| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | tEoS  | | Posted: | Jan 3, 2019 22:51 | | Subject: | Re: Overwatch Mercy & Pharah pictures wrong | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| More bad news. I just checked Lego's website for instructions and it appears
that Genji (dual-sword holder?) and Hanzo (quiver) are missing these neckgear
in their pictures here.
Also, Genji appears to have a piece that connects to his helmet.
I don't have this set yet to confirm the contents. I'm going to run
to Walmart to see if they still have some.
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, tEoS writes:
| | The picture for this fig is wrong.
|
I'm confused. The figure doesn't have a picture.
Only kidding. I removed the images just now. How and why did these images get
approved?
Well, the catalog (me) is trying to be more responsive than it has in the past.
That means more and better communication with members, quicker item approvals,
and no more long queues of pending items. One of the casualties of pumping out
catalog entries is that some get in which are wrong.
I have to put some trust in members that items are submitted properly, especially
for new figures for which the assembly instructions are not always immediately
available. Sometimes that trust is repaid and sometimes it ain't. I have
a decent memory and submissions from the member who submitted these entries will
be checked carefully in the future.
It's a messier method in some ways, but I believe the benefits to members
outweigh making sure a catalog entry is absolutely perfect in every way before
approval. That's what change requests are for. This is not to say that
I don't check and occasionally reject things, of course. I'm just not
going to hold catalog entries forever, especially not desirable new items which
can easily be corrected. The inventory administrators, as Randy said, also sometimes
catch errors during the inventory process.
Having said all that, it was my fault that I approved these images/figures when
they were incorrect and I apologize for the error. I believe the instructions
were already available when I approved those figures with those images and I
neglected to download and check the set instructions regarding the correct assembly.
As you've noticed, the images are gone now.
| | This one is up to the admins. The 1st assembly shown in instructions is the
standard w/ legs. I think this version is a good addition to the catalog, but
it may not fit the catalog policies.
|
There's kinda only one CA for now, and it's me. If the figure does not
match the assembly first shown in the set instructions, then it's off to
deleteland for that figure, which is where this figure has travelled.
Thank you for bringing these issues to my attention.
|
|
 |
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jan 3, 2019 22:03 | | Subject: | Re: Wanted list in seller store | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| Already exists.
In Suggestions, BrickFlipper writes:
| | Firstly love the site.
Been a buyer for a few years now.
And I'm starting to use wanted lists.
And while I'm gooding through a store for a particular part, I'll come
across and item listed in one of my Wanted lists.
If I'm at a large store their maybe a few.
It would be nice to have an option / filter to just list parts in your wanted
list(s).
You may decide to get more parts from that sttore than intended.
Regards
Andrew
|
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jan 3, 2019 21:58 | | Subject: | Overwatch Mercy & Pharah pictures wrong | | Viewed: | 126 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
The picture for this fig is wrong. 1st her head sucks in comparison to what's
shown (but not really the point here).
2nd and most importantly, she needs at least the clear neck piece, if not the
full wing assembly
This fig has special shoulder armor that has some studs on the back for the other
pieces.
______
Not a picture issue:
[m=ow014]
This one is up to the admins. The 1st assembly shown in instructions is the
standard w/ legs. I think this version is a good addition to the catalog, but
it may not fit the catalog policies.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Jan 1, 2019 14:43 | | Subject: | 2 versions of dino tail end #40379 | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
There are two versions of this part where the small hole by the base varies
in location, mirrored left or right side.
This can be seen in the new carousel where it seems Lego tried to include 24/24
(I got 23/25) of each type, so that the holes wouldn't be visible.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Dec 24, 2018 22:11 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 5985-1 | | Viewed: | 18 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Add 1 Part 4532a White Container, Cupboard 2 x 3 x 2 - Solid Studs (Alternate) (match ID 10)
* Change 1 Part White 4532 Container, Cupboard 2 x 3 x 2 {match ID 0 to 10}
* Change 1 Part White {3794 Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with 1 Stud (Jumper) (Undetermined Type) to 3794a Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with 1 Stud without Groove (Jumper)}
* Change 6 Part White {3684 Slope 75 2 x 2 x 3 - Undetermined Stud Type to 3684a Slope 75 2 x 2 x 3 - Hollow Studs}
Comments from Submitter:
I found one sealed bag #5 from this set in my unlisted stock. It only had 2 of the slope 75's so I'm assuming the others were the same style.
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Nov 18, 2018 17:50 | | Subject: | Re: (MARKED FOR DELETION) Why?? | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| It should be safe to assume that there is an error with the catalog entry for
that fig and there's likely a correct version of the fig in the catalog.
Otherwise, provide some examples.
| | But not on all of them they say why.
|
|
|
| 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: | tEoS | | Posted: | Oct 28, 2018 20:50 | | Subject: | Re: This item has already been reserved by member | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| Maybe Gear items need special approval to receive an inventory? Contact the
help desk.
In Inventories, _djm writes:
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2018 10:57 | | Subject: | Re: Restrictions kill sales! I'm outta here! | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| No, I'm simply stating that the "rocket science" argument is flawed. It
implies that you don't need the intellect of a very scientific person, as
if said person has the capacity to know how to do everything very well.
In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | So, you are saying it is difficult. We're talking about sellers here, people
who decide that they can handle selling Lego. Not every person who signs up on
Bricklink has to understand how to set up shipping methods. But I think it is
only fair that for the small portion of those members who really are serious
enough to get into selling, it should be expected of them that they're able
to handle it. If they're not, they should either ask for help or just use
some other way to sell Lego that they do understand (In fact, I think setting
things up at Brickowl is easier than at BL.)
In Suggestions, tEoS writes:
| | I grow tired of reading the old "it's not rocket science" argument, as if
it somehow substantiates a person's claim.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | tEoS | | Posted: | Oct 5, 2018 07:59 | | Subject: | Re: Restrictions kill sales! I'm outta here! | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| I grow tired of reading the old "it's not rocket science" argument, as if
it somehow substantiates a person's claim.
| | And I think on the seller's side of the interface, it should also warn that
not all weight/volume/value/country combinations are covered. I think it's
the sellers responsibility to make sure that they have it all covered, it's
not rocket science. But it is true it takes some concentration and staring at
the screen to make sure everything is OK, so an algorythm that checks if there
are no holes sounds like exactly the type of thing we have computers for.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
