if in other parts
the itemIDs were assigned chronologically.

BrickLink ID numbers are "smart" numbers - they aren't a series of digits
randomly assigned when an entry is formed. We have those types of numbers internally,
btw, and maybe one of the things we could or should do is to make those numbers
available on the main catalog page for every entry.

The -a, -b, -c pattern is so prevalent in the catalog that even if we put a large
disclaimer on the Help pages stating that a chronological order should not be
inferred, people would still assume so. 99 percent of -a, -b, -c variants are
chronological, and it actually is a great help in giving people an instant understanding
of the relationship between variants, especially when the auto-generated dates
on the catalog page can be so misleading at times.

If a change is needed, maybe it would be better to skip the previously used letters
(-a, -b) and simply use the next available (-c, -d).

Then
- the old part numbers will not cause confusion
- the new part numbers will be in alphabetical order

It might look a bit odd at first sight, but I think that it would be a good compromise.

Also I think the catalog should keep the 'undetermined' versions of parts.
Because: -not all set inventories have the specified mold varients
-not all sellers want to differentiate between small mold varients, and they
should be able to (or must) list as undetermined.
-not all buyers care about the mold varient, they should be able to buy 'undetermined'.
(Ideally if you choose undetermined all versions would show up)

Ideally we decide as a site what we are going to distinguish and not distinguish
and every seller falls in line and helps us uphold a site-wide standard that
buyers can rely on.

The problem is that there *are* variants in the catalog that are not worth the
hassle, and over the years this has resulted in many sellers justifiably rejecting
these distinctions.

I think there is room for a middle ground where for a certain group of variants
sellers can opt to flag their listings for one variant or another, and the listings
would encompass both sellers who distinguish and others who don't.

But for the majority of parts, we need a site-wide standard. To achieve this
we need a joint effort from sellers and the catalog. On the catalog side, we
need to decommission some entries that are needlessly precise. The classic example
of that (and it has already been done) is the headlight brick with slot:
[p=4070a]

Sellers, on the other hand, need to come to the table ready to sort some variants
they may not believe in personally. A great example for that would be the standard
1 x 2 tile:

3069 Tile 1 x 2
Parts: Tile

No seller should be listing the old non-grooved style mixed in with the new grooved
style. They look terrible together and the old version can be very hard to remove.
in this case, we as a site need to make a clear distinction between the old and
the new.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 28, 2018 13:09

Subject:

Re: Crappy pictures for similar parts.

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Catalog, axaday writes:

I can make one for 44302 this evening.

In Catalog, WoutR writes:

In Catalog, tEoS writes:

Of course they are different. Did you read the descriptions? That would give
you a clue to the difference.

In Catalog, zux writes:

44301a Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End with Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

44301b Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End without Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

I first read the name and then I still had to search for the difference. It IS
visible in the photos, but a clear comparison image would be a good addition.

Thanks!

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 28, 2018 12:45

Subject:

Re: Crappy pictures for similar parts.

Viewed:

37 times

Topic:

In Catalog, tEoS writes:

Of course they are different. Did you read the descriptions? That would give
you a clue to the difference.

In Catalog, zux writes:

44301a Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End with Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

44301b Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on End without Bottom Groove
Parts: Hinge

I first read the name and then I still had to search for the difference. It IS
visible in the photos, but a clear comparison image would be a good addition.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 27, 2018 09:48

Subject:

Re: Colour confusion

Viewed:

39 times

Topic:

In Colors, randyf writes:

In Colors, Lord.Oddfish writes:

So i guess my question is, is there a known large varation of the colour of the "pearl dark gray" pieces?

Yes. There is a Pearl Dark Gray pre-2010 (LEGO Color "Dark Grey Metallic"), and
a Pearl Dark Gray post-2010 (LEGO Color "Titanium Metallic").

https://www.flickr.com/photos/126975831@N07/17768155498

The set you are referring to was released in 2004, so the pieces should be in
the old Pearl Dark Gray which looks much more yellow than the current Pearl Dark
Gray.

