Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Brickitty  | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 16:38 | | Subject: | Re: Hose, Rigid 3mm D. length difference | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | I just went through over 200 used and new parts from the category Hose, Rigid
3mm D. (75c03 up to 75c28), and I measured all of them with a ruler. I found
that, for both unconfirmed used hoses and confirmed new ones from sealed sets,
the actual length of the hoses in millimeters were shorter than the lengths listed
in the titles. Nearly every single hose was 0.2 to 0.3 millimeters shorter than
the "official" lengths listed on Bricklink. I confirmed this with other rulers.
Can anyone else confirm this? And if it's normal, perhaps the millimeter
lengths in the titles should be adjusted downward by 0.2mm to be more accurate,
or else changed to be a range, since the hoses often have minor length differences.
|
I'm sorry, those numbers should read either "2 to 3 millimeters" or "0.2
to 0.3 centimeters." My bad.
|
 |
| Author: | Brickitty | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 16:36 | | Subject: | Hose, Rigid 3mm D. length difference | | Viewed: | 92 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I just went through over 200 used and new parts from the category Hose, Rigid
3mm D. (75c03 up to 75c28), and I measured all of them with a ruler. I found
that, for both unconfirmed used hoses and confirmed new ones from sealed sets,
the actual length of the hoses in millimeters were shorter than the lengths listed
in the titles. Nearly every single hose was 0.2 to 0.3 millimeters shorter than
the "official" lengths listed on Bricklink. I confirmed this with other rulers.
Can anyone else confirm this? And if it's normal, perhaps the millimeter
lengths in the titles should be adjusted downward by 0.2mm to be more accurate,
or else changed to be a range, since the hoses often have minor length differences.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 12:19 | | Subject: | Re: Key chain 853992 | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | I just noticed this key chain in the catalog.
The current name is " 2 x 4 Brick - Satin Black Key Chain".
Should that not be "2 x 4 Brick - Chrome Black Key Chain"?
Or am I mistaken here?
|
To be honest, I have no idea. 
When submitting the new key chains, I just tried to follow what was said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=265187&nID=1186400
There isn't any other part in Satin Black in the catalog yet and I don't
own that Chrome Black Darth Vader to compare the colors.
|
The interesting thing about that post is that those are actually NOT what I would
consider to be in the same category as the new Satin colors. I know I said that
at the time, but since then, I have acquired that hair piece, and I would actually
describe that as Opal, not Satin, because of the iridescent qualities. The whole
spectrum of color can be seen as the surface is turned, whereas with the satin
colors, it is merely a shift.
|
|
| Author: | Cob | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 09:30 | | Subject: | Re: Chrome silver Roborider wheels | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Searching, Schredder writes:
| | Hi all,
yesterday i recovered my roborider wheel collection from early this century and
decided to sell it.
In the meantime i know about the metallic gold ones (from e. g. promo pack 800010,
see also my store).
What i am still interested in are 2 chrome silver chainsaw wheels (part 32362).
Does anyone know, if these were official parts or just a misprint?
They do not look like some just painted a normal one.
Best regards,
Manfred
|
There was a shop who would chrome parts, maybe it is a custom chrome job.
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 08:34 | | Subject: | Re: Key chain 853992 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | I just noticed this key chain in the catalog.
The current name is " 2 x 4 Brick - Satin Black Key Chain".
Should that not be "2 x 4 Brick - Chrome Black Key Chain"?
Or am I mistaken here?
|
To be honest, I have no idea.
When submitting the new key chains, I just tried to follow what was said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=265187&nID=1186400
There isn't any other part in Satin Black in the catalog yet and I don't
own that Chrome Black Darth Vader to compare the colors.
|
Chrome black is also this container on the outside
look at the note
I think this brick is chrome black
|
You are probably right. I think I was confused by that other discussion where
nobody mentioned that the black brick might be chrome and not satin/opal/whatever.
Request submitted.
|
|
| Author: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 08:03 | | Subject: | Re: Key chain 853992 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | I just noticed this key chain in the catalog.
