Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | popsicle  | | Posted: | Nov 17, 2020 23:48 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, tonnic writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it as a hat.
|
| | Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms), so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
Had a dog once, that would do that 
|
Sit them in paint first and you get modern art.
|
Aaah! You mean like a Jackson Pollock with odor?
We could start a new style of art: Smellism!
|
Blasfemie!
I am an art lover and ‘the know it all about art people’ say you can see his
mood in his painting.
Nothing to do with his behind!
|
Sure, who knows. Has anyone really witnessed Pollock working in his studio? I
mean, consider his work.... it could well have been his dog~paint~canvas, for
all of me! 
| |
And yes, I really am an art lover but I never saw anything else than dripping
and throwing paint on a canvas by Jackson Pollock but maybe I missed something
when I quit looking at the documentary about him.
|
Not just him, but other overly-hyped artist during in and around that period,
imho.
|
 |
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 13:50 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, bje writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, bje writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently.
|
The catalog/inventories admin team tried getting rewritten figure guidelines
in place. In fact, we were well on our way to getting them hammered out. See
here:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2482
The site management put a halt to it and do not seem particularly interested,
which is weird considering that they will not entertain the option of creating
the ability to have incomplete figures.
Also, users in the forum and site management are the ones who are allowing the
inconsistencies to continue. The more users complain in the forum about the catalog/inventories
admin team trying to keep things consistent, the more site management is overriding
all of our attempts to keep things consistent by creating new precedents that
we have to just go along with. At this time, multiple people on the catalog/inventories
admin team have given up trying to do much of anything.
| | Only then can you actually
have rules for listing items, not before. Only then can you say I will remove
listings with no recourse or appeal. Only then can you say I do not want a thing
appearing in listings. Making up arbitrary decisions and rules to suit a specific
situation on a specific day does not help anything or anybody.
But it is their catalogue, they are going to do as they please and some buyers
will buy things expecting other things and so on and so forth.
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
In truth the Oscar probably only warrants one entry which in my opinion is of
course the more complete one! though I don’t have a major issue with this as
long as there are no more than two entries for any one minifig however the thing
I have a bigger issue with is that we are using a completely different reference
number for each? idea078 and idea079 when they are both centred around the same
minifig and so it might be an idea if we’re going to do this sort of thing that
we just use idea078 for the fully accessorised entry and then just add a ‘b’
or something for any alternative barebone entries - idea078b
If the same additional letter is used each and every time at least people can
look to check to see if there is a barebone version of the same minifig and know
how to search for it
We already have some examples of this in the catalog where these minifigs are
the same and use a similar refernece to define a different colour:-
And here it’s the same minifig but without the proton pack though again it would
benefit from using the same letter at the end each time - gb001b instead of gb001i
And then from there a minifig like this would benefit from an additional non
backpack entry - sw0824b
or at least thats my thinking....
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 06:44 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, bje writes:
| | I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently.
|
But defining clear written rules for how ALL minifigs MUST be listed doesn’t
always serve its purpose for the benefit of the catalog as the Oscar minifig
has shown and it’s better to have a catalog that best serves those customers
who shop here rather than blindly following strict rules that are detrimental
to the way a particular minifig appears in the catalog?
I also have full confidence in the catmins judgement as to what they feel should
constitute the final minifig for each catalog entry as they still follow the
same guideline rules set out for the majority or minifig entries but that doesn’t
mean that other members of the community shouldn’t be able to challenge a minifig
entry or voice an opinion on what parts they feel should or should not be included.
In the end the catmins will decide whether a minifig entry warrants special circumstances
or not but once decided we then all adhere to what is expected based on the final
photo and so it’s not as if rules are not in place for us all to follow?
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 04:51 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, bje writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
I fully agree, for what it is worth. I have no problem with BL defining what
a minifigure is, what it must consist of, how it must inventoried or indeed how
it must be listed. But then BL must have clear written rules and they must allow
catmins to actually apply those rules consistently. Only then can you actually
have rules for listing items, not before. Only then can you say I will remove
listings with no recourse or appeal. Only then can you say I do not want a thing
appearing in listings. Making up arbitrary decisions and rules to suit a specific
situation on a specific day does not help anything or anybody.
But it is their catalogue, they are going to do as they please and some buyers
will buy things expecting other things and so on and so forth.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 04:04 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, bje writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
If rules are there to be broken though, why not have yet another version?
We now have a listing for
the head
the head, body and trash can lid
the head, body, trash can lid and trash can.
So might as well go for a full house and have the head and body. It makes it
harder to list and buy/sell by spreading the listings like this. And there are
other characters that come with things that might be important/unimportant depending
on the buyer/seller. It just shows how much an incomplete minifigure feature
is needed. In this case, the complete figure could be the group of four items,
and anything else is incomplete.
|
|
| Author: | tonnic | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 03:41 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it as a hat.
|
| | Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms), so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
Had a dog once, that would do that
|
Sit them in paint first and you get modern art.
|
Aaah! You mean like a Jackson Pollock with odor?
We could start a new style of art: Smellism!
|
Blasfemie!
I am an art lover and ‘the know it all about art people’ say you can see his
mood in his painting.
Nothing to do with his behind!
And yes, I really am an art lover but I never saw anything else than dripping
and throwing paint on a canvas by Jackson Pollock but maybe I missed something
when I quit looking at the documentary about him.
|
|
| Author: | bje | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 03:09 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
Presumably you must still follow the headgear rule.
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 16, 2020 02:43 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| | | Your request has been granted.
|
What about one without the lid? He doesn't wear the lid as a hat when he
leaves the trash can, does he?
|
|
|
| Author: | zorbanj | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2020 22:46 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| When I list minfigs, my own rule of thumb is that if something is shown in the
catalog inventory it should be included for that minifig to be listed as a complete
minifig vs as parts. The catalog photo is what the buyer sees and expects to
get.
If there's an issue with the minfig inventory that's a different kettle
of fish.
