Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | SylvainLS  | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 12:00 | | Subject: | Re: Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939) | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DianeGronas writes:
| | Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939)
|
As your first post was about PartDesigner, I’m guessing you’re asking for this
part to be added to Studio.
If that’s the case, the dedicated forum for Studio is https://forum.bricklink.com/
(red Studio icon on every page, “Builder Forum”).
But as you didn’t answer any of the other answers, I’m also guessing you won’t
read this answer either….
|
| Author: | tonnic | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: Sea Captain Torso (973 / 88585) | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DianeGronas writes:
What is the meaning of all your forumposts?
They are no questions, at least not as I read them.
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:49 | | Subject: | Re: Tan Knit Sweater Minifig Torso (76382) | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DianeGronas writes:
| | Tan Knit Sweater Minifig Torso (76382)
|
Why are you starting loads of threads with no questions in?
|
| Author: | DianeGronas | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:48 | | Subject: | Tan Knit Sweater Minifig Torso (76382) | | Viewed: | 95 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Tan Knit Sweater Minifig Torso (76382) |
| Author: | DianeGronas | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:45 | | Subject: | Sea Captain's White Hat (13553 / 31841) | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Sea Captain's White Hat (13553 / 31841) |
| Author: | starbeanie | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:44 | | Subject: | Re: Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939) | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| What is your question?
In Catalog Requests, DianeGronas writes:
| | Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939)
|
|
| Author: | DianeGronas | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:42 | | Subject: | Sea Captain Torso (973 / 88585) | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Sea Captain Torso (973 / 88585) |
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:42 | | Subject: | Re: Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939) | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DianeGronas writes:
| | Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939)
|
?
Christian
|
| Author: | DianeGronas | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:41 | | Subject: | Captain Jones Minifig Torso (76382) | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Captain Jones Minifig Torso (76382) |
| Author: | DianeGronas | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 09:36 | | Subject: | Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939) | | Viewed: | 88 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Obi-Wan Kenobi Large Figure Head (21939) |
 |
| Author: | BricksThatStick | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 08:44 | | Subject: | Re: Unknown Minifigure head variation | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, CTschumy writes:
| | Hi
I have a head which I cannot locate on Bricklink. I can find it in the blocked
open stud version, but cannot locate the head with the hollow stud version.
The head has the lego stamp inside the top stud
Item number 3626bpb0435 is for the blocked open stud version
Help please
Thanks
Chris
|
It's just the case that it's not been added yet.
Feel free to submit it to the catalog as 3626cpb0435 and supply a picture if
you can.
If you need help with it please see this forum message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1138517
or this one
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1085264
or watch this tutorial
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1191009
If you have any other questions let us know.
Many thanks,
Paul.
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 07:53 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | | | | | Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
And, of course, a fairly snarky additional note that is clearly the result of
frustration over sellers just not getting the difference (and blaming them for
the problem that BrickLink created).
|
I strongly object to this resolution. As SylvainLS points out, they are functionally
different, and IMHO they are not interchangable, and both as a buyer or seller,
I would care about the variant (as I do today).
I think a better resolution would be to rename part 88072 to 4623b (and keep
part number 88072 secondary), then make 4623 "undetermined arm length" and create
a new part 4623a for the 6 mm variant.
/Jan
|
Well this totally went in a direction I wasn't expecting! Interesting discovery,
Jan! 
|
So where do we go from here? Could the note for the two parts be updated? They
(and some of the inventories containing the 6mm part) are clearly wrong now.
/Jan
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 06:08 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| |
It would be absolutely crazy to remove an entire theme such as Galaxy Squad from
both sets and minifigures, to rebrand the humans into a minifigure section called
Classic Space and the aliens into a completely different section called Aliens,
chuck all the sets in an unsorted Space section, but keep the name of the theme
alive in part names such as "Galaxy Squad Armor".
Oh, wait a minute ... that is exactly what BL is planning with XP.
More than ever minifigures need the correct numbering as that is the only link
to the theme within XP.
|
I think it goes without saying that I would never want to see Galaxy Squad humans
separated from Galaxy Sqaud Aliens so whatever happens they’d need to be grouped
together for sure be that under ‘gs’ or ‘sp’
Where it gets more difficult is with things like skeletons but as a general rule
I’d say plain skeletons remain under ’gen’ but if they are associated with a
pirate theme and wear pirate hat then they should probably be a ‘pi’ code whereas
if they came from a castle theme wearing armour or knight helmet then they should
be a ‘cas’ code but obviously a plain skeleton from a castle set should still
be ‘gen’ but what about this one: cas328 with the red eyes I’m not so sure ’cas’
or ‘gen’?
These codes seem to be placed correctly cas329, cas378
whereas many such as gen009, gen011, gen021, gen037, gen135, gen036 perhaps need
moving?
Then you have oddities like gen027 and gen147 that look almost the same but would
seem strange to separate under ‘hol’ and ‘twn’ so ‘gen’ would seem like the only
suitable option for these?
All in all its a bit of a nightmre to try and organise for the best 
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 04:54 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
As a huge minifigure collector who categorizes their entire collection by the
BrickLink item numbers, I would not be in favor of any renumbering of huge swaths
of the BrickLink catalog as it stands. Small sections, okay, but not lumping
Galaxy Squad into the Classic Space figures, etc. I think having minifigures
classified according to the themes they occur in is how they should be classified
for now, and the catalog manages to currently do that relatively okay for the
majority of the minifigures.
But, once again, this gets back to the database design. We are stuck in a system
that only categorizes things in a flat manner, so moving large amounts of items
around, renumbering large amounts of items, etc., would cause a nightmare for
anyone and everyone involved.
Having a system that allowed tags on items would allow minifigures to be categorized
in more than one way and then all figures could just be given sequential codes
starting from figure000001 all the way up to however many figures there
are and then into the future. So figure009866 might be classified as "Space",
"Galaxy Squad", and "Alien", whereas figure013022 might be classified
as "Licensed", "Space", "Star Wars", and "Alien". No more thinking about how
to structure item numbers, no more worrying about what *specific* category a
minifigure should go in, no more having users even think about numbering since
the system could just assign the next figure number automatically! This is really
where the whole system needs to get to.
