Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | infinibrix  | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 16:51 | | Subject: | Re: Separate Leg Hip wear from Torso Bodywear? | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | Can I make a suggestion that we create a new category for parts that are specifically
designed to go over the leg pins/hips and call it ‘Hip Wear’ or ‘Leg Wear’? as
there are plenty of them and probably many more that I have missed?
In my opinion ‘Body Wear’ should be left exclusively for all those parts that
are designed to go over the Torso/Neck piece only?
|
I have also asked for this in discussions with the other admins. I believe it
will happen. 
|
Okay cool what about also splitting beards/moustaches from the rest of the bodywear
in the same way hair was removed from headgear as it always feels a bit weird
when your looking for wearable items like armour and capes only to find beards
popping up amongst them?
|
 |
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2021 06:06 | | Subject: | Separate Leg Hip wear from Torso Bodywear? | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Can I make a suggestion that we create a new category for parts that are specifically
designed to go over the leg pins/hips and call it ‘Hip Wear’ or ‘Leg Wear’? as
there are plenty of them and probably many more that I have missed?
In my opinion ‘Body Wear’ should be left exclusively for all those parts that
are designed to go over the Torso/Neck piece only?
* | | 24087pb03 Minifigure Skirt Plastic, Ruffled (Ballerina Tutu) with White and Dark Pink Panels, Silver Stars, and Bright Light Orange Border Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Body Wear |
[p=bb0869pb01]
[p=bb0886]
[p=bb0796pb01]
[p=28211pb01]
[p=bb0870]
[p=bb0869]
[p=bb0836pb01]
[p=18832c02]
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 17:42 | | Subject: | Re: Quote cancellation advises buyer | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, BrickBros20 writes:
| | In Suggestions, Emporiosa writes:
| | Suggestion in regards to automatic quote cancellations:
I've never received a quote cancellation myself, but assuming it doesn't
already say so, it would be beneficial that when a quote cancellation is automatically
sent by the BrickLink system due to an item being sold out, that an automated
message to the buyer is sent out and indicating which item caused the quote cancellation
trigger.
I just received yet another message from a newer buyer asking why their quote
was cancelled and they wanted to accept it. To the buyer, it looks like sellers
are cancelling their quotes, when it's simply that a part that they ordered
is no longer available.
|
This would be a great addition! We receive the occasional message asking why
their quote was canceled. It would be a small yet efficient change to how the
quote process works.
~Brick Brothers
|
In my opinion it would be better to have parts held during the quote phase so
that the buyer can secure the parts while they wait to be quoted
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 10:27 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
What about these, they can be very well used in a build:
What I would suggest is just adding the word Skirt to all the 3678b* that are
for minifigs. So that they will appear in searches alongside 36036*
|
Yes and I think someone else once said they could use these robes for some curtains
when I mentioned the same thing before...
* | | 3678bpb027 Slope 65 2 x 2 x 2 with Bottom Tube with Minifigure Dress / Skirt / Robe, White Panel with Black and Gold Trim Pattern
Parts: Slope, Decorated |
but we’re really scratching around the barrel for ideas here on the basis of
a one in a million chance that someone might actually stumble across these parts
and decide to use them for their build either way there is nothing to stop people
having a glance under the minifig robes to see what they can find but overall
they don’t cater very well for builders and likewise slopes with space symbols,
computer panels and numbers don’t cater for the needs of those searching for
minifigure parts hence I feel it would be beneficial to separate them
Likewise we have Minifigure heads which have unrelated heads mixed in with them
from goldfish bowls to death star plans:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=minifigure%20head%20without%20face#T=P
These should be given their own category ‘Decorated heads’ also we separated
Plain Legs and Torsos from Decorated Legs and Torsos which I think was a good
move and so I think we should also consider separating plain heads from decorated
heads and separating both these again from minifigure heads
As the catalog expands I think it benefits to cater better for the two main types
of shopper ‘builders’ and ‘minifig enthusiasts’ whereas piling everything into
the same catalog entries just because they are the same design of part doesn’t
actually allow for efficient shopping for either?
|
Without the tag system suggested we can't improve things like this with the
catalog system Bricklink currently has.