In Inventories, wahiggin writes:
| | In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
|
For every rule there is an exception. Oscar should be listed with the garbage
can.
Wesley
|
|
|
| Author: | wahiggin | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2020 18:52 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
|
For every rule there is an exception. Oscar should be listed with the garbage
can.
Wesley
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 14, 2020 05:55 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, chetzler writes:
| | | | In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included.
|
I've thought this for a long time. There are some some strange minifigure
entries in the catalog. For catalog purposes, guidelines are better than rules.
If the rules are always blindly adhered to, there seems little need for a catmin--anybody
could do the job by just following the rules. I'd rather have thoughtful
people make a decision about what is the most reasonable inventory for a figure
without being bound to a set of rules that can't possibly account for all
current all future cases.
Below is what I always thought was a reasonable exception to the "no hand-held
accessories" rule as the accessories are meant to be an extension of the fig's
alien arms. This exception has existed for a long time, so clearly there is
precedent for going with reasonable vs pedantic.
|
and maybe extending that further to characters that are always seen to look a
certain way for instance Shredder always wearing gauntlets, Karlof always shown
with big fist hands, and a werewolf with claws etc...
Vader on the other hand is'nt always weilding a Lighsaber thereby making
it more of a handheld accessory intended to be added/removed
Either way we have many Ironman minifigs with blue boosters under their legs
but are they any more essential to those minifigs compared to some of the other
parts I've mentioned? I guess in the end those parts don't matter too
much one way or the other as everyone will just follow and include what is shown
in the picture but yes descisons made on a case by case basis is better than
sticking to strict rulings that trip over themselves with their own inconsistencies
especially where key componenets for certain minifigs appear to be missing?
|
|
| Author: | peregrinator | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 20:21 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Oscar also never wore the trashcan lid on his head - it would flip back when
he popped out of the trashcan.
(He was also originally orange, but I'm not old enough to remember that.)
|
|
| Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 18:48 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| | | In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included.
|
I've thought this for a long time. There are some some strange minifigure
entries in the catalog. For catalog purposes, guidelines are better than rules.
If the rules are always blindly adhered to, there seems little need for a catmin--anybody
could do the job by just following the rules. I'd rather have thoughtful
people make a decision about what is the most reasonable inventory for a figure
without being bound to a set of rules that can't possibly account for all
current all future cases.
Below is what I always thought was a reasonable exception to the "no hand-held
accessories" rule as the accessories are meant to be an extension of the fig's
alien arms. This exception has existed for a long time, so clearly there is
precedent for going with reasonable vs pedantic.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 16:42 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
That is very strange. Whoever this Admin_Russell is who did the inventory was
clearly a newby.
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 15:52 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
Yes the Dollar in the bag should'nt be included as to me its no different
to any other minifig tile accessory such as a map, catapult, gamer pad etc...
|
|
| Author: | runner.caller | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:53 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, EnchantedBricks writes:
| | In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
By the rules laid out that all parts must attach together, it should be deleted
and a new entry should be made. Or the rules themselves need to be adjusted.
In the case of Oscar if you go directly to the LEGO site EVERY photo of the Sesame
Street set shows Oscar in his Trashcan. If even LEGO itself believes that Oscar
and his Trashcan are one in the same it should be listed as such here, regardless
of whether or not he "attaches" to it.
Just my opinion !!
|
I agree! I get the want for an absolute rule to follow, but I feel like there
always needs to be special exceptions.
Maybe like an "Iconic Character" clause. Just brainstorming.
Oscar going together with his trashcan is arguably more iconic than any number
of the iron man/jetpack combos that have caused also caused confusion.
|
|
|
| Author: | BulbaNerd4000 | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:33 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| |
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
I'm not against this idea but I have a feeling the Admins/Bricklink will
be plus you also have to consider how far we can stretch things because if you
give every minifig two entries does that actually benefit Bricklink for the better?
I mean do we really want to see caped and non caped versions for each and every
minifigure for example? Well I would'nt have a problem with that either but
there are certainly some minifigs that would benefit a lot more from having two
entries and it may be better starting at these before overcomplicating the catalog
with too many entries when there is only one single part different between them
|
Probably not....
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| |
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
I'm not against this idea but I have a feeling the Admins/Bricklink will
be plus you also have to consider how far we can stretch things because if you
give every minifig two entries does that actually benefit Bricklink for the better?
I mean do we really want to see caped and non caped versions for each and every
minifigure for example? Well I would'nt have a problem with that either but
there are certainly some minifigs that would benefit a lot more from having two
entries and it may be better starting at these before overcomplicating the catalog
with too many entries when there is only one single part different between them
|
|
| Author: | EnchantedBricks | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:29 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, runner.caller writes:
| | | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
By the rules laid out that all parts must attach together, it should be deleted
and a new entry should be made. Or the rules themselves need to be adjusted.
In the case of Oscar if you go directly to the LEGO site EVERY photo of the Sesame
Street set shows Oscar in his Trashcan. If even LEGO itself believes that Oscar
and his Trashcan are one in the same it should be listed as such here, regardless
of whether or not he "attaches" to it.
Just my opinion !!
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:25 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| | In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
Because multiple entries for essentially the same thing are not ideal. They happen,
but are not ideal.
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:16 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
You make a very good point. So I'm back to where I started, confused
What I'm less confused about, is that it can't be easy for those
making catalog listing policies.
|
Ha ha yeah but I think thats the thing, maybe we need less stict policy/rules
on how minifigs are handled and deal with them on a case by case basis by cataloging
them in a way that best serves the majority of the community. If I'm alone
with suggesting Oscar should have a trash can then by all means we should leave
him without it though I'm not sure if that is the case?
|
|
| Author: | BulbaNerd4000 | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:14 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
Is it too much to ask for both?
-Tony Stark
Why don't we make just make an entry for each one?
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:08 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
You make a very good point. So I'm back to where I started, confused
What I'm less confused about, is that it can't be easy for those
making catalog listing policies.
|
|
| Author: | runner.caller | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 11:03 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| | | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
What about the dolla dolla bill in this fig's bag?