HTH,
Randy

... AND the earliest parts in Dark Grey Metallic did look a bit more greenish
in color than the later parts.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 26, 2018 07:55

Subject:

Re: The plight of part 44567

Viewed:

78 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:

This part and its accompanying variant have spelled trouble for a number of years
now in the catalog, and finally a few folks decided to do something about it:

44567 Hinge Plate 1 x 2 Locking with 1 Finger on Side (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Hinge

I suspect that switching the numbers could cause problems for a lot of sellers.
I am quite surprised to see this happening.

Renumbering is never taken lightly, but in this case we felt we had to do it
because of 2 other entries added with nearly the same situation - early grooved
version followed by a non-grooved version. Quite the opposite from what we know
to be true with standard tiles.

Thanks for your patience. Resetting the numbers to reflect the correct chronological
order will save a lot of misunderstanding in the future.

I think we need a better messaging system to inform the sellers who were affected
by the change. I think that bagelboybugle described the only possible route for
a catalog renumbering like this one.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 21, 2018 15:04

Subject:

Re: Who akes OCR cannot leave feedback

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Shintaku writes:

Hello,

as a seller I always have this problem:

buyer submits a rash order then wants to cancel.
If you do agree, you risk the buyer leaving a negative feedback. I would surely
leave a neutral or negative for someone asking to cancel an order just because
they don't want the items anymore. But I can't leave it, as a revenge
negative is always ready.

So I deny the order cancel until they become NPB, I undergo the NPB procedure,
so the buyer isn't allowed to leave a feedback anymore.

But this way my items are BLOCKED FOR 14 DAYS (7 I have to wait + 7 I have to
wait the NPB to resolve) and no one can buy them anymore.

Instead if I was able to accept the OCR, knowing they will not be able to leave
a negative, I would do that, leave a neutral, relist my items instatly and move
on.

I don't think that removing the chance to leave a feedback if we wish to
cancel the order is so unfair. The ones who wish to cease the order, ceases the
feedback with it.

Please help us sellers.

Thanks

No. I have requested to cancel orders because the seller indicated that he did
not have the most important the items. The OCR does not have to mean that the
buyer does not want the items. Also, depending on the behaviour of the seller,
I might want to leave feedback.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 21, 2018 06:54

Subject:

Re: Stickerd Parts no longer CPs?

Viewed:

23 times

Topic:

Inventories

In Catalog Inventories, tmxbricks writes:

Are stickered parts no longer being listed as counter parts in Bricklink inventories?
I was verifying some set inventories and noticed all the following sets have
no stickered parts as CPs:

41322
41323
41327
41328
41329

For my own purposes, I have put stickered parts in the comments section of Brickstock
as I verify my inventories, but I liked having them listed as CPs.

That only means that no one has added those counterparts to the catalog yet.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 19:17

Subject:

Re: No color chosen, listing suggestion.

Viewed:

24 times

Topic:

The problem is that the catalog only knows a limited set of colors. 3001special
for example van be found in many more. And I think that we do not use colors
for stickers and there must be many more exceptions.

In Suggestions, C0lsanders_ writes:

Exactly. I had also thought after I posted that it warns if no condition is selected,
although you can't continue in that instance. I should think that the color
(if applicable) would be as necessary as condition is, and don't get how
it lets us list without a color chosen.

Miles (C0lsanders_)

In Suggestions, WoutR writes:

In Suggestions, C0lsanders_ writes:

Sorry if this has been suggested before (don't know how it couldn't have
been), but maybe red banner, large text saying "NO COLOR CHOSEN" when on the
add item verification page. Sort of the way it already warns you if you already
have 1 of said part in your inventory. Just something to say you failed to chose
a color would be a nice, simple addition. Would certainly help when listing white
items, because if you fail to chose a color, the part's image shows it in
white.