If we were to move things to Category X or Y depending on how it is decorated
it will very well end in a mess of a catalog...
|
Hmmm but for now can I suggest that we add the wording 'slope for Minifigure'
in all the descriptions that way a search for 'minifigure slope' will
bring them all up in one place
If you only rely on words like 'dress, robes, skirt' people will always
end up using different interpretations with each catelog upload meaning a search
for one word may be more/less effective than another whereas if its known that
the word minifigure is always included it's easier to remember making a more
reliable way to search
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 3, 2021 06:45 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
What about these, they can be very well used in a build:
What I would suggest is just adding the word Skirt to all the 3678b* that are
for minifigs. So that they will appear in searches alongside 36036*
|
Yes and I think someone else once said they could use these robes for some curtains
when I mentioned the same thing before...
* | | 3678bpb027 Slope 65 2 x 2 x 2 with Bottom Tube with Minifigure Dress / Skirt / Robe, White Panel with Black and Gold Trim Pattern
Parts: Slope, Decorated |
but we’re really scratching around the barrel for ideas here on the basis of
a one in a million chance that someone might actually stumble across these parts
and decide to use them for their build either way there is nothing to stop people
having a glance under the minifig robes to see what they can find but overall
they don’t cater very well for builders and likewise slopes with space symbols,
computer panels and numbers don’t cater for the needs of those searching for
minifigure parts hence I feel it would be beneficial to separate them
Likewise we have Minifigure heads which have unrelated heads mixed in with them
from goldfish bowls to death star plans:-
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=minifigure%20head%20without%20face#T=P
These should be given their own category ‘Decorated heads’ also we separated
Plain Legs and Torsos from Decorated Legs and Torsos which I think was a good
move and so I think we should also consider separating plain heads from decorated
heads and separating both these again from minifigure heads
As the catalog expands I think it benefits to cater better for the two main types
of shopper ‘builders’ and ‘minifig enthusiasts’ whereas piling everything into
the same catalog entries just because they are the same design of part doesn’t
actually allow for efficient shopping for either?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 10:21 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
as I understand previous admins reason here was that they wanted to have similar
items together in one category. As they are similar a to this one so that is
why they are in the same category.
|
Okay but if there is only to be two categories like we have now i.e Hair and
headgear all those parts you mention are already categoried correctly under 'headgear'
and all other hat/hair combos should also be categoried in the same way leaving
only standalone hair for the hair category. There may be a few exceptions such
as this one with hair band which should remain under hair category especially
as its just a print rather than an actual change to an existing hair mold design
I think its fair to say anything found in the hair category should contain standalone
hair which will mean it contains items that can be widely used on almost any
minifigure whereas with regards to most of these hair/hat combos they are very
specific to either a theme, character or trade which in the example you give
are only really suitable for construction type minifigs therefore keep all the
combos, oddities and unique parts together under 'headgear' and leave
the hair category to only contain simple plain hair whether that be anything
from a side partin to a mohawk
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 08:02 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| We have this style of legs/robes under ‘Minifigure, Legs, Modified, Decorated’
which is all good for finding these McGonagall Robes
[P=36036pb23]
But not this style?
I understand it’s probably due to wanting to keep all the decorated sloped bricks
in one place but when the slopes are specifically designed for use with minifigures
this should take precedence as to where they are located because this is where
people will expect to find them i.e under minifigure entries. Likewise those
searching for decorated slopes for a build I’m sure will have very little use
for these kinds of decorated slope designs making them a search hindrance for
the category if anything?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2021 06:39 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, firestar246 writes:
| | Also, can the headgear and hair issue be fixed this time around? Those pieces
that are a headgear with hair should all be stuck in either one category or the
other.
|
Can you be more specific with examples here, please?
|
Well for example, most are under "hair, combo" in the hair category, like:
are all in hair.