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:56 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it as a hat.
|
| | Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms), so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
Had a dog once, that would do that
|
Sit them in paint first and you get modern art.
|
Aaah! You mean like a Jackson Pollock with odor?
We could start a new style of art: Smellism!
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:49 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
Either way given TLG only gave him a very basic minifig head as a body and did'nt
include arms or even his legs if he has them I think its clear that this area
of the minifig is supposed to be hidden out of view therefore making him seem
incomplete without the trash can to serve its purpose
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:47 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
So the trash can and it's lid, were more a part of the character's persona
originally?
The idea meshes better knowing that. Thanks.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:41 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it as a hat.
|
| | Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms), so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
Had a dog once, that would do that
|
Sit them in paint first and you get modern art.
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I have sympathy with you and the admins are discussing all of this right now
and I believe you will get some of what you are asking for.
I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Okay that explains a lot because I did'nt realise it was'nt actually
attached to the trash can though that said I think if we want to try and make
the catlog minifig entries appear as complete as possible then I'd personally
say that the trash can should probably be included with the rest of the minifig
but saying that as mentioned I would'nt have a problem with two entries for
certain minifigs either although whether the Oscar warrants the need for two
compared to some of the more elaborate entries I'm not so sure.
The ghostbusters minifigs are a good example of where there is a benefit for
two entires (with/without proton pack) and I hope this can be followed through
to other similar minifigs of which we're probably only talking about less
than 1% anyway
In the end rather than following hard and fast rules I would go with what seems
worthy of being complete enough for the catalog and what someone unfamiliar with
Bricklink would expect to be included. Both a chima eagle without wings and Oscar
without a trash can I'm sure most people would see as incomplete especially
if it then means they then end up having to buy the additional parts (handheld
items aside) separately which almost defeats the purpose of a complete minifig
entry
On the otherhand jay without a jet pack and Moroff without his backpack still
seem complete enough to be worthy of being cataloged barebone and in truth I
think this would be the most common way to buy and sell them anyway if users
were given the choice?
But thats just my take on the subject...
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:32 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
In MY era, Oscar never came out of the trashcan. He was just a hand puppet,
not a costume. But also in my era, Snuffy was never seen by anyone except Big
Bird and was possibly an imaginary friend. I know he now walks around in the
open. So I don't know what change may have come for Oscar in that time.
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:26 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it as a hat.
|
| | Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms), so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
Had a dog once, that would do that
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:22 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, popsicle writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
I seem to remember he does come out of the trash can but doesn't wear it
as a hat. Mind you this one cannot walk, as he doesn't have legs (or arms),
so he'll be butt-sliding.
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 10:03 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
|
Using this metric makes sense, it's logical.
Paradoxically, the same procedure makes the new listing that includes the attached
trash can lid, illogical. Unless the character is known to walk around with the
lid on his head (as garb) without the trash can itself? I'm unfamiliar with
the character, maybe he does?
Just some thoughts
|
|
| Author: | Emporiosa | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 08:28 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| Poor Oscar, he must feel naked! I was so surprised when I saw the original marked
for deletion and the new one, but understood why it was done. Although thankfully
if they do keep the newer listing to keep consistency, most buyers are savvy
enough to know to go and look for the trashcan apart (or I also assume we will
see a lot of the Oscar listings including a bonus trashcan accessory to cover
the poor guy up).
In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I have sympathy with you and the admins are discussing all of this right now
and I believe you will get some of what you are asking for.
I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
I’m not sure anyone would consider the newer entry complete for instance would
anyone actually display the Oscar minifig without the trash can either way the
instructions point to the parts being arrow directed down into the trash can
anyway?
Then compared with these minifigs that have non-essential accessories:-
The yoda has a part only useful with the actual build and if you want Jay In
his kimono outfit you have to specifically purchase him with the multiple part
jet pack whilst the other ninja characters in matching outfits are sold standalone
as should be the same for all?
I’m then confused further as we have Ghostbusters characters in the catalog with
and without their proton packs so are they supposed to be fully accessorised,
barebone or a mix of both, which is it?
To be honest I like the two options given for the Ghostbusters minifigs and whilst
the majority of minifgs should only have one entry I think it would make sense
to have two entries for certain minifigs like the Jay without jetpack and other
minifigs like this one with an option to buy with and without a backpack:-
|
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 08:15 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| I have sympathy with you and the admins are discussing all of this right now
and I believe you will get some of what you are asking for.
I added the non-can Oscar. Two admins pointed out the rule that every part of
a minifig has to attach together. The trash can is flat inside and cannot attach
to Oscar. He only stays in by gravity.
In Inventories, infinibrix writes:
| | Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
I’m not sure anyone would consider the newer entry complete for instance would
anyone actually display the Oscar minifig without the trash can either way the
instructions point to the parts being arrow directed down into the trash can
anyway?
Then compared with these minifigs that have non-essential accessories:-
The yoda has a part only useful with the actual build and if you want Jay In
his kimono outfit you have to specifically purchase him with the multiple part
jet pack whilst the other ninja characters in matching outfits are sold standalone
as should be the same for all?
I’m then confused further as we have Ghostbusters characters in the catalog with
and without their proton packs so are they supposed to be fully accessorised,
barebone or a mix of both, which is it?
To be honest I like the two options given for the Ghostbusters minifigs and whilst
the majority of minifgs should only have one entry I think it would make sense
to have two entries for certain minifigs like the Jay without jetpack and other
minifigs like this one with an option to buy with and without a backpack:-
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Nov 13, 2020 07:29 | | Subject: | Minifigue Complete Build Inconsistencies? | | Viewed: | 209 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Whilst I’m sure we all understand and appreciate that minifigs have to be listed
as per the instructions and whilst for the most part this might be a good guideline
to follow can we not also try and gauge what we feel the majority of the community
would consider more fitting as a complete minifigure along with what might be
considered unnecessary as part of a complete minifigure?
For instance we have Oscar the Grouch in his trash can marked for deletion??