The current name is " 2 x 4 Brick - Satin Black Key Chain".
Should that not be "2 x 4 Brick - Chrome Black Key Chain"?
Or am I mistaken here?
|
To be honest, I have no idea.
When submitting the new key chains, I just tried to follow what was said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=265187&nID=1186400
There isn't any other part in Satin Black in the catalog yet and I don't
own that Chrome Black Darth Vader to compare the colors.
|
Chrome black is also this container on the outside
look at the note
I think this brick is chrome black
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 07:20 | | Subject: | Re: Key chain 853992 | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | I just noticed this key chain in the catalog.
The current name is " 2 x 4 Brick - Satin Black Key Chain".
Should that not be "2 x 4 Brick - Chrome Black Key Chain"?
Or am I mistaken here?
|
To be honest, I have no idea.
When submitting the new key chains, I just tried to follow what was said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=265187&nID=1186400
There isn't any other part in Satin Black in the catalog yet and I don't
own that Chrome Black Darth Vader to compare the colors.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 05:45 | | Subject: | Key chain 853992 | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I just noticed this key chain in the catalog.
The current name is " 2 x 4 Brick - Satin Black Key Chain".
Should that not be "2 x 4 Brick - Chrome Black Key Chain"?
Or am I mistaken here?
|
|
| Author: | Schredder | | Posted: | Jul 14, 2020 03:13 | | Subject: | Chrome silver Roborider wheels | | Viewed: | 96 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi all,
yesterday i recovered my roborider wheel collection from early this century and
decided to sell it.
In the meantime i know about the metallic gold ones (from e. g. promo pack 800010,
see also my store).
What i am still interested in are 2 chrome silver chainsaw wheels (part 32362).
Does anyone know, if these were official parts or just a misprint?
They do not look like some just painted a normal one.
Best regards,
Manfred
|
|
|
| Author: | Primicia | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 17:20 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0303 torso in yellow? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, LegoMath writes:
| | In Catalog, Primicia writes:
| | Hi
I just found this minifigure.
But I can only find 973pb0303 in orange.
So how can I add this color?
|
Is this what you are looking for?
|
Thanks!
|
| Author: | Primicia | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 17:20 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0303 torso in yellow? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Cob writes:
| | In Catalog, Primicia writes:
| | Hi
I just found this minifigure.
But I can only find 973pb0303 in orange.
So how can I add this color?
|
|
Thanks!
|
| Author: | Cob | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 14:53 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0303 torso in yellow? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Primicia writes:
| | Hi
I just found this minifigure.
But I can only find 973pb0303 in orange.
So how can I add this color?
|
|
| Author: | FantasyBricks | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 14:52 | | Subject: | Re: 973pb0303 torso in yellow? | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Primicia writes:
| | Hi
I just found this minifigure.
But I can only find 973pb0303 in orange.
So how can I add this color?
|
Is this what you are looking for?
|
| Author: | Primicia | | Posted: | Jul 13, 2020 14:45 | | Subject: | 973pb0303 torso in yellow? | | Viewed: | 119 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi
I just found this minifigure.
But I can only find 973pb0303 in orange.
So how can I add this color?
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 17:13 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Soviet writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
I bought the other sets to inventory them, but at the time this one was reserved
by someone else. It isn't clear now whether they decided not to do it or
their reservation just timed out. I don't remember who it was.
|
They have communicated that they are not going to do the inventory. I will free
it up for you.
|
I'm sorry if I seemed to imply it, but I am not planning to do the set at
this time. I have all I need on my plate at the moment.
|
Alright, I'll do it. I recently got the parting-out ich and it looks pretty
interesting.
|
Excellent. I WILL want to get some of those baby Dinos at some point, but I
think I can wait for clearance.
|
|
| Author: | Soviet | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 16:11 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
I bought the other sets to inventory them, but at the time this one was reserved
by someone else. It isn't clear now whether they decided not to do it or
their reservation just timed out. I don't remember who it was.
