| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | axaday  | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 19:50 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | When it comes to the Dots trays with lids, the current catalog guidelines prohibit
them in two ways. First, from even having an entry:
The system automatically adds / updates / deletes the corresponding original
box entry for every set that is added to the catalog. Original Boxes should therefore
not be added to the catalog.
|
I don't think I have received a Dots set in a box yet. No problem there.
| | The second prohibition is more important,
though. It is not expressly stated, but comes from a combined interpretation
of these two rules:
For example 2, 3, or 4 bricks stacked together should not be added to the
catalog as there are virtually infinite possibilities for these combinations.
|
There is only one way to put a Dots lid with a Dots tray, unless you count rotations.
Then there are 4.
| | The meaning is that random items not packaged and sold that specific way by TLG
should not be added to the catalog. The Dots sorting trays and lids were never
sold separately as a combined empty tray with a lid.
|
The lid on the tray is actually the way all of mine came from the factory.
| | But if we add Dots sorting trays with lids, we have no excuse not to also add
combined entries for the following:
|
There is a white Man-Bat minifigure now and I haven't added it to the catalog.
The rules say he could be added, but no one has done it. And if I needed an
excuse for myself it would be that the set isn't available to me yet, but
I don't need an excuse and no one else does either. It isn't my responsibility
to make sure that everything allowed in the catalog is in the catalog. So no
one would have to add lidded entries to hundreds of containers just because someone
submitted a listing for this one and it got approved. If someone wanted one
of the other hundreds in the catalog and were willing to do the work then they
would do it. Maybe we would never get them all in the catalog. We certainly
don't get all of the stickered counterparts in the catalog either.
|
 |
| Author: | Pippysblocks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 18:29 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| No probs Stormchaser, I'll do this in the morning, I'll add a picture
for the armor too as it doesn't have one for dark blue. Just wasn't sure
on the correct process.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I would have much preferred that the legs were created without a picture (assuming no render was available)
|
+1
I can't stand incomplete inventories and try to avoid them at all costs.
Some inevitably get through for things like gear items, but there really is no
excuse for having an incomplete minifigure inventory.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:42 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
That's a fair question. The reason is that the BrickLink catalog is very
inconsistent. It's difficult to know if an item will be approved or not
and we get requests for preapprovals ("Would this be approved if I submitted
it?") with some frequency.
Preapprovals should not be necessary - that is the purpose of the submission
process. But they are necessary right now because of numerous inconsistencies.
We are in the process of moving to fewer inconsistencies. One step in that
process is updating catalog guidelines, which we are doing right now.
When it comes to the Dots trays with lids, the current catalog guidelines prohibit
them in two ways. First, from even having an entry:
The system automatically adds / updates / deletes the corresponding original
box entry for every set that is added to the catalog. Original Boxes should therefore
not be added to the catalog.
That rule has been disregarded for years and we disregarded it when approving
the Dots trays for catalog entries. The second prohibition is more important,
though. It is not expressly stated, but comes from a combined interpretation
of these two rules:
For example 2, 3, or 4 bricks stacked together should not be added to the
catalog as there are virtually infinite possibilities for these combinations.
Please limit submissions of multi-set Set entries to ways that LEGO itself is
known to have packaged and distributed such things, including sets released as
promotional items through other companies.
The meaning is that random items not packaged and sold that specific way by TLG
should not be added to the catalog. The Dots sorting trays and lids were never
sold separately as a combined empty tray with a lid.
The real question you're asking is this: what's the harm? The answer
is that it introduces further inconsistency. There have been a couple of very
carefully chosen exceptions to these rules over the years (collectible figure
entries are one).
But if we add Dots sorting trays with lids, we have no excuse not to also add
combined entries for the following:
I'm not going to list hundreds of examples, but look through the catalog
at all the items with lids and imagine having separate catalog entries for all
of them plus all combinations of them. This is basically a discussion of assemblies.
Like assemblies for parts, it is a contentious issue.
But we'll be working on the main catalog guidelines page within the next
six months and will post the new guidelines publicly for feedback and modification
before making them official. So if you feel strongly about assemblies of original
boxes, that would be the time to bring it up.
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:12 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
Maybe you can sell this in:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?O=41906-1
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 15:07 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | The process at the time was that he showed up in the list of minifigs that needed
to be inventoried. Now he still needs to be inventoried, but he doesn't
show up on the list. Is there a way to search for more like this?
|
Other than reading through all inventory notes, no. We discussed it at the time
administratively and decided that a partial inventory was preferable to no inventory
at all. I tried to add the word Incomplete in bold to inventory notes
for all partial inventories in the hope that someday we could flag these kinds
of inventories.
You can find all items with inventory notes by using the advanced catalog search
(currently 1,111 items). These notes are not searchable, which is one of several
reasons I've advocated for not including an additional note or inventory
note unless they are actually necessary.
|
Torsos are added with no pics all the time for people who submit assemblies only.
The torso assembly gets inventoried with a part that really only has a ghost
in the catalog, but it is better than nothing. If I were the king even that
wouldn't be allowed, but I would have much preferred that the legs were created
without a picture (assuming no render was available).
|
|
| Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: How to combine parts into a new c01 entry? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | I'ld like to see a new entry in the catalog for the combination of these:
and
When I'm correct in those cases a new part number is required with the extension
c01. How to proceed?
|
I don't think this is something that would be approved. No other tray/bucket/base
and lid combinations are in the catalog as combined entries that I'm aware
of. You have the option of listing the trays and lids as a superlot, but setting
new catalog precedent by adding these kinds of entries is probably not a path
we'd want to go down.
|
Why?
When you look at reviews of Dots sets the boxes are very positively received
and have potential resale value. Going the historically ‘correct’ procedure that
similar parts were not approved earlier is not a valid reason imo. The world
is changing and what was not ok in the past might be ok now.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:36 | | Subject: | Re: construction vehicles | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, TiceRex writes:
| | The sets 31014 and 31041 consist equally 64 parts, the size and proportions are
the same. Why are the categorized differently?
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Model: Construction:" (31041)
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Basic Model: Construction:" (31014)
|
Honestly, we were just being silly. You're welcome to request category changes
to any set in the catalog with this form:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReq.asp?itemType=S
The category definitions are here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1568
In this case I believe the category Model should be changed to Basic Model for
31041.
|
|
| Author: | TiceRex | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:29 | | Subject: | construction vehicles | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| As far as I remember I have asked it already a few years ago, but I can't
find any trace now.
The sets 31014 and 31041 consist equally 64 parts, the size and proportions are
the same. Why are the categorized differently?
What's the difference between these categories?
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Model: Construction:" (31041)
- "Catalog: Sets: Creator: Basic Model: Construction:" (31014)
Regards, TiceRex
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jul 11, 2020 13:23 | | Subject: | Re: NEX117 missing his legs | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | The process at the time was that he showed up in the list of minifigs that needed
to be inventoried. Now he still needs to be inventoried, but he doesn't
show up on the list. Is there a way to search for more like this?
|
Other than reading through all inventory notes, no. We discussed it at the time
administratively and decided that a partial inventory was preferable to no inventory
at all. I tried to add the word Incomplete in bold to inventory notes
for all partial inventories in the hope that someday we could flag these kinds
of inventories.
You can find all items with inventory notes by using the advanced catalog search
(currently 1,111 items). These notes are not searchable, which is one of several
reasons I've advocated for not including an additional note or inventory
note unless they are actually necessary.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