To be replaced with this:-
I’m not sure anyone would consider the newer entry complete for instance would
anyone actually display the Oscar minifig without the trash can either way the
instructions point to the parts being arrow directed down into the trash can
anyway?
Then compared with these minifigs that have non-essential accessories:-
The yoda has a part only useful with the actual build and if you want Jay In
his kimono outfit you have to specifically purchase him with the multiple part
jet pack whilst the other ninja characters in matching outfits are sold standalone
as should be the same for all?
I’m then confused further as we have Ghostbusters characters in the catalog with
and without their proton packs so are they supposed to be fully accessorised,
barebone or a mix of both, which is it?
To be honest I like the two options given for the Ghostbusters minifigs and whilst
the majority of minifgs should only have one entry I think it would make sense
to have two entries for certain minifigs like the Jay without jetpack and other
minifigs like this one with an option to buy with and without a backpack:-
|
|
| Author: | Stuart9 | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 12:40 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| Had some sawn off ones once but they would probably be listed under mini figure
weapons.
In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 12:21 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, novabrick writes:
| | In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
It not that LEGO didn't make 1 x 5 bricks. Just not the right size.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
Yeah...
|
|
| Author: | peregrinator | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 09:40 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SylvainLS writes:
| | It was a time when instructions were hand-drawn.
Maybe the drawer (draught(wo)man?) was disturbed by their pet dinosaur or something
|
I can't stress enough how much I love those classic hand-drawn instructions.
I wish Lego instructions still looked like these.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 08:53 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, peregrinator writes:
| | In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
It is definitely a mistake - in later steps (e.g. 15) you can see that it's
intended to repeat the 1x4, 1x1 pattern
|
It was a time when instructions were hand-drawn.
Maybe the drawer (draught(wo)man?) was disturbed by their pet dinosaur or something
|
|
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 08:47 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
It not that LEGO didn't make 1 x 5 bricks. Just not the right size.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
| Author: | peregrinator | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 08:33 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
It is definitely a mistake - in later steps (e.g. 15) you can see that it's
intended to repeat the 1x4, 1x1 pattern
|
|
| Author: | Iliketurtles1 | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 08:26 | | Subject: | Re: 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, barbeblue writes:
| | Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
Interesting, I love finding errors in LEGO manuals!
|
| Author: | bb1236406 | | Posted: | Nov 9, 2020 08:25 | | Subject: | 853-1 Auto Chassis missing brick | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hello,
I was checking the 853-1 instrunction and I noticed that on the front seat image
there was an 1x5 brick!
So I think there is a mistake in this image.
Has anyone noticed that?
|
|
| Author: | starbeanie | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2020 18:22 | | Subject: | Re: 10717-1 vs 11717 Question | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| https://www.bricklink.com/TL/16026.jpg?0
In Inventories, Bond writes:
| | In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
Thank you. The apps you don't know about until somebody tells you.
Short answer: More or less. Still trying to figure out the wheel/tire assembly
differences; not the qty.
- Pat
|
|
| Author: | Bond | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2020 17:52 | | Subject: | Re: 10717-1 vs 11717 Question | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
Thank you. The apps you don't know about until somebody tells you.
Short answer: More or less. Still trying to figure out the wheel/tire assembly
differences; not the qty.
- Pat
|
|
| Author: | starbeanie | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2020 17:44 | | Subject: | Re: 10717-1 vs 11717 Question | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| use this
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvCompare.asp
In Inventories, Bond writes:
| | Is the only difference between and four of these (and not
Light Aqua; that's the default image)?
I can see that, in 11717-1 inventory, four 91405 (one Bright Green, one Dark
Tan, one Medium Azure, and one White) are listed. All I want to know is if all
the remaining contents are the exact same as those found in 10717-1.
-------------------
Right now, Wal-Mart has the 11717 for $39.99. Not a bad deal, especially when
you consider that you had to be a CostCo member last year to get a 10717-1 for
the same price, and without any 91405.
Regards,
- Pat
|
|
|
| Author: | Bond | | Posted: | Nov 8, 2020 17:23 | | Subject: | 10717-1 vs 11717 Question | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Is the only difference between and four of these (and not
Light Aqua; that's the default image)?
I can see that, in 11717-1 inventory, four 91405 (one Bright Green, one Dark
Tan, one Medium Azure, and one White) are listed. All I want to know is if all
the remaining contents are the exact same as those found in 10717-1.
-------------------
Right now, Wal-Mart has the 11717 for $39.99. Not a bad deal, especially when
you consider that you had to be a CostCo member last year to get a 10717-1 for
the same price, and without any 91405.
Regards,
- Pat
|
|
| Author: | Ninepartsred | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2020 15:26 | | Subject: | Re: Iron Man thrusters/repulsors | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Ninepartsred writes:
| | I know there have been several discussions about what constitutes a minifig and
I'm sure this must have been brought up before, but in the inventories for
a "complete" Iron Man, Legion, Ultron, etc., why are the bricks round included
for the feet but not the plates for the hands?
Those parts are included in but even on the box, Ultron isn't
shown using his thrusters, he's sitting on his shiny metal backside.
Those on the hands are shown in place in the images for most sets and could be
considered more important as they're also used as weapons but they're
not included. Personally, I wouldn't include either of them as they're
really added effects.
|
The catalog/inventories admin team is in the process of writing definitive guidelines
for figures. It is a very complicated topic. We have made it quite far in our
discussions and documentation, but we are stuck in a holding pattern for now
due to circumstances out of our control (read: site administration).
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thanks Randy.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2020 15:08 | | Subject: | Re: Iron Man thrusters/repulsors | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Ninepartsred writes:
| | I know there have been several discussions about what constitutes a minifig and
I'm sure this must have been brought up before, but in the inventories for
a "complete" Iron Man, Legion, Ultron, etc., why are the bricks round included
for the feet but not the plates for the hands?
Those parts are included in but even on the box, Ultron isn't
shown using his thrusters, he's sitting on his shiny metal backside.