|
They have communicated that they are not going to do the inventory. I will free
it up for you.
|
I'm sorry if I seemed to imply it, but I am not planning to do the set at
this time. I have all I need on my plate at the moment.
|
Alright, I'll do it. I recently got the parting-out ich and it looks pretty
interesting.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 16:04 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
I bought the other sets to inventory them, but at the time this one was reserved
by someone else. It isn't clear now whether they decided not to do it or
their reservation just timed out. I don't remember who it was.
|
They have communicated that they are not going to do the inventory. I will free
it up for you.
|
I'm sorry if I seemed to imply it, but I am not planning to do the set at
this time. I have all I need on my plate at the moment.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 14:55 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
I bought the other sets to inventory them, but at the time this one was reserved
by someone else. It isn't clear now whether they decided not to do it or
their reservation just timed out. I don't remember who it was.
|
They have communicated that they are not going to do the inventory. I will free
it up for you.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 11:23 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
I bought the other sets to inventory them, but at the time this one was reserved
by someone else. It isn't clear now whether they decided not to do it or
their reservation just timed out. I don't remember who it was.
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 10:05 | | Subject: | Re: 75939 | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, skikyssing writes:
| | Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
|
BrickLink inventories are and have always been submitted by BrickLink members.
| | I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
|
I seriously doubt LEGO is generating wealth from this little site.
| | Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
|
We have always had volunteer Admins who do an amazing job.
| | Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
|
Because the job would be too big and too expensive. Our data is crowd sourced
because that system is efficient and effective.
| | Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
|
BrickLink does.
| |
Could someone do something about it?
|
Yes! You can! That's what's so great. Feel free to submit the inventory,
people here on the forum will answer any questions you have, and our awesome
admins will help you along. You will be parting out your set in no time.
Sorry if I sound harsh, but your post is very harsh and negative. You have been
a member here for 5 years and have never noticed who creates our catalog?
Good luck,
Jen
|
|
| Author: | skikyssing | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 09:41 | | Subject: | 75939 | | Viewed: | 106 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi,
The inventory of the 75939 has been added on june first. but we can not still
part out the set.
I guess Lego do not care about getting fees from Bricklink...
Lego should hire someone who can be responsable for inventories.
Why do we have to make the job of Bricklink and Lego?
Bricklink and Lego should give reward for the people who take their extra time
to register all the sets...
Could someone do something about it?
|
|
| Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 02:31 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| All of them are with groove. I made a change request as you asked.
In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
|
Yes, that is correct.
Could you also check and change the undetermined black hinge plates in the set?
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 12, 2020 00:31 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I assume you are being facetious, but yeah. I would add them as counterparts
in the set also. I think it is an item that people will be interested in buying
and they probably won’t want the tray or lid by itself. Commercially they are
best listed as a set.
Really hard to find right now since they are gear and are not in inventories.
|
When we're redoing the catalog guidelines we'll take this into consideration.
I'm not opposed to these entries on principle, just for the potential they
introduce. But again, we'll consider it and have something solid in place
by the end of the year.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 22:26 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | So no one would have to add lidded entries to hundreds of containers
|
Would I be accurate in assessing your comments to say that you support the addition
of combined tray/lid catalog entries for Dots sorting containers?
|
I assume you are being facetious, but yeah. I would add them as counterparts
in the set also. I think it is an item that people will be interested in buying
and they probably won’t want the tray or lid by itself. Commercially they are
best listed as a set.
Really hard to find right now since they are gear and are not in inventories.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 19:54 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | So no one would have to add lidded entries to hundreds of containers
|
Would I be accurate in assessing your comments to say that you support the addition
of combined tray/lid catalog entries for Dots sorting containers?
