Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Brickitty  | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 17:24 | | Subject: | Re: Wondering if part 53588 exists - want to buy | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, MidwestBrick writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, mfav writes:
You're right, it is. Perhaps the catalog admin should change this and consolidate
both parts under 53588pb01, in Dark Gray or Dark Bluish Gray, then?
|
And possibly purchase some items at those two stores to make amends? 
|
I'll definitely send a message to the sellers I messaged before, to let them
know they should relist the parts appropriately. But I'm curious why you
think I'm in any way responsible for the catalog error or receiving refunds
for what I could only assume were mistakes? I was just going off of the catalog,
and it's only the difficulties during this last week that led me to believe
that the part might not exist in a non-marbled version.
|
 |
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 17:11 | | Subject: | Re: Wondering if part 53588 exists - want to buy | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, MidwestBrick writes:
| | | | You're right, it is. Perhaps the catalog admin should change this and consolidate
both parts under 53588pb01, in Dark Gray or Dark Bluish Gray, then?
|
And possibly purchase some items at those two stores to make amends?
|
I believe it is asking a bit much that we purchase from stores whenever errors
are discovered in the catalog. 
I am not wealthy and this is a volunteer position. If an error exists with this
part then I apologize, but that's about as much as my budget will allow.
|
|
| Author: | MidwestBrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 17:07 | | Subject: | Re: Wondering if part 53588 exists - want to buy | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, mfav writes:
You're right, it is. Perhaps the catalog admin should change this and consolidate
both parts under 53588pb01, in Dark Gray or Dark Bluish Gray, then?
|
And possibly purchase some items at those two stores to make amends?
|
| Author: | Brickitty | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 16:55 | | Subject: | Re: Wondering if part 53588 exists - want to buy | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, mfav writes:
You're right, it is. Perhaps the catalog admin should change this and consolidate
both parts under 53588pb01, in Dark Gray or Dark Bluish Gray, then?
|
|
|
| Author: | Brickitty | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 16:19 | | Subject: | Wondering if part 53588 exists - want to buy | | Viewed: | 180 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Hi everybody!
I've had quite an adventure trying to track down a copy of 53588 Dark Bluish
Gray Baseplate, Raised 16 x 16 No Studs with Cross Opening, 4 Holes.
I got an incomplete copy of 7739 in a Craigslist lot and wanted to complete it.
First, I bought 2 copies of 53588 from USA sellers early this year, but when
they arrived they both had the Red and Light Gray marbling described in the entry
for 53588pb01. The marbling is fairly subtle, so I didn't blame the sellers
for missing it, and they both gave me refunds.
Then I tried messaging every single North American seller who had a copy of 53588
listed to see if it was actually solid Dark Bluish Gray with no marbling. Many
never replied, but all took down their listings within a week. I was busy for
a few months, but over the last week I've messaged more sellers. Again, nothing.
Most sellers have taken down their listings, and the 3 that returned my messages
confirmed that there was marbling in their copies that they missed.
Now I'm starting to wonder if a solid-color 53588 with no marbling actually
exists. I've tried Google, Brickset, and other sources to find pictures of
the set, but no pictures show the part in high enough quality to confirm there's
no marbling -- except box and instruction artwork, which doesn't count.
The biggest thing that makes me suspect that a non-marbled piece doesn't
exist is that both of the marbled 53588pb01 copies I have are almost definitely
Dark Bluish Gray, not Dark Gray... but they still have marbling. According to
Bricklink, those pieces shouldn't exist. So perhaps the part was entered
incorrectly, and the old Dark Gray versions of the mold from 4 Bionicle sets
and the Dark Bluish Gray version in 7739 are all marbled?
Can anyone who owns 7739, especially a copy they built new, check to see if their
53588 from that set is marbled? And if any seller out there can confirm that
they have a non-marbled piece for sale, you will immediately get my business.
Thanks everyone!
-Jordy (Brickitty)
|
|
| Author: | mfav | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 14:32 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | | | | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
|
Disagree. Dual-sided is not the same as printed front and back. Dual-sided means
there are two faces to choose from. Printed front and back means there are also
details printed on the back. To call one of these Dual is inaccurate. It is not
meant to be put on the minifig backwards.
I think Dual-sides should be left alone and any head with back printing get a
mention of it is the Name if possible. Most images already show this.
|
I think the head issue is going to require some additional thought. Some are
suggesting that splitting the heads into two categories will make things easier
to find. I'd suggest that is not always going to be the case. Splitting will
cut both ways. In some instances we have heads with hollow studs...and an alternate
with a blocked open stud. Also sometimes you have a pattern that is on a one-sided
head and the same pattern may be used on one side of a two-sided head.
If you have a head in hand, then, it probably will make finding the head marginally
easier.
If you do not have the head in hand, then you're compounding the complexity
of the search as you'll have to run the search against two categories. I
believe at the moment the BL search function restricts the user to one category
at a time for search. So, conceivably the search would have to be run twice:
once on "single-side heads" and again on "dual-side heads".
Then there are the non-head heads like
I'd suggest that this question of splitting heads may actually result in
splitting headaches somewhere down the road. I'm neither in the "for" or
"against" camp at this point, I'm in the "better think it through thoroughly"
camp.
| | | |
Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
|
However, you are opening up a nice can of worms here! Are you going to start
differentiating between printed patterns and molded patterns all over the catalog
or just here??
|
Well. Yeah. There's already some differentiation between printed and stickered
parts, and there ought to be some method of differentiating the printed and molded
parts. I'd wager that this also needs some extended consideration. Short
term, though, changing the descriptions would be moving in a positive direction.
I'd suggest that including the word "pattern" would indicate a printed piece
and the absence of "pattern" would indicate a molded piece. Or something along
those lines. At core, though, I think it's a similar issue as the stickered
vs. printed decorated parts.
| | | | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
|
Sure it is convenient! (But also easily achieved with a -pattern search??)
|
I don't know about "easily". Possibly "mostly". Only if the word "pattern"
is consistently used throughout the category in reference to those legs with
printing. And this raises the same issue as the mini doll legs being molded or
patterned...some minifig legs are dual-color molded and not otherwise decorated.
I don't know offhand if there are also dual color molded leg assemblies with
printing. Wonder Woman maybe?
| | There should be a check box on every catalog search page to 'Hide Decorated Parts.'
Ta dah! Problem solved.
|
I imagine Jen is attempting some humor here, but from a practical standpoint
the database isn't structured such that it would be feasible to implement
in this fashion.
Whatever solutions arise, I believe it would be preferable to have these solutions
be more immediate and less convoluted...meaning that a newbie coming in here
could assess the situation without requiring deep intimate knowledge about all
the nuances of how a piece may be decorated to find it. If we need to explain
that one needs to search two sections of minifig heads or deal with three decoration
variables or whatever other complexities may be involved, then it's not a
great system. Some of the proposed changes I think are weighted to the hard-core
know-it-alls and less to the noobs.
The true solution undoubtedly lies in a new, built-from-scratch, relational underlying
database and part-specific search forms. I don't see those happening any
time soon.
So while I see pluses and minuses to the proposed changes, and given the current
state of the database, I'm probably leaning towards not splitting decorated
categories and creating a uniform code of description for the decorated parts.
Then one is not having to search through multiple decorated head or other categories.
As far as splitting non-decorated leg assemblies from decorated ones, sure. There's
precedent for that with many other parts.
|
|
| Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 12:18 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 71 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, dearlydeparted writes:
| | I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
This item was marked for deletion because it sets a precedent for adding dozens
of unnecessary combinations of hinges as assemblies to the catalog."
|
I understand the reason for the deletion of this part. But since it has been
in the catalog for a very very long time, and many people do use this listing,
I would be in favor in keeping in around for the sake of others, even though
I myself do not use it.
|
|
| Author: | BricksThatStick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 12:17 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog Requests, tEoS writes:
| | I realize that since you've been appointed many things are being accomplished/changed.