Cheers,
Randy
|
To be honest I don’t have too much concern about stuff like Galaxy Squad remaining
‘gs’ and was more interested in other people’s opinions of where we think it
might go though I would just say that if the system remained as it is we could
potentially run out of abbreviations if we continue to use them on every sub-theme
like this but I guess I have bigger issue with the minifigs from both the ‘dim’
and ‘idea’ categories taking precedence over existing categories which are better
suited for them because to me it’s a bit like categorising a Star Wars minifig
from an advent calendar as ‘adv’ or from polybag as ‘pol’ when it should still
be ‘sw’?
On the same token if it goes the way your suggesting then I guess that would
blow everything out the water all together and whilst it could work the only
real issue I would have is with the length of the codes which would also take
away the ability to memorize them for instance without even looking I know that
sw0707 is Yoda and are we going to have more instances where we end up forgetting
which minifig code we came to pick once at the storage location?
As the current system shows a small abbreviation of letters + number combos allows
for codes to be shorter and more memorable
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 04:34 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | As a huge minifigure collector who categorizes their entire collection by the
BrickLink item numbers, I would not be in favor of any renumbering of huge swaths
of the BrickLink catalog as it stands. Small sections, okay, but not lumping
Galaxy Squad into the Classic Space figures, etc. I think having minifigures
classified according to the themes they occur in is how they should be classified
for now, and the catalog manages to currently do that relatively okay for the
majority of the minifigures.
|
It would be absolutely crazy to remove an entire theme such as Galaxy Squad from
both sets and minifigures, to rebrand the humans into a minifigure section called
Classic Space and the aliens into a completely different section called Aliens,
chuck all the sets in an unsorted Space section, but keep the name of the theme
alive in part names such as "Galaxy Squad Armor".
Oh, wait a minute ... that is exactly what BL is planning with XP.
More than ever minifigures need the correct numbering as that is the only link
to the theme within XP.
|
|
|
| Author: | CTschumy | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 04:21 | | Subject: | Unknown Minifigure head variation | | Viewed: | 95 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi
I have a head which I cannot locate on Bricklink. I can find it in the blocked
open stud version, but cannot locate the head with the hollow stud version.
The head has the lego stamp inside the top stud
Item number 3626bpb0435 is for the blocked open stud version
Help please
Thanks
Chris
|
|
| Author: | markim | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 03:44 | | Subject: | part inventory dplane3 | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hey!
I am busy putting duplo into my inventory and ran into this little airplane.
It is not in a condition i want to sell it in, so i looked if it could be demolished
to smaller parts. In my idea it contains some wheels i cannot find in the catalog
and wheel pins number 2344. Can it be parted out?
Regards, Marielle
|
|
|
| Author: | SurplusParts | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 02:32 | | Subject: | Re: Can stickers over 2 parts be added? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Thanks very much.
I have never seen that section of the catalogue before. You learn something
new every day.
I will add to the catalogue shortly when i get time.
Cheers
In Catalog, SurplusParts writes:
| | This is the dashboard sticker from
It is placed over 2 black arches 6005.
Can this placed in the catalogue as a stickered counterpart?
Asking as it is over 2 parts and not one it may not be.
Thanks
Douglas
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 02:26 | | Subject: | Re: Can stickers over 2 parts be added? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SurplusParts writes:
| | Can this placed in the catalogue as a stickered counterpart?
|
Yes.
|
| Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 01:48 | | Subject: | Re: Can stickers over 2 parts be added? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SurplusParts writes:
| | This is the dashboard sticker from
It is placed over 2 black arches 6005.
Can this placed in the catalogue as a stickered counterpart?
Asking as it is over 2 parts and not one it may not be.
Thanks
Douglas
|
Category Sitcker Over Assembly. There are many parts already in that category.
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=P&catID=582
|
|
| Author: | SurplusParts | | Posted: | Jun 15, 2020 01:16 | | Subject: | Can stickers over 2 parts be added? | | Viewed: | 75 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| This is the dashboard sticker from
It is placed over 2 black arches 6005.
Can this placed in the catalogue as a stickered counterpart?
Asking as it is over 2 parts and not one it may not be.
Thanks
Douglas
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 22:18 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
As a huge minifigure collector who categorizes their entire collection by the
BrickLink item numbers, I would not be in favor of any renumbering of huge swaths
of the BrickLink catalog as it stands. Small sections, okay, but not lumping
Galaxy Squad into the Classic Space figures, etc. I think having minifigures
classified according to the themes they occur in is how they should be classified
for now, and the catalog manages to currently do that relatively okay for the
majority of the minifigures.
But, once again, this gets back to the database design. We are stuck in a system
that only categorizes things in a flat manner, so moving large amounts of items
around, renumbering large amounts of items, etc., would cause a nightmare for
anyone and everyone involved.
Having a system that allowed tags on items would allow minifigures to be categorized
in more than one way and then all figures could just be given sequential codes
starting from figure000001 all the way up to however many figures there
are and then into the future. So figure009866 might be classified as "Space",
"Galaxy Squad", and "Alien", whereas figure013022 might be classified
as "Licensed", "Space", "Star Wars", and "Alien". No more thinking about how
to structure item numbers, no more worrying about what *specific* category a
minifigure should go in, no more having users even think about numbering since
the system could just assign the next figure number automatically! This is really
where the whole system needs to get to.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 21:46 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
Yes I can see it’s definitely a challenge especially since many minifg codes
have become well established with people even though they may not make too much
sense structure wise!
I guess the reason I asked was mainly because I could see some Ideas codes had
been changed to Ghostbuster codes whilst Dimensions Ghostbuster minifgs and the
Ideas Pirate minifigs hadn’t been altered in the same way?
Either way I guess there would need to be a rule of thumb on want constitutes
a minifig range being given its own theme code abbreviation. For instance do
you start giving the ghostbuster minifigs the ‘gb’ code when there are at least
8 minifigs in the range for example?
On the other hand if there are only 2 or 3 ghostbusters minifigs do they perhaps
always just start off with a miscellaneous code which might also include everything
from Santa to ET?