Those on the hands are shown in place in the images for most sets and could be
considered more important as they're also used as weapons but they're
not included. Personally, I wouldn't include either of them as they're
really added effects.
|
The catalog/inventories admin team is in the process of writing definitive guidelines
for figures. It is a very complicated topic. We have made it quite far in our
discussions and documentation, but we are stuck in a holding pattern for now
due to circumstances out of our control (read: site administration).
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Ninepartsred | | Posted: | Nov 7, 2020 13:34 | | Subject: | Iron Man thrusters/repulsors | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I know there have been several discussions about what constitutes a minifig and
I'm sure this must have been brought up before, but in the inventories for
a "complete" Iron Man, Legion, Ultron, etc., why are the bricks round included
for the feet but not the plates for the hands?
Those parts are included in but even on the box, Ultron isn't
shown using his thrusters, he's sitting on his shiny metal backside.
Those on the hands are shown in place in the images for most sets and could be
considered more important as they're also used as weapons but they're
not included. Personally, I wouldn't include either of them as they're
really added effects.
|
|
| Author: | bb1891313 | | Posted: | Nov 5, 2020 11:24 | | Subject: | Re: Applying order to Wanted List | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| | Does anyone know of a work-around? |
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Nov 4, 2020 19:16 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I believe someone who has this minifig from a sealed set
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is any requirement
that minifigure inventories be completed from sealed set contents. That requirement
is only for sets themselves during the first 12 months after release.
|
I apologize if I seem heavy-handed in insisting that someone who has the set
do it. But you know I would feel kind of resentful if I added the last parts
to the catalog (BigBBricks did some of them early on) and then someone else went
and did the inventory from the "Parts List".
|
|
| Author: | Tadashi3750 | | Posted: | Nov 4, 2020 08:11 | | Subject: | Re: Applying order to Wanted List | | Viewed: | 20 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| Yep, that is what I was trying to do. Apply what I bought (received) to my wanted
list. At least I know it is broken and not something I am doing wrong. Thanks.
In Inventories, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Inventories, Tadashi3750 writes:
| | I cannot seem to get the order applied to my Wanted List. I have tried in the
order to hit the button "Add Order Items to My Wanted List" and it shows with
errors (drop downs not working and "Add Parts" button does nothing).
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1227004
| | I have also tried to add the order in the Wanted List using the "Apply Order"
and nothing happens when I select the order then select "Apply to List".
|
“Apply Order” doesn’t add an order to a WL. It doesn’t create items in a WL.
It’s to change the Have fields in your WL.
(Note that, anyway, this feature is broken as it doesn’t remember if it has already
been applied. So if you have multiple WLs that match an order, it can make you
believe you fulfilled them all when it’s not the case.)
| | I have tried with Mozilla, Chrome, and IE. What am I doing wrong? Thanks.
|
Yeah, broken for everyone, for weeks….
|
|
|
| Author: | novabrick | | Posted: | Nov 4, 2020 02:17 | | Subject: | Re: Items moved from A-B | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, qwertyboy writes:
Wow, this is a very neat thing. Thanks for sharing.
Christian
novabrick-team
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Kathleen_55 | | Posted: | Nov 3, 2020 22:06 | | Subject: | Items moved from A-B | | Viewed: | 84 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I've noticed items that are being moved from one category to another. Is
there a list that I can use because I'm finding it very time consuming hunting
for the product in a order. Please and thank you. Kathleen
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2020 11:32 | | Subject: | Re: Applying order to Wanted List | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Tadashi3750 writes:
| | I cannot seem to get the order applied to my Wanted List. I have tried in the
order to hit the button "Add Order Items to My Wanted List" and it shows with
errors (drop downs not working and "Add Parts" button does nothing).
|
See https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1227004
| | I have also tried to add the order in the Wanted List using the "Apply Order"
and nothing happens when I select the order then select "Apply to List".
|
“Apply Order” doesn’t add an order to a WL. It doesn’t create items in a WL.
It’s to change the Have fields in your WL.
(Note that, anyway, this feature is broken as it doesn’t remember if it has already
been applied. So if you have multiple WLs that match an order, it can make you
believe you fulfilled them all when it’s not the case.)
| | I have tried with Mozilla, Chrome, and IE. What am I doing wrong? Thanks.
|
Yeah, broken for everyone, for weeks….
|
|
| Author: | Tadashi3750 | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2020 11:18 | | Subject: | Applying order to Wanted List | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I cannot seem to get the order applied to my Wanted List. I have tried in the
order to hit the button "Add Order Items to My Wanted List" and it shows with
errors (drop downs not working and "Add Parts" button does nothing).
I have also tried to add the order in the Wanted List using the "Apply Order"
and nothing happens when I select the order then select "Apply to List".
I have tried with Mozilla, Chrome, and IE. What am I doing wrong? Thanks.
Keith
|
| Author: | TravelBound | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2020 10:58 | | Subject: | Re: How many bags in SW 8085 | | Viewed: | 15 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
Thank you! I couldn't remember the name of the site.
|
| Author: | TravelBound | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 18:40 | | Subject: | How many bags in SW 8085 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | Anyone know? Thanks. |
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 08:59 | | Subject: | Re: 4865pb005 and 3068bpb0001 "colors" | | Viewed: | 17 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yvesson writes:
| | […]
Or could there be an option with primary color and secondary color to be sure
to match the wanted list if the vendor didn't reference it properly ?
|
If you set the colour to Not Applicable in your Wanted List, all colours will
match in a search.
IOW, in a WL, N/A means “Any Colour.”
|
|
| Author: | yvesson | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 08:55 | | Subject: | Re: 4865pb005 and 3068bpb0001 "colors" | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, hpoort writes:
| | In Inventories, yvesson writes:
| | Hej,
I have just noticed these two parts with the "shell" prints on them may be listed
as color "white" or "not applicable", though it's the exact same piece. So
they should be merged.
I may have missed them because I had listed only the white ones in my wanted
list.
