Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | infinibrix  | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
In truth the Oscar probably only warrants one entry which in my opinion is of
course the more complete one! though I don’t have a major issue with this as
long as there are no more than two entries for any one minifig however the thing
I have a bigger issue with is that we are using a completely different reference
number for each? idea078 and idea079 when they are both centred around the same
minifig and so it might be an idea if we’re going to do this sort of thing that
we just use idea078 for the fully accessorised entry and then just add a ‘b’
or something for any alternative barebone entries - idea078b
If the same additional letter is used each and every time at least people can
look to check to see if there is a barebone version of the same minifig and know
how to search for it
We already have some examples of this in the catalog where these minifigs are
the same and use a similar refernece to define a different colour:-
And here it’s the same minifig but without the proton pack though again it would
benefit from using the same letter at the end each time - gb001b instead of gb001i
And then from there a minifig like this would benefit from an additional non
backpack entry - sw0824b
or at least thats my thinking....
|
 |
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 06:44 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, bje writes:
| | I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently.
|
But defining clear written rules for how ALL minifigs MUST be listed doesn’t
always serve its purpose for the benefit of the catalog as the Oscar minifig
has shown and it’s better to have a catalog that best serves those customers
who shop here rather than blindly following strict rules that are detrimental
to the way a particular minifig appears in the catalog?
I also have full confidence in the catmins judgement as to what they feel should
constitute the final minifig for each catalog entry as they still follow the
same guideline rules set out for the majority or minifig entries but that doesn’t
mean that other members of the community shouldn’t be able to challenge a minifig
entry or voice an opinion on what parts they feel should or should not be included.
In the end the catmins will decide whether a minifig entry warrants special circumstances
or not but once decided we then all adhere to what is expected based on the final
photo and so it’s not as if rules are not in place for us all to follow?
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2020 05:55 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, chetzler writes:
| | | | In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included.
|
I've thought this for a long time. There are some some strange minifigure
entries in the catalog. For catalog purposes, guidelines are better than rules.
If the rules are always blindly adhered to, there seems little need for a catmin--anybody
could do the job by just following the rules. I'd rather have thoughtful
people make a decision about what is the most reasonable inventory for a figure
without being bound to a set of rules that can't possibly account for all
current all future cases.
Below is what I always thought was a reasonable exception to the "no hand-held
accessories" rule as the accessories are meant to be an extension of the fig's
alien arms. This exception has existed for a long time, so clearly there is
precedent for going with reasonable vs pedantic.
|
and maybe extending that further to characters that are always seen to look a
certain way for instance Shredder always wearing gauntlets, Karlof always shown
with big fist hands, and a werewolf with claws etc...
Vader on the other hand is'nt always weilding a Lighsaber thereby making
it more of a handheld accessory intended to be added/removed
Either way we have many Ironman minifigs with blue boosters under their legs
but are they any more essential to those minifigs compared to some of the other
parts I've mentioned? I guess in the end those parts don't matter too
much one way or the other as everyone will just follow and include what is shown
in the picture but yes descisons made on a case by case basis is better than
sticking to strict rulings that trip over themselves with their own inconsistencies
especially where key componenets for certain minifigs appear to be missing?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 15:52 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
Yes the Dollar in the bag should'nt be included as to me its no different
to any other minifig tile accessory such as a map, catapult, gamer pad etc...
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| |
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
I'm not against this idea but I have a feeling the Admins/Bricklink will
be plus you also have to consider how far we can stretch things because if you
give every minifig two entries does that actually benefit Bricklink for the better?
I mean do we really want to see caped and non caped versions for each and every
minifigure for example? Well I would'nt have a problem with that either but
there are certainly some minifigs that would benefit a lot more from having two
entries and it may be better starting at these before overcomplicating the catalog
with too many entries when there is only one single part different between them
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:16 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose 
|
You make a very good point. So I'm back to where I started, confused
What I'm less confused about, is that it can't be easy for those
making catalog listing policies.
|
Ha ha yeah but I think thats the thing, maybe we need less stict policy/rules
on how minifigs are handled and deal with them on a case by case basis by cataloging
them in a way that best serves the majority of the community. If I'm alone
with suggesting Oscar should have a trash can then by all means we should leave
him without it though I'm not sure if that is the case?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:49 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I have sympathy with you and the admins are discussing all of this right now
and I believe you will get some of what you are asking for.