Miles (C0lsanders_)

I think we could do better...

When listing an item,
1) give a warning iF no color is chosen,
2) give a warning iF a color is chosen that is not known in the catalog,
3) give no warning if a color is chosen that is known in the catalog

After the warning, the seller should be able to continue with the listing. This
method is intended to prevent errors, but the seller could have a good reason
to list the item under that color.

To avoid unnecessary warnings, we might want to exclude certain parts or categories
such as stickers, 3001special, etc.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 17:00

Subject:

Re: No color chosen, listing suggestion.

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, C0lsanders_ writes:

I think we could do better...

When listing an item,
1) give a warning is no color is chosen,
2) give a warning is a color is chosen that is not known in the catalog,
3) give no warning if a color is chosen that is known in the catalog

After the warning, the seller should be able to continue with the listing. This
method is intended to prevent errors, but the seller could have a good reason
to list the item under that color.

To avoid unnecessary warnings, we might want to exclude certain parts or categories
such as stickers, 3001special, etc.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 09:57

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I found this brick among my spare parts. I can't find this configuration
of bottom tubes anywhere in the catalog among 1x6 bricks. It doesn't look
to me like the missing tubes are broken off, they're just missing. Does anyone
recognize it?

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Yes, and instead of a 3009, it is printed on a

crssprt02 Brick 1 x 6 without Bottom Tubes, with Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

I have tried to add printed variants like this to the catalog before and have
been told they will not be approved.

I would say it's neither of the two. 3009pb156 has 5 buttom tubes, and crssprt02
has none (but two cross supports). Mine has 2 buttom tubes with supports.

/Jan

Yes, and it has thin walls with vertical ridges. This is not an early brick design.

I don't agree there was a period in the early 1960 that had this style on
molds. so my first guess would have been like the OP first said that the pins
had been broken off, this can be done quite clean, if you put pressure on them
they will break right down by the pins bottom. Maybe it has been done to put
lights in the sign for a project.

I have never seen bricks from the early 1960s with thin walls.

I have four of these Shell signs with those thin walls but with all the pins
intact, (two different types of embossed prints) another two with a single lower
side support in the middle without thin walls.

I got one "POLICE" sign on the same kind of mold.

And one of those red 1x6 with Black headlight pattern.

3009p01 Brick 1 x 6 with Black Car Grille Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Years Released: 1971 - 1977

3009pb022 Brick 1 x 6 with Black 'POLICE' Serif Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Years Released: 1972 - 1983

These are bricks from the 1970s, not early 1960s.

I also got quit a bunch of unprinted ones but those
make it harder to determine which year they where used.

These where used but only during a very short period.

I stand corrected took it out of my memory without checking. still older then
other thin wall molds.

That is true. 2x4 molds with thin walls and split tubes were made around 1973-1976
(and remained in use for several years after that). Then LEGO returned to thick
walls for a few years. Around 1980 the thin walls came back with the 3001 with
cross-support. These 1x6 molds were probably made around the same time as the
2x4 bricks with split tubes.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 07:30

Subject:

Re: Seeking Opinions on Part Assemblies in Invs

Viewed:

31 times

Topic:

In LEGO, axaday writes:

In LEGO, StormChaser writes:
things like the following assembly (which was clearly created

only for commercial purposes):

spa0006 (Inv) Jurassic World Truck - Set 10758
Parts: Special Assembly

If that is what he was thinking, he was out of his mind. No one would buy that.
At least not in a timely manner.

BTW, since this has come up several times: this issue is not about the
amount of work involved.

I'm not calling you lazy and I'm not calling myself lazy, but why do
the work twice? We made some special assemblies a few months ago because Russell
was into it and I haven't spoken with him since, but if he is still into
it, I'd guess he has more stroke with the programmers than you or I do.
Maybe this can really get done soon.