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 19:50 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | When it comes to the Dots trays with lids, the current catalog guidelines prohibit
them in two ways. First, from even having an entry:
The system automatically adds / updates / deletes the corresponding original
box entry for every set that is added to the catalog. Original Boxes should therefore
not be added to the catalog.
|
I don't think I have received a Dots set in a box yet. No problem there.
| | The second prohibition is more important,
though. It is not expressly stated, but comes from a combined interpretation
of these two rules:
For example 2, 3, or 4 bricks stacked together should not be added to the
catalog as there are virtually infinite possibilities for these combinations.
|
There is only one way to put a Dots lid with a Dots tray, unless you count rotations.
Then there are 4.
| | The meaning is that random items not packaged and sold that specific way by TLG
should not be added to the catalog. The Dots sorting trays and lids were never
sold separately as a combined empty tray with a lid.
|
The lid on the tray is actually the way all of mine came from the factory.
| | But if we add Dots sorting trays with lids, we have no excuse not to also add
combined entries for the following:
|
There is a white Man-Bat minifigure now and I haven't added it to the catalog.
The rules say he could be added, but no one has done it. And if I needed an
excuse for myself it would be that the set isn't available to me yet, but
I don't need an excuse and no one else does either. It isn't my responsibility
to make sure that everything allowed in the catalog is in the catalog. So no
one would have to add lidded entries to hundreds of containers just because someone
submitted a listing for this one and it got approved. If someone wanted one
of the other hundreds in the catalog and were willing to do the work then they
would do it. Maybe we would never get them all in the catalog. We certainly
don't get all of the stickered counterparts in the catalog either.
|
|
| Author: | Pippysblocks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 18:29 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| No probs Stormchaser, I'll do this in the morning, I'll add a picture
for the armor too as it doesn't have one for dark blue. Just wasn't sure
on the correct process.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I would have much preferred that the legs were created without a picture (assuming no render was available)
|
+1
I can't stand incomplete inventories and try to avoid them at all costs.
Some inevitably get through for things like gear items, but there really is no
excuse for having an incomplete minifigure inventory.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:42 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
That's a fair question. The reason is that the BrickLink catalog is very
inconsistent. It's difficult to know if an item will be approved or not
and we get requests for preapprovals ("Would this be approved if I submitted
it?") with some frequency.
Preapprovals should not be necessary - that is the purpose of the submission
process. But they are necessary right now because of numerous inconsistencies.
We are in the process of moving to fewer inconsistencies. One step in that
process is updating catalog guidelines, which we are doing right now.
When it comes to the Dots trays with lids, the current catalog guidelines prohibit
them in two ways. First, from even having an entry:
The system automatically adds / updates / deletes the corresponding original
box entry for every set that is added to the catalog. Original Boxes should therefore
not be added to the catalog.
That rule has been disregarded for years and we disregarded it when approving
the Dots trays for catalog entries. The second prohibition is more important,
though. It is not expressly stated, but comes from a combined interpretation
of these two rules:
For example 2, 3, or 4 bricks stacked together should not be added to the
catalog as there are virtually infinite possibilities for these combinations.
Please limit submissions of multi-set Set entries to ways that LEGO itself is
known to have packaged and distributed such things, including sets released as
promotional items through other companies.
The meaning is that random items not packaged and sold that specific way by TLG
should not be added to the catalog. The Dots sorting trays and lids were never
sold separately as a combined empty tray with a lid.
The real question you're asking is this: what's the harm? The answer
is that it introduces further inconsistency. There have been a couple of very
carefully chosen exceptions to these rules over the years (collectible figure
entries are one).
But if we add Dots sorting trays with lids, we have no excuse not to also add
combined entries for the following:
I'm not going to list hundreds of examples, but look through the catalog
at all the items with lids and imagine having separate catalog entries for all
of them plus all combinations of them. This is basically a discussion of assemblies.
Like assemblies for parts, it is a contentious issue.
But we'll be working on the main catalog guidelines page within the next
six months and will post the new guidelines publicly for feedback and modification
before making them official. So if you feel strongly about assemblies of original
boxes, that would be the time to bring it up.
