Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies |
| Author: | randyf  | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 16:29 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for fabac3 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I would like to create an inventory for part just like part
has. But what part number should I use for the base?
|
If there is no number on it, then it gets a 'bb' number. The next available
'bb' number is bb1131.
Cheers,
Randy
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 16:19 | | Subject: | Inventory for fabac3 | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I would like to create an inventory for part just like part
has. But what part number should I use for the base?
/Jan
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 11:37 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Fair point. But the same sets packaged in different factories or even at different
times in the same factory, or perhaps even at the same time in the same factory,
may contain different variants.
|
That other sets came out differently from the same (or not) factory at the same
time (or not) doesn’t change the fact that one set is as it was when it came
out of the factory.
All the sesterces are different, it doesn’t change the fact some of them can
be certified as being real antique coins from a certified time-period.
| | I stand by my opinion that period-specificity is at least somewhat delusional.
|
If you’re “bricklinking” the set.
And it also depends on your value of “good enough”: Do you trace all the parts,
asserting they came from boxes the siblings of the set you’re bricklinking?
Or are you content with “we know these variants were made around that time”?
| | | | So even if BL’s catalogue didn’t exist, one could still be proud of owning a
period-specific set.
|
True. But what does that even mean?
|
Well, you are the one who used the term 
| | […]
Because of the aforementioned variability in packaging for a given set, what
real meaning do the words "historically accurate" or "period-specific" even have?
|
There’s the same thing with cars: there are the “only original parts,” the “we
replaced some parts with others from the same manufacturer and period,” and the
“we used some 3D-printed parts” and so on. And some parts (chassis, engine…)
are more important than others (belts) and even on some important parts, some
modifications are allowed without removing value (remove rusted parts of the
body, weld some new bits).
There’s the same thing with all collectible items.
And the “meaning” of “historically accurate” or “period-specific” is not binary
(is / isn’t), it’s, like about every word, a gradation of what people agree it
is.
It can be discussed precisely, generally between a seller and a buyer, to translate
it in monetary value, but it’ll still be generally fuzzy.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:45 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 93 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | One’s owning the set since it was bought sealed and never having mixed its parts
allows one to say one’s copy is historically accurate.
Or any certified track of the set and its parts from the time it was bought sealed
allows the latest owner to say their copy is historically accurate.
|
Fair point. But the same sets packaged in different factories or even at different
times in the same factory, or perhaps even at the same time in the same factory,
may contain different variants.
I stand by my opinion that period-specificity is at least somewhat delusional.
| | So even if BL’s catalogue didn’t exist, one could still be proud of owning a
period-specific set.
|
True. But what does that even mean?
I do not have a large personal collection of LEGO parts. I looked through my
parts collection recently to create the attached image of the variants in molded
printing (which BL doesn't even distinguish) for just one part. And I missed
including one in the photo, by the way.
Each part in the photo shows a distinct and separate variant of molded printing,
with the second from the top having none at all. And my rough estimate at this
point is that at least two thirds of all parts have actual mold variants, while
most parts in production for more than a couple years probably have one or many
molded printing variants.
Because of the aforementioned variability in packaging for a given set, what
real meaning do the words "historically accurate" or "period-specific" even have?
|
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:40 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
|
snip
| |
I think I've figured out that, in addition to the other problems with variants,
BrickLink perpetuates the somewhat delusional thinking of pride in owning a period-specific
set.
Only if every single variant was thoroughly documented and also documented to
have appeared in that set could you say that your copy of a set is historically
accurate. And considering that many (if not most or all) parts have variants,
chasing those phantoms might become rather nonsensical at some point.
|
Don't know about the delusion so much, but I would be pretty ticked off if
somebody sold me a so-called used complete at $1 000 and it included
a bunch of modern cheap variants. Or worse still some early space sets with
the wrong clips, and LBG and DBG parts. It is all relative - someone like me
prefer to deal ith the correct thing at the correct time and I am prepared to
invest the time and effort in it. From experience with return buyers, I know
I am not alone. And yes, I've had buyers ask me to check pips, pins, hole
sizes, clips and mold numbers and send images prior to shipping and also to make
sure the variants and colour differences are correct. Of course I've also
had buyers who just do not care.