We might need some way to sort these "functional part assemblies" from "minibuilds"
in the Special Assembly section. We would improve the Counterpart section, but
we might create a challenge for the Special Assemblies section.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 07:21

Subject:

Re: Seeking Opinions on Part Assemblies in Invs

Viewed:

43 times

Topic:

In LEGO, StormChaser writes:

In LEGO, WoutR writes:

Assemblies that are combined simply because they are "easy to sell" or "probably
wanted by buyers" are no real counterparts according to this definition. (Although
I do usually buy my hinges combined/as a pair, so I have some mixed feelings
about those.)

As I said, I imagine the catalog entries would remain. You could still buy and
sell assemblies (like the hinges you prefer to buy as a pair), but they wouldn't
be included in inventories.

As for assemblies that aren't really legitimate counterparts, I only made
two exceptions: parts with wheels and wheel and tire assemblies. I don't
feel like two exceptions is too many. The other exceptions are special/large
assemblies and those will likely have their own section in inventories at some
point.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. It seems like everyone who
has responded are on pretty much the same page. The only real problem I can
see with better defined inventories is that it will create more orphaned catalog
entries (entries without appearances in sets or timelines of release). These
orphaned entries are somewhat off the beaten path and thus are more difficult
to locate.

How do you feel about that?

I am convinced that the function of counterparts in our inventories is to accommodate
those parts that have changed. That is the only reason why we need counterparts.
(The MISB/unchanged part in the main inventory, the changed part in the counterpart
section).

Everything else we use the counterpart section for is an exception.

I do however see good reasons to include many assemblies in the catalog. I prefer
to have those linked to inventories. Currently, the counterpart section is the
best suited option to include them. Maybe the Special Assemblies section could
be used in the future.

The more I think about this, the longer the list of useful functional pairs becomes.
- wheel + tire
- turntable
- hinge
- animals (body + jaw, body + legs etc)
- container + lid
- window + glass
- lever + base
- For vehicles, the situation already becomes more complicated, there we have
a frame + wheels + tires (but the assembly should not become more complicated
than that)

For all of these, there are some basic guidelines:
- The assembly was actually used in a set. We should not want to add any combination
that would be theoretically possible.
- The assembly is simple, a few parts only (usually two, but vehicles use more)
- The assembly often provides a function (the parts were designed as a pair to
provide movement, rotation, etc.) or the assembly contains parts that are usually
not disassembled after their first use (animal parts, window + glass, container+lid)
because many users (and buyers) will perceive them as belonging together. Resellers
will often find these assemblies as pairs in used lots, the part is often useless
without its paired part (what use is glass without a window frame? or a jaw without
an animal body? I am sure that someone can MOC an exception, but 99% of the
time they will be used assembled).

Making this long list, I feel that making an exception for wheels+tires only
is not enough.

But I also feel that I do not want to open up the counterparts section for an
unlimited amount of subassemblies and minibuilds. The counterparts section clearly
needs some restrictions to remain useful. Something like the carrot assembly
(33172c01) should not be a counterpart. (But it might be a Special Assembly.
I still think the Special Assemblies are an unwanted clutter and complication
of our catalog, but I accept those are going to happen no matter how I feel about
them).

To summarize:
All these assemblies are exceptions if we use them as counterparts but I do prefer
to have them linked to inventories. Mini-builds/special assemblies are not counterparts
and we do need some limits to avoid blurring the distinction between those.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 19, 2018 06:26

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Yes, and instead of a 3009, it is printed on a

crssprt02 Brick 1 x 6 without Bottom Tubes, with Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

I have tried to add printed variants like this to the catalog before and have
been told they will not be approved.

I would say it's neither of the two. 3009pb156 has 5 buttom tubes, and crssprt02
has none (but two cross supports). Mine has 2 buttom tubes with supports.

/Jan

Yes, and it has thin walls with vertical ridges. This is not an early brick design.

I have never seen bricks from the early 1960s with thin walls.

And one of those red 1x6 with Black headlight pattern.

3009p01 Brick 1 x 6 with Black Car Grille Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Years Released: 1971 - 1977

3009pb022 Brick 1 x 6 with Black 'POLICE' Serif Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Years Released: 1972 - 1983

These are bricks from the 1970s, not early 1960s.

I also got quit a bunch of unprinted ones but those
make it harder to determine which year they where used.

These where used but only during a very short period.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 18, 2018 18:56

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, Biodreamer writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Yes, and instead of a 3009, it is printed on a

crssprt02 Brick 1 x 6 without Bottom Tubes, with Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

I have tried to add printed variants like this to the catalog before and have
been told they will not be approved.

I would say it's neither of the two. 3009pb156 has 5 buttom tubes, and crssprt02
has none (but two cross supports). Mine has 2 buttom tubes with supports.

/Jan

Yes, and it has thin walls with vertical ridges. This is not an early brick design.

I have never seen bricks from the early 1960s with thin walls.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 18, 2018 18:03

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Yes, and instead of a 3009, it is printed on a

crssprt02 Brick 1 x 6 without Bottom Tubes, with Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

I have tried to add printed variants like this to the catalog before and have
been told they will not be approved.

I would say it's neither of the two. 3009pb156 has 5 buttom tubes, and crssprt02
has none (but two cross supports). Mine has 2 buttom tubes with supports.

/Jan

Yes, and it has thin walls with vertical ridges. This is not an early brick design.

I didn't look closely. Weird. No point to the ridges without the pins. Some
kind of error?

Without the ridges the brick could not connect to a stud below. Without the pins,
this connection is less stable though.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 18, 2018 16:57

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

44 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

In Catalog Identification, 62Bricks writes:

In Catalog Identification, WoutR writes:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Yes, and instead of a 3009, it is printed on a

crssprt02 Brick 1 x 6 without Bottom Tubes, with Cross Supports
Parts: Brick

I have tried to add printed variants like this to the catalog before and have
been told they will not be approved.

I would say it's neither of the two. 3009pb156 has 5 buttom tubes, and crssprt02
has none (but two cross supports). Mine has 2 buttom tubes with supports.

/Jan

Yes, and it has thin walls with vertical ridges. This is not an early brick design.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 18, 2018 16:07

Subject:

Re: Brick 1 x 6 with two bottom tubes?

Viewed:

57 times

Topic:

In Catalog Identification, normann1974 writes:

I think it must be

3009pb156 Brick 1 x 6 with Red 'Shell' Wide with Squared 'e' Pattern
Parts: Brick, Decorated

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 18, 2018 10:49

Subject:

Re: Differentiate in SALES

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, Teup writes:

In Suggestions, StarBrick writes:

Sales are nice thing, right? Scoring a bulk load of 1x1 plates you so desperately
need for a long overdue project helps you move on!
When 70% of the sales announcements concern shops that do NOT ship to you, the
nice efforts turn into an ever growing deception....

So here's my suggestion: have a SALE announcement link to the shipping terms
of the store so there will be ONLY announcement visible that actually DO ship
to your country.

Ever working on a more pleasant environment.

StarBrick

It could be a good idea, reminds me of my suggestion for an American subforum
besides the language specific fora as I often find myself ending up in threads
that I have no knowledge of and that have no relevance to me, but then again
the entire forum needs to be chucked and replaced by a proper 21st century forum
in general so let's not try to fix an oldtimer with tape and elastic bands.

Anyway, actually I wonder - and this is an open question - are sales posts any
good at all? As a seller I've posted several and never noticed any effect,
and as a buyer it's time consuming to plough through as it is not immediately
clear if the sale and/or the store is serious and relevant. Maybe just get rid
of them in general or do others have thrilling sale experiences?

Anyway I'll vote yes.

I think that sales posts are effective for rare/unusual parts.