I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Okay that explains a lot because I did'nt realise it was'nt actually
attached to the trash can though that said I think if we want to try and make
the catlog minifig entries appear as complete as possible then I'd personally
say that the trash can should probably be included with the rest of the minifig
but saying that as mentioned I would'nt have a problem with two entries for
certain minifigs either although whether the Oscar warrants the need for two
compared to some of the more elaborate entries I'm not so sure.
The ghostbusters minifigs are a good example of where there is a benefit for
two entires (with/without proton pack) and I hope this can be followed through
to other similar minifigs of which we're probably only talking about less
than 1% anyway
In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included. Both a chima eagle without wings and Oscar
without a trash can I'm sure most people would see as incomplete especially
if it then means they then end up having to buy the additional parts (handheld
items aside) separately which almost defeats the purpose of a complete minifig
entry
On the otherhand jay without a jet pack and Moroff without his backpack still
seem complete enough to be worthy of being cataloged barebone and in truth I
think this would be the most common way to buy and sell them anyway if users
were given the choice?
But thats just my take on the subject...
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 07:29 | | Subject: | Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 209 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
I’m not sure anyone would consider the newer entry complete for instance would
anyone actually display the Oscar minifig without the trash can either way the
instructions point to the parts being arrow directed down into the trash can
anyway?
Then compared with these minifigs that have non-essential accessories:-
The yoda has a part only useful with the actual build and if you want Jay In
his kimono outfit you have to specifically purchase him with the multiple part
jet pack whilst the other ninja characters in matching outfits are sold standalone
as should be the same for all?
I’m then confused further as we have Ghostbusters characters in the catalog with
and without their proton packs so are they supposed to be fully accessorised,
barebone or a mix of both, which is it?
To be honest I like the two options given for the Ghostbusters minifigs and whilst
the majority of minifgs should only have one entry I think it would make sense
to have two entries for certain minifigs like the Jay without jetpack and other
minifigs like this one with an option to buy with and without a backpack:-
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2020 13:25 | | Subject: | Re: Incomplete Minifigures? | | Viewed: | 77 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, axaday writes:
| | In Suggestions, steamingpile writes:
| | I understand the desire to eliminate the incomplete minifigures from the listings.
But is there any chance that actual "minifigure" listings could come without
all the accessories?
For example sw0824 has 3 actual minifigure parts, and a 14 piece backpack. Wouldn't
the acutal minifigure end at the 3 actual minifigure parts, and not include the
random bricks?
|
If I were the king, we would make a category for Brick Built Minifigure Accessories
that would include backpacks and weapons that are official builds. Then the
minifigure listings would lose all backpacks and minifigs that come with a hat
and a hair option would have both in the inventory. A BUNCH of Chima minifigs
would disappear.
|
I agree that some re-thinking should be considered as if we’re going to say that
multi-part backpacks and capes are an essential part of a minifigure build then
why stop at just those parts because if we’re saying we want minifigs to appear
exactly as they appear in the instructions then I agree that minifigs should
also include satchels, sword holders, weapons and accessories too?
The only obstacle I can see is where you have for example Indiana Jones iaj001
which appears in 12 sets and the accessories given by each set may vary from
including the whip, satchel and pistol to perhaps not including one of those
parts or perhaps even coming with him wearing handcuffs instead?
However logic says that you don’t accessorise and photo him wearing handcuffs
you simply accessorise him with the most common accessories for that minifig.
If the first uploader accessorises and photos him with satchel, whip, and pistol
then those should then become the MUST include parts for that minifigure or even
if the first photo uploader doesn’t include the pistol that may still seem a
valid upload to go with, On the other hand if someone photos and uploads without
the satchel or whip then someone may request to revise the photo to include what
they consider a vital component to the overall look of Indiana Jones so that
it does include these elements
I know it’s not a perfect solution but then does it really need to be? As long
as the photo includes the more relevant parts associated with the minifig in
question and buyers can see what they will get I think this is more helpful to
buyers than leaving them having to hunt around looking for a satchel or lightsaber
hilt?