However, part of me is uncomfortable that Maggie or Ronald aren't at the
head of these discussions/changes, as if they are being side-stepped in this
process.
They have been performing these duties for a long-time and I think it would go
a long way to create credibility in these decisions, if they were the voice of
the catalog reorganization process.
|
I would assume/hope that behind the scenes there is private admin discussion/agreement
on the changes.
| | | | Unfortunately, I've been rather busy in the last two weeks since I was appointed.
Until I get around to addressing this issue, part assemblies are kind of up
in the air.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 11:18 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I realize that since you've been appointed many things are being accomplished/changed.
However, part of me is uncomfortable that Maggie or Ronald aren't at the
head of these discussions/changes, as if they are being side-stepped in this
process.
They have been performing these duties for a long-time and I think it would go
a long way to create credibility in these decisions, if they were the voice of
the catalog reorganization process.
| | Unfortunately, I've been rather busy in the last two weeks since I was appointed.
Until I get around to addressing this issue, part assemblies are kind of up
in the air.
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 10:11 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | The next catalog project consists of replacing all current photos of minifigures
with photos of the same minifigures on sport bikes. You can see this on the
Catalog Roadmap:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473
Okay, not really. The (Other) project is winding down and next we're looking
at implementing some, if not all, of LordSkylark's suggestions. We need
to decide together how many of these (or maybe all of them?) we want to tackle.
Let's discuss them.
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
My take: I'm good with this and it has been requested before. It will reduce
catalog entries from 23 to 11 entries for straight two-color arms. It will take
some work and I'm not sure about the exact logistics, but it can be done.
|
I always thought these arms should be classified by the color of the part of
the arm that attached to the minifigure, instead of classified by the color coming
'out' of the 'sleeve'. A big yes from me on this one.
| | Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
|
At first, my take on this would be a no due simply to the fact that the clips
on the hips are irreversibly damaged when the legs are taken off for the first
time (unlike arms from torsos). So hips alone would never be able to be sold
as new.
However, if the majority wants to have them and would list the parts correctly,
then I don't see why not.
In the end, I think the amount of work involved in this enormous task would outweigh
any benefit. Most people would just buy the legs assembly.
| | Adding individual Technic figure parts.
My take: currently against policy, a policy which is not adhered to considering
that at least one of these is already in the catalog. I see little harm in it,
but again: how many want this and how badly?
|
Change the policy and include these. There are not many of them, and the workload
would be rather small. Also, people have asked for these many times over the
years.
| | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
|
I like the 'dual-sided' moniker for those heads which have a completely
different full-faced expression on each side. I am not for adding the moniker
to those heads with a face on only one side and, for example, just a few lines
on the other side to represent head creases or hair.
Splitting the head category into two for dual-sided and single-sided sounds like
a good idea.
| | Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
My take: I would like to see a detailed explanation of the exact issue to understand
it better. I believe one was posted somewhere, but it would be great if it could
be posted one last time in this thread so that we all have an idea of what this
would entail.
|
This is needed. I understand the issue having looked at these in person. Some
of the minidoll legs used to be molded in one color and then had a print added
to represent a second color (like for skin tones). The newer versions of those
legs are dual-molded, so that each color is a different plastic color with no
print needed. Certain minidolls only came with one of the two types, and it would
be nice to have the correct version of the legs in the inventories for the correct
figures.
| | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
Yes. I find it almost impossible to find undecorated legs.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 10:03 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| |
Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
|
I think the legs are pretty much broken once they've come apart.
| |
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
|
Disagree. Dual-sided is not the same as printed front and back. Dual-sided means
there are two faces to choose from. Printed front and back means there are also
details printed on the back. To call one of these Dual is inaccurate. It is not
meant to be put on the minifig backwards.
I think Dual-sides should be left alone and any head with back printing get a
mention of it is the Name if possible. Most images already show this.
| |
Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
|
This would help with the difference between
which has Tan printed shoes on Dark Blue plastic (despite it's
current description) and
[p=92253c00pb05] which is molded with Dark Blue and Tan plastic.
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=175562&nID=851127
However, you are opening up a nice can of worms here! Are you going to start
differentiating between printed patterns and molded patterns all over the catalog
or just here?? I do not envy you this task.
| |
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
|
Sure it is convenient! (But also easily achieved with a -pattern search??) There
should be a check box on every catalog search page to 'Hide Decorated Parts.'
Ta dah! Problem solved.
Thanks!
Jen
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 09:45 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | | However, I see little point
in putting single and dual sided heads in different categories.
|
If you want to use a head either without hair / helmet /hat or with a short hair
/ hat that doesn't cover up the back print, it is very useful to just see
a list of single sided heads. Of course, you can search for "-dual" to help get
rid of the dual ones.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 09:45 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | [1] Accessory, Human Tool - Rip Cords
The ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category has been created and it blurs
the line between a Part and Gear. I guess we should wait until all part categories
have been properly defined, however, the category has already been created and
rip cords have already been added. Therefore I suggest we move these gear ...
[g=ripcordcover1][g=ripcordcover2]
... as parts in the ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category. Also rename
them
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Lion Head for Chima
Speedorz "
and
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Crocodile Head for
Chima Speedorz "
, respectively.
|
I like this idea. Seconded.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 09:42 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | I suggest a new category is created called 'Ephemera' and things like
competition forms and event guides from the ' (Other) ' category are
moved into there.
|
I like to think that a have a rather large vocabulary, and even I had to go and
look up the meaning for 'ephemera'. If one needs to look up the definition
for a category name, then I think that is a good indicator that the name is too
obtuse. I think two new categories called 'Competition Forms' and 'Event
Guides' would be rather nice and simple.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | mockingbird | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 07:13 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | |
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
|
YES
| | Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
|
NO
| |
Adding individual Technic figure parts.
|
YES
Arms and legs can relatively easy be removed from a technic figure. I've
often found incomplete technic figures or just some parts of the arms or legs.
| |
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
|
YES
More consistent naming is a good thing. And splitting into two categories is
also a good thing to make it easier to find an individual head.
| | Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
|
NEUTRAL
Don't know exactly what this change would be
| |
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
|
YES
Although the suggestion of adding 'plain' in the name might also work.
But a 'decorated' category would be consistent with other categories.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 07:02 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
I know this is not fourth project, but I'd like to ask it anyway:
11. Create Complete Series Entries for Collectible Minifigures - A project to
create catalog entries to enable the sale of full sets of each series
of collectible minifigures. This is a minor, but controversial, project which
needs to be fully understood before moving forward.
Date first added: 10/30/2018
Suggested by: Rw107
Can this text be changed to:
11. Create Complete Series Entries for Collectible Minifigures - A project to
create catalog entries to enable the sale of full series of collectible minifigures.
This is a minor, but controversial, project which needs to be fully understood
before moving forward.
Removing "sets of". A series is not a set, so they should not be refered to as
a set. Maybe refer to them as a collection* like other series. However, I am
in favour of allowing the sale of a complete series in the same way as sets are
sold.
But there is a consistency issue. If CMF are allowed to be sold as complete numbered
series, then so should things like Friends Animals. These were sold by series,
yet the individual series have no category or even mention in the set name.
eg: this is just a Friends set.
There is no indication at all it is in from a series of collectible animals,
or which series it is in.
*Star Wars Planets - these already are (in some series) as "Buidable Galaxy"
collections.
But these were an official collection.
Mixels: for example,
Again collections (also official).
Maybe non-official numbers could be used to create corresponding collections
were LEGO did not sell them that way. For example, a BL defined "Buildable Galaxy
III" collection could exist to sell complete series of planets, even though LEGO
did not sell it.