A general percentage off does not really interest me, small chance the seller
has enough of the important items on my wanted list to trigger an impulsive order.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 17, 2018 17:08

Subject:

Re: Seeking Opinions on Part Assemblies in Invs

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In LEGO, StormChaser writes:

In LEGO, randyf writes:

This list would *not* include everything else: motorcycles, wheelbarrows, trikes,
bicycles, dollies, wheel and tire assemblies, hinges, turntables, carrots, glass
on windows or doors, animals, minifigs, etc.

I excepted the wheel and tire assemblies for two reasons: first, they genuinely
are a pain to deal with. I think people would greatly prefer to buy and sell
these assembled and there is no harm in exceptions so long as they are clearly
defined. Second, a number of them did come assembled in sets. My thinking was
that if any part assembly did indeed come assembled in at least one set, then
it would hurt nothing to include it as a counterpart in other sets. Since it
will have a timeline of appearance by virtue of being included in some sets,
we might as well have an accurate timeline.

As for parts with wheels like the others you mentioned (motorcycles, trikes,
bicycles, wheelbarrows, skateboards, etc.) I was trying to strike a balance between
a little change and a lot of change. Removing all of the assemblies with wheels
from all inventories would be a significant change. The good thing about the
way I've worded the rule is that if later on we decide to go that route,
the term "parts with wheels" can simply be removed from the list of exceptions.

We agree on hinges, turntables, carrots, glass on windows or doors, etc.

I have always felt the Counterpart area should *only* be for things
in a set that could never be reversed and would be found in a Used set.

That's actually a very good definition. I like it.

I proposed something similar in 2016:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=963408

I agree we need a better definition of the counterpart. In my opinion, the counterpart
is an item that has changed when the set was build. If an assembly was assembled
by LEGO, but could be separated later then that would also be a "change" from
the original MISB situation.

- Parts taken from their sprue
- Stickers taken from sheet and applied
- Sticker over assembly
- Assembly by LEGO that can be taken apart by users later
- Assembly by user that cannot be taken apart easily (or without risking damage)

Such a definition would also guide us in the future. LEGO might surprise us with
something new, and then we would have a simple principle to base the inventory
decisions on.

Assemblies that are combined simply because they are "easy to sell" or "probably
wanted by buyers" are no real counterparts according to this definition. (Although
I do usually buy my hinges combined/as a pair, so I have some mixed feelings
about those.)

This list would include lengths of string that had to be cut, parts removed from
plastic sheets, parts removed from cardboard or paper sheets, stickers applied
to parts, etc. In none of these situations can the parts ever be returned to
their original state.

+ parts taken from their sprue

For parts removed from sheets that won't be an issue once they can be parted
out. For other parts, though, it makes sense:

4209c05 (Inv) String Reel 2 x 4 x 2 Holder with Black Drum with Black String and Light Gray Plate, Modified 1 x 1 with Light Attachment - Thick Ring (4209 / 4208 / x77 / 4081b)
Parts: String Reel / Winch

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 15, 2018 17:55

Subject:

Re: Wrong color item shown on Appears In page

Viewed:

29 times

Topic:

In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:

In Suggestions, randyf writes:

In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:

E.g.
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=4073#T=C&C=76

Select any color in the Known colors column, on the next page it shows
always the same color item image.

Even though the text states the color selected.

BrickLink... please show the image of the color selected.

Thank you.

Yes, yes, yes! I have always hated that, and it seems like a very easy fix.

Randy

Selecting the Price Guide Info column, does show the CORRECT color image,
so I agree it seems very easy to fix.

I think it shows the correct color when you look at the small image, but not
when the page uses the generic large image.

(Can't really test that now, typing on my phone...)

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 14, 2018 19:45

Subject:

Re: Color range on marbled parts 92235

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Colors, enig writes:

Hi,

This does not look a like a normal color range to me, but unfortunately I only
have the two pieces to compare.

