Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Stuart9  | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2020 11:26 | | Subject: | Re: Panel needs checking please | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I think I have one or two of those, if I can find them I'll check mine.
In Catalog Requests, tpr writes:
| | Hi
* |  | 4215pb003 Panel 1 x 4 x 3 with Blue, Red and Silver Space Mechanical Pattern on Inside (Sticker) - Set 6949 (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Panel, Decorated
Marked for Deletion |
I have this item with solid studs, so should be under 4215a
It is currently under 4215 which is undetermined.
Can anyone check the third picture - comes up too small for me, to see the studs
If they are solid, which I think they are, this wants re-assigning to a 4215a
number
Thanks
tpr
|
|
|
| Author: | tpr | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2020 11:19 | | Subject: | Panel needs checking please | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi
* | | 4215pb003 Panel 1 x 4 x 3 with Blue, Red and Silver Space Mechanical Pattern on Inside (Sticker) - Set 6949 (Undetermined Type)
Parts: Panel, Decorated
Marked for Deletion |
I have this item with solid studs, so should be under 4215a
It is currently under 4215 which is undetermined.
Can anyone check the third picture - comes up too small for me, to see the studs
If they are solid, which I think they are, this wants re-assigning to a 4215a
number
Thanks
tpr
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 19:08 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | […]
However, if LDraw
still uses some "x" numbers, it would be wise to retain them.
|
LDraw doesn’t use “x” numbers. They use “u” numbers, and they get rid of them
as soon as the correct ID is known.
So, rid away with the “x”!
As for aliases, they make alias files (their descriptions start with a “=”).
So that takes care of that.
Now, their patterns numbers are not compatible with BL’s. So this would be a
bigger problem, except, now, the BL ID is often put as keywords (inside the file
but searchable in some CADs or simply with a grep).
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 17:28 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
"x" exists as a temporary number when the official Lego part number was originally
not known (usually because it is not printed on the part itself).
|
The "x" numbers come from the old peeron/LDraw days when numbers were not known.
| | When I've discovered the true part number, I've submitted many for the
"x" number to be replaced by the official Lego part number, and it's always
been done. (The "x" number was not even retained as an alternate.) In fact, one
time I went through the catelog to discover and replace as many as I could find
the original part number for.
|
Nope, this is not always the case. Some admins would change them and others would
not. The ones who would not change them stated that the reason was to maintain
consitency with peeron/LDraw. Since peeron has been defunct for quite a while,
I see no need to continue to maintain consistency with them. However, if LDraw
still uses some "x" numbers, it would be wise to retain them.
| | For some reason here though... When the original part number was discovered,
it was added as an alternate number, but not replaced. So, there's obviously
serious inconsistency here.
|
|
|
| Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 16:54 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
"x" exists as a temporary number when the official Lego part number was originally
not known (usually because it is not printed on the part itself).
When I've discovered the true part number, I've submitted many for the
"x" number to be replaced by the official Lego part number, and it's always
been done. (The "x" number was not even retained as an alternate.) In fact, one
time I went through the catelog to discover and replace as many as I could find
the original part number for.
For some reason here though... When the original part number was discovered,
it was added as an alternate number, but not replaced. So, there's obviously
serious inconsistency here.
|
|
| Author: | stutrippant | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 14:42 | | Subject: | White bricks on a white background. | | Viewed: | 132 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Seriously, what genius thought the best avatar brick in the catalog should be
white when the background is white too. So many hard to figure out bricks. Please
change all white avatar bricks to something more visible.
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 04:48 | | Subject: | Re: Where can I submit product flyers | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Can I add those to the catalog?
|
You may submit any genuine LEGO item to the catalog.
| | And where: book / gear / catalog
|
At this point in time most paper objects should be added as the Books item type.
If the flyers have the characteristics of a catalog, then that's where they'd
go. Otherwise books.
|
|
| Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Mar 17, 2020 04:43 | | Subject: | Where can I submit product flyers | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| TLG is distributing general product flyers in sets within the same theme. For
example DOTS and Ninjago Arcade Pods. The flyers are all the same, so not specific
to a particular set.
Can I add those to the catalog? And where: book / gear / catalog / somewhere
else?
|
|
|
| Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 23:48 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, edeevo writes:
| | […]
I'm guessing it also has to do with all the dependencies within the site
that would be affected if the numbers were simply changed... […]
|
Nah, items have a fixed, internal ID in the database, that ID doesn’t change.
The part ID is just another description, shorter and unique.
Think about when they add a digit to the numbered minifigs (bla001 becoming bla0001).
|
Right. These "x" numbers are changed all the time when the actual number becomes
known. I'm surprised it wasn't done here.
|
|
| Author: | Doodlebug | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 21:02 | | Subject: | p12cty01, 02, & 03 | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Is there any printing on the reverse side of this 2012 series of posters? Acquired
some, but they have B/W smaller versions on the reverse.
|
|
| Author: | edeevo | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 13:48 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, edeevo writes:
| | I'm confident we're in good hands with StormChaser at the helm…
|
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I am not at the helm of anything.
I am the merely the newest of three catalog associates and we all work together
as a team with the two inventory administrators.
My role on the team is to spend most of my time posting in the discussion forum
while others do the actual work. 
|
...an important calling nonetheless... 
Life is Good.
~Ed.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 12:50 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, edeevo writes:
| | I'm confident we're in good hands with StormChaser at the helm…
|
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I am not at the helm of anything.
I am the merely the newest of three catalog associates and we all work together
as a team with the two inventory administrators.
My role on the team is to spend most of my time posting in the discussion forum
while others do the actual work.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, edeevo writes:
| | […]
I'm guessing it also has to do with all the dependencies within the site
that would be affected if the numbers were simply changed... […]
|
Nah, items have a fixed, internal ID in the database, that ID doesn’t change.
The part ID is just another description, shorter and unique.
Think about when they add a digit to the numbered minifigs (bla001 becoming bla0001).
|
|
| Author: | edeevo | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 12:00 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
It has been renamed.
|
Is there a reason that the "x" number is still the primary number when the actual
part number is now known?
|
I'm guessing it also has to do with all the dependencies within the site
that would be affected if the numbers were simply changed... & it's probably
a bit of a chore to verify and test such dependencies *before* making the change
each time, though I'm confident we're in good hands with StormChaser
at the helm… 
Life is Good.
~Ed.
|
|
| Author: | TheBrickGuys | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 11:19 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, TheBrickGuys writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
It has been renamed.
|
6 minutes - You are FAST.
|
Or should I say, 6 MINUTES? What the L took so long??
Jim.
|
| Author: | TheBrickGuys | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 11:18 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
It has been renamed.
|
6 minutes - You are FAST.
|
|
| Author: | starbeanie | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 10:35 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I agree. Having the set number in neither the part number or description will
make it harder to find.
In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Here's my plan to handle the restructuring, which is a combination of ideas
from everyone:
For Existing Duplicate Catalog Entries:
1. Stickers that appear in multiple sets will have a new catalog entry
created. Then all existing duplicate entries will be merged into the new entry.
2. Item numbers for the new catalog entries will be formatted like this:
multistk001, multistk002, multistk003, etc.
3. Item titles for new entries will be formatted as follows. When the
sticker appears in three or fewer sets, then "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets
- 1001, 1002, 1003." When the sheet appears in more than three sets (there are
only 19 of these): "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets, Town, Fish and Coral."
|
Is there a reason why we can't have all the set numbers in the titles besides
the title length limitation? Since there are so few of these, I honestly don't
see why we would create two new naming conventions for these sheets that differ
from the convention used for all other sticker sheets. Also, since you are changing
the item numbers for these multi-set sticker sheets, it is probably more important
than ever to have the set numbers in the titles for search purposes. Using a
title like "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets, Town, Fish and Coral" does nothing
to help find this sticker sheet.
My suggestion is for one naming convention:
"Sticker Sheet for Set ..." for one-set sticker sheets and "Sticker Sheet for
Sets ..." for multi-set sticker sheets.
| | 4. N/A and International sticker sheet entries will be merged when there
are no apparent differences beyond the standard N/A / International differences.
5. Where significant differences exist between sticker sheets, such as
color differences in the stickers themselves, the duplicate entries will be retained.
For All Sticker Sheet Entries:
1. PCCs for all sticker sheets will be moved from the item title to the
PCC field. Item numbers will be retained in their current place in the titles.
2. Item titles for all sticker sheets will be changed from the format
"Sticker for Set" to "Sticker Sheet for Set."
If anyone has suggestions for this plan or sees where it may encounter problems,
please say something. Otherwise, we'll move into the action phase during
the upcoming week.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 00:33 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Here's my plan to handle the restructuring, which is a combination of ideas
from everyone:
For Existing Duplicate Catalog Entries:
1. Stickers that appear in multiple sets will have a new catalog entry
created. Then all existing duplicate entries will be merged into the new entry.
2. Item numbers for the new catalog entries will be formatted like this:
multistk001, multistk002, multistk003, etc.
3. Item titles for new entries will be formatted as follows. When the
sticker appears in three or fewer sets, then "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets
- 1001, 1002, 1003." When the sheet appears in more than three sets (there are
only 19 of these): "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets, Town, Fish and Coral."
|
Is there a reason why we can't have all the set numbers in the titles besides
the title length limitation? Since there are so few of these, I honestly don't
see why we would create two new naming conventions for these sheets that differ
from the convention used for all other sticker sheets. Also, since you are changing
the item numbers for these multi-set sticker sheets, it is probably more important
than ever to have the set numbers in the titles for search purposes. Using a
title like "Sticker Sheet for Multiple Sets, Town, Fish and Coral" does nothing
to help find this sticker sheet.
My suggestion is for one naming convention:
"Sticker Sheet for Set ..." for one-set sticker sheets and "Sticker Sheet for
Sets ..." for multi-set sticker sheets.
| | 4. N/A and International sticker sheet entries will be merged when there
are no apparent differences beyond the standard N/A / International differences.
5. Where significant differences exist between sticker sheets, such as
color differences in the stickers themselves, the duplicate entries will be retained.
For All Sticker Sheet Entries:
1. PCCs for all sticker sheets will be moved from the item title to the
PCC field. Item numbers will be retained in their current place in the titles.
2. Item titles for all sticker sheets will be changed from the format
"Sticker for Set" to "Sticker Sheet for Set."
If anyone has suggestions for this plan or sees where it may encounter problems,
please say something. Otherwise, we'll move into the action phase during
the upcoming week.
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Mar 16, 2020 00:23 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | For All Sticker Sheet Entries:
1. PCCs for all sticker sheets will be moved from the item title to the
PCC field. Item numbers will be retained in their current place in the titles.
2. Item titles for all sticker sheets will be changed from the format
"Sticker for Set" to "Sticker Sheet for Set."
|
We can get started on this now. I can add the word "Sheet" to titles administratively,
but there is no easy way to accomplish moving PCCs administratively. Assistance
with catalog change requests would be appreciated.
Please see the attached images. The first image shows how to move the PCC when
there is only one number in the title. If anyone disagrees with treating this
number as a PCC, then say something.
|
I do! (hand in air)
I am not sure what this number is on these sheets. It could be an Element ID,
but maybe it isn't. I would rather us just move numbers to PCCs that we know
for sure are Element IDs. These would be the sticker sheets with a clear "Design
ID/Element ID" format on the sheets.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 23:17 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
| | Is there a reason that the "x" number is still the primary number when the actual
part number is now known?
|
Yes, there is a reason.
The reason is that BrickLink is leery of changing item numbers. There are hundreds
of item numbers that need to be changed and someday I may make a list of them.
|
|
| Author: | LordSkylark | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 23:09 | | Subject: | Re: Question about part x168 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, jonwil writes:
| | is labeled as "underwater" when it has never
appeared in any underwater type sets?
Should it be renamed?
|
It has been renamed.
|
Is there a reason that the "x" number is still the primary number when the actual
part number is now known?
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 22:56 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | please ask for clarification
|
Forgot to clarify: we're only changing parts that appear in a single set.
If the sticker sheet appears in more than one set, then ignore it for now.
|
|
| Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Mar 15, 2020 22:40 | | Subject: | Re: March Project - Sticker Sheet Restructuring | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | For All Sticker Sheet Entries:
1. PCCs for all sticker sheets will be moved from the item title to the
PCC field. Item numbers will be retained in their current place in the titles.
2. Item titles for all sticker sheets will be changed from the format
"Sticker for Set" to "Sticker Sheet for Set."
|
We can get started on this now. I can add the word "Sheet" to titles administratively,
but there is no easy way to accomplish moving PCCs administratively. Assistance
with catalog change requests would be appreciated.
Please see the attached images. The first image shows how to move the PCC when
there is only one number in the title. If anyone disagrees with treating this
number as a PCC, then say something. The second image shows how to move the
PCC when there are two numbers in the title separated by a slash. The lengthier
number should be the PCC (ask if unsure in a specific instance).
For sticker sheets from roughly 1997-2014 PCCs were already moved, but they were
(most unfortunately) left in the titles. They still need to be removed from
titles. If the PCC has already been moved, you'll get the message shown
in the third image. In those cases, just remove the PCC from the title.
If you're not sure how this should be done properly, please ask for clarification
before proceeding to assist with these changes. The parts shown in the images
are linked for reference:
|
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
USA, Ohio
Netherlands, Overijssel
)
)
)