Do we also start to catalog things not necessarily by Legos themes but by what
the community itself classes as the best match for Space, Castle, Pirates etc...
with anything that does'nt fit among the established themes classed as miscellaneous?
For instance do you envisage that stuff like Galaxy Squad might come under space
‘sp’? instead of ‘gs’?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
Item numbers for figures are a mess. We're working on it.
See this forum post for a poetically eloquent description of the mess:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1187433
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 14:48 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | I don't know if its just me but with regards to the ideas and dimensions
themes would'nt it make sense to only give minifigures the 'idea'
and 'dim' codes if they don't already belong to an established and
existing theme? For instance all the Ideas Pirates of Barracuda Bay minifigs
should perhaps be given 'pi' numbers instead of 'idea' numbers?
Likewise dimensions Gimli, Gandalf, Legolas should maybe have a 'lor'
number instead of 'dim' same goes for Slimer and Stay Puft Marshmallow
man which also have 'dim' numbers instead of 'gb'
With the original ghostbusters minifigs from Ecto-1 it looks like they were already
changed from 'idea' numbers to 'gb' numbers with an i on the
end which might be a good way to keep some continuity on the site?
|
No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
I guess no one sort by ID….
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 14, 2020 14:07 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | I don't know if its just me but with regards to the ideas and dimensions
themes would'nt it make sense to only give minifigures the 'idea'
and 'dim' codes if they don't already belong to an established and
existing theme? For instance all the Ideas Pirates of Barracuda Bay minifigs
should perhaps be given 'pi' numbers instead of 'idea' numbers?
Likewise dimensions Gimli, Gandalf, Legolas should maybe have a 'lor'
number instead of 'dim' same goes for Slimer and Stay Puft Marshmallow
man which also have 'dim' numbers instead of 'gb'
With the original ghostbusters minifigs from Ecto-1 it looks like they were already
changed from 'idea' numbers to 'gb' numbers with an i on the
end which might be a good way to keep some continuity on the site?
|
No thoughts on this from anyone? It really must be just me then?
|
|
| Author: | zzed | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 23:32 | | Subject: | Re: Harry Potter (Sorcerer's Stone) | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, cycbuild writes:
| | HP & the Toilet of Secrets. )
|
ROFL 
|
|
| Author: | cycbuild | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 20:57 | | Subject: | Re: Harry Potter (Sorcerer's Stone) | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, zombiedyer writes:
| | Hey, so I was wondering why BrickLink lists the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's
Stone items under the "Sorcerer's Stone" name? Even brickset uses the original
title as the subtheme. Just seems kinda odd.
|
Other countries translated it to Filosofal, Sorciers, Wijzen, etc. But I don't
buy into the English/English language barrier in this case. Sorcerer sounds like
a darker version of Wizard, and not so academic as Philosopher.
Far as the web of sites go, Huw runs Brickset from England, while BrickLink is
quite Ameri-centric. So it's not so odd that Brickset would choose
the original.
(I'd like to think, after her breakout success, JK Rowling grew powerful
enough to overthrow Scholastic's bid at HP & the Toilet of Secrets. )
|
|
| Author: | BrickenbergNC | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 20:30 | | Subject: | Re: Harry Potter (Sorcerer's Stone) | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, zombiedyer writes:
| | Hey, so I was wondering why BrickLink lists the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's
Stone items under the "Sorcerer's Stone" name? Even brickset uses the original
title as the subtheme. Just seems kinda odd.
|
Probably has to do with the country of the person who added it to the catalog
originally. As far as I can tell the founder of brickset lives in the UK where
it was called the Philosopher's Stone. Many (if not all) of the sets were
added to the Bricklink catalog by "Admin" back in 2001-2002 and that Admin may
have been US based.
|
|
| Author: | IceWorm | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 18:47 | | Subject: | Harry Potter (Sorcerer's Stone) | | Viewed: | 81 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hey, so I was wondering why BrickLink lists the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's
Stone items under the "Sorcerer's Stone" name? Even brickset uses the original
title as the subtheme. Just seems kinda odd.
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 14:42 | | Subject: | Textured variant of 30602 | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Today, I found a variant of with thin walls where the sides are slightly
textured. I found it only in yellow, all other parts have blank sides. There
is also a variant where the thin part of the back wall is slightly textured while
the sides are blank. Please consider updating the note on the part. I'll
be uploading the picture to the part. Accept it if you want it.
/Jan
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 12:39 | | Subject: | Minifigures being given incorrect codes? | | Viewed: | 103 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I don't know if its just me but with regards to the ideas and dimensions
themes would'nt it make sense to only give minifigures the 'idea'
and 'dim' codes if they don't already belong to an established and
existing theme? For instance all the Ideas Pirates of Barracuda Bay minifigs
should perhaps be given 'pi' numbers instead of 'idea' numbers?
Likewise dimensions Gimli, Gandalf, Legolas should maybe have a 'lor'
number instead of 'dim' same goes for Slimer and Stay Puft Marshmallow
man which also have 'dim' numbers instead of 'gb'
With the original ghostbusters minifigs from Ecto-1 it looks like they were already
changed from 'idea' numbers to 'gb' numbers with an i on the
end which might be a good way to keep some continuity on the site?
|
|
| Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 07:48 | | Subject: | Fancy a quiz about stickers set 374-1? | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Here we go: (the answers are on the bottom of this message)
1. How many Classic Fire Logo stickers are on the stickersheet of set 374-1?
2. How many Classic Fire Logo stickers are on the counterparts together?
3. Which counterpart is responsible for the difference?
4. Can we just rename this counterpart? Yes or No?
5. Why not?
6. What can we do about this?
If you have correctly answered all the 6 questions, your price is the title 'logical
thinker of the day'!
Cheers, Wilbert
Answers:
1. Five
2. Six (3009pb043L: one; 3009pb043R: one; 3001oldpb07: two (both sides); BA067pb01:
two (both sides)
3. Part 3001oldpb07 (look closely to the frontpage of the instructions as the
instructions itself are not conclusive)
4. No
5. As counterpart 3001oldpb07 is also related to set 590-1, which has the right
number of Classic Fire Logo stickers on the stickersheet (six), which by the
way is not proven by the (frontpage of the) instructions. But ok .....!