The one on the right - is it WAY too bright, or still 'OK'?

I think that it is supposed to look like the version on the left...

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 14, 2018 16:51

Subject:

Re: Brown or Reddish Brown??? Please help!

Viewed:

30 times

Topic:

In Colors, patpendlego writes:

In Colors, MidwestBrick writes:

In Colors, bje writes:

Aah glad I'm not the only one with this problem

Sunlight IMO works best, I've sometimes looked at these till my eyes water
under every conceivable type of lightbulb and still made mistakes which came
out later in sunlight. Best is to have them in a pile like you have and then
pick out the ones that do not look as bright, those would be brown (technical
term would be less red, but that would confuse the issue)
If your pile is the same I've marked the ones that stand out clearly.

HTH

Jean

In Colors, patpendlego writes:

Is there an easy way to tell which brick is Brown and which Reddish Brown? I've
tried different things, under a lightbulb, halogene light, sunlight... I just
don't see it... please help!

Best way is to make a color palette. I have one for nearly every color and it
is obvious when you compare them vs the palette. Put the colors that are similar
right next to each other so it is even easier to distinguish them apart from
each other. This picture looks like medium dark flesh almost due to the lighting
and I believe I counted at least 9 that do not look the same color as the rest.

Yes, I have a palet. It helps me for all colors, except Brown and Reddish Brown.
I just don't see it. Even in the palet they look the same to me so I do not
put them besides each other because it confuses me even more. I am avoiding the
whole issue by not putting these colors in my store, but even so I would love
to learn to tell the difference.

With the right lighting (led, or halogene) I learned Blue vs Blue-Violet, Light
Bluish Grey vs Light Grey, etc. But Brown and Reddish Brown....

The light color is much more important than the light source. Many of our light
have light in the 2800-3000 Kelvin range. That light is yellow and makes it difficult
to see the difference. Make sure you use daylight color or a more blueish color
light.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 11, 2018 15:54

Subject:

Re: Color variations of new parts

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Colors, MidwayPete writes:

Is there any resource that describes the slight color variations of new LEGO
parts.

For instance, I know that there are two distinct shades of Dark Red and two distinct
shades of Reddish Brown.

I swear that there are two different yellows (official LEGO color: Bright Yellow)
but this is a very subtle difference, if it exists at all.

It exists.

I don't expect sellers to sort the parts by these slight variations. As a
buyer, however, I would like to be able to confirm that yes, these parts I just
ordered are all Pearl Gold, despite the fact that I can see two different hues
when I dump the bag of parts on my sorting table.

Ryan Howerter's color guide on Flickr is quite helpful, but it seems to me
that the Bricklink catalog could include a brief comment when there are more
than one acceptable variations of the same color. And by "acceptable," I mean
that these are color variations produced by LEGO under the same color name.

Peter

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 9, 2018 12:03

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8624-1

Viewed:

26 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, WoutR writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

8624-1 (Inv) Race for the Mask of Life
436 Parts, 8 Minifigures, 2006
Sets: BIONICLE: Playsets

* Add 4 Part 54821pb05 Bright Green Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) with Marbled Trans-Bright Green Pattern (match ID 13)
* Change 4 Part Trans-Neon Green 54821 Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) {Regular to Alternate} {match ID 0 to 13}

Comments from Submitter:
Inventory change after introduction of 54821pb05 in the catalog.

This multi-colored ball has been reported in different color variations in the past. To avoid confucion the others are listed as alternate with a quantity matching that of the item in the Regular Items section.

It might take a little time to consider and work through these requests (I'm
working on several new set inventories right now), but I won't forget about
them.

No problem.
All these changes are based on the ElementID in the parts list in the instructions.

I used the same method as was used for set 8893-1 (using the color variations
of 54821pb05 as alternate colors of 54821, with the marbled part as the regular
inventory item).

