Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | StormChaser  | | Posted: | Mar 4, 2021 09:44 | | Subject: | Re: sh693 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | Why not have the inventory of the figure include both heads?
|
Because the inventory system doesn't support alternates for figure inventories.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 3, 2021 20:16 | | Subject: | Re: sh693 | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Mirko8710 writes:
| | according to instructions this minifigure was assembled wrong. It need to be
build with trans clear head instead of light nougat one.
[sh693]
|
From Set 76175.
Hmmm, that's a tough one. The box front advertises Peter Parker (see attached
image). We could include the mannequin as the standard figure in the inventory,
but I think people will want the Peter Parker figure as advertised - so maybe
include s693 as an inventory alternate?
|
|
 |
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 3, 2021 15:11 | | Subject: | Re: Please clarify similar torsos | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Kenopolis writes:
| | Could you please make a "this item is similar to" note to them?
|
This is accomplished by requesting an item relationship addition with this convenient
and all-natural form:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogRelAdd.asp
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 3, 2021 15:05 | | Subject: | Re: TRUKAYAK | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | Even it was a TRU exclusive, there is no TRU branding on the instructions or
on the bag, it meets the Co-branding rules?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1046
Co-branded items are items that have another brand name, logo, or trade dress
on the box, in the set contents, or in the set name.
Cheating? Maybe a little, but Toys "R" Us is in BrickLink's set name.
There are additional guidelines on that page that would tend to prohibit this
type of co-branding, but they've been loosely followed going way back:
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 3, 2021 10:14 | | Subject: | Re: TRUKAYAK | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Predatedcow writes:
| | Hey, I’m trying to list the 2015 Toys r Us TRUKAYAK kayak and I can’t find it
in the catalogue.
|
Just added this for you. 
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 17:00 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | All in my imagination of course, but this is just my perpetual frustration
speaking up.
|
I'm happy to report that things have improved. CAs/IAs have a much better
working relationship with the site than existed in the past and at least some
hope of making progress on long-needed catalog/inventory improvements.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 11:07 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | Is "Figure" the best keyword?
|
No idea. We use "Minifigure" 8,567 times and "Figure" 1,843 times. There's
no standardization of the terms.
I suppose we could change them all to "Figure/Minifigure" to catch both types
of searches. That's only 10,410 catalog changes.
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In which case 'Slope, Minifigure' would be better?
|
First you must consider how best to accomplish your goal. You want to tag all
the Slope 45 2 x 2 parts that are used as the bottom halves of figures with a
unique identifier to make them easier to locate.
Is the word "Minifigure" the most appropriate term to use here? It is already
used for 8,567 items in the catalog. I doubt anyone would use that word when
searching for these particular slopes, but I suppose they might?
The word "Legs" is used 5,679 times. Oddly, in combination ("Minifigure Legs")
we only find 42 uses. Regardless, it might be worth considering the best search
terms to use for your endeavor.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 10:01 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | My request would simply be to put the word 'Minifigure' in front of the
word Slope
|
This change would cause items in this list to sort improperly by title:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=P&catString=33
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 09:48 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | Does that mean I have to submit a separate request for each and every Sloped
Legs?
|
Yes, it does mean that.
| | or can I just submit one part as an example of how they all need to be changed?
|
Start with one request to show us what you have in mind. We'll contact you
if it can't be approved. If it is approved, you're cleared to request
updates to the rest of the items you'd like to change.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 09:24 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | So, wait.. does that mean submenus are a planned feature to happen eventually?
|
We have not been told that submenus for parts will happen. We have merely requested
them.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 2, 2021 09:22 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | would it be possible to add the word 'Minifigure' within the description
|
If you'd like to see titles of individual items changed, you may request
those with this form:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReq.asp
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 1, 2021 21:59 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two - UPDATE | | Viewed: | 96 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| END OF DISCUSSION
Okay, so the end of the discussion has arrived. I'll turn this list over
to management to review during March:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2487
There could be subtractions from the list during the next month, but there will
be no additions.
SHAPE-BASED DEFINITIONS
The good news is that there was progress on further defining shape-based categories:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1568
Shape-based categories now have images that more clearly define the category
(a great idea from jennnifer). Those images should mostly be good, but I still
need to update a couple of them to address unanticipated categorization issues.
THANK YOU!
Thank you to everyone who contributed to the discussion. You raised some issues
I hadn't considered. I know these changes are frustrating to some of you,
but with written definitions we hope to have a much more solid catalog moving
into the future. Thank all of you for your patience with us.
Of course, when the site gives us submenus for parts we'll be able to more
sharply separate items to make them easier to find.
UNADDRESSED ISSUES
There were still numerous unaddressed issues from both this discussion and the
one we had six months ago. For example, we'll be creating a Slope, Wedge
category, but won't be populating it yet.
To better address the abundance of category issues raised, I think instead of
doing things exactly the same way in October we'll just continuously work
on the next group between now and then. A month wasn't enough time for people
with full-time jobs elsewhere to address everything mentioned and compile the
list.
We have 915 items potentially moving this time (up from 540 items last October),
but we still didn't make it to these suggestions from the February, 2021
discussion:
randyf
Friends category
Stellar
Technic category
Watch parts to parts
speech bubbles
combining door and window frames
sports cleanup
Connection name standardization – can be accomplished with title changes for
right now
(but we did get your Bracket definition update completed)
infinibrix
body wear – not until we have parts submenus
decorated slopes used as legs - these should remain decorated slopes
firestar246
elbow bricks to Technic, Connector
hair vs. hair combo – need submenus first
The_RealRedHex
Animal body parts vs. animals – not this time, but needs to be addressed
Ber_i
Fabuland parts - not sure on these
Bar parts – lot of contention here, so no changes yet
WhiteVanMan
Friends accessories - similar to randyf's suggestion
yorbrick
Parts Duplo Minifigure Modified head - need submenus
figure movements/changes - would need to be part of a much larger project
par016
numerous suggestions from last time – still didn’t get to most of ‘em
leopard37
utensil and weapon categories – need submenus
DeLuca
cake frosting
Plate, Round 1 x 1 with Binoculars (Robot / Droid Head)
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2021 02:57 | | Subject: | Re: Duplo Mushroom | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_RealRedHex writes:
| | A while ago my change was rejected.
|
It must have been over a month ago:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReqList.asp?nID=&viewDate=Y&viewType=E&viewStatus=2&itemType=P&viewAction=N
During that month we've had over 1,200 change requests:
https://www.bricklink.com/calendar.asp?m=0&v=Q
so I have no idea why your requests were not approved. We usually PM the reason
to the submitter when we can't approve a change request.
| | Anyone got an idea of why it was rejected
|
Catalog administrators would typically be more able to answer this question than
the general membership of BrickLink. It would be appropriate to PM us with questions
such as these. In this case, of course, we don't know the answer because
of the length of time that passed between when the requests were not approved
and when you asked the question.
| | or should I request it again.
|
We're usually willing to reconsider requests and you're welcome to resubmit
if you feel the requests were handled erroneously.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 25, 2021 09:39 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | What does base and thickness mean here?
|
You bring up good points. There hasn't been a clear line drawn in the past
between what is a Brick, Modified vs. Plate, Modified. That line could be drawn
as follows:
1. Everything not as tall as a full brick is a modified plate.
2. Everything taller than one plate is a modified brick.
3. Everything between brick and plate goes in a separate in-between category.
The in-between items aren't actually bricks or plates. I went with
number 2 when writing category definitions rather than trying to create entirely
new categories for these items, but the same basic arguments could be made for
going with number 1 instead.
I'll attempt to modify the definitions (including possibly going with number
1 instead) to make a little more sense out of the whole thing.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 25, 2021 09:22 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | 1. For parts defined as Plate, Modified with at least one side of the base is
fully or partially tapered.
|
| | With this proposal what I mean to accomplish is to have all wedged plates together,
as the wedge is a very visual difference and also the category Plate, Wedge is
much smaller than the Plate, Modified.
|
Okay, I understand you now. This is a similar problem to the slope categories,
where the base is used to define the differences between Slope/Slope, Curved
and Slope, Wedge. I still have not quite figured this out yet, including what
it means for this part:
It's a curved slope, but the base is not square or rectangular. Therefore,
according to the current definitions it doesn't fit into any slope category.
As for wedge plates, if we allow attachments and bases taller than a single plate
in height it leads to more items being considered Plate, Wedge because of a general
wedge shape. That includes these modified plates, among others:
The current category definitions restrict the Wedge, Plate category to a strict
definition and leave the Plate, Modified category open to more bizarre and hard-to-categorize
parts. I felt this was the most appropriate approach for future category use
as well as making sense of things, staying with BrickLink tradition, and minimizing
disruption.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 24, 2021 13:13 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | The same is true for another train wheel holder and assembly:
|
I think it would be helpful at some point to group parts designed for wheel attachments
together in one place. Perhaps Wheel, Holder or something of that sort.
They're all over the place right now (at least the following eight categories):
* | | bb0037 Train Brick 2 x 4 x 1 1/3 Sliding Block with Wheels Holder
Parts: Train |
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 24, 2021 12:53 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Was searching my train department upside down for this part...
[38339]
But I see it is in "Wheel"... is this a mistake? Since, well, it clearly is not
a wheel
|
Wheels and wheel assemblies are something of a mess, especially for titles.
We've been meaning to get them cleaned up, but . . .
Number 25 on this roadmap:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2476
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 22, 2021 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: 40450 Amelia Earhart - add to catalog?? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, platinum_lego writes:
| | I was just wondering what the deal is with adding a new set to the catalog.
|
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2021 19:08 | | Subject: | Re: Adjusting Colour Names such as Bluish Grey? | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | Either way what is it about ‘old’ in the colour names that Bricklink doesn’t
like?
|
Old is an undefined word, as is new. Old as relative to what? We've run
into problems in the past using old/new as descriptors and are definitely moving
away from using those two words. They are ultimately meaningless.
For example, if TLG deliberately changes the colors of grays again, we're
stuck renaming everything again. And to what? Old LBG, New LBG, and Even Newer
LBG?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2021 03:31 | | Subject: | Re: Some sad news | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stuart9 writes:
| | A huge thank you from me for all that you, Hygrotus, have done and posted over
the years, you will certainly be missed regarding your contributions.
|
Marek really brought a lot of value to BrickLink. I enjoyed working with him
and am going to miss that. 
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 11:23 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, leopard37 writes:
| | I propose sub categories to thin out the main categories.
|
This is a good idea and we'd like to move toward it. The problem is that
the main categories list already numbers in the hundreds. We'd prefer to
have submenus before we do a bunch of additional splitting.
Please see this message for more information:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1168807
If you'd like to vote on it, see this message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1169569
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 11:18 | | Subject: | Re: Why should I... | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | We apologize for this error on our part. The deletion was due to circumstances
beyond our control.
|
Those are contradictory statements, but hopefully you get the general drift.
We didn't intentionally remove your pending submission, but we regret that
it happened nonetheless.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 11:16 | | Subject: | Re: Why should I... | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Bendix writes:
| | ...upload an item for the catalog - when it is deleted due to unknown reasons?
|
We apologize for this error on our part. The deletion was due to circumstances
beyond our control. We typically try to notify submitters when a submission
cannot be approved.
You're welcome to resubmit this item with the image.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 11:01 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
I really like that you're interested in discussing the category guidelines,
but I'm a little confused on the changes you'd like to see. It would
be helpful for me if you'd post the current guidelines and then your revised
guidelines so I can understand the differences between them.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:24 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:13 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part gal22 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg Nick, Bottom Section with Black Shoe
* Delete 2 Part x283c01 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg with Patch Pocket, Pin Socket and Dark Gray Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal16 Medium Violet Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Top Section
* Delete 1 Part gal21 Medium Violet Galidor Torso Nick with Dark Gray Pants
* Delete 1 Part gal10 Nougat Galidor Head Nick, with 1 Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal17 Nougat Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Bottom Section
* Delete 2 Part x281c02 Violet Galidor Wing with Turbine Cannon and Dark Gray Pin
Comments from Submitter:
Converting to figure
|
You're acting from your emotions and feelings here, not your reason or logic.
You would first need to add the figure to the catalog before these requests
could be approved.
I encourage you to work with us on making the situation better rather than sniping
at us from the sidelines.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:10 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 4566-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, axaday writes:
| | I considered it. I just looked at the statuette's to see precedent and apparently
30598 pb names are what I should have used to begin with.
|
There are no guidelines for figure item numbers. In the absence of written guidelines,
you did fine. There are no right or wrong answers.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | My solution would be that it is not a figure, but the guidelines say it is for
anyone that wants to change it.
|
I should have been more clear. If you disagree with the current situation with
portions of the catalog, please offer concrete suggestions to improve the situation.
This must occur at the level of policy/guidelines.
So, an example of these kinds of suggestions:
1. I think you guys should rewrite the guidelines for minifigs to say
exactly this thing: "Minifigs are defined as (insert content)."
2. Then you guys should delete every item in the catalog that does not
comply with the newly written definition.
Criticizing those who are actually working to resolve some of these longstanding
issues with the catalog makes you feel good and I get that. I do it too and
for the same reasons: it releases neurochemicals for me.
But until you put in the effort to effect solutions rather than just pointing
out problems, you're behaving in destructive rather than constructive ways.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:55 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | How is this type of minifigure to be handled?
|
You're welcome to offer solutions to the problems you point out.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | I just find it ridiculous that anyone, but especially a company owned by LEGO
themselves, would refer to a DUPLO train as a minifigure.
|
I think we get around it by using the slang term minifig.
I first started asking in the fall of 2018 for this issue to be corrected. In
fact, I made a list of all the different types of things BrickLink considers
to be "minifigs":
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2489#FigureTypes
I've not gotten any responses whatsoever to my requests to change the way
we refer to figures. But we really need updates to the way figures are handled
in inventories before we approve more of these kinds of figure assemblies for
catalog addition.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:23 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 18-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, SezaR writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory
|
These requests were not approved because they were accompanied by a sum total
of zero evidence for the claims made.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:15 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | Why is
[27928]
moved to plate, modified
and
[2401]
moved to plate, wedge?
|
Please see the definitions of those categories on this recently-updated page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1568
| | I think the wedge base should be the defining characteristic.
|
As always, if you or any other member want to offer suggestions for redefining
categories that are an improvement you're welcome to do so.
| | There are other parts in the wedge, plate category that have modifications apart
from the wedge.
|
Right, and the list is not complete yet. It won't be complete until March
1st (and subject to review/approval during March).
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:09 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | The entire assembly of this set, and all other buildable figures should be moved
into minifigures. These are characters built out of parts like Thomas the Tank
Engine, Cars, etc. As those examples are now minifigures, then surely so are
these characters.
|
It is not possible to make everyone happy.
As I said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1246481
"Ideally, we would hold off on these changes until the inventory system was
corrected and we could move all figures to counterparts. But people have been
asking for these figures to be considered figures for years and years, so I don't
see that it would really hurt anything to do it now."
I get your objections and I agree with them, to some degree. The addition of
the additional Thomas the Tank figures was not part of msSquirrel's original
request.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 11, 2021 11:39 | | Subject: | Re: 4150px33 variant | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
| | So maybe the other suggestion, I proposed?
"Does this warrant a split or should a note be added?"
|
Yes, in this instance the standard procedure for newly-discovered variants of
all kinds can be followed:
1. Submit a comparison photo showing the differences.
2. Request an additional note. This can be done by including a message
to us with the photo submission or, if you'd prefer a more formal approach,
with a discussion forum catalog request.
3. Request that an item relationship be added for the part as an unsplit
part variant.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 11, 2021 10:58 | | Subject: | Re: 4150px33 variant | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, normann1974 writes:
We're not super-thrilled about splitting anything right now. Especially
print variations and even more especially print variations for which we don't
know if the color differences are intentional or just poor quality control.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2021 13:34 | | Subject: | Re: set 1944-1 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Stellar writes:
| | I thought that indeed it can be removed, check most foil packs
|
Instructions entries can be removed. In the case of 1944-1, it's a different
kind of flaw.
| | Also, can the images of [1944-1] be moved to default the one showing the storage
case with the boxed set?
|
We can't move images from one place to another. Images have to be downloaded
and uploaded. You're welcome to do this if you'd like the images arranged
differently.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2021 13:25 | | Subject: | Re: set 1944-1 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, samsam2 writes:
| | Sure, but I guess I don't understand why there are two sets.
|
The idea is to treat sets with storage cases consistently catalog-wide when the
items in a bundle are packaged separately. Some sets absolutely require separate
catalog entries because they were sold in different ways:
Therefore, for the sake of consistency, all sets should ideally be treated like
the above examples. Moving toward the catalog-wide consistency in this area
was something I began some years ago and never finished.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2021 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: set 1944-1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, samsam2 writes:
| | 1944-1 does not need an instruction entry, only 1944-2 which is the set with
the parts.
Stormchaser is the one who added the -2 subset so maybe when he has time to respond,
he will explain how this works.
|
You are correct that 1944-1 technically should not have an instructions entry.
However, the instructions entry cannot be removed from the set entry due to
a flaw in site architecture. Thus, it remains.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 7, 2021 12:23 | | Subject: | Re: Friends accessories pin vs bar classification | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Miro78 writes:
| | I'll await to hear back from Catalog
admin to see how they want to handle it.
|
In the absence of written guidelines for item titles, any attempts to standardize
titles is potentially a waste of time.
We are currently struggling in our attempts to adopt written guidelines for the
most important aspects of the catalog and item titles are one of those things
(including how part features such as clips, pins, holes, bars, joints, hinges,
etc. are described and unifying the terminology used). Also sorely needed are
clear, consistent, and easily-comprehensible written guidelines for:
Part assemblies, including figures
Item dimensions
Item numbers
Search terms/keywords
Part variants
Colors and how they're used and inventoried
Our seeming inability to progress in these areas is a result of several different
causes, but we are still trying. The progress is exceptionally slow and we are
no happier about that than everyone else.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 22:40 | | Subject: | Re: BAM Plans - Finished | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | Can we have inventories for these?
|
Yes.
| | I think the Halloween set would not be a problem, but the Christmas set seems
to come in different versions.
|
As long as there aren't a crazily excessive number, the inventories system
is capable of handling alternate items.
| | Maybe they could be added as alternates in the inventories. Any thoughts?
|
I see no reason not to add them as alternate items.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 1, 2021 12:15 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | Also, can the headgear and hair issue be fixed this time around? Those pieces
that are a headgear with hair should all be stuck in either one category or the
other.
|
Can you be more specific with examples here, please?
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Feb 1, 2021 02:43 | | Subject: | Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 209 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved. |
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 23, 2021 12:55 | | Subject: | Re: How to add 'bag' 21 of set 75978? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I would like to add this to the catalogue but I don't know how to proceed
since it's not a set in itself.
|
I think at this time we probably wouldn't approve an item like this for a
separate catalog entry. It sets too much of a precedent for adding individually-bagged
or boxed interior packaging of sets.
It's possible in the future that we'd have the technical ability to present
an inventory by interior packaging as an alternate view. I know people would
appreciate that functionality. But that would take a whole lot of work and probably
wouldn't happen anytime soon.
| | Maybe treat it the same as cardboard sleeves, catalogue-wise?
|
Cardboard sleeves (and multipacks), obviously, set a precedent that would indicate
the acceptableness of adding the Diagon Alley box. But, as I said, we probably
would stop before going that far with precedents.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 17, 2021 13:15 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 3815-1 | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, LEdougGO writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 6041 Black Propeller 3 Blade 3 Diameter (match ID 3815)
Comments from Submitter:
instruction booklet calls for two
|
The other one is here:
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 11, 2021 23:39 | | Subject: | Re: Cylinder Hemisphere 3 x 3 Ball Turret Socket | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_RealRedHex writes:
| | putting in a category change request?
|
Please do not request any category changes right now. They will not be approved.
We'll open a forum thread three weeks from today for our next movement of
parts that will happen in April. Mention any category changes you want to see
in that thread.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 11, 2021 05:04 | | Subject: | Re: Figure Titling Guidelines (DeLuca) | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I understand that it is difficult to implement concrete Catalog-wide standards,
but there is some decision-making process that determines if a Catalog
change-request is accepted or rejected.
|
The decision-making process is irrelevant without written guidelines.
I've spent hours today on creating guidelines and didn't get super-far
(in addition to all the time I've spent in the past). Figure titling is
an incredibly complicated issue.
You have 33 pending change requests, most of which are to change figure titles.
How about this: before we go shuffling the words in figure titles around yet
again, why don't you suggest some guidelines?
As regards the pending requests, here are some questions to consider as you draft
your guidelines (there's no need to answer them here in the forum - just
in your proposed guidelines):
Change Item Name from
{Ogel Minion, Super Ice Drone, Alpha Team Arctic}
to
{Super Ice Drone - Mission Deep Freeze, Trans-Medium Blue Helmet, Red Scarab
Symbol with Silver Outline, Black Evil Skull}
Why are hyphenated divisions better than comma-separated divisions?
Is this just your personal preference?
What about parenthetical divisions - what role should they play in figure titles?
What about other forms of punctuation in titles?
Why was "Ogel Minion" removed from the title?
Should it be there - if so, where?
Where does the term "Super Ice Drone" come from?
Is Ogel Minion any kind of official term or just something someone made up?
Why was the word "arctic" included in the original title?
Why is the theme Alpha Team included in the original title?
Don't categories handle this?
Why was it removed in your request?
How does it affect sorting by name when there is no sub-theme?
Why was the sub-theme included in your request?
Are all the identifiers (helmet and color, torso pattern, head description) included
in your revision necessary?
If so, why aren't they included for all figures?
Should they be?
Change Item Name from
{Ogel Minion, Alpha Team Arctic}
to
{Ice Drone - Mission Deep Freeze, Trans-Medium Blue Helmet, Red Scarab Symbol,
Evil Skull}
What is the difference between an ice drone and a super ice drone?
Who determined it and how reliable is the information?
People enjoy browsing figures by title and I believe it's the default setting
- how would these figures be sorted if this category had, say, 500 figures?
Wouldn't ice drones appear very far apart (in the I and S sections)?
Change Item Name from
{Ogel, Black Hands}
to
{Ogel - Black Hands}
Why is a named figure treated differently than an unnamed figure?
Should it be?
Why or why not?
Change Item Name from
{Alpha Team Android}
to
{Tee Vee - Mission Deep Freeze, Android}
What is more important as the first word in the title, when it comes to sorting:
the character name (Tee Vee) or what the character is (an android)?
Change Item Name from
{Zed}
to
{Zed - Mission Deep Freeze, Sports Helmet with Black and Blue Bangs and Goatee}
There's only one Zed in the entire catalog. Why, then, is it necessary to
describe further?
And, if it is necessary, then why did your Ninjago work not follow this philosophy?
Also, does the sports helmet have black and blue bangs and a goatee?
Are "with" and "and" necessary in figure titles, or would comma separation work
to the same effect?
Why were only two attributes (the helmet and the head) described in the title?
Since titles have limited room, what attributes are chosen to be described therein
and what is the criteria for selecting them?
Change Item Name from
{Ogel, Trans-Red Hook}
to
{Ogel - Mission Deep Sea, Black Hand and Trans-Red Hook}
Why was it necessary to describe the other hand in the title?
What role do images play in titles?
Must everything in the image be described, or does the image itself perform some
role of description?
If the image takes on some role in describing an object, don't categories
do the same?
If so, should they ever be included in titles?
Change Item Name from
{Ogel Minion Commander}
to
{Skeleton Drone - Police Cap and Red Epaulettes, Standard Skull}
Not a single word from the original title was kept - who is responsible for answering
complaints when people can't find something?
Is it worth keeping old title language within a new title for a period of time?
If so, where will it go and how will it be distinguished from the revised title?
How long will it be kept?
How will we find it to change it?
What is a standard skull?
Titling this with the first word as "skeleton" will group this figure with other
skeletons - is this desirable?
This figure is neither a skeleton, nor a drone - if "Skeleton Drone" is what
the figure is officially referred to, then how can it be titled properly for
sorting?
I look forward to seeing your ideas for figure title guidelines. 'Cause,
as I mentioned, I sorta ran into some dead ends.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 10, 2021 21:07 | | Subject: | Re: Please Change Name of Part (973pb4140c01) | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I understand that it is difficult to implement concrete Catalog-wide standards
|
I'm working on this right now.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jan 10, 2021 19:59 | | Subject: | Re: Please Change Name of Part (973pb4140c01) | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | BTW, why did you change "Sensei Wu" to "Wu Sensei"?
|
Because some Wus were sorted together by name and others were scattered all over
by name. Now all the Wus are together. If you'd like the title to say "Wu,
Sensei Wu" that's no problem. It still searches just fine no matter the
word order.
But the character's name should be the first word in the title and this fella's
name is Wu. Sensei is an honorific term. That's just a rule I made up,
by the way. Because we have no guidelines.
| | He has only been referred
to as the former.
|
Even as a child?
Sensei Wu Child?
| | Having some guidelines is better than having none at all
|
I agree. But . . . again, I cannot force this to happen. I've been trying
for over a decade now to institute logical, consistent, easy-to-understand systems
catalog-wide. But even where I am, there are still barriers.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
USA, Oklahoma