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:12 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
Maybe you can sell this in:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?O=41906-1
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:07 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | The process at the time was that he showed up in the list of minifigs that needed
to be inventoried. Now he still needs to be inventoried, but he doesn't
show up on the list. Is there a way to search for more like this?
|
Other than reading through all inventory notes, no. We discussed it at the time
administratively and decided that a partial inventory was preferable to no inventory
at all. I tried to add the word Incomplete in bold to inventory notes
for all partial inventories in the hope that someday we could flag these kinds
of inventories.
You can find all items with inventory notes by using the advanced catalog search
(currently 1,111 items). These notes are not searchable, which is one of several
reasons I've advocated for not including an additional note or inventory
note unless they are actually necessary.
|
Torsos are added with no pics all the time for people who submit assemblies only.
The torso assembly gets inventoried with a part that really only has a ghost
in the catalog, but it is better than nothing. If I were the king even that
wouldn't be allowed, but I would have much preferred that the legs were created
without a picture (assuming no render was available).
|
|
| Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
I don't think this is something that would be approved. No other tray/bucket/base
and lid combinations are in the catalog as combined entries that I'm aware
of. You have the option of listing the trays and lids as a superlot, but setting
new catalog precedent by adding these kinds of entries is probably not a path
we'd want to go down.
|
Why?
When you look at reviews of Dots sets the boxes are very positively received
and have potential resale value. Going the historically ‘correct’ procedure that
similar parts were not approved earlier is not a valid reason imo. The world
is changing and what was not ok in the past might be ok now.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: construction vehicles | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, TiceRex writes:
| | The sets 31014 and 31041 consist equally 64 parts, the size and proportions are
the same. Why are the categorized differently?
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Model: Construction:" (31041)
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Basic Model: Construction:" (31014)
|
Honestly, we were just being silly. You're welcome to request category changes
to any set in the catalog with this form:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReq.asp?itemType=S
The category definitions are here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1568
In this case I believe the category Model should be changed to Basic Model for
31041.
|
|
| Author: | TiceRex | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:29 | | Subject: | construction vehicles | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| As far as I remember I have asked it already a few years ago, but I can't
find any trace now.
The sets 31014 and 31041 consist equally 64 parts, the size and proportions are
the same. Why are the categorized differently?
What's the difference between these categories?
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Model: Construction:" (31041)
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Basic Model: Construction:" (31014)
Regards, TiceRex
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:23 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | The process at the time was that he showed up in the list of minifigs that needed
to be inventoried. Now he still needs to be inventoried, but he doesn't
show up on the list. Is there a way to search for more like this?
|
Other than reading through all inventory notes, no. We discussed it at the time
administratively and decided that a partial inventory was preferable to no inventory
at all. I tried to add the word Incomplete in bold to inventory notes
for all partial inventories in the hope that someday we could flag these kinds
of inventories.
You can find all items with inventory notes by using the advanced catalog search
(currently 1,111 items). These notes are not searchable, which is one of several
reasons I've advocated for not including an additional note or inventory
note unless they are actually necessary.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:10 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
The procedural answer to your question is that you would add 907957c01 to the
catalog as a new item and then inventory it with both of the pieces. But don't
do it in this case, because admin said it wouldn't be approved.
What I do in a case like this is sell [g=907957] with the note "With Matching
Lid" and I have sold many things like this that way.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:05 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | The legs simply need to be added to the catalog and then to the figure inventory.
It's essentially the same process now as it was then.
|
The process at the time was that he showed up in the list of minifigs that needed
to be inventoried. Now he still needs to be inventoried, but he doesn't
show up on the list. Is there a way to search for more like this?
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:02 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | The legs simply need to be added to the catalog and then to the figure inventory.
It's essentially the same process now as it was then.
|
Now he is rare.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 12:08 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
I don't think this is something that would be approved. No other tray/bucket/base
and lid combinations are in the catalog as combined entries that I'm aware
of. You have the option of listing the trays and lids as a superlot, but setting
new catalog precedent by adding these kinds of entries is probably not a path
we'd want to go down.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 12:01 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I wish that hadn't been done. It would have been a lot easier to fix at
the time than it is now.
|
The legs simply need to be added to the catalog and then to the figure inventory.