Possibly a lot of other printed items have the same problem ?
|
[p=3068bpb0001]
Shops that list them under 'Not applicable' have listed them mistakingly.
It is those shops that should correct their listing. Nothing to merge on Bricklink's
catalog side.
|
Hej,
Okej I checked and some shops work for both indeed, but when there is only one
color existing, shouldn't the inventory be referenced differently to avoid
the problem ?
Or could there be an option with primary color and secondary color to be sure
to match the wanted list if the vendor didn't reference it properly ?
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 07:23 | | Subject: | Re: 4865pb005 and 3068bpb0001 "colors" | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, yvesson writes:
| | Hej,
I have just noticed these two parts with the "shell" prints on them may be listed
as color "white" or "not applicable", though it's the exact same piece. So
they should be merged.
I may have missed them because I had listed only the white ones in my wanted
list.
Possibly a lot of other printed items have the same problem ?
|
[p=3068bpb0001]
Shops that list them under 'Not applicable' have listed them mistakingly.
It is those shops that should correct their listing. Nothing to merge on Bricklink's
catalog side.
|
|
| Author: | yvesson | | Posted: | Oct 31, 2020 05:37 | | Subject: | 4865pb005 and 3068bpb0001 "colors" | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hej,
I have just noticed these two parts with the "shell" prints on them may be listed
as color "white" or "not applicable", though it's the exact same piece. So
they should be merged.
I may have missed them because I had listed only the white ones in my wanted
list.
Possibly a lot of other printed items have the same problem ?
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Oct 29, 2020 13:17 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for Diagon Alley incorrect. | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, paulvdb writes:
| | I have submitted the plain 35530 to the catalog.
|
|
|
| Author: | paulvdb | | Posted: | Oct 29, 2020 12:45 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for Diagon Alley incorrect. | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, firestar246 writes:
| | I've never made a change request or added a piece here, so maybe someone
with more skill with that and for free time can do it. But there is an error
for the Diagon Alley 75978 inventory.
According to Bricklink, it supposedly has two green 19729 (regular size minecraft
head) with no prints. However, upon opening the set, I have found that they are
not 19729, but 35530 (baby minecraft head). There is currently no listing on
BL for a plain 35530.
|
I have submitted the plain 35530 to the catalog. It can be added to the inventory
when the submission is approved.
|
|
| Author: | tons_of_bricks | | Posted: | Oct 29, 2020 11:48 | | Subject: | Inventory for Diagon Alley incorrect. | | Viewed: | 97 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I've never made a change request or added a piece here, so maybe someone
with more skill with that and for free time can do it. But there is an error
for the Diagon Alley 75978 inventory.
According to Bricklink, it supposedly has two green 19729 (regular size minecraft
head) with no prints. However, upon opening the set, I have found that they are
not 19729, but 35530 (baby minecraft head). There is currently no listing on
BL for a plain 35530.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 27, 2020 11:22 | | Subject: | Re: Sticker differences for 6382 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | Ok, it turns out that I do have a new sticker sheet 192895 that is the other
version! The only difference is that the big stickers is longer (longer black
background on both sides)
Other than that, I do not see any other difference. Shall I submit it as a new
entry?
|
I would definitely submit it and reference this thread. I cannot say if it will
be accepted or not, but it is worth a try.
|
|
| Author: | building4ever | | Posted: | Oct 27, 2020 09:57 | | Subject: | Re: Sticker differences for 6382 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | In Inventories, building4ever writes:
Nice catch.
If we find a second version of sticker sheet, then it is a proof. Otherwise the
box art cannot be reliable at all.
The stickers on the used model may not be original or they may be from this
|
That idea book sticker sheet has a black fire helmet. The used set shows a white
fire helmet.
But, yes, we would definitely need to see a different sticker sheet to really
prove anything.
|
Nice catch, you too 
What I meant is that stickers on used models are not in general original.
Ok, it turns out that I do have a new sticker sheet 192895 that is the other
version! The only difference is that the big stickers is longer (longer black
background on both sides)
Other than that, I do not see any other difference. Shall I submit it as a new
entry?
|
Yes, please submit that! I would be curious to find out when (and why) TLG decided
to go for a smaller oder bigger sticker, whatever was before. It is the same
mystery like the POLICE print on 6384, where it is unknown why they went from
Sans Serif to Serif. At least it is documented in the set inventory list.
|
|
| Author: | SezaR | | Posted: | Oct 26, 2020 18:22 | | Subject: | Re: Sticker differences for 6382 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | In Inventories, building4ever writes:
Nice catch.
If we find a second version of sticker sheet, then it is a proof. Otherwise the
box art cannot be reliable at all.
The stickers on the used model may not be original or they may be from this
|
That idea book sticker sheet has a black fire helmet. The used set shows a white
fire helmet.
But, yes, we would definitely need to see a different sticker sheet to really
prove anything.
|
Nice catch, you too
What I meant is that stickers on used models are not in general original.
Ok, it turns out that I do have a new sticker sheet 192895 that is the other
version! The only difference is that the big stickers is longer (longer black
background on both sides)
Other than that, I do not see any other difference. Shall I submit it as a new
entry?
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 25, 2020 18:59 | | Subject: | Re: Sticker differences for 6382 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | In Inventories, building4ever writes:
Nice catch.
If we find a second version of sticker sheet, then it is a proof. Otherwise the
box art cannot be reliable at all.
The stickers on the used model may not be original or they may be from this
|
That idea book sticker sheet has a black fire helmet. The used set shows a white
fire helmet.
But, yes, we would definitely need to see a different sticker sheet to really
prove anything.
|
|
| Author: | SezaR | | Posted: | Oct 25, 2020 18:02 | | Subject: | Re: Sticker differences for 6382 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, building4ever writes:
Nice catch.
If we find a second version of sticker sheet, then it is a proof. Otherwise the
box art cannot be reliable at all.
The stickers on the used model may not be original or they may be from this
|
|
|
| Author: | SimonBrix | | Posted: | Oct 23, 2020 00:01 | | Subject: | Re: 76167 Inventory. | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, SimonBrix writes:
| | Why does it take so long to get approved?