I personally would not go as far as to mention closed and open pins and combinations
thereof, but I find for the serious buyer it pays to find serious sellers, catalogue
failings notwithstanding
|
|
| Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:32 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
The note for this one can of course also be added to the unprinted 3009. And
probably a number of other decorated versions of this brick and other 1 x X bricks
and plates.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:22 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Only if every single variant was thoroughly documented and also documented to
have appeared in that set could you say that your copy of a set is historically
accurate.
|
Er, not exactly.
One’s owning the set since it was bought sealed and never having mixed its parts
allows one to say one’s copy is historically accurate.
Or any certified track of the set and its parts from the time it was bought sealed
allows the latest owner to say their copy is historically accurate.
So even if BL’s catalogue didn’t exist, one could still be proud of owning a
period-specific set.
| | And considering that many (if not most or all) parts have variants,
chasing those phantoms might become rather nonsensical at some point.
|
And the one who discovers a variant can’t even have the ego-boost of the variant
being named after them.
No “3961 stormchaserus” for you
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | May 19, 2020 10:06 | | Subject: | Re: More Variants Discovered | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | I just added comparison photos and additional notes for the following part variants
|
I've just added pictures and notes for ten more. A few are mildly interesting
and will be worth your time to see:
* | | 30387 Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Locking with 1 Finger Vertical End and 2 Fingers Vertical End
Parts: Hinge |
I think I've figured out that, in addition to the other problems with variants,
BrickLink perpetuates the somewhat delusional thinking of pride in owning a period-specific
set.
Only if every single variant was thoroughly documented and also documented to
have appeared in that set could you say that your copy of a set is historically
accurate. And considering that many (if not most or all) parts have variants,
chasing those phantoms might become rather nonsensical at some point.
|
|
| Author: | bengreen28 | | Posted: | May 16, 2020 14:38 | | Subject: | Re: Part marked for deletion | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Proprietor writes:
| | List it in under the Sticker over Assembly number and indicate in your comments
that it’s the plate only and price it accordingly.
In Catalog, bengreen28 writes:
| | In Catalog, BricksThatStick writes:
| | In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
| | In Catalog, BricksThatStick writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, bengreen28 writes:
| | Hi, I have a 1x2 plate that has a sticker on it, I have gone to list it and have
found that it is marked for deletion because the sticker was applied to the wrong
part.
I have got this model at home and also have the instructions for it. the sticker
has been applied to the correct part as it shows it clearly on the instructions.
Who do we contact in order to get the deletion cancelled?
Part number is 3023pb01, you can see clearly in the picture that the sticker
is applied to the 1x2 plate and not the mudguard.
|
Here is the thread from when it was removed from the inventory:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=253659
The sticker now forms this assembly:
* | | BA081pb01 Stickered Assembly 4 x 2 x 1 with 'Shell' Small Pattern on Both Sides (Stickers) - Set 6634 - 2 Plate 1 x 2, 1 Mudguard 2 x 4 with Arch Studded
Parts: Stickered Assembly |
So the sticker is in the correct place but it covers more than 1 part (admittedly
only just)
|
The only problem is, because that is just barely over, a majority of people will
have the 1x2 plate with with the sticker in a lot rather than the entire assembly...
|
True but that leaves the sticker open to being damaged or getting gunk stuck
to it.
There's no reason why you can't sell it as an individual part but it
doesn't need it's own catalog entry as we are now happily accepting sticker
over assembly entries.
|
That's the problem though, there is a catalog entry for the part, I'm
unable to list it as it's marked for deletion. I only have one of the plates
and I also don't have the other parts to be able to list it in the sticker
over assembly entry.
So I end up with a part I can't list or I remove the sticker and list the
plate whilst binning the sticker.
This is not one from my set as that is complete and still has all the original
parts from when I bought it new.
|
|
Cool thanks I'll do that.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Poland, w. Wielkopolskie
USA, Ohio
Denmark
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
South Africa, Western Cape
Netherlands, Overijssel
United Kingdom, England