6. I really do not know hahaha! No seriously: add a new counterpart for set 374-1.
|
|
| Author: | 1271moggy | | Posted: | Jun 13, 2020 04:39 | | Subject: | Re: Set 3178 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, 1271moggy writes:
| | Just wondering if anyone has a sealed set of .
I am parting out an incomplete set bought off Ebay and have a query with part
.
The current inventory lists the undetermined part 3794 in LBG, but I have found
LBG during part out.
So hence the request for a sealed set to check which variant is used, and to
correct the catalogue if needed.
Linda
|
I have this set tucked away somewhere that was opened from a sealed set, so someday
I may get around to digging it out.  However, having said that, I believe it
would be extremely unlikely for that set to have contained 15573.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thank you all for your replies. I didn't think to check the dates of issue
for 15573.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 14:44 | | Subject: | Re: Set 3178 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1271moggy writes:
| | Just wondering if anyone has a sealed set of .
I am parting out an incomplete set bought off Ebay and have a query with part
.
The current inventory lists the undetermined part 3794 in LBG, but I have found
LBG during part out.
So hence the request for a sealed set to check which variant is used, and to
correct the catalogue if needed.
Linda
|
I have this set tucked away somewhere that was opened from a sealed set, so someday
I may get around to digging it out. However, having said that, I believe it
would be extremely unlikely for that set to have contained 15573.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 08:40 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SezaR writes:
| | I am not sure why you referred three times to what you wrote me in private messages.
Were I assumed to send your messages to other members with whom I have regular
communications?
|
I have little interest in drama and I make few assumptions about you or any other
member. I suggest we focus instead on discussing LEGO items.
|
|
| Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 08:21 | | Subject: | Re: Set 3178 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1271moggy writes:
| | Just wondering if anyone has a sealed set of .
I am parting out an incomplete set bought off Ebay and have a query with part
.
The current inventory lists the undetermined part 3794 in LBG, but I have found
LBG during part out.
So hence the request for a sealed set to check which variant is used, and to
correct the catalogue if needed.
Linda
|
Based on the timeline of the set and the part I think it's very unlikely
that 15573 would be found in this set. Most likely just 3794a in early production
runs of the set with 3794b possibly showing up as an alternate in later production
runs.
|
|
| Author: | 1271moggy | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 07:43 | | Subject: | Set 3178 | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Just wondering if anyone has a sealed set of .
I am parting out an incomplete set bought off Ebay and have a query with part
.
The current inventory lists the undetermined part 3794 in LBG, but I have found
LBG during part out.
So hence the request for a sealed set to check which variant is used, and to
correct the catalogue if needed.
Linda
|
|
| Author: | SezaR | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 03:38 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | Here is the most relevant part of the PM I sent to Reza when I rejected his pending
submission:
As I explained to Reza: if the CAs could ...
I also told Reza that ...
|
There is more to discuss about this and I will add more into it, but here I am
not sure why you referred three times to what you wrote me in private messages.
Were I assumed to send your messages to other members with whom I have regular
communications?
|
|
| Author: | Rarah | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2020 15:46 | | Subject: | Re: wrong helmet on minifig partout | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Rarah writes:
Update: this should be the same helmet but the colour variation is ultra big
one on the left is bluish faded green and the one on the right is green more
like olive etc. Is this really the same item ? Should the colour variation be
mentioned in the item description?
|
|
|
| Author: | jsnhghs | | Posted: | Jun 11, 2020 03:43 | | Subject: | Why listed as US rather than uk? | | Viewed: | 95 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please can someone tell me why c88us and c89us are listed as US when it is a
UK catalogue?
|
| Author: | DeanS | | Posted: | Jun 10, 2020 15:45 | | Subject: | Item approval/change request | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I have added the image to minifig hp223
I would like to upload my inventory of these
I also have weight: 3.8 grams
and the description should read:
"Cho Chang (Set 40419) Grin / Frown"
Thanks!
-Dean
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 10, 2020 15:08 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Match | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
Eighteen newly-discovered variant notes and pictures added today:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogRelList.asp?showUsers=Y&v=1&pg=1&relID=24&viewDate=Y
Some are minor differences, but others are the kinds of differences BrickLink
has split parts for in the past. I have to say I'm rather glad we added
this new relationship match. It makes things* much easier.
*And by things, I mean my self-appointed and ongoing task of (a) pointing out
the problems with obsessing over part variants, and (b) providing gentle criticism
of BrickLink's approach to handling them in the catalog.
The irony, of course, is that I have now become the (a) portion of the above
sentence and I am partially responsible for the (b) portion. What a strange
world we inhabit.
|
|
| Author: | Hamster_Prod | | Posted: | Jun 10, 2020 04:28 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| |
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories
|
My point with the attempted humor in my previous post, Josh, is not to take it
too seriously and you'll do fine.
-Cory
|
I'm a scientist, it is my job to take things too seriously
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 18:26 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| |
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories
|
My point with the attempted humor in my previous post, Josh, is not to take it
too seriously and you'll do fine.
-Cory
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:43 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
where does the minifig item number come from?
|
I'll share something that very few are privy to, Josh: minifigure item numbers
are allocated by the almighty minifig-spirit...
|
|
|
| Author: | BricksThatStick | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:23 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | Not sure how to go about this, but part
needs to be broken up into 2 separate entries. Currently we only have one for
a lime printing. I have been listing legs recently and came across 4 of these
legs. Three of them had lime printing, the fourth has bright green printing(verified
as Lego). Searching for "Buzz Lightyear" figures, I came across minifig toy004
from which the picture seems to show bright green printing, yet inventory says
it has the legs with lime print.
My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
The image for toy004 is a bit oversaturated I think which leads to it being a
bit deceptive.
Here is a toy004 taken from set 30073
The green on the legs and the helmet parts do differ slightly because the print
on the legs isn't so thick so shows some of the white through it
|
|
|
| Author: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:22 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Tracyd writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | | | | | My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
All of the parts of the minifig appear to have bright green print, not lime
|
Which leads me to believe that there are two versions of Buzz and all his parts:
Lime and Bright Green. Which sets each came in I have no idea.
|
The bright green print may have come from the magnet gear set
* | | 852949 (Inv) Magnet Set, Minifigures Toy Story (3) - Woody, Alien, Buzz Lightyear - with 2 x 4 Brick Bases blister pack
Gear: Magnet: Toy Story |
Those were made in China, I believe, and could possibly have had poor quality
control.
I have not seen a Buzz with anything but lime print, but all of the ones I have
came from the real Toy Story sets.
|
Weren't the magnet sets all glued when these came out?
|
They started gluing it from 2011, Magnet sets from 2009 and 2010 are not glued.
But there are some sets which have not glued and glued versions.
Evrything is here
http://thebrickblogger.com/2011/06/glued-and-non-glued-lego-magnets/
So in our catalog those from 2011 and later aren't inventoried, inventoried
are those from 2009 and 2010.
|
|
| Author: | Tracyd | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:13 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | | | | | My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
All of the parts of the minifig appear to have bright green print, not lime
|
Which leads me to believe that there are two versions of Buzz and all his parts:
Lime and Bright Green. Which sets each came in I have no idea.
|
The bright green print may have come from the magnet gear set
* | | 852949 (Inv) Magnet Set, Minifigures Toy Story (3) - Woody, Alien, Buzz Lightyear - with 2 x 4 Brick Bases blister pack
Gear: Magnet: Toy Story |
Those were made in China, I believe, and could possibly have had poor quality
control.
I have not seen a Buzz with anything but lime print, but all of the ones I have
came from the real Toy Story sets.
|
Weren't the magnet sets all glued when these came out?
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | | | | | My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
All of the parts of the minifig appear to have bright green print, not lime
|
Which leads me to believe that there are two versions of Buzz and all his parts:
Lime and Bright Green. Which sets each came in I have no idea.
|
The bright green print may have come from the magnet gear set
* | | 852949 (Inv) Magnet Set, Minifigures Toy Story (3) - Woody, Alien, Buzz Lightyear - with 2 x 4 Brick Bases blister pack
Gear: Magnet: Toy Story |
Those were made in China, I believe, and could possibly have had poor quality
control.
I have not seen a Buzz with anything but lime print, but all of the ones I have
came from the real Toy Story sets.
|
|
| Author: | Hamster_Prod | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 17:01 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, runner.caller writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=168
on item numbers
and https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
on adding items to the catalog
|
Ah, thanks. That explains it. So it comes from the order in which folks on bricklink
added it to the catalogue. I guess for most categories it is basically the order
in which the figures were released.
|
I think the catalogers try to follow the set number too. So for "lord of the
rings" the first set number in that theme
has the first two "lor" figure numbers
and the next set
has the next three "lor" figure numbers.
However, there are probably scenarios where the sets aren't cataloged in
the same order as their sequential set number, but I think this is a loose goal.
|
Interesting point, thanks! One of the things that threw me off is the Adventurers
line is catalogued in alphabetical order and completely ignores release date.
I guess this was all done in one go at some point after everything had already
been released.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 16:56 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, runner.caller writes:
| | I think the catalogers try to follow the set number too. So for "lord of the
rings" the first set number in that theme
has the first two "lor" figure numbers
and the next set
has the next three "lor" figure numbers.
However, there are probably scenarios where the sets aren't cataloged in
the same order as their sequential set number, but I think this is a loose goal.
|
Nope. That is just the order that the inventories for the sets were added to
the catalog. If the largest LotR set would have been inventoried first, it would
have had the minifigures with the first minifigure numbers in the theme. Like
someone said earlier, it is mostly up to fate (i.e. what minfigures get added
first to the catalog based on which sets are getting inventoried first).
|
|
| Author: | tons_of_bricks | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 16:33 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | | | My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
All of the parts of the minifig appear to have bright green print, not lime
|
Which leads me to believe that there are two versions of Buzz and all his parts:
Lime and Bright Green. Which sets each came in I have no idea.
|
|
| Author: | Cob | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 16:27 | | Subject: | Re: two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | Not sure how to go about this, but part
needs to be broken up into 2 separate entries. Currently we only have one for
a lime printing. I have been listing legs recently and came across 4 of these
legs. Three of them had lime printing, the fourth has bright green printing(verified
as Lego). Searching for "Buzz Lightyear" figures, I came across minifig toy004
from which the picture seems to show bright green printing, yet inventory says
it has the legs with lime print.
My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
All of the parts of the minifig appear to have bright green print, not lime.
|
|
| Author: | tons_of_bricks | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 16:17 | | Subject: | two versions of part 970c00pb0052 | | Viewed: | 86 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Not sure how to go about this, but part
needs to be broken up into 2 separate entries. Currently we only have one for
a lime printing. I have been listing legs recently and came across 4 of these
legs. Three of them had lime printing, the fourth has bright green printing(verified
as Lego). Searching for "Buzz Lightyear" figures, I came across minifig toy004
from which the picture seems to show bright green printing, yet inventory says
it has the legs with lime print.
My guess is that it hasn't been discovered yet that there is a bright green
version, so all the figures with it are being inventoried as having the lime
version.
|
|
| Author: | runner.caller | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 14:01 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=168
on item numbers
and https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
on adding items to the catalog
|
Ah, thanks. That explains it. So it comes from the order in which folks on bricklink
added it to the catalogue. I guess for most categories it is basically the order
in which the figures were released.
|
I think the catalogers try to follow the set number too. So for "lord of the
rings" the first set number in that theme
has the first two "lor" figure numbers
and the next set
has the next three "lor" figure numbers.
However, there are probably scenarios where the sets aren't cataloged in
the same order as their sequential set number, but I think this is a loose goal.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:41 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
I guess for most categories it is basically the order
| | in which the figures were released.
|
Roughly, yes.
|
|
| Author: | Hamster_Prod | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:40 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=168
on item numbers
and https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
on adding items to the catalog
|
Ah, thanks. That explains it. So it comes from the order in which folks on bricklink
added it to the catalogue. I guess for most categories it is basically the order
in which the figures were released.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:31 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| But to answer more fully, the numbers you see here are Bricklink's. I have
seen them used on eBay because Bricklink is the preeminent catalog. I assume
Brickowl has their own system, but perhaps they follow us.