When I first arrived here I found it strange that none of the minifigure photos
showed accessories and I really didn’t know what to expect would be included
either?
I think it’s fair to say that I think minifgs should either be properly fully
accessorised or listed barebone which for Indiana Jones would be just the hat,
head, torso and legs. Obviously not all minifigs are as simple as this so what
constitutes barebone would need careful consideration but minifigures are a huge
part of the market on Bricklink and so I feel having options would be of greater
benefit to the platform, in fact it would be nice if there were two options for
most minifigs for example iaj001 could be a fully accessorised Indiana Jones
with iaj001b (The ‘b’ representing the fact that the minifig is bare bone with
just the main minifig components head legs torso etc..
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 9, 2020 12:03 | | Subject: | Re: Please show part numbers in Shopping Cart | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | The shopping cart while checking out shows a picture and description of
the part you want to buy, but no part number.
Please add the part number somewhere here.
Thank you.
|
+1
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 10:02 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, peregrinator writes:
| | In Suggestions, Brickwilbo writes:
| | The feedback page encourages to resolve issues before leaving feedback:
Please try to resolve any disputes before posting a complaint. Feedback must
not be used to communicate with your trading partner or ask them a question
|
Why not require the user leaving the feedback to check a box saying "[] I have
tried to resolve this issue with my trading partner before posting this"?
|
+1
or if not this the pop up prompt to the buyer as also suggested
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 09:56 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, psusaxman2000 writes:
| | In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
|
| | While a pop up message sounds all well and good, they only work for a short time.
Once someone knows that it is there, they tend to just ignore them.
|
but your talking as though people regularly leave negative feedback because buyers
will only see the pop up warning in situations where they are about to leave
negative feedback?
Its also more geared towards newbies who may not be aware that communication
is key on sites like Bricklink and ebay rather than just leaving feedback without
a second thought!
| | I like the idea of having some secondary or hybrid concept and I think it could
help eliminate some work for the admins with feedback removal. How about if
when sending a non-positive feedback, the system puts a set hold time (say 2
days) before it is officially posted, but also sends as an email and/or message
to the other party giving them a chance to respond. The response would then
allow the parties to (hopefully) better align and come to a better resolution.
There would obviously have to be some kind of limit on this for those transactions
that are actually bad and need to be noted as such, but this would give some
help to the process.
|
I think it's just overcomplicating things if the buyer is confronted with
a pop up warning prior to leaving negative feedback where Bricklink suggests
it might be worth contacting the seller before committing to the feedback, that
should be good enough.
In the end some buyers will take note of that and show willingness to see if
the situation can be resolved with the seller whilst others won't and for
those that don't there's little point delaying the inevitable feedback
from being posted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Oct 1, 2020 07:06 | | Subject: | Re: Compulsory message before negative/neutral fb | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Shintaku writes:
| | | | The feedback page encourages to resolve issues before leaving feedback:
Please try to resolve any disputes before posting a complaint. Feedback must
not be used to communicate with your trading partner or ask them a question
|
Yes that is actually suggested and I would welcome it to become compulsory.
|
I think a pop up type message might be better that says something along the lines
of:-
"You are about to leave a Negative feedback but have you considered contacting
the seller first? Most sellers will be keen to resolve issues given fair opportunity
to do so?"
If the buyer is able to leave a kind of draft negative that appears after a certain
time it will just put the sellers back up and make them feel like they're
being blackmailed and having to resolve because of the impending negative rather
than because they want to resolve off their own back!
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 30, 2020 08:41 | | Subject: | Re: Color question | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Bendix writes:
| | Duplo snowflake of set 10899, Frozen Ice Castle is listed as Trans Clear
Maybe the correct color should be Trans Milky or Trans White?
|
Having checked the part on the Lego site, Lego refer to its colour as Trans White
which translates to Trans Clear on Bricklink and the important thing here is
to always catalog the colour not as we see it but as the colour description given
by Lego/Bricklink otherwise you end up creating additional sub-categories of
colour which Lego themselves don't recognise and which leave sellers with
no clear indication of where they should list their item for sale also there
are other colours that vary in shade such as Pearl Gold and yellow and if you
start doing sub categoris for one colour I'm not sure where it would end?