Of course, there is a dilemma as to how to sell a collection for a seller:
List as a series/collection, or list as individual sets, or list as a superlot
of individual sets?
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 06:40 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | | Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
|
A big NO. At least, legs and hips should not be allowed to be sold new. Pulling
legs off can easily damage the hips and legs are often loose when put back on.
This is much worse than pulling off arms and removing hands.
| | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
|
Splitting to single and dual is a good idea. Sometimes you want to just see single
sided prints.
| | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
Yes.
|
|
| Author: | Hurt | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 06:16 | | Subject: | Re: Chronological list of new categories? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
Not exactly, as there are only changes like "Category Name Change" or "Category
Merge", but nothing for new categories
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 06:14 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
|
Fine. I don't really care I think. But will the logistics include changing
the code of torso assemblies to indicate which kind of arms they have without
checking the inventory?
| | Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
|
My opinion is that this is a LOT of effort for very little result. I'm sure
there is a small market for mixing and matching decorated hips and legs. I've
done it a little, but never with impressive results. And I just had to buy hip
assemblies to do it and it was fine. I wouldn't bother here.
| | Adding individual Technic figure parts.
|
I am at a loss here. I had a large Technic figure as a child and my opinion
was that he was not divisible. Is it pretty hard? Like the decorated hips,
are there people wanting to mix these up? They come assembled and my impression
is that they aren't intended to be taken apart.
| | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
|
This is a twofer. Changing titles to reflect dual sided heads is merely regular
maintenance. Any of those known should be fixed. However, I see little point
in putting single and dual sided heads in different categories. The only application
that would interest me would be making it obvious where there was a dual sided
head needing a new pic because it looks like a single.
| | Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
|
I have no idea what this is about.
| | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
|
Presumably you mean "legs assemblies" where you said "legs". To this one I say
"I guess". The precedent is having separate categories for printed and non-printed
things when there get to be quite a few. To me it means increased risk of putting
a new piece in the wrong category by accident. It might be simpler to add a
code word like "plain" to the unprinted ones. There is plenty of space in their
item names. Even as it is now, all you have to do to find the unprinted one
you are looking for is find out the color number for the legs. And you may even
know it. I don't have to look to know that an assembly with black legs is
970c10.
A related issue that would interest me academically, but which might also have
little need, would be recognizing legs assemblies with dual molded legs as a
separate piece. Not that they need to be put in an actual different category,
but a code letter in the item number (like 970c00 v 970cm00).
|
|
| Author: | Hurt | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 06:14 | | Subject: | Re: Chronological list of new categories? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Thanks!
I only wanted to see new catalog categories for parts. Not so much movements
of parts between categories.
I've found this one and can live with it (although it also includes categories
for sets, etc. - but that's fine ):
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogCategory.asp?catName=&catTypeID=8&sortBy=I&sortAsc=D
In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | [Hurt] writes:
| | ... is there some way to find out which categories are new (chronologically sorted)?
|
It depends exactly what you want to see but have a click around: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogLogs.asp
|
|
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 06:07 | | Subject: | Re: Chronological list of new categories? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| [Hurt] writes:
| | ... is there some way to find out which categories are new (chronologically sorted)?
|
It depends exactly what you want to see but have a click around: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogLogs.asp
|
|
| Author: | Hurt | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 05:48 | | Subject: | Chronological list of new categories? | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Hi everyone!
I've recently sorted my parts by bricklink catalog category instead of colors
and already finished it.
I saw that some categories are new now - seems like at least 4 new categories
have been created from the old "(Other)" category:
* Accessory, Human Tool
* Chain
* Energy Effect
* Ring
Any other new categories than the 4 mentioned?
Instead of checking the list of categories every day (https://www.bricklink.com/catalogTree.asp?itemType=P&itemBrand=1000),
is there some way to find out which categories are new (chronologically sorted)?
Thanks!
|
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 05:15 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
ABSTAIN. I do not sell in this sub-market, and don’t like taking arms out of
torsos.
Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
NO. Disassembling torso assemblies is never a good thing. I remember a wise
person ([axaday]) once said “Legs never are as good once you have take them apart.”
Adding individual Technic figure parts
YES. I do not see any harm in this. I have a technic figure complete except for
a broken shoe/foot, so selfishly I would like this sub-project done.
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
YES. Change the titles of all dual-sided heads.
YES. Normally I would consider changing the title only for this because it would
help searching. However, since there are so many heads splitting the category
also would be beneficial for browsing the catalogue.
Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
ABSTAIN. I have no idea what we are talking about here. Are we talking about
the Friends Reboot?
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
YES. If anyone has an ideal way to compartmentalise their physical inventory
of minifig legs assembly, then please let me know. I have no system and consequently
picking legs assemblies is slower than picking other parts.
|
|
| Author: | bricks2you | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 05:09 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
Yes
|
| Author: | miskox | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 05:02 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
+1
Saso
|
|
| Author: | mhortar | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 04:44 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
These are the two that I am most in favor of, as they would most impact me as
a buyer. The others I don't have a real opinion of one way or the other.
Josh
|
|
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 04:42 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | ...
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
My take: I'm good with this and it has been requested before. It will reduce
catalog entries from 23 to 11 entries for straight two-color arms. It will take
some work and I'm not sure about the exact logistics, but it can be done.
|
Sounds like a good idea to me.
| | Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
|
We have a few left overs and spare parts from some decorated legs/hips. Which
probably got lost during the play time in the past or where just broken partly
( we mostly buy unsorted used lots ) So we could sell the hand full of them.
But it's possibly not worth it..? Someone might look for spares for their
orphaned hips without getting a full replacement. I think we're talking saving
pennies here (if relatively common)
| | Adding individual Technic figure parts.
My take: currently against policy, a policy which is not adhered to considering
that at least one of these is already in the catalog. I see little harm in it,
but again: how many want this and how badly?
|
I would like it since is already part of the catalog and we have a box
full of Belville and Technic body parts. Occasionally I can fix up complete figures
to sell. But kids seem to like to tare them apart and some got broken....
tl;dr
Yes, I want this.
| | Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
|
Everything that makes it easier to find is a good idea in my book.
| | Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
My take: I would like to see a detailed explanation of the exact issue to understand
it better. I believe one was posted somewhere, but it would be great if it could
be posted one last time in this thread so that we all have an idea of what this
would entail.
|
No opinion, haven't really dealt much with those yet.
| | Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
Everything that makes it easier to find is a good idea in my book.
Christian
novabriok-team
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 04:14 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
snip
| |
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
My take: I'm good with this and it has been requested before. It will reduce
catalog entries from 23 to 11 entries for straight two-color arms. It will take
some work and I'm not sure about the exact logistics, but it can be done.
|
Thumbs up
| |
Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
|
If you are splitting the leg assemblies as below, are you not going to need/want
this for inventories of those decorated parts or does the policy also extend
to the inventories of decorated hips and legs? Consistency would be a good thing;
it is of no use that only certain leg assemblies are inventoried because it is
easy to do, and others not because it might present some difficulty. Obviously
adding parts and parts categories might not be the same thing as doing the inventories
thereof, but I would think that you are not about to embark on a project with
only one objective in mind. This is maybe not a burning issue, but certainly
worth considering. If the view is that it is not critical, then you should maybe
consider this as a sub-project to be worked on at a later date.
snip
| |
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
|
No dissent here, should have been done already when these started coming out.
snip
| |
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
No dissent, mess is never good. And since we already have other parts split into
decorated/non-decorated categories, I can't see that some consistency would
be a bad thing to have.
|
|
| Author: | blockbuster | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 04:01 | | Subject: | Re: Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Hello,
Just a thought make it simple keep the answers to yes or no, allow the post to
run for a set time and review the results.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | The next catalog project consists of replacing all current photos of minifigures
with photos of the same minifigures on sport bikes. You can see this on the
Catalog Roadmap:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473
Okay, not really. The (Other) project is winding down and next we're looking
at implementing some, if not all, of LordSkylark's suggestions. We need
to decide together how many of these (or maybe all of them?) we want to tackle.
Let's discuss them.
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms. YES
My take: I'm good with this and it has been requested before. It will reduce
catalog entries from 23 to 11 entries for straight two-color arms. It will take
some work and I'm not sure about the exact logistics, but it can be done.
Adding individual decorated hips and legs. NO
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
Adding individual Technic figure parts. NO
My take: currently against policy, a policy which is not adhered to considering
that at least one of these is already in the catalog. I see little harm in it,
but again: how many want this and how badly?
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories. YES
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods. YES
My take: I would like to see a detailed explanation of the exact issue to understand
it better. I believe one was posted somewhere, but it would be great if it could
be posted one last time in this thread so that we all have an idea of what this
would entail.
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs. YES
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 03:28 | | Subject: | Fourth Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 237 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| The next catalog project consists of replacing all current photos of minifigures
with photos of the same minifigures on sport bikes. You can see this on the
Catalog Roadmap:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473
Okay, not really. The (Other) project is winding down and next we're looking
at implementing some, if not all, of LordSkylark's suggestions. We need
to decide together how many of these (or maybe all of them?) we want to tackle.
Let's discuss them.
Reorganizing dual-colored molded arms.
My take: I'm good with this and it has been requested before. It will reduce
catalog entries from 23 to 11 entries for straight two-color arms. It will take
some work and I'm not sure about the exact logistics, but it can be done.
Adding individual decorated hips and legs.
My take: This is currently against policy. Policies can be changed, though.
My question would be this: is it necessary? Does anyone feel a burning need
to sell these parts? Have your buyers been requesting them? How many support
this and how strongly?
Adding individual Technic figure parts.
My take: currently against policy, a policy which is not adhered to considering
that at least one of these is already in the catalog. I see little harm in it,
but again: how many want this and how badly?
Changing titles of certain dual-sided heads to reflect this fact and splitting
heads into single-side print and dual-side print categories.
My take: I think these are good ideas, but am always willing to listen to dissenters.
Reorganizing/renumbering certain mini doll legs to reflect a change in production
methods.
My take: I would like to see a detailed explanation of the exact issue to understand
it better. I believe one was posted somewhere, but it would be great if it could
be posted one last time in this thread so that we all have an idea of what this
would entail.
Splitting decorated/non-decorated minifigure legs.
My take: This one was not on the list for the original project, but I'm adding
it. There are over 1,400 items in the Minifig, Legs Assembly category and I
find it exceedingly difficult to find non-decorated legs in all that mess. Does
anyone else besides me feel like this would be a good split?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:52 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | I suggest a new category is created called 'Ephemera' and things like
competition forms and event guides from the ' (Other) ' category are
moved into there.
|
Okay, so now we can discuss it properly.
As a quick update:
Parts are completely done.
Sets are done once the LEGO Brand categories can be used again (I still
need to know if LEGO World is an official LEGO event or not, though - so far
no one has answered).
Minifigures are done (with three exceptions) once the LEGO Brand categories
can be used.
Catalogs needed no work.
Books and Gear, then, are really the only things left. Books should
be easy, Gear not so much. It was the biggest (Other) group of all of them for
a reason. Still, I've knocked over 200 items off the (Other) list for gear.
There are 47 (Other) books and I really doubt anyone is going to care too much
where they go. These aren't exactly big sellers. I was thinking of moving
the competition forms to Gear. The Books section has gotten a little watered
down and forms which you fill out in hopes of winning a prize definitely aren't
books. I haven't thought about where they'd go once they get over to
Gear.
Ephemera, though, is a word not in common usage. I don't think it fits well
as a category with Bedding, Video Game, Storage, Magnet, Clock, and other common
words already used as categories. Not that it ain't a fun word, but I think
it's one of those somewhat esoteric words which would appeal primarily to
people with large vocabularies and discountenance everyone else by virtue of
its inscrutability.
|
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:31 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Once again I would first like to congratulate [StormChaser] and the community
on the progress made in the ' (Other) ' Category Project.
I would like to raise my points to a few things in clearing out the ' Gear
(Other) ' category:
[1] Accessory, Human Tool - Rip Cords
The ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category has been created and it blurs
the line between a Part and Gear. I guess we should wait until all part categories
have been properly defined, however, the category has already been created and
rip cords have already been added. Therefore I suggest we move these gear ...
[g=ripcordcover1][g=ripcordcover2]
... as parts in the ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category. Also rename
them
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Lion Head for Chima
Speedorz "
and
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Crocodile Head for
Chima Speedorz "
, respectively.
This leaves ...
... which under the Human Tool definition should be sets and not gear.
[2] Accessory, Human Tool - Ruler
For the same reason as above, I suggest we merge the ruler set inventory with
the ruler (see also https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1060834). So merge
...
... into ...
[p=bb342]
So in the same manner gear ...
...should become a set.
|
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:27 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I suggest a new category is created called 'Ephemera' and things like
competition forms and event guides from the ' (Other) ' category are
moved into there.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:26 | | Subject: | Re: Gear (Other) - 2nd Catalog Project | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | I would like to raise my points to a few things in clearing out the ' Gear
(Other) ' category:
|
I'm still considering the rest of the Gear stuff. You might get more responses,
though, if you posted under the catalog project thread.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:24 | | Subject: | Re: (Other) Books | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | I suggest a new category is created called 'Ephemera' and things like
competition forms and event guides from the ' (Other) ' category are
moved into there.
|
Thank you for the suggestion. It would probably be more convenient for everyone
if you posted this under the second catalog project thread, though.
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1112938
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2018 00:20 | | Subject: | (Other) Books | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| I suggest a new category is created called 'Ephemera' and things like
competition forms and event guides from the ' (Other) ' category are
moved into there.
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 19:28 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I definitely agree with dearlydeparted on this. I think this part should stay
in the catalog. I know when I buy it, I look for the assembly.
I assume the multitude of possible combinations would be due to all the different
colors that that hinge comes in? Perhaps the only assembly of it allowed in
the catalog would be one in which both halves are the same color? If the top
and bottom halves are different colors, then the seller will have to list them
separately.
David
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:53 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3023 1x2 plate sky blue color | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, yoavheskia writes:
| | i'm looking for this part in sky blue. i bought it few times and always got
medium azure.
is it possible that this part was never available in this color? In b.l reference
catalog this part appears as alternate in set 5961. does anyone has this set
with sky blue parts instead of aqua?
|
It was most definitely made in Sky Blue (LEGO color Dove Blue) at some point
according to the official LEGO sources.
It has an Element ID (BrickLink Part Color Code) and is listed as coming in one
single LEGO set:
https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-4493568
That one set just happens to be the one set on BrickLink listed with it as an
alternate.
It's out there somewhere, but it is probably very difficult to get some.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:34 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3023 1x2 plate sky blue color | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, yoavheskia writes:
| | is it possible that this part was never available in this color?
|
It is indeed. The person who added it to the inventory had an eye for bricks,
but that doesn't mean that an error wasn't made. Considering the totality
of the circumstances, an error seems likely.
|
|
| Author: | Pippysblocks | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:27 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3023 1x2 plate sky blue color | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I've parted this set-out some time ago and I am certain it came with aqua,
the only sky blue parts I have are from clickits so I had a reference point at
the time. Looks like it might be a tricky part to find in that colour (if it
even exists). Good luck though.
In Catalog, yoavheskia writes:
| | i'm looking for this part in sky blue. i bought it few times and always got
medium azure.
is it possible that this part was never available in this color? In b.l reference
catalog this part appears as alternate in set 5961. does anyone has this set
with sky blue parts instead of aqua?
|
|
|
| Author: | yoavheskia | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:21 | | Subject: | Part 3023 1x2 plate sky blue color | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| i'm looking for this part in sky blue. i bought it few times and always got
medium azure.
is it possible that this part was never available in this color? In b.l reference
catalog this part appears as alternate in set 5961. does anyone has this set
with sky blue parts instead of aqua?
|
|
| Author: | wahiggin | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:19 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
It looks like it is an official minifig on this page https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=M&catString=9.279
|
I don't when it got implemented, but for items on that page marked for deletion,
I see a little bright light orange 'X' next to it. See first image.
I also don't know when this got implemented, but for items on that page marked
for deletion, I see boxes that are a dull yellow instead of gray. See second
image.
These are both wonderful additions to those pages. I wonder when they rolled
those out.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Those X's don't appear for me when I view the same link.
|
Turns out that I can see those X's and faded-yellow backgrounds because of
my Administrative privileges now. I really think those additions should be added
for everyone. I will see if I can bump this suggestion up the chain.
Cheers,
Randy
|
The X's would be good for this page too
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=2&pg=1&catString=9.279&catType=M
|
|
| Author: | WhiteVanMan | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 17:12 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Selling, dearlydeparted writes:
| | I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
This item was marked for deletion because it sets a precedent for adding dozens
of unnecessary combinations of hinges as assemblies to the catalog."
|
You have 17 'lots' of these listed within your store.
You also have the 'halves' that make up these components.
How hard it it going to be to delete the assemblies from your inventory, separate
the 2 parts, and adjust the totals within the inventory that you have?
I did it within 10 mins.
I understand WHY it's been marked for deletion, and as soon as I saw that,
I updated my inventory straight away.
(The only thing I'm prevaricating on is the clickits that I have.....) They
are really a pain to identify!
Paul
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 16:10 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Selling, paulej72 writes:
I didn't think it big enough to add, but I guess we won't really know
how big it will be until we get into it. I have therefore added it to the list
and credited you.
|
|
| Author: | paulej72 | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 15:59 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| The question on assemblies does not seem to be on the catalog roadmap: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473.
It probably should be added as this seems to be a valid project.
In Selling, StormChaser writes:
| | In Selling, dearlydeparted writes:
| | I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
|
The items marked for deletion are definitely more noticeable now that I've
gone through and added that phrase to most titles (still have a few left to add).
Here's the thing with part assemblies: we have no choice but to draw the
line somewhere. If we let everything in which fit together, then the catalog
would be overwhelmed with assemblies. This particular part never came assembled
in any set and it was marked for deletion before I became a catalog administrator:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1104767
Rules on what assemblies would or would not be accepted into the catalog were
not written down in the past. I tried to solve this when I was an inventories
administrator, but was told this was an issue which must be decided from the
catalog side of things. Now that I am on this side it will be decided
and we will have written guidelines for part assemblies and these guidelines
will be discussed with the community.
Unfortunately, I've been rather busy in the last two weeks since I was appointed.
Until I get around to addressing this issue, part assemblies are kind of up
in the air.
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 15:29 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Selling, StormChaser writes:
| | […]
Until I get around to addressing this issue, part assemblies are kind of up
in the air.
|
This one seems more 6 ft under than up in the air.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 15:10 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Selling, dearlydeparted writes:
| | I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
|
The items marked for deletion are definitely more noticeable now that I've
gone through and added that phrase to most titles (still have a few left to add).
Here's the thing with part assemblies: we have no choice but to draw the
line somewhere. If we let everything in which fit together, then the catalog
would be overwhelmed with assemblies. This particular part never came assembled
in any set and it was marked for deletion before I became a catalog administrator:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1104767
Rules on what assemblies would or would not be accepted into the catalog were
not written down in the past. I tried to solve this when I was an inventories
administrator, but was told this was an issue which must be decided from the
catalog side of things. Now that I am on this side it will be decided
and we will have written guidelines for part assemblies and these guidelines
will be discussed with the community.
Unfortunately, I've been rather busy in the last two weeks since I was appointed.
Until I get around to addressing this issue, part assemblies are kind of up
in the air.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, BeauBricks writes:
| | What are the guidelines that the venus flytrap is not an assembly? It is really
confusing.
|
At this moment there are little to no guidelines on what should or should not
be added to the catalog as an assembly. The current part entry for the flytrap
is not an assembly because it is an entry for just one shell (you'd need
two shells plus a couple other parts for a complete assembly).
As for whether the catalog would accept an entry for the complete assembly if
someone submitted it with a photo . . . well, there are no rules. Assemblies
are something which need to be addressed in writing, but which haven't yet
been.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 14:52 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | […]
Turns out that I can see those X's and faded-yellow backgrounds because of
my Administrative privileges now. I really think those additions should be added
for everyone. I will see if I can bump this suggestion up the chain.
|
Perks of the position 
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 14:23 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
It looks like it is an official minifig on this page https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=M&catString=9.279
|
I don't when it got implemented, but for items on that page marked for deletion,
I see a little bright light orange 'X' next to it. See first image.
I also don't know when this got implemented, but for items on that page marked
for deletion, I see boxes that are a dull yellow instead of gray. See second
image.
These are both wonderful additions to those pages. I wonder when they rolled
those out.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Those X's don't appear for me when I view the same link.
|
Turns out that I can see those X's and faded-yellow backgrounds because of
my Administrative privileges now. I really think those additions should be added
for everyone. I will see if I can bump this suggestion up the chain.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:57 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 102 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
Robert
|
Hi Robert - I thought there was all this talk and discussion about assemblies
a short time ago and that has changed but I will bow to your knowledge and separate
them out.
|
Not sure about that discussion but thinking about it the picture may confuse
some buyers into thinking they get 2 halves when ordering 1.. so I'm going
to make that clear in our description.
Robert
|
I've added a Lego render showing just the one part to avoid confusion. You
may need to do a hard refresh to see the new image.
|
|
| Author: | dearlydeparted | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:26 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | | Agreed! IMO, no reason it couldn't have just been allowed to be grandfathered
in. There's some pretty good posts on the topic from September supporting
keeping the part in the catalog, but apparently not good enough 
|
I must have been closed then - totally missed the posts. I think the dialogue
and analysis should be revisited by Catalog Admins.
|
|
| Author: | wahiggin | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:13 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
It looks like it is an official minifig on this page https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=M&catString=9.279
|
I don't when it got implemented, but for items on that page marked for deletion,
I see a little bright light orange 'X' next to it. See first image.
I also don't know when this got implemented, but for items on that page marked
for deletion, I see boxes that are a dull yellow instead of gray. See second
image.
These are both wonderful additions to those pages. I wonder when they rolled
those out.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Those X's don't appear for me when I view the same link.
|
|
|
| Author: | wahiggin | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:10 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
|
I may not be able to do anything about greying out entries, but if you'd
like I can run through the list of items marked for deletion and put MARKED FOR
DELETION in the titles of all of them (see the figure above - I just retitled
it). Would that be helpful?
|
I like this idea and it would address my problems on every page.
Wesley
|
|
| Author: | JulieK | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:09 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Selling, dearlydeparted writes:
| | I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
This item was marked for deletion because it sets a precedent for adding dozens
of unnecessary combinations of hinges as assemblies to the catalog."
|
Agreed! IMO, no reason it couldn't have just been allowed to be grandfathered
in. There's some pretty good posts on the topic from September supporting
keeping the part in the catalog, but apparently not good enough
|
|
| Author: | BeauBricks | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 12:05 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
Robert
|
This one is:
What are the guidelines that the venus flytrap is not an assembly? It is really
confusing.
|
|
| Author: | dearlydeparted | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:48 | | Subject: | Catalog: Strongly disagree 3830c0 deletion | | Viewed: | 249 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| I think this is a bad call, that complete assembly is necessary, but just my
2 cents, others may disagree. And absolutely not looking forward to wasting
the time to "undo" and reenter years worth of inventory.
"Hinge Brick 1 x 4 Swivel - Complete Assembly - (MARKED FOR DELETION)
Item No: 3830c01
This item was marked for deletion because it sets a precedent for adding dozens
of unnecessary combinations of hinges as assemblies to the catalog."
|
|
| Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:47 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
Robert
|
Hi Robert - I thought there was all this talk and discussion about assemblies
a short time ago and that has changed but I will bow to your knowledge and separate
them out.
|
Not sure about that discussion but thinking about it the picture may confuse
some buyers into thinking they get 2 halves when ordering 1.. so I'm going
to make that clear in our description.
Robert
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:46 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly
|
Maybe add a simple line in the picture to show it’s both sides of the same part
and not two parts.
| | and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
|
It would need a pin too
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:45 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
Robert
|
Hi Robert - I thought there was all this talk and discussion about assemblies
a short time ago and that has changed but I will bow to your knowledge and separate
them out.
|
|
| Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Try that again | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, calsbricks writes:
| | - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
As currently set up in the catalogue 29112pb01 is for 1 piece i.e. half of the
assembly and the band is just another separate part. For an assembly the inventory
would need to be 2 x 29112pb01 plus one band but typically assemblies like this
are not catalogued.
Robert
|
|
| Author: | calsbricks | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 11:39 | | Subject: | Try that again | | Viewed: | 224 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| - Not swure thie is correct in the catalogue. In all 3 sets that
it comes in there is an white rubber band which holds the two halves
together. The instructions show the rubber band being used in each case. Should
there be an inventory for the part?
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 08:11 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
It looks like it is an official minifig on this page https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=M&catString=9.279
|
I don't when it got implemented, but for items on that page marked for deletion,
I see a little bright light orange 'X' next to it. See first image.
I also don't know when this got implemented, but for items on that page marked
for deletion, I see boxes that are a dull yellow instead of gray. See second
image.
These are both wonderful additions to those pages. I wonder when they rolled
those out.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 07:32 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Right now I'm just clearing out the (Other) category and not all solutions
will be perfect. Later on we can look at how all minifigures are categorized
and come up with standard practices for how it should be done.
|
Ah, good point. Continue onward, my friend! We shall meet again!
Randy
|
|
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 03:27 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | Does this change their itemnumber like
|
No, I had not planned on changing any item numbers for any minifigures. They
would all keep the gen*** numbers.
| | This may mix up our sorting system otherwise.
|
Please clarify what you're saying here. What exactly would mix up your sorting
system and in what way?
|
You already answered my question. I just wanted to make sure that the item numbers
don't change. Our minifigs are at the moment sorted by the initial letters
of the item number. (like one box oct*** one box cas*** etc...) and changing
item numbers would have making finding the right figure a bit harder.
Sorry if I brought up a bit of confusion as english isn't my first language
and I may have phrased it a bit complicated.
Thanks for the clarification
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
| Author: | legoman77 | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 00:41 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | Wesley, put this as a suggestion and you will get my vote.
|
There are over 1,400 open suggestions dating back to 2010. I sincerely doubt
that another suggestion would be heeded.
|
Maybe suggest that they read the suggestions.
John P
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 00:31 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Lauren_Luke writes:
| | Wesley, put this as a suggestion and you will get my vote.
|
There are over 1,400 open suggestions dating back to 2010. I sincerely doubt
that another suggestion would be heeded.
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2018 00:06 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| [wahiggin] writes:
| | I wish they had an orange box or were greyed out or something to indicate that
they are marked from deletion rather than it only appearing on one page.
|
Wesley, put this as a suggestion and you will get my vote.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 23:51 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
|
I may not be able to do anything about greying out entries, but if you'd
like I can run through the list of items marked for deletion and put MARKED FOR
DELETION in the titles of all of them (see the figure above - I just retitled
it). Would that be helpful?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 23:45 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, wahiggin writes:
| | Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
|
In some cases item numbers really should be changed - we just need a way to notify
sellers of item number changes. Since we don't have that, I'm going
to be careful about changing any item numbers.
| | One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
|
Actually, I have suggested a stock image with the words MARKED FOR DELETION for
all items marked for deletion. This was not looked upon fondly because of concerns
that no one would know what the item was once the image was gone.
We have a backlog of 274 items marked for deletion right now, some dating as
far back as 2001 (that's the earliest one I saw). Clearly we need to be
doing better about getting rid of things once we've decided to do so. Limitations
in the system have hindered us in the past, but these limitations are scheduled
to be addressed.
|
|
| Author: | wahiggin | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 23:32 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | Does this change their itemnumber like
|
No, I had not planned on changing any item numbers for any minifigures. They
would all keep the gen*** numbers.
| | This may mix up our sorting system otherwise.
|
Please clarify what you're saying here. What exactly would mix up your sorting
system and in what way?
|
I don't want to speak for novabrick, but it would mess up my sorting system
if the number where changed. If I had this minifig in a bag marked 'gen002'
and then got an order for minifig: 'cas999.' I would be looking for the
wrong item number to fill my order. That's why some of us are wary of changes
to part numbers, categories etc. Unless we regularly check our stock against
the Change Log, we only find out about things when an order is placed and we
go hunting for a part. It is understandable since the Catalog is a living breathing
thing, but it does cost some time. I need a little note or something to remind
myself:
Don't Look Twice, Check the Change Log First!
Hope that helps!
Jen
|
Agree, it would mess up my existing sorting system as well. Once they are given
a classification number it shouldn't be changed.
One change I would like to see is that the minifigs that are "Marked for deletion"
would be greyed out on all pages.
CAS106 is an example.
It looks like it is an official minifig on this page https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=M&catString=9.279
or this page
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=2&pg=1&catString=9.279&catType=M
If you look at the inventory page it looks like it is an official minifig
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=cas106
I wish they had an orange box or were greyed out or something to indicate that
they are marked from deletion rather than it only appearing on one page.
When I am building minifigs I will look at the category page
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?v=2&pg=1&catString=9.279&catType=M
and then click on the INV link from that page
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=cas106
to build the minifig. Neither page lets me know the minifig doesn't exist.
Wesley
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 23:15 | | Subject: | Re: (Other) Parts Have Moved! - Seller Reference | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Please do not respond to this forum post.
Three items previously categorized as parts are now categorized as minifigures
and do not show up on the list of parts which were moved. Those three items
are:
* | | frnd279 Baby / Infant - with Stud Holder on Back with Smiling Face and Large Eyes Pattern (Baby Ola) (6193930)
Minifigures: Friends |
[M=sw978]
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 22:40 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | I do think there may be some serious theme overlap for some of the early figures, though. Those are going to be contentious, and a simple solution for some of them may not present itself.
|
There really are no rules for categorizing minifigures, or at least none which
are written. For example, look at the minifigures included in this set and where
they were categorized:
Right now I'm just clearing out the (Other) category and not all solutions
will be perfect. Later on we can look at how all minifigures are categorized
and come up with standard practices for how it should be done.
|
| Author: | legoman77 | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 22:26 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
John P
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 22:08 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | I will ask to see how feasible it would be to include a second
list at the bottom of the minifigure page where figures are categorized by profession/appearance/clothing.
|
Meh. Ignore that. I was thinking of the list at the bottom of the Parts page
where you can see the categories of sticker sheets. I realize now how that data
is populated and it would take a whole lot of work to do something similar for
minifigures. Would be nice, but impractical.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 21:41 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
| | I'd say go with a Skeleton & Ghost category, but retain the numbering system
with "Gen" (at least for now). Because many of these span multiple series, I
cannot see a better way to do it.
|
That opens us up to a Construction Worker category and a Space Alien category
and a Race Car Driver category, etc., etc., etc. Writing those words gave me
an idea, though: I will ask to see how feasible it would be to include a second
list at the bottom of the minifigure page where figures are categorized by profession/appearance/clothing.
That would be quite convenient, I would imagine.
People can still use the keyword "ghost" to find all the ghosts in the catalog,
just as they can use the keyword "zombie" to find all the zombies in the catalog.
I was actually just now in the process of categorizing ghosts and skeletons.
I don't think there will be any significant problems from category overlap.
And yes, I'm leaving the item numbers alone.
|
|
| Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 21:32 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I'd say go with a Skeleton & Ghost category, but retain the numbering system
with "Gen" (at least for now). Because many of these span multiple series, I
cannot see a better way to do it.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 15:12 | | Subject: | Re: Third Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | This catalog project involves updating Flag on Flagpole, Wave parts:
|
This project is now complete! See details on the Catalog Roadmap page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2473
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 15:00 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I apologize that my remark looked like a suggestion. Of course zombies cannot
be lumped in with the dead. They are very clearly UNdead.
|
That made my day!
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 14:36 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | I don't want to speak for novabrick, but it would mess up my sorting system
if the number where changed.
|
I understand. There is no need to change item numbers. Figures numbered gen***
exist in other categories (although not many):
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 14:36 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I apologize that my remark looked like a suggestion. Of course zombies cannot
be lumped in with the dead. They are very clearly UNdead.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In response to axaday's suggestion about moving zombies, I say look at this
page of zombies:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=M&q=zombie&catLike=W&itemBrand=1000&searchMethod=searchBoth
If we moved all the zombies into one place we'd be pulling them from these
categories:
Minecraft
Star Wars
Pirates of the Caribbean
Game
Scooby-Doo
Monster Fighters
Collectible Minifigures
Ghostbusters
Holiday
Once we did that, those categories would no longer be complete because that is
not the way minifigures are categorized. I thought it would be nice to keep
the ghosts and skeletons together, but I guess they really should be moved into
the themes from which they came (as nearly as possible). So that's the new
plan if no one objects.
|
|
|
| Author: | Give.Me.A.Brick | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 14:29 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
|
I agree. Exception or not
I would also create the Plain Torso category. Ok maybe thats going too far.
If reasonable is it possible to keep their bricklink reference (gen001 etc) though?
There's not much gain in changing them I'd think.
Thank you!
|
|
| Author: | mhortar | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 14:13 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
|
The short answer is yes. However, if you look at the minifigure overview page
you'll notice that minifigures are categorized by theme:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogTree.asp?itemBrand=1000&itemType=M
They're not categorized by what they are, but by which theme they came from
(generally speaking - there are inconsistencies). So there are Town: City: Hospital
and Town: City: Airport but not Town: Doctor or Town: Pilot or Town: Plumber.
Creating new categories Ghost and Skeleton would be contrary to the current cataloging
system. I'm not saying it is a bad idea, but it would increase inconsistency
in the catalog. The other option for ghosts and skeletons would be to move them
into the individual themes from which they came (since my idea of Halloween doesn't
seem too popular).
In response to axaday's suggestion about moving zombies, I say look at this
page of zombies:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=M&q=zombie&catLike=W&itemBrand=1000&searchMethod=searchBoth
If we moved all the zombies into one place we'd be pulling them from these
categories:
Minecraft
Star Wars
Pirates of the Caribbean
Game
Scooby-Doo
Monster Fighters
Collectible Minifigures
Ghostbusters
Holiday
Once we did that, those categories would no longer be complete because that is
not the way minifigures are categorized. I thought it would be nice to keep
the ghosts and skeletons together, but I guess they really should be moved into
the themes from which they came (as nearly as possible). So that's the new
plan if no one objects.
|
It does seem like the only real option is to move each figure into it's 'source'
category. It's unfortunate that these type of figures (which can span categories)
can't belong to multiple categories, but that's a huge can of worms.
Josh
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 13:52 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
|
The short answer is yes. However, if you look at the minifigure overview page
you'll notice that minifigures are categorized by theme:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogTree.asp?itemBrand=1000&itemType=M
They're not categorized by what they are, but by which theme they came from
(generally speaking - there are inconsistencies). So there are Town: City: Hospital
and Town: City: Airport but not Town: Doctor or Town: Pilot or Town: Plumber.
Creating new categories Ghost and Skeleton would be contrary to the current cataloging
system. I'm not saying it is a bad idea, but it would increase inconsistency
in the catalog. The other option for ghosts and skeletons would be to move them
into the individual themes from which they came (since my idea of Halloween doesn't
seem too popular).
In response to axaday's suggestion about moving zombies, I say look at this
page of zombies:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=M&q=zombie&catLike=W&itemBrand=1000&searchMethod=searchBoth
If we moved all the zombies into one place we'd be pulling them from these
categories:
Minecraft
Star Wars
Pirates of the Caribbean
Game
Scooby-Doo
Monster Fighters
Collectible Minifigures
Ghostbusters
Holiday
Once we did that, those categories would no longer be complete because that is
not the way minifigures are categorized. I thought it would be nice to keep
the ghosts and skeletons together, but I guess they really should be moved into
the themes from which they came (as nearly as possible). So that's the new
plan if no one objects.
|
I always liked having the skeletons and ghosts in one place for ease of finding
them to collect (I am a horror hound), but I feel there current classification
was more based out of tradition than any policy.
It always felt weird to me that the ghosts from the Monster Fighters theme were
classified in (Other) away from all other Monster Fighters figures. So in this
case, if you are collecting Monster Fighters figures (like I did), you don't
see them all in one place.
Therefore, I am all for moving them into their themes where they occurred if
possible, such as those Monster Fighters ghosts. I do think there may be some
serious theme overlap for some of the early figures, though. Those are going
to be contentious, and a simple solution for some of them may not present itself.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 13:42 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Once we did that, those categories would no longer be complete because that is
not the way minifigures are categorized. I thought it would be nice to keep
the ghosts and skeletons together, but I guess they really should be moved into
the themes from which they came (as nearly as possible). So that's the new
plan if no one objects.
|
What with this one for example then in this way of moving them:
it is in sets from four different categories!
First set in which it came was Star Wars
- 2013
then was it added to set from Halloween -2015, The Ninjago Movie -2017 and recently
Creator -2018
I do not want to see it in SW category
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 13:35 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
|
The short answer is yes. However, if you look at the minifigure overview page
you'll notice that minifigures are categorized by theme:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogTree.asp?itemBrand=1000&itemType=M
They're not categorized by what they are, but by which theme they came from
(generally speaking - there are inconsistencies). So there are Town: City: Hospital
and Town: City: Airport but not Town: Doctor or Town: Pilot or Town: Plumber.
Creating new categories Ghost and Skeleton would be contrary to the current cataloging
system. I'm not saying it is a bad idea, but it would increase inconsistency
in the catalog. The other option for ghosts and skeletons would be to move them
into the individual themes from which they came (since my idea of Halloween doesn't
seem too popular).
In response to axaday's suggestion about moving zombies, I say look at this
page of zombies:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=M&q=zombie&catLike=W&itemBrand=1000&searchMethod=searchBoth
If we moved all the zombies into one place we'd be pulling them from these
categories:
Minecraft
Star Wars
Pirates of the Caribbean
Game
Scooby-Doo
Monster Fighters
Collectible Minifigures
Ghostbusters
Holiday
Once we did that, those categories would no longer be complete because that is
not the way minifigures are categorized. I thought it would be nice to keep
the ghosts and skeletons together, but I guess they really should be moved into
the themes from which they came (as nearly as possible). So that's the new
plan if no one objects.
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | Does this change their itemnumber like
|
No, I had not planned on changing any item numbers for any minifigures. They
would all keep the gen*** numbers.
| | This may mix up our sorting system otherwise.
|
Please clarify what you're saying here. What exactly would mix up your sorting
system and in what way?
|
I don't want to speak for novabrick, but it would mess up my sorting system
if the number where changed. If I had this minifig in a bag marked 'gen002'
and then got an order for minifig: 'cas999.' I would be looking for the
wrong item number to fill my order. That's why some of us are wary of changes
to part numbers, categories etc. Unless we regularly check our stock against
the Change Log, we only find out about things when an order is placed and we
go hunting for a part. It is understandable since the Catalog is a living breathing
thing, but it does cost some time. I need a little note or something to remind
myself:
Don't Look Twice, Check the Change Log First!
Hope that helps!
Jen
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 12:52 | | Subject: | Re: Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, novabrick writes:
| | Does this change their itemnumber like
|
No, I had not planned on changing any item numbers for any minifigures. They
would all keep the gen*** numbers.
| | This may mix up our sorting system otherwise.
|
Please clarify what you're saying here. What exactly would mix up your sorting
system and in what way?
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 10:33 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
|
I agree. I do not associate these figures with Halloween at all.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 56 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| "Dead Folks" or "The Dead". We could move all the zombies in there too!
In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| |
Tough one, but Holiday: Halloween. There have clearly been different opinions
over the years on how to classify minifigures and there are inconsistencies in
the catalog. Since no written policies currently exist and the intent was to
keep all the ghosts together, I'd like to respect that and move them as a
group. Same goes for skeletons further below.
|
| |
Holiday: Halloween. See discussion about ghosts above.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 06:00 | | Subject: | Q about (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! | | Viewed: | 177 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Stormchaser wrote:
| | In November, 2018 110 minifigures were removed from the (Other) category and
classified into categories. This is a list of all the minifigures which were moved and
this list shows how they are currently classified:
|
Does this change their itemnumber like
To "cas999" or "gho999" whatever or will it just be the category which is changed?
This may mix up our sorting system otherwise.
As requested I didn't answer the original post.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
| Author: | Hygrotus | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 05:03 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Couldn't they just have their own separate categories: ghosts and skeletons?
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| |
Tough one, but Holiday: Halloween. There have clearly been different opinions
over the years on how to classify minifigures and there are inconsistencies in
the catalog. Since no written policies currently exist and the intent was to
keep all the ghosts together, I'd like to respect that and move them as a
group. Same goes for skeletons further below.
|
| |
Holiday: Halloween. See discussion about ghosts above.
|
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 04:53 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | I'm going to post back here later today with all my
proposed changes (I may have to take this in steps) and give people a chance
to comment.
|
Okay, here is my plan for minifigures. Let's discuss it.
All of these to Holiday. One or more birthday figures are already there. Might
do Holiday: Party Supplies or may add new Birthday Party category. May also
add new Wedding category.
Both to LEGO Brand with subcategories (LEGO Brand Store, LEGO Inside Tour, etc.).
Promotional.
Holiday. Perhaps Holiday: Wedding if I add that category.
LEGO Brand.
Promotional.
LEGO Brand.
Promotional.
Tough one, but Holiday: Halloween. There have clearly been different opinions
over the years on how to classify minifigures and there are inconsistencies in
the catalog. Since no written policies currently exist and the intent was to
keep all the ghosts together, I'd like to respect that and move them as a
group. Same goes for skeletons further below.
LEGO Brand.
Same as bride (see above).
LEGO Brand.
[M=gen096]
Promotional. Yes, it is going to be deleted. Until then, there's no reason
not to move it.
LEGO Brand.
Building Bigger Thinking.
Office and School Supplies. Or wherever that gear ends up (currently uncategorized).
Building Bigger Thinking.
Not inventoried in an item. Goes in a storage item. Taking suggestions on where
to put it.
Same as pln170 just three figures above.
Constructing Larger Thought Processes.
Promotional.
LEGO Brand.
Collectible Minifigures.
LEGO Brand.
Holiday: Halloween. See discussion about ghosts above.
LEGO Brand.
Promotional.
LEGO Brand.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2018 04:09 | | Subject: | (Other) Minifigures Have Moved! - Seller Reference | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| Please do not respond to this forum post.
In November, 2018 110 minifigures were removed from the (Other) category and
classified
into categories. This is a list of all the minifigures which were moved and
this list
shows how they are currently classified:
[M=gen096]
|
|
| Author: | Lauren_Luke | | Posted: | Nov 6, 2018 07:49 | | Subject: | Gear (Other) - 2nd Catalog Project | | Viewed: | 105 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Once again I would first like to congratulate [StormChaser] and the community
on the progress made in the ' (Other) ' Category Project.
I would like to raise my points to a few things in clearing out the ' Gear
(Other) ' category:
[1] Accessory, Human Tool - Rip Cords
The ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category has been created and it blurs
the line between a Part and Gear. I guess we should wait until all part categories
have been properly defined, however, the category has already been created and
rip cords have already been added. Therefore I suggest we move these gear ...
[g=ripcordcover1][g=ripcordcover2]
... as parts in the ' Accessory, Human Tool ' category. Also rename
them
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Lion Head for Chima
Speedorz "
and
" Human Tool, Rip Cord Handle Cover in Flexible Rubber with Crocodile Head for
Chima Speedorz "
, respectively.
This leaves ...
... which under the Human Tool definition should be sets and not gear.
[2] Accessory, Human Tool - Ruler
For the same reason as above, I suggest we merge the ruler set inventory with
the ruler (see also https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1060834). So merge
...
... into ...
[p=bb342]
So in the same manner gear ...
...should become a set.
[3] Speech Bubbles
The speech bubbles gear ...
... should be a set and its inventory (perhaps all but the stensil) should be
parts, since they interact with minifigs and not us humans.
That's all at the moment. I will be interested in your thoughts.
|
|
| Author: | Abels_Bricks | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2018 17:14 | | Subject: | Re: counterpart for set 5682? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Abels_Bricks writes:
| | Hello
I am just parting out
And I wonder if parts
and
should not be combined as an counterpart as the turntable base once attached
is quite hard to remove.
regards
david
|
Also what part number you I create it under?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2018 12:28 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Wow. LEGO has produced so much peripheral rubbish I wouldn't like to be
in your shoes with all of that, seems daunting. I agree, better to focus on items
that are bought and sold. Actually it's already above my expectation that
every fart LEGO produces gets a place in the Bricklink catalog with picture,
info and all. I don't mind that whole categorisation at all.
|
TLG has had a huge number of licensing agreements with other companies and I
am certain that there are tens of thousands of LEGO-branded items which are still
not in the BrickLink catalog. Many of them are lost and will never be added.
Even today it's not unheard of to come across an older LEGO set which the
fan community has never documented. I've done so numerous times and I know
of one from the 1990s right now which I haven't got around to adding - picture
below.
I like that we include obscure stuff in the catalog, even if it's never bought
or sold. It makes BrickLink the most complete reference catalog anywhere for
all things LEGO.
|
|
|
| Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2018 05:54 | | Subject: | Re: Second Catalog Project Underway | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | I'm going to post back here later today with all my
proposed changes (I may have to take this in steps)
|
I'm going to switch gears from sets and parts for a bit and work on Gear
items. This section of (Other) items is so large that I'm not going to solicit
comments/suggestions on individual items until I get some of the obvious stuff
cleared out. If anyone wants to share ideas before then, feel free. Here's
the list:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1113841
These are not high-profile items like other items are and a goodly portion of
them have no items for sale, so I don't anticipate much disruption with Gear
things.
|
Wow. LEGO has produced so much peripheral rubbish I wouldn't like to be
in your shoes with all of that, seems daunting. I agree, better to focus on items
that are bought and sold. Actually it's already above my expectation that
every fart LEGO produces gets a place in the Bricklink catalog with picture,
info and all. I don't mind that whole categorisation at all.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
)
)