In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
No one decides but fate. When you are naming a new minifig, you use the next
number available.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:29 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=168
on item numbers
and https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
on adding items to the catalog
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:29 | | Subject: | Re: Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hamster_Prod writes:
| | Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
No one decides but fate. When you are naming a new minifig, you use the next
number available.
|
|
| Author: | Hamster_Prod | | Posted: | Jun 9, 2020 13:23 | | Subject: | Who decides the minifig item No? | | Viewed: | 140 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi,
This is probably a very daft question, but I can't seem to find the answer
anywhere so... where does the minifig item number come from?
For example, take the minifig 'twn071' (https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?M=twn071)
As far as I understand, this means it is the 71st figure within the category
'Town'.
So who decides the categories and the number ordering within those categories?
LEGO? Bricklink? Someone else?
I am asking because I want to start seriously collecting and organising figures
across several categories, but I would like to fully understand this system before
I start using it!
Thanks in advance,
Josh
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Match | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, hpoort writes:
| | Is there a flag you can set so that this relation type also shows up at catalog
item pages like other relations?
|
No. Frankly, I'm not sure why we need one. Every item on the list should
have, at a minimum, an additional note and preferably also a comparison image.
So specifying on an individual catalog entry itself that a part is flagged as
a part variant is unnecessary.
| | Or is this up to admin Russell to get a developer onto this?
|
If there were a developer on it, we would not have needed to use the relationship
match in this way.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
In my opinion, the additional notes are not best used to admonish sellers in
a patronizing and condescending tone.
|
More criticism for the catalog admin team, I see.
|
In this case, I think the criticism was justified.
I am happy to see that the Additional notes were updated.
[p=88072]
|
|
| Author: | tonnic | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 08:20 | | Subject: | Re: SOA part in 5541 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, electricbaer writes:
| | In Catalog, tonnic writes:
| | In Catalog, electricbaer writes:
| | I have the small stickers that fit over the blue 6541 and the blue 4070 to this
set as they are applied in the first model. However in the alternate build for
this set, they look to be applied to a 1 x 6 brick.
Do they qualify to be added as a SOA part, and also as a brick decorated part
to the catalog, or are they nullified from being added since they can be applied
in multiple configurations in this set?
|
You do not want to know what SOA means in the Netherlands.
I understand this is the best way to make the description short but the association
is grose.
|
Welp, curiosity always had to kill the cat. You know I had to go search it after
you told me what I didn't want to know
|
Don’t say I didn’t warn you!
|
|
| Author: | electricbaer | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 08:18 | | Subject: | Re: SOA part in 5541 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, tonnic writes:
| | In Catalog, electricbaer writes:
| | I have the small stickers that fit over the blue 6541 and the blue 4070 to this
set as they are applied in the first model. However in the alternate build for
this set, they look to be applied to a 1 x 6 brick.
Do they qualify to be added as a SOA part, and also as a brick decorated part
to the catalog, or are they nullified from being added since they can be applied
in multiple configurations in this set?
|
You do not want to know what SOA means in the Netherlands.
I understand this is the best way to make the description short but the association
is grose.
|
Welp, curiosity always had to kill the cat. You know I had to go search it after
you told me what I didn't want to know
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 06:58 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
In my opinion, the additional notes are not best used to admonish sellers in
a patronizing and condescending tone.
|
More criticism for the catalog admin team, I see.
|
An admin appears to agree that the additional notes are "fairly snarky" out of
"frustration over sellers just not getting the difference."
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1202493
In my opinion, since users aiming their frustration at admins is discouraged,
admins using the catalog to aim their frustrations at sellers should also be
discouraged.
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 06:55 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Match | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
Nice way to see them in one list
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 06:50 | | Subject: | Re: New Relationship Match | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
Great idea to do it this way.
Is there a flag you can set so that this relation type also shows up at catalog
item pages like other relations? Or is this up to admin Russell to get a developer
onto this?
|
|
|
| Author: | tonnic | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 04:20 | | Subject: | Re: SOA part in 5541 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, electricbaer writes:
| | I have the small stickers that fit over the blue 6541 and the blue 4070 to this
set as they are applied in the first model. However in the alternate build for
this set, they look to be applied to a 1 x 6 brick.
Do they qualify to be added as a SOA part, and also as a brick decorated part
to the catalog, or are they nullified from being added since they can be applied
in multiple configurations in this set?
|
You do not want to know what SOA means in the Netherlands.
I understand this is the best way to make the description short but the association
is grose.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 02:46 | | Subject: | Re: SOA part in 5541 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, electricbaer writes:
| | I have the small stickers that fit over the blue 6541 and the blue 4070 to this
set as they are applied in the first model. However in the alternate build for
this set, they look to be applied to a 1 x 6 brick.
Do they qualify to be added as a SOA part, and also as a brick decorated part
to the catalog, or are they nullified from being added since they can be applied
in multiple configurations in this set?
|
They do qualify and can be added.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 02:45 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 86 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
In my opinion, the additional notes are not best used to admonish sellers in
a patronizing and condescending tone.
|
More criticism for the catalog admin team, I see.
|
|
| Author: | jbroman | | Posted: | Jun 8, 2020 01:12 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 62Bricks writes:
| | In my opinion, the additional notes are not best used to admonish sellers in
a patronizing and condescending tone.
|
Instead of "Please be wary of the difference...", it would be better to have
"Please be aware of the difference..."
Wary means feeling or showing caution about possible dangers or problems.
Aware means knowing that something exists, or having knowledge or experience
of a particular thing.
|
|
| Author: | electricbaer | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 23:35 | | Subject: | SOA part in 5541 | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I have the small stickers that fit over the blue 6541 and the blue 4070 to this
set as they are applied in the first model. However in the alternate build for
this set, they look to be applied to a 1 x 6 brick.
Do they qualify to be added as a SOA part, and also as a brick decorated part
to the catalog, or are they nullified from being added since they can be applied
in multiple configurations in this set?
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 22:58 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I strongly object to this resolution.
|
| | both as a buyer or seller, I would care about the variant
|
I don't care whatsoever about this variant difference (personally, as opposed
to in any official capacity). Wouldn't it be great if BrickLink handled
variants in a way that would serve you and I equally well?
