Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | dcarmine  | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2020 14:53 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, dcarmine writes:
| | According to the new standard for "difference types" the difference has to be
related to the way a part functions, not just cosmetic differences. So with
that rule, there would be only one entry for this hat.
|
I think there you are talking about run change things. Minor adjustments to
a mold to use less plastic or something that don't change its function at
all don't make "a difference". But a change of design on a hat makes it
a new hat.
|
Ok good to know.
Donna
|
 |
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2020 14:39 | | Subject: | Re: Questions about Unikitty / Counterparts | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, mjwest83 writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | But for all other sets, we've decided one entry is enough. To allow more
entries like this would create a precedent with huge implications. So your pending
entries will be rejected in a few days.
|
In regards to the two Unikitties in set , if you only want to list
one of them, fine. But which one? The decision is totally arbitrary. The box
itself is effectively two separate presentations. It doesn't have a front
and back, so much as two fronts. If you look at the instructions, they do NOT
have numbers. Instead it has two equal, independent instruction books. Really,
this set is two completely independent sets that happen to use the same parts.
As such, choosing just one of those Unikitties is a completely arbitrary decision,
and it can be argued that either one should be the primary.
|
The box, instructions, and LEGO set description are definitive about the situation,
although it may not look that way at first.
(1) LEGO lists the first instruction manual as the one used to build the house.
(2) The set is named "Emmet's Dream House/Rescue Rocket!", so it is clear
which model is considered the main model and which is considered the alternate
model.
(3) The set description from LEGO.com says "This 2-in-1 construction toy features
Emmet’s home which can be rebuilt into a rocket."
All of the key information is there to determine that the main model is the house
and the alternate model is the rescue rocket. Based on that determination, the
instruction manual for the house takes precedence.
| | This is NOT a case where there is an obvious primary build of the minifigure,
with a side picture showing an alternative build. (Like a character that has
both a helmet and hair, where one is the primary build, and the other is an alternative
for play purposes.) No, this is outright two separate minifigures that just happen
to use common parts. This is a very different case than just about any other
situation.
|
It cannot be two separate minifigures, because there is only one tail for Unikitty
in the set, as well as only one set of ears, one horn, and one headband plate.
Therefore, we have to make a decision about what minifigure gets added to the
set for now. That minifigure was determined based on the above data that I listed.
In the future, when the "Minifigs:" section of an inventory will hopefully just
be an "Assemblies:" section which includes other assembled counterparts, two
different assemblies of parts can be added. However, we are nowhere close to
that.
The admins can discuss this situation some more, but I don't believe we will
come to a different decision at this time.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | mjwest83 | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2020 11:31 | | Subject: | Re: Questions about Unikitty / Counterparts | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | But for all other sets, we've decided one entry is enough. To allow more
entries like this would create a precedent with huge implications. So your pending
entries will be rejected in a few days.
|
In regards to the two Unikitties in set , if you only want to list
one of them, fine. But which one? The decision is totally arbitrary. The box
itself is effectively two separate presentations. It doesn't have a front
and back, so much as two fronts. If you look at the instructions, they do NOT
have numbers. Instead it has two equal, independent instruction books. Really,
this set is two completely independent sets that happen to use the same parts.
As such, choosing just one of those Unikitties is a completely arbitrary decision,
and it can be argued that either one should be the primary.
This is NOT a case where there is an obvious primary build of the minifigure,
with a side picture showing an alternative build. (Like a character that has
both a helmet and hair, where one is the primary build, and the other is an alternative
for play purposes.) No, this is outright two separate minifigures that just happen
to use common parts. This is a very different case than just about any other
situation.
Also, if they can't be listed as counter-parts, how are they supposed to
be sold. It is flat out the case that this minifigure will be sold as a minifigure,
whether it has a specific listing or not. There are only two ways to do so: one
is as a custom figure (which is pointless) and the other is as an incomplete
set (which is what will be done). When listed as an incomplete set, this pollutes
the averages on which so much stuff is based. When it is such a small part of
the set, that can have a very over-sized impact on those averages. By allowing
the counterpart figure, you avoid those issues.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2020 02:39 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | I suggest adding names and titles that have "Type 1", "Type 2", etc. in them
to the project. Those terms are useless.
|
I completely agree.
But I also know from experience that bundling too many things in together is
not conducive to finishing things. So I may make this a separate project. One
way or the other, it is needed.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 21:26 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, dcarmine writes:
| | According to the new standard for "difference types" the difference has to be
related to the way a part functions, not just cosmetic differences. So with
that rule, there would be only one entry for this hat.
|
I think there you are talking about run change things. Minor adjustments to
a mold to use less plastic or something that don't change its function at
all don't make "a difference". But a change of design on a hat makes it
a new hat.
|
|
| Author: | mfav | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 21:10 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, dcarmine writes:
| | I have about 98% of the Harry Potter sets if you want to use that for year of
change or verification on that hat. I'm willing to look at them and report
what I find.
|
I'm content to let the mad geniuses of catalog control sort out the catalog.
I'm just documenting the differences I can find in the handful of hats I
have.
Regardless of whatever else, the presence of the prong on some hats and the absence
on others I would think constitutes a different mold, and the supercollectors
may want to note the differences. But, again, I'm content to let the catmins
sort all that out.