Bricklink would have an even bigger colour pallette with no clear certainty as
to where an item should be listed?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 23, 2020 09:36 | | Subject: | Re: Anyone use counter scale? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, novabrick writes:
| | In Inventories, nielnc3 writes:
| | Hey, we are thinking about buying a counter scale to help with inventory - we
are hoping to find one that can count small, very light pieces such as 1x1 tile,
1x1 round plate, etc all the way up to 2x4 bricks.. does anyone use a counter
scale to help be more efficient pulling orders? Or to help with adding inventory
more quickly? Thanks for the feedback.
|
We have one. But there is always an error margin. Since not all parts are the
same weight to the last microgramm, especially used ones. So there can be a bit
of fluctuation. We only use it on really high digit counts like 5000+.
Setup takes like weighing 250 or something of a part and then add the whole lot
to get a fairly accurate number. I wouldn't trust it by just weighing a single
part and go up from there.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
I should add that the weights I've used are just an example I have no idea
what 100 of any part actually weigh 
| | Yes and if sellers intend to rely on scales they should always ensure that the
customer gets either the correct amount or a couple extra rather than being short.
Therefore if you count and weight 100 parts at 28g probably safer to ensure that
the weight is around 29g on the scales to allow for marginal errors as from a
customers perspective its not very acceptable to find parts missing when they
have been weighed and estimated instead of properly counted
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 23, 2020 09:32 | | Subject: | Re: Anyone use counter scale? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, novabrick writes:
| | In Inventories, nielnc3 writes:
| | Hey, we are thinking about buying a counter scale to help with inventory - we
are hoping to find one that can count small, very light pieces such as 1x1 tile,
1x1 round plate, etc all the way up to 2x4 bricks.. does anyone use a counter
scale to help be more efficient pulling orders? Or to help with adding inventory
more quickly? Thanks for the feedback.
|
We have one. But there is always an error margin. Since not all parts are the
same weight to the last microgramm, especially used ones. So there can be a bit
of fluctuation. We only use it on really high digit counts like 5000+.
Setup takes like weighing 250 or something of a part and then add the whole lot
to get a fairly accurate number. I wouldn't trust it by just weighing a single
part and go up from there.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Yes and if sellers intend to rely on scales they should always ensure that the
customer gets either the correct amount or a couple extra rather than being short.
Therefore if you count and weight 100 parts at 28g probably safer to ensure that
the weight is around 29g on the scales to allow for marginal errors as from a
customers perspective its not very acceptable to find parts missing when they
have been weighed and estimated instead of properly counted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Sep 22, 2020 08:52 | | Subject: | Re: Change entry for minifigs, NEW / INcomplete | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Pazzo writes:
| | Hi all,
recently some of our parts/sets/minifigs are removed from my inventorie.
Before you would get a notification, but nowadays items are removed without further
notice.
I do understand that it is necessary to list the items correctly, but I do have
a problem with removing minifigs from the inventorie.
For example:
SW0105: Lando Calrissian, Cloud City Outfit (Smooth Hair)
We do have this minifig in stock, it is new, but the cape is missing
We do not have an option to list the minifig as NEW and INcomplete, but the minifig
IS completly new!!
Either change the way we can add this to our inventorie (like sets) or let us
list them as new! It would be incorrect if we would list them as USED, as clearly
they are NOT.
just my 2 cents,
be cool and have fun!
Eric
|
I've also just had that very same Lando minifigure removed because of the
missing cape and yet there is surely some value to be added to the bricklink
marketplace by giving people access to rare minifigures like this. See here...
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1223220
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Aug 1, 2020 18:51 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog Project - Moving Things | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, I won't promise anything will happen.
But this is the plan:
1. I'm opening discussion right now, in this thread, on changes in
item type and and category for any items wrongly categorized. I expect discussion
will probably focus on parts and last around two weeks.