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:56

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8893-1

Viewed:

20 times

Topic:

In Inventories Requests, WoutR writes:

In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:

In Inventories Requests, WoutR writes:

The part list in the instruction manuals shows 4 x element 4296080, suggesting
that all four marbled green zamor spheres are the same.

Please read the inventory note for the set.

I read the note. I would prefer the marbled sphere to be regular inventory item,
and have the other color variations as alternates.

Great that you added the marbled sphere to the catalog. This new entry can be
used to update several sets:

Set - ElementID of the marbled green zamor sphere
8624-1 4296080
8893-1 4296080
8894-1 4296080
8900-1 4296080
8901-1 4296080
8902-1 4296080
8903-1 4296080
8904-1 4296080
8905-1 4296080
6945-1 4296080
8103-1 4296080
7147-1 4583979
7148-1 4583979
7156-1 4583979
7157-1 4583979
7162-1 4583979
9450-1 4583979

All these have been verified in the instructions part list.

Element 4297034 (set 8727-1, 8728-1) used a diffent color (trans-green). The
milky white sphere is probably the other extreme in this "marbled with trans-green"
range.

We will also need marbled trans-blue and marbled trans-orange zamor spheres to
correct the other sets.

I have made change requests for all other inventories using part 54821pb05.

The sets using milky-white/trans-green, marbled trans-blue and marbled trans-orange
still need an update because those multicolor parts have not been added to the
catalog yet.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:53

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 9450-1

Viewed:

17 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

9450-1 (Inv) Epic Dragon Battle
885 Parts, 7 Minifigures, 2012
Sets: NINJAGO: Rise of the Snakes

* Add 1 Part 54821pb05 Bright Green Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) with Marbled Trans-Bright Green Pattern (match ID 5)
* Change 1 Part Trans-Bright Green 54821 Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) {Regular to Alternate} {match ID 0 to 5}

Comments from Submitter:
Inventory change after introduction of 54821pb05 in the catalog.

This multi-colored ball has been reported in different color variations in the past. To avoid confucion the others are listed as alternate with a quantity matching that of the item in the Regular Items section.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:51

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 7162-1

Viewed:

5 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

7162-1 (Inv) Rotor
145 Parts, 2010
Sets: Hero Factory: Villains

* Add 1 Part 54821pb05 Bright Green Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) with Marbled Trans-Bright Green Pattern (match ID 1)
* Change 1 Part Trans-Neon Green 54821 Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) {Regular to Alternate} {match ID 0 to 1}

Comments from Submitter:
Inventory change after introduction of 54821pb05 in the catalog.

This multi-colored ball has been reported in different color variations in the past. To avoid confucion the others are listed as alternate with a quantity matching that of the item in the Regular Items section.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:49

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 7157-1

Viewed:

5 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

7157-1 (Inv) Thunder
47 Parts, 2010
Sets: Hero Factory: Villains

* Add 1 Part 54821pb05 Bright Green Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) with Marbled Trans-Bright Green Pattern (match ID 2)
* Change 1 Part Trans-Neon Green 54821 Bionicle Zamor Sphere (Ball) {Regular to Alternate} {match ID 0 to 2}

Comments from Submitter:
Inventory change after introduction of 54821pb05 in the catalog.

This multi-colored ball has been reported in different color variations in the past. To avoid confucion the others are listed as alternate with a quantity matching that of the item in the Regular Items section.

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:48

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 7156-1

Viewed:

6 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

7156-1 (Inv) Corroder
40 Parts, 2010
Sets: Hero Factory: Villains

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:47

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 7148-1

Viewed:

4 times

Topic:

Status:

Open

Please make changes to the following inventory:

7148-1 (Inv) Meltdown
50 Parts, 2010
Sets: Hero Factory: Villains

Author:

WoutR

Posted:

Aug 8, 2018 16:45

Subject:

Inventory Change Request for Set 7147-1

Viewed:

6 times

Topic:

Status:

Open