If you want to get really crazy, the undersides of the brims also exhibit differences
under the magnifying glass. Some are smooth, some have a pebbled inner and outer
ring, some have an inner ring with parallel striations instead of pebbling, a
couple have a narrow band of striations in an otherwise smooth inner ring. The
subtleties are kind of endless.
For whatever it's worth, though, mine are:
Black 90460: fine pebbling overall
Black: smooth cone, pebbled brim, with prong,
Black: slightly pebbled cone, pebbled brim, with prong,
Blue, Purple, Green: slightly pebbled cone, definitely pebbled brim, with prong
Dark Green, Dark Green with dragon decoration: definitely pebbled cone and brim,
no prong
Tan: slightly pebbled cone, definitely pebbled brim, no prong
Light Purple: cone too beat up to tell if it's smooth or slightly pebbled,
definitely pebbled brim, with prong
The dark green ones and the 90460 are pretty much pristine; the others are old
and worn. Your mileage may vary.
My sample size is small, so additional data is probably warranted if the admins
want to try to make sense of it.
I just updated the hats page with closeups. Don't know if you saw that version
or the earlier no-closeups version.
My opinion otherwise though is that using renders instead of photographs for
the parts is misleading for the collector.
Did I mention: The page cannot be displayed because an internal server error
has occurred.
|
|
| Author: | dcarmine | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 19:55 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, mfav writes:
According to the new standard for "difference types" the difference has to be
related to the way a part functions, not just cosmetic differences. So with
that rule, there would be only one entry for this hat.
I don't know if that rule applies to minifig categories, but I guess it depends
on how far down the "collector's details" rabbit hole you want to go.  .
I have about 98% of the Harry Potter sets if you want to use that for year of
change or verification on that hat. I'm willing to look at them and report
what I find.
HTH
Donna
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 19:10 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I reformatted a BUNCH of road signs with type 1 and type 2 bases. They should
perhaps be (xxxx / xxxx) like tire combinations?
In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | I suggest adding names and titles that have "Type 1", "Type 2", etc. in them
to the project. Those terms are useless.
Cheers,
Randy
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | We are finally making serious headway with the catalog backlog. The catalog
change requests queue is cleared out.
In the spirit of trying to ensure that the Catalog Roadmap is not just something
to look at, I am continuing with the goal of moving through one project each
month. We have essentially had a January project (flesh to nougat) and there
is a new project starting today for February:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2476
What is this project?
This project involves accurately describing the differences between early (old)
versions of an item and later (new) versions. We need this for two reasons:
1. Using the words "old" and "new" were easy ways to avoid having to describe
actual differences between items. Set numbers in minifigure titles performed
the same function, which is why they were removed.
2. When a third version of an item appears, the old/new descriptors are useless.
Similar items should be described by their differences (usually the way in which
the later version is different from the earlier version).
There are around 500-1000 items expected to be affected by this project.
How can members contribute?
For the immediate moment, members may contribute by submitting title change requests.
I'm not sure how we're going to do item numbers yet, so hold off on
those. If you're not confident that you know exactly what this project entails
or need clarification on a specific issue, then please ask before submitting
a request.
For the immediate moment, ignore the additional topic bundled with this project
(looking at the use of with/without in titles). We may be able to include that,
or it may need to be made its own project. This project should also look at
the use of early/later descriptors since they serve the same function as the
terms old/new.
The goal is to wrap this up by the end of February. Of course, we also have
catalog work still to do and that takes precedence over projects - so this may
run over schedule.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 18:12 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I suggest adding names and titles that have "Type 1", "Type 2", etc. in them
to the project. Those terms are useless.
Cheers,
Randy
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | We are finally making serious headway with the catalog backlog. The catalog
change requests queue is cleared out.
In the spirit of trying to ensure that the Catalog Roadmap is not just something
to look at, I am continuing with the goal of moving through one project each
month. We have essentially had a January project (flesh to nougat) and there
is a new project starting today for February:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2476
What is this project?
This project involves accurately describing the differences between early (old)
versions of an item and later (new) versions. We need this for two reasons:
1. Using the words "old" and "new" were easy ways to avoid having to describe
actual differences between items. Set numbers in minifigure titles performed
the same function, which is why they were removed.
2. When a third version of an item appears, the old/new descriptors are useless.
Similar items should be described by their differences (usually the way in which
the later version is different from the earlier version).
There are around 500-1000 items expected to be affected by this project.
How can members contribute?
For the immediate moment, members may contribute by submitting title change requests.
I'm not sure how we're going to do item numbers yet, so hold off on
those. If you're not confident that you know exactly what this project entails
or need clarification on a specific issue, then please ask before submitting
a request.
For the immediate moment, ignore the additional topic bundled with this project
(looking at the use of with/without in titles). We may be able to include that,
or it may need to be made its own project. This project should also look at
the use of early/later descriptors since they serve the same function as the
terms old/new.
The goal is to wrap this up by the end of February. Of course, we also have
catalog work still to do and that takes precedence over projects - so this may
run over schedule.
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2020 17:27 | | Subject: | Re: February Roadmap Project: Old and New | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
So like we would change this to "NBA Jason Kidd, Dark Blue Jersey Nets #5", right?
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
