| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | StormChaser  | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 20:04 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
It has been renamed.
|
| Author: | jonwil | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 19:58 | | Subject: | Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 89 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Can anyone tell me why is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
 |
| Author: | Captain.M | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 18:02 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I had a few of these, and because I noticed the anti-stud I also figured it might
be useful for MOC builders, so I put it in my store. A couple have sold, ages
ago, now only 1 left. I did message the buyer to make sure they knew what they
were buying. They were happy (they also bought some shurikens at the same time).
I don't know if they were actively looking for the sprue, maybe they just
wanted to make a set 100% complete once they saw the sprue for sale alongside
the shurikens. Would they have found them if they were listed under their own
entry in the catalogue? Who can say. Maybe my last one will never sell if it
is given a separate sprue designation in the catalogue and folks don't know
to look for it. But upon finding your post, my pedantic sense of order and completeness
immediately says "Yes, add it to the catalogue!" (even if it's to my own
detriment).
Just my 2 cents. I will leave it up to those more wise than I to decide.
Cheers
In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 09:19 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
I think it would be fine in the catalog, although I'm sure there are others
who would oppose it. Are there other sprue-only entries in the catalog?
David
|
I don't think so, but I'm unaware of another sprue that can actually
go on a stud.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 17:55 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 75 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
I think it would be fine in the catalog, although I'm sure there are others
who would oppose it. Are there other sprue-only entries in the catalog?
|
It would at least limit the number of people not finding it in the catalogue.
 
|
|
| Author: | Jblotempio | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 17:49 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
I think it would be fine in the catalog, although I'm sure there are others
who would oppose it. Are there other sprue-only entries in the catalog?
David
|
It appears in over 20 Ninjago sets, doesn't it? I see no reason why you
would not list it. I see those teeny screwdrivers listed by themselves, and in
fact, have bought one. Jerri
|
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 17:37 | | Subject: | Re: Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
I think it would be fine in the catalog, although I'm sure there are others
who would oppose it. Are there other sprue-only entries in the catalog?
David
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 16:03 | | Subject: | Silly to Consider This Sprue a Part? | | Viewed: | 154 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| I apologize for the quick lo-res pic, but I think a lot of people are familiar
with this piece. It's the sprue from [p=19807c01]. And it IS just a sprue.
But I was looking it over today before tossing it in the trash and it is a pretty
neat looking piece AND it was obviously designed with some play value, because
it fits on a stud. It has never been used in a set, I believe, but it is easy
for me to imagine it being useful in MOCs. Would it be silly to add it to the
catalog?
|
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 09:28 | | Subject: | Re: New minifigure head variant 28621 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Thankfully Axaday jumped in and added the new variant so I don't have to
deal with the description anymore. 
[p=3626d]
I'm not sure about the part number, though. Officially, the new mold has
nothing to do with 3626 and in similar cases (where a new mold number is known)
like
or
BL used to take the official number instead of the previous one +letter.
Regards,
Jonas
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 14, 2020 03:18 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Here's my plan to handle the restructuring, which is a combination of ideas
from everyone:
For Existing Duplicate Catalog Entries:
1. Stickers that appear in multiple sets will have a new catalog entry
created. Then all existing duplicate entries will be merged into the new entry.
2. Item numbers for the new catalog entries will be formatted like this:
multistk001, multistk002, multistk003, etc.
3. Item titles for new entries will be formatted as follows. When the
sticker appears in three or fewer sets, then "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets
- 1001, 1002, 1003." When the sheet appears in more than three sets (there are
only 19 of these): "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets, Town, Fish and Coral."
4. N/A and International sticker sheet entries will be merged when there
are no apparent differences beyond the standard N/A / International differences.
5. Where significant differences exist between sticker sheets, such as
color differences in the stickers themselves, the duplicate entries will be retained.
For All Sticker Sheet Entries:
1. PCCs for all sticker sheets will be moved from the item title to the
PCC field. Item numbers will be retained in their current place in the titles.
2. Item titles for all sticker sheets will be changed from the format
"Sticker for Set" to "Sticker Sheet for Set."
If anyone has suggestions for this plan or sees where it may encounter problems,
please say something. Otherwise, we'll move into the action phase during
the upcoming week.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