It's essentially the same process now as it was then.
Pippyblocks, submit the legs here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp
and add a picture here:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogImageAdd.page
|
|
| Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 11:41 | | Subject: | How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 11:14 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Pippyblocks writes:
| | Just about to part out some
and I realise he appears to a bit legless. How do these get added to the catalog?
Many thanks,
|
I wish that hadn't been done. It would have been a lot easier to fix at
the time than it is now.
|
| Author: | Pippysblocks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 10:25 | | Subject: | NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 93 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Just about to part out some
and I realise he appears to a bit legless. How do these get added to the catalog?
Many thanks,
|
|
| Author: | peterab | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 08:51 | | Subject: | Re: Are there sets with seperate Parts Lists or.. | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
| | In Catalog, patpendlego writes:
| | Are there LEGO sets with seperate Parts Lists or Inventory Lists?
The Catalog defines packaging and instructions and other books etc.
I would like to know if there are also parts lists?
Thx,
Arnoud
|
I mean parts lists on paper, like instructions, that come in the box... 
|
I've seen pictures of a wooden box set from the 60's that had a printed
parts list. Of course because of the age these are rare. If I remember correctly
it was an English list so perhaps this was something that only happened with
the English sets.
|
|
| Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 02:51 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Submitted the changes for the red 44301. I shall have a look at the black 44301
and 44302.
In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
|
Yes, that is correct.
Could you also check and change the undetermined black hinge plates in the set?
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 02:46 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
|
Yes, that is correct.
Could you also check and change the undetermined black hinge plates in the set?
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 02:43 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
|
Yep.
|
|
| Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 02:38 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| OK, thanks to you all. So if I read it right, I should submit two red 44301a
as regular and two red 44301b as alternate and delete the two red 44301?
In Catalog, paulvdb writes:
| | In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | In a sealed set 4203 I found the red 44301 with and without groove. Is it normal
to have different variations of one part in one set? Should it be noted or is
the Undetermined Type in the inventory enough?
|
As others already mentioned, this is common with some part variants if borh were
in production at the same time. In such a case one of the variants should be
in the inventory as a regular and the other as an alternate.
Undetermined parts should be eliminated from inventories if we have evidence
for one or more specific variants in a set.
|
|
|
| Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | Jul 10, 2020 13:07 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, primadeluxe writes:
| | In a sealed set 4203 I found the red 44301 with and without groove. Is it normal
to have different variations of one part in one set? Should it be noted or is
the Undetermined Type in the inventory enough?
|
As others already mentioned, this is common with some part variants if borh were
in production at the same time. In such a case one of the variants should be
in the inventory as a regular and the other as an alternate.
Undetermined parts should be eliminated from inventories if we have evidence
for one or more specific variants in a set.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jul 10, 2020 13:06 | | Subject: | Re: With and without groove in one set | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | […]
Yes, it's normal. I just opened hundreds of sealed sets from 2015-2017 and
another few dozen individual sealed bags from 2005-2018. Not only is it normal
to have groove/no groove differences in the same set, but it's also normal
for the proportion of them to vary between different copies of the same set,
even bought at the same place on the same day. Same for hollow stud/blocked open
stud on heads and certain other pieces, same for hollow/solid underside tubes
on bricks and plates, same for virtually every mold difference.
|
Yep. And BL’s inventories shouldn’t be read as “you either get N of this variant
or N of that one” but as “you N parts total, either of this or that variant.”
So each time there’s an Alternate for N parts, that means there are potentially
N+1 times more versions of the set.
Maybe something should be added to explaim that in https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1562&q=Alternate#alternateItems
?
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Germany, Niedersachsen
Poland, w. Wielkopolskie
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Sweden, Västerbotten
Norway, Hordaland
United Kingdom, England
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
Hungary, Pest
Australia, Victoria
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine