Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | yorbrick  | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2021 14:29 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I guess the reasoning is that a lightsaber is only a weapon when it is lit?
No. A lightsaber is always a weapon. A handgun is always a weapon, even when
it isn’t loaded.
|
In that case, Prime Empire Red Visors have lightsaber-bayonets:
As do A.I.M. soldiers (Which makes sense, considering 1.) they are A.I.M., and
2.) they need to compete with S.H.I.E.L.D.'s shotgun-axe technology):
LEGO City Police use lightsabers disguised as flashlights (which explains their
lack of guns (except for that one time)):
This is canon: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T5jK4XnaAQQ
Rey actually had her lightsaber built into her staff all along:
Firefighters have an entire rack of lightsabers (for job-security purposes?):
The Ninja use them all the time - As torches:
Built into spears:
Cole has two built into the cockpit of his mech:
Lloyd has one hidden in the bumper of his car (And Nya has another in her trident!):
In seriousness, though, the reasoning is that a lightsaber is only a lightsaber
when it is being used as a lightsaber. Part (64567) has been used in many
other (often non-weapon and non-lightsaber) assemblies as a bar/connector, so
categorising it as a "Minifigure, Weapon" both only acknowledges one possible
use for the part, as well as making the part more difficult to find (since most
would search for it as a bar - particularly considering the fact that Part (92690)
is considered a "Bar", despite its numerous uses in weapon-assemblies). Conversely,
guns are almost never used as anything but guns (Set (76157) is the only
example that I can think of wherein guns are used in a non-weapon assembly),
so leaving them in "Minifigure, Weapon" makes sense.
* |  | 92690 Bar 1L with Top Stud and 2 Side Studs (Connector Perpendicular)
Parts: Bar |
Additionally, Part (66909) is very debatably a weapon, since (at least until
Maul inevitably uses it for his lightsaber) its only use as a weapon has been
as the ends of a staff - It is more often used for flagpoles/railings/other non-weapon
features within the same theme. As such, it should be classified a "Bar", similarly
to Part (92690).
* | | 92690 Bar 1L with Top Stud and 2 Side Studs (Connector Perpendicular)
Parts: Bar |
Moreover, the "a part that can be a weapon always is a weapon"
reasoning could be extended to Part (60849), since it has more often been used
to represent a gun than it has a "Hose Nozzle":
That said, I do not think that Part (60849) should be in the "Minifigure, Weapon"
category, since it has also been used in countless other non-weapon assemblies
(I actually think that it should also be moved to the "Bar" category, as well).
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Parts (64567), (66909), (61199), and (x156) from "Minifigure, Weapon" to "Bar".
|
I understand where your coming from and maybe it might work for just the standard hilts but those curved ones are very much for weapon use and since they ideally need to be in the same location I'm torn between puting them under weapons or bars though bars seems like the wrong description?
|
The curved hilts are not weapons themselves, but attachment-points used
to build weapons. Moreover, for the sake of consistency and ease-of-searching,
they should be classified as bars, since that is what they resemble most.
| | At the same time I do actually think these should also be located in the same location as the hilts:-
|
Good point - Part (64644) should be moved from "Minifigure, Utensil" to "Bar".
| | So perhaps it just requires a new category 'Bar Holders' or 'Bar Connectors' or if the hilts go under bars I think some re-wording of the category would be required such as 'Bars & Bar Holders'
|
I am not sure that an entirely new category is needed, since pieces like Part
(64567) are simultaneously Bars and Bar-Holders, though I would support renaming
the "Bar" category to something like "Bar & Connector".
Agreed - Part (18673) and Part (36017) should be moved from "Minifigure, Weapon"
to "Bar".
|
|
|
This reads like an argument that
should definitely not be in food, as it has other uses such as dog poop. It only becomes food when put on an ice cream or cake or similar. Otherwise it is just a 1x1 round plate or tile that has been modified with multiple uses. Same with
|
The difference is that while there is an obvious alternative category for Part
(64567), et al, there is not one for Parts (53119) and (15470). As they
are neither Plates (as they do not have a stud on the top) nor Tiles (as they
do not have flat tops), they do not belong in either category. The "Food & Drink"
category is where Part (6254) is (despite its having been used for non-food items
such as smoke), which is similar to the parts in-question in that it has no obvious
alternative category.
Now that I think of it, these pieces would actually fit into the new "Cone &
Dome" category, since they are such, respectively (albeit with a swirl/grooved
pattern). This would still leave Part (6254) in "Food & Drink", though. 😕
|
Those parts are just as much a (modified) round plate as a dragon's head
hilt is a bar.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 28, 2021 13:57 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | I guess the reasoning is that a lightsaber is only a weapon when it is lit?
No. A lightsaber is always a weapon. A handgun is always a weapon, even when
it isn’t loaded.
|
In that case, Prime Empire Red Visors have lightsaber-bayonets:
As do A.I.M. soldiers (Which makes sense, considering 1.) they are A.I.M., and
2.) they need to compete with S.H.I.E.L.D.'s shotgun-axe technology):
LEGO City Police use lightsabers disguised as flashlights (which explains their
lack of guns (except for that one time)):
This is canon: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T5jK4XnaAQQ
Rey actually had her lightsaber built into her staff all along:
Firefighters have an entire rack of lightsabers (for job-security purposes?):
The Ninja use them all the time - As torches:
Built into spears:
Cole has two built into the cockpit of his mech:
Lloyd has one hidden in the bumper of his car (And Nya has another in her trident!):
In seriousness, though, the reasoning is that a lightsaber is only a lightsaber
when it is being used as a lightsaber. Part (64567) has been used in many
other (often non-weapon and non-lightsaber) assemblies as a bar/connector, so
categorising it as a "Minifigure, Weapon" both only acknowledges one possible
use for the part, as well as making the part more difficult to find (since most
would search for it as a bar - particularly considering the fact that Part (92690)
is considered a "Bar", despite its numerous uses in weapon-assemblies). Conversely,
guns are almost never used as anything but guns (Set (76157) is the only
example that I can think of wherein guns are used in a non-weapon assembly),
so leaving them in "Minifigure, Weapon" makes sense.
* | | 92690 Bar 1L with Top Stud and 2 Side Studs (Connector Perpendicular)
Parts: Bar |
Additionally, Part (66909) is very debatably a weapon, since (at least until
Maul inevitably uses it for his lightsaber) its only use as a weapon has been
as the ends of a staff - It is more often used for flagpoles/railings/other non-weapon
features within the same theme. As such, it should be classified a "Bar", similarly
to Part (92690).
* | | 92690 Bar 1L with Top Stud and 2 Side Studs (Connector Perpendicular)
Parts: Bar |
Moreover, the "a part that can be a weapon always is a weapon"
reasoning could be extended to Part (60849), since it has more often been used
to represent a gun than it has a "Hose Nozzle":
That said, I do not think that Part (60849) should be in the "Minifigure, Weapon"
category, since it has also been used in countless other non-weapon assemblies
(I actually think that it should also be moved to the "Bar" category, as well).
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Parts (64567), (66909), (61199), and (x156) from "Minifigure, Weapon" to "Bar".
|
I understand where your coming from and maybe it might work for just the standard hilts but those curved ones are very much for weapon use and since they ideally need to be in the same location I'm torn between puting them under weapons or bars though bars seems like the wrong description?
|
The curved hilts are not weapons themselves, but attachment-points used
to build weapons. Moreover, for the sake of consistency and ease-of-searching,
they should be classified as bars, since that is what they resemble most.
| | At the same time I do actually think these should also be located in the same location as the hilts:-
|
Good point - Part (64644) should be moved from "Minifigure, Utensil" to "Bar".
| | So perhaps it just requires a new category 'Bar Holders' or 'Bar Connectors' or if the hilts go under bars I think some re-wording of the category would be required such as 'Bars & Bar Holders'
|
I am not sure that an entirely new category is needed, since pieces like Part
(64567) are simultaneously Bars and Bar-Holders, though I would support renaming
the "Bar" category to something like "Bar & Connector".
Agreed - Part (18673) and Part (36017) should be moved from "Minifigure, Weapon"
to "Bar".
|
|
|
This reads like an argument that
should definitely not be in food, as it has other uses such as dog poop. It only
becomes food when put on an ice cream or cake or similar. Otherwise it is just
a 1x1 round plate or tile that has been modified with multiple uses. Same with
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 27, 2021 16:52 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | |
The curved hilts are not weapons themselves, but attachment-points used
to build weapons. Moreover, for the sake of consistency and ease-of-searching,
they should be classified as bars, since that is what they resemble most.
|
So where will axe heads and some sword blades go, as they are also not weapons
by themselves, just used to build weapons.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 27, 2021 14:20 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Parts (15470) and (53119) from "Plate, Round" to "Food and Drink".
|
Bon appetit 
|
There are not really any other categories where these parts would fit,
though. 😕
|
They fit perfectly well in plate, round. If these are moving, presumably the
flowers will also move to plants, and other similar shaped parts will also get
moved out. This may well make things harder to find, as you'd have to look
through multiple categories to find things if you don't know what they are.
Whereas keeping parts based on round plates in the plates, round category means
if you know the shape then you can easily browse all parts with that shape.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 25, 2021 10:12 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | What does base and thickness mean here?
|
You bring up good points. There hasn't been a clear line drawn in the past
between what is a Brick, Modified vs. Plate, Modified. That line could be drawn
as follows:
1. Everything not as tall as a full brick is a modified plate.
2. Everything taller than one plate is a modified brick.
3. Everything between brick and plate goes in a separate in-between category.
The in-between items aren't actually bricks or plates. I went with
number 2 when writing category definitions rather than trying to create entirely
new categories for these items, but the same basic arguments could be made for
going with number 1 instead.
I'll attempt to modify the definitions (including possibly going with number
1 instead) to make a little more sense out of the whole thing.
|
This was a part I couldn't recall/find earlier.
If this wasn't technic but a regular plate with regular bricks on the sides,
when considering the base of the part, is it a plate with bricks added on,
or a 1 1/3 high brick with a large hole cut out of it. I guess it is one of those
"depends" answers, like is an in-between jumper style part a plate with studs
removed or a tile with studs added.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 25, 2021 05:06 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| What does base and thickness mean here?
1. No parts with a base thicker than a standard plate.
Isn't part of that base thicker than a standard plate, as part of it (directly
above the base) is two tiles high. Or is it a plate high base with something
extra on top?
This is a bit further, are these are a plate thickness base, with another plate
on top:
And then if it covers the whole base, so this:
Is that still a plate high base with something on top, or is the whole thing
a two plates high base? And then presumably a short brick rather than a tall
plate.
I'm wondering what would happen in the hypothetical situation that LEGO created
a whole series of parts that were, for example, a 2x8 plate with a 1x1 plate
on top, the next with 2 1x1 plates on top (whether side by side or separate),
then 3 ..., then 15, then 16.
Are they all modified plates, or are 1-15 modified plates and once the sixteenth
one goes on top and covers the whole base it becomes a 2x8x2/3 brick.
Or to put it in another way, what is the base of these parts?
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 24, 2021 12:58 | | Subject: | Re: Wheel? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | Was searching my train department upside down for this part...
[P=c]
But I see it is in "Wheel"... is this a mistake? Since, well, it clearly is not
a wheel 
|
* | | 38339c01 (Inv) Train Wheel RC, Holder with Pin Slots with 2 Black Train Wheel RC Train with Pins (38339 / 38340)
Parts: Wheel |
The same is true for another train wheel holder and assembly:
* | | 2878c01 (Inv) Train Wheel RC, Holder with Black Train Wheel Pair on Chrome Silver Metal Axle with Slots (2878 / 2879c01)
Parts: Wheel |
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 22, 2021 15:51 | | Subject: | Re: white horse bridle dark orange or brown?? | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, BellaFux writes:
| | Hi there,
I am currently separating different horse types from each other - there are a
few hundred of them here with me.
I found my way through all the colours and types until the simple white horse
-
here on BL it has 4493c01pb04 - white horse with Black Eyes, White Pupils
and DARK ORANGE bridle Pattern .
On brick owl the same Item number says "white horse blabla eyes and BROWN
bridle. (the picture looks very much like dark orange)
I have a lot of them, and some sure look brown, some sure dark orange (I dont
think it is just faded)
but there seems to be no distinction in the item number...
if I want to sell them - do I put both under the same item number???
thanks a lot for your help!!
|
It is printed, so it is neither of them. Some examples are close to one of the
colours, other examples closer to the other. And many somewhere in between. If
you have any that are far from the named colour, I'd mention it so a buyer
knows what they are getting. Otherwise, ignore it, as there are often variations
in print density and hence colour.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 22, 2021 08:30 | | Subject: | Re: Mushrooms In Super Mario | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Iliketurtles1 writes:
| | Why are the mushrooms not considered figures? They are considered figures in
the character packs.
|
Because it was decided that they are not figures ...
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1218528
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 22, 2021 08:15 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | | As long as BL is registered as a marketplace, then they have to collect the VAT,
invoice the customer and be responsible for the goods, as Arnoud said. Sellers
are only fulfillment partners, like on Amazon.
If they do not meet ALL of the requirements for an OMP, they should not have
registered as such. They can still change their registration to an ordinary vendor
and actually inform sellers what they are doing while waiting. This dense wall
of non-communication about what they are doing is what is causing the confusion,
not HMRC or tax experts or whatever.
|
This has already been posted by BL staff in response to a US / non-UK seller
about VAT:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1245416
BrickLink is now a registered marketplace in the UK, meaning the burden of
the
VAT is on BrickLink, and not you as a seller. You can send whatever size of
order you like to the UK on BrickLink. Don't feel you need to limit orders
to 135 GBP and above.
From the wording, I would take it as the burden of the VAT calculation and collection
is on BL, not on individual sellers. Quite why this statement was made at that
time, I do not know, as it is clear that BL are not calculating or collecting
VAT for imports into the UK.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 22, 2021 04:17 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
[snip]
| | Everything is just so backwards, I am not a tax expert by a long shot but let's
just look at this from a logic perspective:
If it was legally valid to write "Bricklink order" on your invoice, then the
EU and the UK would have had an emergency meeting by now because they realised
that almost all of the international trade is being labelled "Bricklink order"
It can't work like that. So yeah, EITHER Bricklink is the seller and WE sell
to Bricklink - thus a US export, export to US rules apply - OR we sell to the
customer in their country AND that country's rules apply.
From the persective of the seller, these are simply the only two ways. As a seller
you need to have invoices that mention the country, and then apply the rules
for THAT country. There is only "United States" or "United Kingdom". There's
simply no such thing as "United Kingdom-but-it's-a-Bricklink-order-and-Bricklink-said-it's-fine"
Or am I too pessimstic about the amount of patience tax agencies have when doing
audits and people come up with stories about platform selling (without hard evidence)?
|
Read the link below, this is not something new. The UK already started in 2016
with quote: "special provisions for online marketplaces".
http://kluwertaxblog.com/2020/02/26/online-marketplaces-and-eu-vat-global-reach-but-compliance-still-local/
These changes to come have been known for 4 years up until Jan 1, 2021.
The OMP is liable. Not just for VAT, but also for the transaction to the buyer.
A BrickLink Order has become a transaction between 3 parties: the buyer, the
(overseas) seller, and BrickLink is now involed too.
All this because governments/countries want to VAT low valued transactions because
of the high volume and thus high 'income' there is to gain by taxing.
|
So, what does the seller's invoice look like?
|
The seller is not invoicing anymore. BrickLink is. The seller is merely a third-party
provider allowing BrickLink to sell their items. The customer buys from BrickLink.
E.g. like bol.com
|
If that becomes the case, and it has already been said by admin it won't
be (at least for the UK) then a lot of stores will disappear. They have said
repeatedly that they have no plans on charging vat on orders in the UK, other
than import/export situation.
Mind you all of this is total speculation and that was mentioned by Russell in
this thread. They are lagging behind on getting this done, which is also increasingly
worrying. When it comes to making progrtammin chnages haste makes waste and they
are very much aware of that.
|
Yes, although some indication of when they will be doing something about it would
be useful. Are they waiting for the EU changes to come in before bothering with
the UK? Are they going to get the UK version up and running to test it works
before the EU changes come in? Are they going to do nothing about it and hope
everyone just gives up and the problem goes away? Nobody really knows anything.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2021 10:57 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 75 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, mvfisker writes:
| | Just wondering.
Chose "European Union" as seller - and Great Britain sellers still came up. Shouldn't
that be changed now after Brexit?
Cheers, Morten
|
Bricklink time is currently somewhere in about 2004.
|
I think they already had websites with timezones in 2004..
|
TLG had big plans with BrickLink but is choking now..
|
BrickLink is busy with USA sales taxes, we really should not expect multitasking
in their attempts to break things. They did say they will address the Brexit
issues before 5 February (they did not say which aeon though).
|
No, we should expect. After all we pay fees for this site. It was long time known
Brexit was coming, they should have been ready for it.
|
As almost everyone on this forum knows I am not Bricklink's biggest fan as
far as developmenet work goes however I think in this case it is fair to say
that the UK hasn't yet got it right and neither does the rest of the EU -
Just look at the below from a site we use regularly. (Don't forget we still
have VAT to look forward to 
|
Yes, true. UK hasn't got it on the track. EU does however. On the short term
EU draws the longest straw, more and more companies are moving away from UK in
favor of EU or elsewhere. That is a loss for the UK regrettably, but needles
to say UK wanted the Brexit no the EU. On the long run it is inconclusive if
this development is a good thing. Cooperation is imo the better road how complicated
it might be.
So maybe it is the best of worst to exclude UK for now. Until they got their
things together. But I give you this, it is very complicated.
|
Things are together, at least at other websites. I've ordered non-lego parts
from aliexpress since the change from different sellers. VAT was charged and
all were clear on the declaration that VAT was paid. Similarly I've ordered
lego parts from Germany, via another online marketplace website, VAT paid there
too.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2021 06:29 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Stacey_Love writes:
| | In Suggestions, Stellar writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, mvfisker writes:
| | Just wondering.
Chose "European Union" as seller - and Great Britain sellers still came up. Shouldn't
that be changed now after Brexit?
Cheers, Morten
|
Bricklink time is currently somewhere in about 2004.
|
I think they already had websites with timezones in 2004..
|
TLG had big plans with BrickLink but is choking now..
|
BrickLink is busy with USA sales taxes, we really should not expect multitasking
in their attempts to break things. They did say they will address the Brexit
issues before 5 February (they did not say which aeon though).
|
No, we should expect. After all we pay fees for this site. It was long time known
Brexit was coming, they should have been ready for it.
|
As almost everyone on this forum knows I am not Bricklink's biggest fan as
far as developmenet work goes however I think in this case it is fair to say
that the UK hasn't yet got it right and neither does the rest of the EU -
Just look at the below from a site we use regularly. (Don't forget we still
have VAT to look forward to
|
I recently promised more details on our Brexit solution, but I will just be frank
with you, that what you have described is exactly the case. We are waiting to
hear from our tax professionals as to how we need to proceed, and they are waiting
to hear from the authorities. It feels as if we are actually further from a solution
at this point than we were at the beginning of the year.
|
We have already pointed you links from the UK Gov website (authorities) explaining
things.
BL is still charging EU VAT in sales to UK, and that is without doubt illegal...
At least we sellers can disable it. But for sales under 135GBP B2C it is illegal
not to charge UK 20% VAT and remit it to UK HMRC.
Those are factually correct...
If the problem is if you are legally not sure if BL is an OMP or not, this maybe
needs a decision of just accepting it is a OMP even thought legally could be
defended is not (hypothetically).
Then decide to gather the UK VAT the same as US TAX, that would make BL a stronger
platform, because the other option means BL sellers will have to register by
themselves and most would not do it. This will mostly close the international
UK buying options.
And this would happen again and again as each country creates new laws to collect
VAT on buyers behalf. US and Norway since last year, UK since two months ago,
EU in four months from now...
Here is what other website puts on the invoices to UK if this helps:
20% UK Import VAT has been paid on this order via the online marketplace XXXXXXXXX
Ltd with VAT ID GBXXXXXXXXX. For more information see https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vat-and-overseas-goods-sold-to-customers-in-the-uk-using-online-marketplaces
You already have the development to take a % fee from a PayPal or Stripe payment,
this would work the same for now, even simpler because it would be a fixed VAT
rate depending of the buyer country.
But best would be if offsite payments would be accepted too, and in those cases
the % VAT owed to BL from the seller paid by IBAN transfer that has no fees for
most, we understand this can come at a later date.
Russell, sincerely, what I mean is just one question...
What are your tax professionals expecting to hear from the authorities that it
is not already explained in the UK GOV website?
Thanks
|
I particularly like the uk.gov website regarding distance selling, this is there
advice."
The Brexit transition period has ended and new rules on distance selling now
apply. This page is currently out of date.
https://www.gov.uk/online-and-distance-selling-for-businesses
|
That is because many other sites link to the gov.uk pages. So rather than just
have dead links, they tell you it is now out of date, so you know to look up
the correct information on the site.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 21, 2021 06:26 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Stacey_Love writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, calsbricks writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, bje writes:
| | In Suggestions, patpendlego writes:
| | In Suggestions, Teup writes:
| | In Suggestions, yorbrick writes:
| | In Suggestions, mvfisker writes:
| | Just wondering.
Chose "European Union" as seller - and Great Britain sellers still came up. Shouldn't
that be changed now after Brexit?
Cheers, Morten
|
Bricklink time is currently somewhere in about 2004.
|
I think they already had websites with timezones in 2004..
|
TLG had big plans with BrickLink but is choking now..
|
BrickLink is busy with USA sales taxes, we really should not expect multitasking
in their attempts to break things. They did say they will address the Brexit
issues before 5 February (they did not say which aeon though).
|
No, we should expect. After all we pay fees for this site. It was long time known
Brexit was coming, they should have been ready for it.
|
As almost everyone on this forum knows I am not Bricklink's biggest fan as
far as developmenet work goes however I think in this case it is fair to say
that the UK hasn't yet got it right and neither does the rest of the EU -
Just look at the below from a site we use regularly. (Don't forget we still
have VAT to look forward to
|
I recently promised more details on our Brexit solution, but I will just be frank
with you, that what you have described is exactly the case. We are waiting to
hear from our tax professionals as to how we need to proceed, and they are waiting
to hear from the authorities. It feels as if we are actually further from a solution
at this point than we were at the beginning of the year.
|
And what are we supposed to do in the meantime ?. ......... Is the only option
to register for england vat, or exclude selling to england ?.
And can you fix the selling zones as england is defiantly not in the EU. Thanks.
|
There is no such thing as England VAT. Similarly you cannot exclude just England.
There is UK VAT, and you can exclude UK.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2021 16:27 | | Subject: | Re: Brexit | | Viewed: | 106 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, mvfisker writes:
| | Just wondering.
Chose "European Union" as seller - and Great Britain sellers still came up. Shouldn't
that be changed now after Brexit?
Cheers, Morten
|
Bricklink time is currently somewhere in about 2004.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 19, 2021 03:19 | | Subject: | Re: Country flags by usernames, feedback support | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickEmAll writes:
| | Hi,
I was wondering if it’s possible to let people see which country they’re from
(little flags). For instance: at the feedback page of a store. So new buyers
can see directly (flag) the feedback posts of fellow countrymen. It would be
more convincing for them to buy from other countries. And with this COVID it
will help to convince them that shipping is ok from other countries.
|
There are already national flags on feedback pages.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 18, 2021 15:38 | | Subject: | Re: White or LBG....can you see it? | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, dcarmine writes:
| | This has been bugging me for a while. Many years ago the color of the rendering
images was changed. Ever since, I have had trouble telling the difference between
some color images. I know others complained about it also. Because of this,
I make mistakes when pulling the right color parts.
I have no trouble telling the difference between any colors of real bricks or
any of the photo images. It is only the part renderings. Maybe if enough people
can't tell either, we can get it changed to something that is easier to see.
So, who can tell the difference between these two images? One is white and one
is LBG. They are screen shots of rendered parts without any editing. What say
you?
Donna
|
I sort by colour when picking so it isn't an issue.
I looked up both parts in white and neither matches the shades you have shown
here, so I don't know if something strange is going on.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 18, 2021 02:21 | | Subject: | Re: Adjusting Colour Names such as Bluish Grey? | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, brickglen writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Suggestions, infinibrix writes:
| | I hope others will share the same logic in what I’m trying to suggest or perhaps
I’m barking up the wrong tree? Thoughts?
|
We have considered harmonization of colors in the past, and we continue to do
so. But one thing I will mention is that the word "OLD" is likely not a term
we will include in Item Names or Color Names.
On BrickLink, the color and item name are often concatenated, meaning they are
stuck together for use as a single term. The official color numbers of Modulex
were removed from the color name for this very reason, to keep people from getting
confused.
And speaking of numbers, I'm thinking the first step in harmonization would
be to replace the BrickLink color numbers with official LEGO numbers. What do
people think of THAT idea. When we speak to internal folks, they tend to use
the numbers instead of the names, so there is value in those numbers.
|
I think using the color numbers is a good idea, it would remove any ambiguity.
There could be an account option for each user to select which group of color
names is used to appear beside the number. So if someone wants to work with the
official lego names they could choose that option. Or the peeron names, bricklink
names - could even have options for other languages. It wouldn't be a large
table table to maintain.
|
Colour names are used in different ways. They are used as base part colours but
also used in descriptions as text. So any scheme would need to cover both uses.
Reusing names is a very bad idea especially if bricklink only announced it in
the forum, or only announced it once. People come and go over long timescales
and there would need to be constant reminders about changes such as reusing colour
names for different colours. We cannot have long time but infrequent users coming
back one day, buying a load of light gray parts and getting what they think is
LBG.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 17, 2021 17:31 | | Subject: | Re: Adjusting Colour Names such as Bluish Grey? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, jennnifer writes:
| | In Suggestions, Admin_Russell writes:
| | | |
Ha, ha! You got me. And, I spell the Gray my own way too. Nothing but trouble
here.
Jen
|
How about we rename Light Bluish Gray to Light Grey, and retain the "A" for the
older color:
Light Gray (1970s through 2003)
Light Grey (2004 though the present)
|
That would be hilarious! And terrible.
We could call retired colors 'colours' too. It would be a theme.
|
For consistency, retired colours would need to be 'colors' if American
spellings are used for the retired greys.
| | The only Greys on BrickLink are Gandalf and Phoenix.
|
Don't forget Fenrir Greyback.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 17, 2021 11:12 | | Subject: | Re: Wanted Lists: Sublists | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, TheOneDavid writes:
| | My number of Wanted Lists has expanded into chaos. I'm working on a big project
and I would really appreciate sublists (or superlists) in the Wanted List section.
What I mean is basically the possibility to have a new list inside of a Wanted
List. For example a regular Wanted List containing a load of items AND another
list called "extra parts". Or a Wanted List called "castle" containing my castle
related lists. I hope you get the idea. Please make this happen!!
|
Can't you just use multiple lists to do almost the same thing, with systematic
naming.
So for example call them
Castle Main Keep
Castle Main Keep extra parts
Castle Hideout cave
Castle Forest shelter
Castle Minifigs
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2021 00:19 | | Subject: | Re: Some sad news | | Viewed: | 96 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Good luck to him. Hopefully it is happy news that some new opportunity has come
for him, or just spending more time on another or different aspect of the hobby.
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 16, 2021 00:05 | | Subject: | Re: Elastigirl | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, runner.caller writes:
| |
Any reason this minifig is only named "Elastigirl" when she's wearing the
Mrs. Incredible outfit?
|
In the official description of the set, she is only referred to as Elastigirl.
I guess it is a bit like the various Iron Man suits, where they take the name
lego gives and not extra terms.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 15, 2021 23:55 | | Subject: | Re: Distinctive? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Dixi78 writes:
| | Hi,
I'm adding some counterparts (stickered parts) for the set 60183.
One of the items is a slope with Red and White Danger Stripes Thick Pattern.
See attached picture.
I found a similar item from another set in the catalog:
It's almost the same, the difference is the white dot in de lower left corner.
Should I add 'my' part as a new part or can I consider these items the
same?
And if it's distinctive, what name should I give it?
I'd like to hear your opinion!
|
It looks like the same part to me, just not quite perfect alignment of the sticker
print when cut.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 14, 2021 14:40 | | Subject: | Re: transparent colors chemically react - now wha | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Teup writes:
| | In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Colors, Teup writes:
| | In Colors, tec writes:
What's wrong with #7? (or #8, or #9?)
|
Nothing. The post is an accumulation of building techniques, some of them illegal,
some of them flimsy, some of them totally legal.
|
"The issue with this is that there will be great strain placed on the pieces
since they are not meant to be combined this way."
Apparently, you're not supposed to make a roof out of cheese slopes. Who
knew
|
Putting a 1x1 cheese slope on any stud is enough to crack it. Sometimes I think
looking at them is enough.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 14, 2021 14:18 | | Subject: | Re: Minifigures | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Tiggy2 writes:
| | Hi
Just wondering why a Minifigure I listed was deleted.
This is what it is...Dragon Knights - Knight 1, Light Gray Legs with Black Hips,
Black Chin-Guard, Quiver
This is my Comments: Excellent Condition, no splits or dents. Missing Quiver/Arrows.
Is it because I don’t have the Quiver? Can I list Minifigures if missing parts?
Thank you
|
The message would have said it is because it is incomplete.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 14, 2021 03:10 | | Subject: | Re: Part 42022 in Dark Purple | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, SDF_Bricks writes:
| | I have several parts 42022 in my collection (16 I think) in Dark Purple. I for
sure got them in a new set as I do not buy used stuff from eBay or else. The
puzzle (nagging question) is that such part does not show up at all in Dark Purple
in any Bricklink Set. In fact the color is totally non-existent.
Any clue what set such part comes from ?
|
Are you sure you have both the part number and colour identified correctly? If
so, have you bought individual parts, as it may be a non production part.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 15:32 | | Subject: | Re: Incomplete Minifigs | | Viewed: | 79 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, peregrinator writes:
| | In Suggestions, TorontoLego writes:
| | B) Make a rule that ALL minifigs MUST be complete as inventoried. Otherwise
they should be listed as their component parts.
|
This is the rule - all listed minifigs must be complete
|
It wasn't a decade ago though, when the post was made.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 13, 2021 15:28 | | Subject: | Re: New Lego Drowned Minifigure | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, calebfishn writes:
| | In Catalog, The_RealRedHex writes:
| | Reaching out to those that have the new drowned Minifigure from Lego Minecraft.
Please contact me, I would like to discuss weights, pictures, dimensions, etc.
Regards,
Theo - The_RealRedHex
|
I have a couple. But I have no idea how to weigh or measure the dimnensions of
these things. So probably not much help.
|
I imagine the dimensions and weight are going to be very similar to the other
Minecraft zombies, given the parts are the same aside from the print.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 15:45 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
You asked for me to be constructive rather than destructive criticism, so I have
started adding missing figures to the catalogue using these published Figure
guidelines: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Figure classification can sometimes be difficult. Therefore, this section
further clarifies how BrickLink decides if an item is a figure or not.
Figures: Characters, fantasy creatures, humans, mechanical objects, and statues.
Additional clarifications listed below.
Characters - These typically have a face and a name, but always display sentient
behavior beyond that of a similar animal or object.
Nick Bluetooth and so on all come under character, don't they? Even Shimmel.
|
There is also this rule from the Adding Catalog Items Help Page:
Large part assemblies. - Large assemblies of parts that can be built into
figures, vehicles, or other structures often comprise a substantial portion of
a set and should not be added to the catalog. An exception has been made in the
past for some DUPLO vehicles representing fictional characters and some other
large assemblies with the Item Number prefix "spa" which were added as experiment.
If the entire set (or half the set) is used to build a figure / character, we
would be going against precedent to add it to the catalog. Adding it as a minifigure
is even a further stretch.
|
So a set such as
which currently has one minifig should have four "figures" that would get put
into the category called minifigs, based on one figure that LEGO would normally
refer to as a minifigure and three other assemblies that BL refers to as figures,
even though LEGO would not call them minifigures due to the lack of minifigure
parts. Or do those also have too many parts to be considered as figures?
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 15:35 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, bje writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
You asked for me to be constructive rather than destructive criticism, so I have
started adding missing figures to the catalogue using these published Figure
guidelines: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Figure classification can sometimes be difficult. Therefore, this section
further clarifies how BrickLink decides if an item is a figure or not.
Figures: Characters, fantasy creatures, humans, mechanical objects, and statues.
Additional clarifications listed below.
Characters - These typically have a face and a name, but always display sentient
behavior beyond that of a similar animal or object.
Nick Bluetooth and so on all come under character, don't they? Even Shimmel.
|
There is also this rule from the Adding Catalog Items Help Page:
Large part assemblies. - Large assemblies of parts that can be built into
figures, vehicles, or other structures often comprise a substantial portion of
a set and should not be added to the catalog. An exception has been made in the
past for some DUPLO vehicles representing fictional characters and some other
large assemblies with the Item Number prefix "spa" which were added as experiment.
If the entire set (or half the set) is used to build a figure / character, we
would be going against precedent to add it to the catalog. Adding it as a minifigure
is even a further stretch.
|
And exactly here is the problem when you and your catalogue team do not speak
with one voice or even have a comparative understanding of what is happening.
The page you refer to:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=71
was updated on 18 November 2020 by you, but you apparently did not check that
that the catalogue item minifig does not exist any longer. The information relating
to large part assemblies of figures and the thing previously known as a minifig
have been replaced by the new definition of a "figure"
The new definition of figures are on this page:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
which has been in existence and confirmed as being active since 1 June 2020 and
which are the definitions used to add the figure items to the catalogue.
On that definition, there is no such thing as a minifig. There are only figures.
A figure can be any size part assembly, says so right there. There is no specific
limitation as to number of parts. There is no specific limitation as to what
percentage of the set must be made up to the figure. For an item to be a catalogue
item as a figure, the only standard that has to be met is that it must be an
autonomous entity. You and your catalogue team should perhaps get together and
actually fix the cross references and actually speak with one voice as to what
exactly is meant when catalogue items are discussed.
It has been pointed out ad nauseum that we still do not have a definition for
a complete minifigure (whatever that is, see above) either - so perhaps it would
be best to complete the definitions such that users are not confused.
And if these figures (note: figures) are in fact figures by definition, there
should be absolutely no reason not to add them as catalogue items.
|
This is exactly it. There are humans and humanoids that are not figures, whereas
trains with faces are figures. Lego Bricklink uses the terms minifigs and figures
apparently equivalently but not minifigures which is a term used by LEGO (and
BL staff).
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 15:26 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
You asked for me to be constructive rather than destructive criticism, so I have
started adding missing figures to the catalogue using these published Figure
guidelines: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Figure classification can sometimes be difficult. Therefore, this section
further clarifies how BrickLink decides if an item is a figure or not.
Figures: Characters, fantasy creatures, humans, mechanical objects, and statues.
Additional clarifications listed below.
Characters - These typically have a face and a name, but always display sentient
behavior beyond that of a similar animal or object.
Nick Bluetooth and so on all come under character, don't they? Even Shimmel.
|
There is also this rule from the Adding Catalog Items Help Page:
Large part assemblies. - Large assemblies of parts that can be built into
figures, vehicles, or other structures often comprise a substantial portion of
a set and should not be added to the catalog. An exception has been made in the
past for some DUPLO vehicles representing fictional characters and some other
large assemblies with the Item Number prefix "spa" which were added as experiment.
If the entire set (or half the set) is used to build a figure / character, we
would be going against precedent to add it to the catalog. Adding it as a minifigure
is even a further stretch.
|
So what is special about a Duplo assembly compared to any other assembly? Of
course there are also system based sets where cars are defined here as minifigs
or figures (but not minifigures). I really cannot understand why Duplo train
consisting of four parts is any different to a miniature figurine consisting
of approx 10 parts, yet one is a minifig.
There are even some sets with 3 or 4 parts only to build a miniature figure,
such as
But they are not minifigs, whereas a car or a train is?
As I said, I just don't understand the reasoning, when defining a large train
as a minifigure is not a precedent or a stretch.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:37 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
I think it would be best to wait until you've had some time to calm down
so that we can have a more rational discussion on this topic.
|
You asked for me to be constructive rather than destructive criticism, so I have
started adding missing figures to the catalogue using these published Figure
guidelines: https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=170
Figure classification can sometimes be difficult. Therefore, this section
further clarifies how BrickLink decides if an item is a figure or not.
Figures: Characters, fantasy creatures, humans, mechanical objects, and statues.
Additional clarifications listed below.
Characters - These typically have a face and a name, but always display sentient
behavior beyond that of a similar animal or object.
Nick Bluetooth and so on all come under character, don't they? Even Shimmel.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:22 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| | | I have requested the figure to be added.
|
Do you prefer to wait until the minifig is approved before filing the removals?
|
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:19 | | Subject: | Re: Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests | |
|
| In Inventories Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Inventories Requests, yorbrick writes:
| | Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part gal22 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg Nick, Bottom Section with Black Shoe
* Delete 2 Part x283c01 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg with Patch Pocket, Pin Socket and Dark Gray Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal16 Medium Violet Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Top Section
* Delete 1 Part gal21 Medium Violet Galidor Torso Nick with Dark Gray Pants
* Delete 1 Part gal10 Nougat Galidor Head Nick, with 1 Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal17 Nougat Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Bottom Section
* Delete 2 Part x281c02 Violet Galidor Wing with Turbine Cannon and Dark Gray Pin
Comments from Submitter:
Converting to figure
|
You're acting from your emotions and feelings here, not your reason or logic.
You would first need to add the figure to the catalog before these requests
could be approved.
I encourage you to work with us on making the situation better rather than sniping
at us from the sidelines.
|
I have requested the figure to be added.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:16 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 4040-1 | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 1 Part mcnick3 Dark Gray Galidor, Promo Legs Nick (from McDonald's set)
* Delete 1 Part mcnick2 Medium Blue Galidor, Promo Torso and Arms Nick (from McDonald's set)
* Delete 1 Part mcnick1 Nougat Galidor, Promo Head Nick (from McDonald's set)
Comments from Submitter:
Figure
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 12:10 | | Subject: | Inventory Change Request for Set 8313-1 | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Inventories Requests (Entry) | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Please make changes to the following inventory:
* Delete 2 Part gal22 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg Nick, Bottom Section with Black Shoe
* Delete 2 Part x283c01 Dark Gray Galidor Limb Leg with Patch Pocket, Pin Socket and Dark Gray Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal16 Medium Violet Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Top Section
* Delete 1 Part gal21 Medium Violet Galidor Torso Nick with Dark Gray Pants
* Delete 1 Part gal10 Nougat Galidor Head Nick, with 1 Pin
* Delete 2 Part gal17 Nougat Galidor Limb Arm Nick, Bottom Section
* Delete 2 Part x281c02 Violet Galidor Wing with Turbine Cannon and Dark Gray Pin
Comments from Submitter:
Converting to figure
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:57 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | How is this type of minifigure to be handled?
|
You're welcome to offer solutions to the problems you point out.
|
My solution would be that it is not a figure, but the guidelines say it is for
anyone that wants to change it.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:48 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | The entire assembly of this set, and all other buildable figures should be moved
into minifigures. These are characters built out of parts like Thomas the Tank
Engine, Cars, etc. As those examples are now minifigures, then surely so are
these characters.
|
It is not possible to make everyone happy.
As I said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1246481
"Ideally, we would hold off on these changes until the inventory system was
corrected and we could move all figures to counterparts. But people have been
asking for these figures to be considered figures for years and years, so I don't
see that it would really hurt anything to do it now."
I get your objections and I agree with them, to some degree. The addition of
the additional Thomas the Tank figures was not part of msSquirrel's original
request.
|
How is this type of minifigure to be handled?
Presumably the minifigure inventory will contain the parts for the body/head/hair/legs/arms/hands
but exclude the axe, even though it is built into the minifigure's hand before
the figure is completed?
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 11:27 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | The entire assembly of this set, and all other buildable figures should be moved
into minifigures. These are characters built out of parts like Thomas the Tank
Engine, Cars, etc. As those examples are now minifigures, then surely so are
these characters.
|
It is not possible to make everyone happy.
As I said here:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1246481
"Ideally, we would hold off on these changes until the inventory system was
corrected and we could move all figures to counterparts. But people have been
asking for these figures to be considered figures for years and years, so I don't
see that it would really hurt anything to do it now."
I get your objections and I agree with them, to some degree. The addition of
the additional Thomas the Tank figures was not part of msSquirrel's original
request.
|
I just find it ridiculous that anyone, but especially a company owned by LEGO
themselves, would refer to a DUPLO train as a minifigure. LEGO used to appear
to be so protective and careful with their use of the word minifigure previously
to not apply to things like droids, Unikitty, skeletons, and so on but I guess
if they are supporting these changes then they must be OK with it.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 07:25 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Similarly, nearly all the brickheadz are brick built characters
so the relevant assemblies should be moved to minifigures.
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 07:22 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Move to minifigure:
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 05:57 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
The entire assembly of this set, and all other buildable figures should be moved
into minifigures. These are characters built out of parts like Thomas the Tank
Engine, Cars, etc. As those examples are now minifigures, then surely so are
these characters.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 12, 2021 05:51 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Now these are minifigures:
Shouldn't these parts and similar
[p=52053]
be moved into a new category: Parts Duplo Minifigure Modified head
Or get rid of the minifigures category completely by renaming it, then have a
minifigures category inside that so that the word minifigures corresponds to
what LEGO and most LEGO fans call minifigures, figures assembled from minifigure
parts.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2021 04:19 | | Subject: | Re: Are there differences in instructions CMF? | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| ere were a couple of the collectors series that had a small printed number
| |
Thanks a lot Jen!
I never noticed it!
|
I seem to remember as well that the number on the back did not match the number
of the figure. That is, that not all Kings had a number 1 leaflet and so on.
I guess it was something to do with the extra printed code on the back of the
leaflet rather than the figure it was included with.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2021 03:26 | | Subject: | Re: set 1944-1 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, samsam2 writes:
| | I'm wondering if these are the same set? The way they are listed seems strange
If one is a set containing a sub-set, shouldn't there
be just one set of instructions and one box?
|
I don't have it. But it seems the set was sold with a cardboard box, and
also with the plastic storage box (gear) hence the difference.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 5, 2021 09:15 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
And this outlines the second problem: Colour convention. This has to be made
consistent as well. I think I'd prefer the second one, as I'd say hair
colour is intuitively the more logical variable part than the headgear. Headgears
like cook's or police hats typically don't vary much in colour, so
the variation in the hair is more likely.
As for catagorisation, I'd prefer them in Minifig,Hair as it is less than
half the size of Headgear, but it's just my vote.
|
Me too. I'd prefer anything with hair goes into the hair category.
I would not want pieces like this where there is moulding to indicate an accessory/non-hair
to be moved out of hair:
* | | 29639pb01 Minifigure, Hair Female Long with Parted Bangs, Partly Braided in Back with Yellow Elf Ears and Silver Flower Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Hair |
* | | 28798pb01 Minifigure, Hair Female Pigtails High Bouncy, Hole on Top with Black Hair on Left Side and Black Tie on Right Side Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Hair |
And in some cases, the accessory is the same colour as the hair:
Especially if parts like this, where there is just print and no moulding, remained
in hair:
* | | 85974pb04 Minifigure, Hair Female Mid-Length with Part over Right Shoulder and Medium Lavender Starfish and Lime Seaweed Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Hair |
There are quite a few hairstyles where there is a plain coloured hairpiece, but
also with a version with coloured accessory such as:
They are surely still hair even though there is a non-hair accessory. It cannot
be down to how big the accessory is before something goes in hair or headgear,
as there will be contradictions.
And there are parts like this, that are not all hair but body part and not accessory:
Colour is problematic. Ideally it would be the colour of the hair as the part
colour, but there are pieces like the bald guy head above where the part is light
nougat and the hair painted on.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 13:12 | | Subject: | Re: Fake ninjago minifigs | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| The other good thing you have done is check them on receipt and not put them
away for a while.
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 11:53 | | Subject: | Re: Fake ninjago minifigs | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | Question: How do most people here know these are fakes? Unless you
look carefully for the LEGO logos, which you can't do from most auction pics,
how do you tell fakes from real?
|
Ask the direct question "Are these genuine LEGO?". If the seller/auctioneer says
yes, then they have to be genuine LEGO or you have a valid complaint. If they
say they are unsure or they have not checked every piece or do not reply, chances
are they are not genuine LEGO.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 11:39 | | Subject: | Re: Fake ninjago minifigs | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, G3NU5 writes:
| | I have unfortunately purchased an auction of many Ninjago minifigs which appear
to be very good fakes. Aside from missing LEGO logos, these are for the most
part look exactly the same.
I am not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I would like to post
pictures for awareness and education so others don't run into this issue.
If someone could suggest where a good place (this forum or otherwise) to put
up pictures of these fakes, I would appreciate it.
Here are some examples:
|
Most people here know there are fakes, and to avoid auctions where items are
not described as LEGO but have words like compatible in.
Were these described as LEGO? If so, complain.
|
|
| Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 05:54 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
An oar is something you use to propel a boat when rowing. It is attached to the
boat, though an oarlock or rowlock. Paddles are different, they are not attached
to the boat and are used to paddle rather than row a boat.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