2. I'll post all changes deemed worth making on this page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2487
3. The catalog team will discuss internally during the month of September.
This will give everyone time to prepare for item movements. I'll post public
updates/reminders occasionally during August and September.
4. The actual changes will be made on October 1st, 2020. A record of
the changes will be retained for reference purposes for two years on the page
linked to above.
I know some of you are excited about this. It's the first time BrickLink
has been widely open to correcting some longstanding categorization issues.
I'm excited, too. I will fully read and carefully consider every post made
in this thread. To help me out, please:
1. Snip replies (remove extraneous content before replying).
2. Stay on point (don't post digressions).
3. Keep everything in this one thread.
4. Don't expect miracles. Some ideas may have to be added to the
roadmap as separate projects.
5. Try to limit complaints. Or, if you believe everything is already
properly categorized and don't like change, complain loudly and often. Site
management will be watching.
Thanks to everyone for the input you're about to provide. I don't know
how this will go, but I expect it to be interesting.
|
Whilst I feel the 'modified' categories work quite well as a place to
seach for the more unusual bricks and plates, I've always felt that clips
are quite a specific thing that people may wish to search for and so would the
catelog benefit from moving parts with clips to their own categories?
Plates with Clips:-
4085
15712
92280
6019
63868
11476
Bricks with clips:-
60476
30241b
60583b
30237
Whilst you could do the same with bricks with pins, connectors, sockets and handles
I fear people may struggle to determine all those different aspects and even
more so if the part contains a clip aswell as a handle or pin but when it comes
to peoples understanding of what a clip is I think everyone shares that same
idea? Though the catalog describes the part 4081b as having a clip but to me
its more of a pin socket?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, misbi writes:
| | Now that TLG has acquired BL, isn't it about time that we set about resolving
conflicting colour names? The flesh/nougat adjustment shows that it's possible,
so when are we going to rename BL Dark Green to Earth Green?
Obviously there are many others which need aligned over time, but currently Dark
Green should be an immediate priority.
|
I can't see why this would be a priority at all. Dark Green is clearly a
better name than Earth Green. TLC has come up with some odd color names over
the years. I think it would be best for Bricklink to keep their color names.
David
|
I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
Bricklink has been around for 20 years. Bricklink being owned by LEGO is a recent
thing, so for a couple decades Bricklink customers have become used to the Bricklink
color names. Changing them because TLC bought Bricklink is not logical.
|
You could say that Lego have been around longer still and yet naming them different
to what Lego(The actual Manufacture) call them is logical?
and I appreciate you may have been with BL from near the start but I would still
have to adapt to the offical Lego names the same as anyone else
| | Furthermore, you compare color names for LEGO parts to color names for well-known
paint brands. You mention "The customer knows the brand of paint they want and
they know the colour that the manufacture calls it," however, that's not
the case with LEGO. Very few LEGO customers are going to know that TLC calls
regular green "Dark Green" and that they call dark green "Earth Green." Changing
names like that at this point would cause a lot of confusion.
David
|
But not all Lego enthusiasts use Bricklink simply because they find it too complicated
or are unaware of its presense or what it can offer them however that may be
about to change with the release of XP along the wider community slowly being
made more aware of Legos aquisition of the site
Many people simply use Brickset and/or the official Lego sites as their reference
point after all going direct to the official manufacure to look up parts from
a set would seem like the logical step to take for your average Lego household
not yet fully accustomed to BL?
Whatever confusion this might cause for existing BL users will be nothing compared
to the confusion that awaits future BL users that are expected to know all this
stuff?
Exisitng members ar'nt going to go anywhere and so Bricklinks target market
needs to be encouaging new users and making things as simple for them as possible!
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 08:33 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, hpoort writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | | | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
Once again, no thank you.
|
But if it’s just a preference thing why stop there... Why not just ignore the
Lego part numbers too and use our own/old peeron codes? But wait we already do?
I’ve never understood why the biggest Lego market place ignore Legos colour system
and ignores Legos official part numbers. Granted you can search by the Lego references
but we are still presented with this 3626cpb0730 instead of this 6003296?
|
You are presented with both on the catalog item page. Because for more than half
of the parts the official Design Id (BL: Part number) or Element Id (BL: PCC)
is not known, is not referring to the part (single part or combination) refers
to a technical difference (such as ABS versus PC or PE) that is not distinguished
on Bricklink and because there is relational information hidden inside the Bricklink
numbering system.
|
I don't see 6003296 here:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3626cpb0730#T=C&C=90
and I would argue that an official Lego part number should mean more to a larger
group of people compared to an unofficial reference like this 3626cpb0730 either
which way I think I'd rather see the official part numbers displayed in the
prominent spots and have those other references searchable but hidden from view
instead? If its all about having the ability to differenciate between different
variaitions of the same part why not just add a letter on the end 6003296b, 6003296c,
6003296d? The description will explain the differences and so does it really
require the part reference iteself to try to explain those differences?
| | And for the color names: because Bricklink and the whole AFOL market had to choose
their own naming systems long before LEGO published their color names - which
are confusing at best.
|
I'm aware and appreciate that but as Lego have long since published their
colour names we should be making a better attempt to mirror what they use or
if we still strongly feel we cannot bring ourselves to use them we should use
the power and persuasion of the AFOL community to suggest to Lego to adopt Bricklinks
colour system instead?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 05:36 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, randyf writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
Once again, no thank you.
|
But if it’s just a preference thing why stop there... Why not just ignore the
Lego part numbers too and use our own/old peeron codes? But wait we already do?
I’ve never understood why the biggest Lego market place ignore Legos colour system
and ignores Legos official part numbers. Granted you can search by the Lego references
but we are still presented with this 3626cpb0730 instead of this 6003296?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 04:26 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, crazylegoman writes:
| | In Colors, misbi writes:
| | Now that TLG has acquired BL, isn't it about time that we set about resolving
conflicting colour names? The flesh/nougat adjustment shows that it's possible,
so when are we going to rename BL Dark Green to Earth Green?
Obviously there are many others which need aligned over time, but currently Dark
Green should be an immediate priority.
|
I can't see why this would be a priority at all. Dark Green is clearly a
better name than Earth Green. TLC has come up with some odd color names over
the years. I think it would be best for Bricklink to keep their color names.
David
|
I think the change of ALL colour names should be a priority because however bizarre
Legos colour names may seem to us it is the manufacture who made those decisions
for their product and so it’s their name choices that should take precedence?
If an established and well-known paint brand names one of their colours ‘Bright
Yellowish Green’ distributors and retailers should follow that colour guide because
by re-labelling it as ‘Lime’ they only create confusion for their customers.
The customer knows the brand of paint they want and they know the colour that
the manufacture calls it and yet the customer is expected to somehow work it
out for themselves or if they’re lucky stumble across a third party colour guide?
The variations of the Lego product are confusing enough at the best times so
why create further confusion in areas that are easily fixed?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jul 10, 2020 15:21 | | Subject: | Re: Dark Green - who's going to crack first? | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, misbi writes:
| | In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Colors, misbi writes:
| | Now that TLG has acquired BL, isn't it about time that we set about resolving
conflicting colour names? The flesh/nougat adjustment shows that it's possible,
so when are we going to rename BL Dark Green to Earth Green?
Obviously there are many others which need aligned over time, but currently Dark
Green should be an immediate priority.
|
The Flesh / Nougat change had nothing to do with trying to align with LEGO colors.
In general we try to align new colors or color name changes with official LEGO
color names, and that has been a policy for a long time. But even in the Flesh
/ Nougat change, we did not follow the LEGO name in every case.
|
Fair enough, but uniquely with Dark Green, there is a direct clash/contradiction
between BL and LEGO.
|
Misbi, its been raised before and I'm with you all the way and whilst I would
prefer Lego to adopt BL names I would settle for any colour description so long
as that same description is widely used by 'Everyone!' including Lego
and Bricklink. Having different descriptions for colours depending on what site
your on or who you talk to only creates uneccessary confusion? I would rather
clear transparency between myself, my suppliers and my customers than being overly
concerned about the use of colour descriptions that are not to my personal choosing
or liking!
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