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 21:13 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | | | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
| | | | In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
|
I’m not sure this is serious due to the way it’s worded but if I owe an apology,
I’d sincerely apologize to you, your wife’s memory, and her family and friends
for having mentioned an hypothetical wife of yours in a rhetorical argument and
triggered painful memories of a dearly departed.
|
Seriously!? While I have never committed the most heinous and vile crime you
accuse me of, as an LEO and EMS responder, I have seen more than my fair share
of domestic violence. I find your willingness to use such imagery as a comedic
prop, repugnant.
| | | | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
|
It’s also a trap question that can’t be answered without verifying (making true)
the tacit premise (asking about circumstances of something stopping implies the
something existed).
Did you stop eating snails?
— Yes ≫ Yuck! You ate snails.
— No ≫ Yuck! You’re still eating snails.
|
The fact your patently false statements, and lack of remorse, are endorsed by
TLG administration, is disconcerting, as well.
Fortunately, I am an extendedly tolerant man and personally unfazed by such attacks,
I only bother to address this matter because you both have offended the honor
of a person I continue to hold in the highest regard, who never sinned against
either of you, and who didn't deserve to be disparaged. Your follies to falsely
hold out a kind and gentle soul, as a victim of a true social ill, only diminish
the voice of the real victims of abuse.
Shame on you both!
|
Please do not continue to include me in this. The fact that you are assuming
that I condoned the behavior is insulting and offensive to me.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 21:04 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 80 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this.
|
Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
And, of course, a fairly snarky additional note that is clearly the result of
frustration over sellers just not getting the difference (and blaming them for
the problem that BrickLink created).
|
I strongly object to this resolution. As SylvainLS points out, they are functionally
different, and IMHO they are not interchangable, and both as a buyer or seller,
I would care about the variant (as I do today).
I think a better resolution would be to rename part 88072 to 4623b (and keep
part number 88072 secondary), then make 4623 "undetermined arm length" and create
a new part 4623a for the 6 mm variant.
/Jan
|
Well this totally went in a direction I wasn't expecting! Interesting discovery,
Jan!
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 21:02 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| |
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
I cannot believe you would defend such reprehensible behaviour... if that were
the point, there are less personal ways of making it.
|
Hold on now. I did not say that I was defending it or that I thought it was a
tactful example. I was just explaining what I *thought* they meant by it.
|
|
| Author: | Legoboy_II | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 20:29 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | | | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
| | | | In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
|
I’m not sure this is serious due to the way it’s worded but if I owe an apology,
I’d sincerely apologize to you, your wife’s memory, and her family and friends
for having mentioned an hypothetical wife of yours in a rhetorical argument and
triggered painful memories of a dearly departed.
|
Seriously!? While I have never committed the most heinous and vile crime you
accuse me of, as an LEO and EMS responder, I have seen more than my fair share
of domestic violence. I find your willingness to use such imagery as a comedic
prop, repugnant.
| | | | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
|
It’s also a trap question that can’t be answered without verifying (making true)
the tacit premise (asking about circumstances of something stopping implies the
something existed).
Did you stop eating snails?
— Yes ≫ Yuck! You ate snails.
— No ≫ Yuck! You’re still eating snails.
|
The fact your patently false statements, and lack of remorse, are endorsed by
TLG administration, is disconcerting, as well.
Fortunately, I am an extendedly tolerant man and personally unfazed by such attacks,
I only bother to address this matter because you both have offended the honor
of a person I continue to hold in the highest regard, who never sinned against
either of you, and who didn't deserve to be disparaged. Your follies to falsely
hold out a kind and gentle soul, as a victim of a true social ill, only diminish
the voice of the real victims of abuse.
Shame on you both!
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:36 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | […]
Ah, I remember having trouble identifying the variants I had when I got out of
my Dark Ages. I thought I was holding them wrong and trusted the catalogue(s)
As with all my old parts, the “Antiques” (pre-Dark Ages) are stored separately.
So, I have 3 Black and 1 LG SHORT 4623 (and 3 Black and 2 White long ones).
They come from
Yes, one Black is missing, I have to hunt it down.
|
Found it. And he’s a shorty.
So, 4 short, 3 long in Black. That may mean 6011 was a long. Or it might not.
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:34 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this.
|
Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
And, of course, a fairly snarky additional note that is clearly the result of
frustration over sellers just not getting the difference (and blaming them for
the problem that BrickLink created).
|
I strongly object to this resolution. As SylvainLS points out, they are functionally
different, and IMHO they are not interchangable, and both as a buyer or seller,
I would care about the variant (as I do today).
I think a better resolution would be to rename part 88072 to 4623b (and keep
part number 88072 secondary), then make 4623 "undetermined arm length" and create
a new part 4623a for the 6 mm variant.
/Jan
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:25 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this.
|
Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
|
But but but, they are functionnaly different! 
|
Merging the entries will of course rid the admins of any more problems, but only
by handing them off to the users.
The parts are not always interchangeable. The assembly below from set 6398, for
example, requires the 6mm version. Elsewhere in the set, a white one is used
as a hook for a helmet. It is possible to use the 5mm version for that one, but
the helmet has to be pushed into place and it stresses the parts.
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:09 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this.
|
Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
|
But but but, they are functionnaly different!
| | And, of course, a fairly snarky additional note that is clearly the result of
frustration over sellers just not getting the difference (and blaming them for
the problem that BrickLink created).
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:08 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | | | I have several light gray with the shorter arm. They are light gray, not yellowed
LBG, and they are marked 4623.
|
Ouch, I just checked all 5mm versions that I currently have for sale. I found
one blue and about half of my black ones (13) bearing mold number 4623. I can
therefore conclude that mold number 4623 was used for both versions of this part
(I have checked the 6mm versions also, they also bear this number).
I ought to have seen this already this a month ago when I was double-checking
the contents of my childhood sets. Those sets have been mixed together, but for
my mid-80's castle sets, I was wondering why all of them had 5 mm versions
when the inventories stated they had to be 6 mm. Not a single 6 mm found among
those sets. So I replaced the parts with 6 mm versions believing this was the
right thing to do. But now I know why I didn't find the 6 mm art in them.
The 5 mm version was apparently already in use during the 80's with the same
mold number.
The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this. Sorry to be the messenger. 
|
Ah, I remember having trouble identifying the variants I had when I got out of
my Dark Ages. I thought I was holding them wrong and trusted the catalogue(s)
As with all my old parts, the “Antiques” (pre-Dark Ages) are stored separately.
So, I have 3 Black and 1 LG SHORT 4623 (and 3 Black and 2 White long ones).
They come from
Yes, one Black is missing, I have to hunt it down.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 19:03 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this.
|
Honestly, I'm tempted to merge them. There is little reason for this part
to be split over an excessively confusing difference that requires no less than
three comparison images.
And, of course, a fairly snarky additional note that is clearly the result of
frustration over sellers just not getting the difference (and blaming them for
the problem that BrickLink created).
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 17:56 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | I have several light gray with the shorter arm. They are light gray, not yellowed
LBG, and they are marked 4623.
|
Ouch, I just checked all 5mm versions that I currently have for sale. I found
one blue and about half of my black ones (13) bearing mold number 4623. I can
therefore conclude that mold number 4623 was used for both versions of this part
(I have checked the 6mm versions also, they also bear this number).
I ought to have seen this already this a month ago when I was double-checking
the contents of my childhood sets. Those sets have been mixed together, but for
my mid-80's castle sets, I was wondering why all of them had 5 mm versions
when the inventories stated they had to be 6 mm. Not a single 6 mm found among
those sets. So I replaced the parts with 6 mm versions believing this was the
right thing to do. But now I know why I didn't find the 6 mm art in them.
The 5 mm version was apparently already in use during the 80's with the same
mold number.
The catalog for this part is now officially a mess, and an admin need to work
on fixing this. Sorry to be the messenger.
/Jan
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:55 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| |
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
|
I’m not sure this is serious due to the way it’s worded but if I owe an apology,
I’d sincerely apologize to you, your wife’s memory, and her family and friends
for having mentioned an hypothetical wife of yours in a rhetorical argument and
triggered painful memories of a dearly departed.
| | I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
It’s also a trap question that can’t be answered without verifying (making true)
the tacit premise (asking about circumstances of something stopping implies the
something existed).
Did you stop eating snails?
— Yes ≫ Yuck! You ate snails.
— No ≫ Yuck! You’re still eating snails.
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:45 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
In my opinion, the additional notes are not best used to admonish sellers in
a patronizing and condescending tone.
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:38 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | | | I can see a bit of light bluish gray around the base of one of the studs on the
part you are saying is light gray. I believe you have a damaged light bluish
gray part that has been yellowed. I find it *very* hard to believe that this
mold would have been used to make parts in a color that had been retired for
*years* before the mold was ever even manufactured.
|
I am not convinced that there is any LBG on this part. I have checked under magnifyning
glass, it has to be some lighting issue. The color is the same on all sides,
even inside. What's even stranger: I've just seen (in the magnifying
glass), that the mold number says 4623, but it's not a 6 mm arm, it's
5 mm (see another attached image).
Could this be a prototype of the upcoming 5 mm change back in the days?
/Jan
|
I have several light gray with the shorter arm. They are light gray, not yellowed
LBG, and they are marked 4623.
|
|
| Author: | Legoboy_II | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:37 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| |
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
I cannot believe you would defend such reprehensible behaviour... if that were
the point, there are less personal ways of making it.
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:10 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | I can see a bit of light bluish gray around the base of one of the studs on the
part you are saying is light gray. I believe you have a damaged light bluish
gray part that has been yellowed. I find it *very* hard to believe that this
mold would have been used to make parts in a color that had been retired for
*years* before the mold was ever even manufactured.
|
I am not convinced that there is any LBG on this part. I have checked under magnifyning
glass, it has to be some lighting issue. The color is the same on all sides,
even inside. What's even stranger: I've just seen (in the magnifying
glass), that the mold number says 4623, but it's not a 6 mm arm, it's
5 mm (see another attached image).
Could this be a prototype of the upcoming 5 mm change back in the days?
/Jan
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 16:03 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
Certainly. But a 1x4 plate? What does that accomplish, and from which angle do
you want it?
/Jan
|
I can see a bit of light bluish gray around the base of one of the studs on the
part you are saying is light gray. I believe you have a damaged light bluish
gray part that has been yellowed. I find it *very* hard to believe that this
mold would have been used to make parts in a color that had been retired for
*years* before the mold was ever even manufactured.
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 15:56 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
Certainly. But a 1x4 plate? What does that accomplish, and from which angle do
you want it?
/Jan
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 15:12 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
|
Gots to be honest with you, I'm still wondering. Can you post an image of
the two parts attached side by side on a 1 x 4 plate (any color)?
Just want to be certain since this part was released (according to our timeline)
five years after the LBG colour change.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 15:10 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Legoboy_II writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| |
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
I believe that was a rhetorical question meant as an example to show that the
questions that were being asked were not really relevant when there is an even
bigger underlying problem that is not being addressed.
|
|
| Author: | normann1974 | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 14:57 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Is this part
?
In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
/Jan
|
|
No, it's 88072 as stated. The handle is centered between the studs (see the
base as the perspective warps the image).
/Jan
|
|
| Author: | Pippysblocks | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 14:41 | | Subject: | Re: 88072 in Light Gray | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Is this part
?
In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | I have found this part in Light Gray, and I'll be supplying an image to the
catalog. Here is some comparison images. The car base is also Light Gray.
/Jan
|
|
| Author: | Legoboy_II | | Posted: | Jun 7, 2020 14:27 | | Subject: | Re: Did horizontal become vertical & vice versa? | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| |
When and why did you stop beating your wife?
|
I think you owe the Community a sincere apology for
such a personal and unwarranted attack against my
deceased wife, whom you didn't even know and had
absolutely no reason to drag into your argument.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Netherlands, Noord-Holland
United Kingdom, England
Germany, Schleswig-Holstein
Denmark
Australia, Queensland
Canada, British Columbia
Slovakia, Trnavský Kraj
Poland, w. Wielkopolskie
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
)
)