Is it because of the Iron Man Minifig?
|
You guessed it.
|
Alright. Thank you. 
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2020 23:18 | | Subject: | Re: 76167 Inventory. | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SimonBrix writes:
| | Why does it take so long to get approved?
Is it because of the Iron Man Minifig?
|
You guessed it.
|
| Author: | SimonBrix | | Posted: | Oct 22, 2020 22:07 | | Subject: | Re: 76167 Inventory. | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| Why does it take so long to get approved?
Is it because of the Iron Man Minifig?
|
|
| Author: | Daddy_Daughter | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 19:22 | | Subject: | Re: Mos Eisley Cantina | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
| | are you talking about "Item Consists Of
Inventory Pending Approval (?)"
It means a member has inventoried all the pieces and it is awaiting verification
before that list is live on the site.
In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | Any idea what the status mean for this set? New to BrickLink thanks
|
|
Who needs to verify the inventory?
|
The user who submitted the inventory has not yet completed it. When it has been
completed, one of the Inventories Admins (either myself, Paul [paulvdb], or Marek
[Hygrotus]) will verify the inventory. I have sent a message to the submitter
to see if they plan on completing it soon.
|
Gotcha thanks for the update 👍
|
Randy any luck with the user? I am new to all this no idea how it all works
|
Yes! We received a response from the user, and the inventory has been completed.
The submitter did not know we were waiting for some things as they are relatively
new to the process. The inventory will most likely be verified within the week.
It is a *very* big set. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Thanks again!
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 19:17 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I believe someone who has this minifig from a sealed set
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is any requirement
that minifigure inventories be completed from sealed set contents. That requirement
is only for sets themselves during the first 12 months after release.
|
There isn't, but Jon sets a high bar for figure inventories, and I also won't
do figure inventories unless they come directly from a sealed set.
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 12:22 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I believe someone who has this minifig from a sealed set
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is any requirement
that minifigure inventories be completed from sealed set contents. That requirement
is only for sets themselves during the first 12 months after release.
|
You know that I would correct you if you were wrong.
I set the standard for myself some time back. I didn't write down the date.
I want to look at the part myself and see that it matches. I encourage the
same for others.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 11:05 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
| | I believe someone who has this minifig from a sealed set
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is any requirement
that minifigure inventories be completed from sealed set contents. That requirement
is only for sets themselves during the first 12 months after release.
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 10:59 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, BulbaNerd4000 writes:
| | In Inventories, axaday writes:
Yay! I need there to be an inventory so I can get that coat cloth piece. I need
it for a custom
|
You can get that cloth pieces from , assuming they are the same. They
should be.
|
|
| Author: | BulbaNerd4000 | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 09:01 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
Yay! I need there to be an inventory so I can get that coat cloth piece. I need
it for a custom
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 21, 2020 03:23 | | Subject: | Re: mk012 Easy Minifig Inventory | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, axaday writes:
My younger son has this set. I will take a look at it.
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 23:45 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | | | I am surprised that none of our resident train experts that have weighed in on
almost everything else train related have never weighed in on this.
|
Hi Randyf,
I believe you mean in particular me.
|
Actually, I didn't have anyone particular in mind, Reza.
There are many train experts that have lingered here over the years and still
do, and I had never heard this set mentioned by anyone. I was generally surprised
that I had not.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 23:20 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, SezaR writes:
| | 122 inventory change requests in pending status
|
Many of your requests concern part variants, which are a contentious issue that
BrickLink does not handle well at all. We hope to have a programming change
that will allow us to more effectively handle variants in set inventories, but
until then (if there ever is a then) I don't think any of us are too eager
to shuffle variants endlessly in and out of inventories.
|
|
| Author: | SezaR | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 22:56 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | Hi,
I bought this one incomplete:
I found 4 black pcs of each of these in that set:
These aren't in the BL inventory and they're also not in the inventory
on Rebrickable, Peeron, ..
BUT! If you look at the box, they are used in one of the alternate models.
That model isn't on the instructions though.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/164-1?showpic=6308
Inventory on BL and Peeron both show "instructions" as source of the inventory
list.
Could it be that they originally were included with the set, even though they
weren't actually used in the instructions?
If yes, can these be added as extras in the inventory, or should that only be
done if someone opens a sealed set?
|
For sets in this time period, if you see parts used on a box model, they were
most likely included in each set. Look at the underside of the parts to make
sure they are period correct, and if so, I would add them.
|
They look correct to me.
|
I am surprised that none of our resident train experts that have weighed in on
almost everything else train related have never weighed in on this.
|
Hi Randyf,
I believe you mean in particular me.
Consider the following facts:
- I know certain things but I am not an expert on trains before 1979.
- The inventory of these sets are complicated. As of today, I don't know
for sure all the variations of 4.5v motors.
- there are not many evidence. If you are going to accept my words with some
semi-evidence, I can submit many inventory change requests. Indeed I have few
pending change requests since few months ago
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?viewType=E&viewYear=&viewMonth=&viewGeDate=&itemNo=&q=&chgUsername=SezaR&viewStatus=0&itemType=
In particular, the one for 165 is so surprising. I hope I get some time soon
to finish my story I started to post.
122 inventory change requests in pending status is a record on its own
I have some more changes to submit.
- I have not bought this set or many other trains from 70s. I don't have
room to keep them. Without the sets in hand, it is harder and more time-consuming
to study them.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 20:34 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | Hi,
I bought this one incomplete:
I found 4 black pcs of each of these in that set:
These aren't in the BL inventory and they're also not in the inventory
on Rebrickable, Peeron, ..
BUT! If you look at the box, they are used in one of the alternate models.
That model isn't on the instructions though.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/164-1?showpic=6308
Inventory on BL and Peeron both show "instructions" as source of the inventory
list.
Could it be that they originally were included with the set, even though they
weren't actually used in the instructions?
If yes, can these be added as extras in the inventory, or should that only be
done if someone opens a sealed set?
|
For sets in this time period, if you see parts used on a box model, they were
most likely included in each set. Look at the underside of the parts to make
sure they are period correct, and if so, I would add them.
|
They look correct to me.
|
I am surprised that none of our resident train experts that have weighed in on
almost everything else train related have never weighed in on this.
|
|
| Author: | Daddy_Daughter | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 19:09 | | Subject: | Re: Mos Eisley Cantina | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
| | are you talking about "Item Consists Of
Inventory Pending Approval (?)"
It means a member has inventoried all the pieces and it is awaiting verification
before that list is live on the site.
In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | Any idea what the status mean for this set? New to BrickLink thanks
|
|
Who needs to verify the inventory?
|
The user who submitted the inventory has not yet completed it. When it has been
completed, one of the Inventories Admins (either myself, Paul [paulvdb], or Marek
[Hygrotus]) will verify the inventory. I have sent a message to the submitter
to see if they plan on completing it soon.
|
Gotcha thanks for the update 👍
|
Randy any luck with the user? I am new to all this no idea how it all works
|
Yes! We received a response from the user, and the inventory has been completed.
The submitter did not know we were waiting for some things as they are relatively
new to the process. The inventory will most likely be verified within the week.
It is a *very* big set. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Awesome news! Thank you! I am looking forward to it 😀
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 18:41 | | Subject: | Re: Mos Eisley Cantina | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
| | are you talking about "Item Consists Of
Inventory Pending Approval (?)"
It means a member has inventoried all the pieces and it is awaiting verification
before that list is live on the site.
In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | Any idea what the status mean for this set? New to BrickLink thanks
|
|
Who needs to verify the inventory?
|
The user who submitted the inventory has not yet completed it. When it has been
completed, one of the Inventories Admins (either myself, Paul [paulvdb], or Marek
[Hygrotus]) will verify the inventory. I have sent a message to the submitter
to see if they plan on completing it soon.
|
Gotcha thanks for the update 👍
|
Randy any luck with the user? I am new to all this no idea how it all works
|
Yes! We received a response from the user, and the inventory has been completed.
The submitter did not know we were waiting for some things as they are relatively
new to the process. The inventory will most likely be verified within the week.
It is a *very* big set. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Dimi_DBB | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 16:49 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | Hi,
I bought this one incomplete:
I found 4 black pcs of each of these in that set:
These aren't in the BL inventory and they're also not in the inventory
on Rebrickable, Peeron, ..
BUT! If you look at the box, they are used in one of the alternate models.
That model isn't on the instructions though.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/164-1?showpic=6308
Inventory on BL and Peeron both show "instructions" as source of the inventory
list.
Could it be that they originally were included with the set, even though they
weren't actually used in the instructions?
If yes, can these be added as extras in the inventory, or should that only be
done if someone opens a sealed set?
|
For sets in this time period, if you see parts used on a box model, they were
most likely included in each set. Look at the underside of the parts to make
sure they are period correct, and if so, I would add them.
|
They look correct to me.
|
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 16:36 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Inventories, Dimi_DBB writes:
| | Hi,
I bought this one incomplete:
I found 4 black pcs of each of these in that set:
These aren't in the BL inventory and they're also not in the inventory
on Rebrickable, Peeron, ..
BUT! If you look at the box, they are used in one of the alternate models.
That model isn't on the instructions though.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/164-1?showpic=6308
Inventory on BL and Peeron both show "instructions" as source of the inventory
list.
Could it be that they originally were included with the set, even though they
weren't actually used in the instructions?
If yes, can these be added as extras in the inventory, or should that only be
done if someone opens a sealed set?
|
For sets in this time period, if you see parts used on a box model, they were
most likely included in each set. Look at the underside of the parts to make
sure they are period correct, and if so, I would add them.
|
|
| Author: | Dimi_DBB | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 16:27 | | Subject: | Inventory for 164-1 | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi,
I bought this one incomplete:
I found 4 black pcs of each of these in that set:
These aren't in the BL inventory and they're also not in the inventory
on Rebrickable, Peeron, ..
BUT! If you look at the box, they are used in one of the alternate models.
That model isn't on the instructions though.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/164-1?showpic=6308
Inventory on BL and Peeron both show "instructions" as source of the inventory
list.
Could it be that they originally were included with the set, even though they
weren't actually used in the instructions?
If yes, can these be added as extras in the inventory, or should that only be
done if someone opens a sealed set?
|
|
| Author: | Daddy_Daughter | | Posted: | Oct 19, 2020 14:36 | | Subject: | Re: Mos Eisley Cantina | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | In Inventories, starbeanie writes:
| | are you talking about "Item Consists Of
Inventory Pending Approval (?)"
It means a member has inventoried all the pieces and it is awaiting verification
before that list is live on the site.
In Inventories, Daddy_Daughter writes:
| | Any idea what the status mean for this set? New to BrickLink thanks
|
|
Who needs to verify the inventory?
|
The user who submitted the inventory has not yet completed it. When it has been
completed, one of the Inventories Admins (either myself, Paul [paulvdb], or Marek
[Hygrotus]) will verify the inventory. I have sent a message to the submitter
to see if they plan on completing it soon.
|
Gotcha thanks for the update 👍
|
Randy any luck with the user? I am new to all this no idea how it all works
|
|
| Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | Oct 18, 2020 16:34 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory being deleted by BL unfairly? | | Viewed: | 60 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
|
| In Inventories, Brickwilbo writes:
| | In Inventories, chetzler writes:
| | I'm just highlighting the inconsistencies, not only between different parts
of the site, but even here in the forum. Does anyone care about that? Do you
care? Depending on who you are and when you post, you can sometimes get away
with some vile stuff.
I see that the thread in the second link I posted still remains unmoderated.
|
Actually it was moderated: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1225917
|
Umm...no, it wasn't.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
South Africa, Western Cape
Netherlands, Noord-Holland
Canada, Ontario
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Germany, Schleswig-Holstein
Italy, Piemonte
Belgium, Limburg