But a few oddballs are in the headgear category, like:
are in helmet.
It's a bit confusing.
|
Yes I agree and personally I think all those combos you have mentioned should
come under headgear including these two as well along with I'm sure many
more...
* | | 11420pb01 Minifigure, Hair Shaggy and Short with Braided Beard with Olive Green Laced Shirt, Light Nougat Bald Spot and Chin Pattern
Parts: Minifigure, Hair |
The ruling should be that hair can only appear in the hair category if it ONLY
contains hair! I appreciate having bombur within headgear may not sit very well
for everyone but when I think of headgear to me its more than just hats and helmets.
Its 'gear' that is intended to go over a head piece and in the case of
the bombur that consists of both hair and body areas. Maybe in the long term
you could use headgear for all the hair/hat/body combos only and then create
a new category called 'headwear' for all your standalone hats and helmets
etc..?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Feb 1, 2021 07:06 | | Subject: | Re: Category Changes, Part Two | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | Okay, we're ready to hear what you want moved.
|
Currently in ‘Body Wear’ but should be in ‘Minifigure Utensil’ with other similar
items such as Surfboards/Skateboards/Ski’s
Also not sure this one belongs under ‘Body Wear’ either?
Or this under ‘Body Part’ instead of handheld weapons/accessories but I’ll leave
others to decide?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2021 19:27 | | Subject: | Re: Have all printed Legs been deleted? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | In Catalog, LordSkylark writes:
Well, I hope that they don't delete the non-printed versions, because when
I get large lots of used pieces, I end up with lots of misc. legs.
But I definitely would rather have all printed legs added to the catelog.
|
As far as the printed legs and hips go I have a feeling its probably just a case
of them being a bit overkill and somewhat of a burden on the catalog to keep
updated and maintained especially when you consider how few people probably search
for them. The thing is those that do search for them are unlikely to find what
they need anyway which makes the whole process of searching for these sub parts
unreliable and not very worthwhile
I guess its a bit different for the plain colours as they have far more uses
and are easier to manage and maintain in the catalog
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2021 06:24 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | In Catalog, randyf writes:
If it would have been a new head, then that would be the easiest route. However,
since this is just the 'c'-style mold of the 'b'-style head,
you just reuse the same number as the 'b'-style head and change the 'b'
to a 'c'. In this case, you would have numbered the head 3626cpb0491.
|
Thanks Randy but just to clarify the first letter after 3626 is reference to
the mold 'c' for hollow stud or 'b' for blocked open stud right?
What about the following letters and the number at the end only I'm not familar
when you say 'Style' of head?
Also are those that contribute to the catalog expected to get this reference
correct or will it just be corrected by someone before it goes live on the
site. To be honest I always assumed that guys like you, Stormchaser, Hygrotus
etc... actually added most things and also cleared off everyone elses submissions
too but if you yourself are also having to submit catalog entries who's actually
clearing all this stuff off? Is it just Russell and a few back team staff that
we don't hear of? Maybe that includes Stormchaser too now?
| | This is part of the inefficiency of the system. You first have to create the
part using one form, then upload the image using another form. The admin team
has asked for these functions to be combined into one step, but it may take years
for that to happen.
|
Okay cool its not just me then  
Lastly should'nt the fields on some part types be auto filled for instance
it asks for dimensions on a head along with the weight though they should be
the same for all but I guess this is probably something else that needs time
to be incorporated
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 17:30 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| | | In Colors, Admin_Russell writes:
To get PCC's (Element IDs) to show on an inventory page, change your catalog
settings. BrickLink can display / store up to 10 PCCs per line.
|
Thank you for the response but I already have that option ticked and I already
see those element I.D's you've circled which I use and reference for
the unique parts but for non printed parts that come in a variation of colours
I inventory and store those parts by design I.D. however on that same minifig
breakdown page for the Epaulette you have design I.D 2526 visible but not for
the Bandana which still has x70 instead of Design I.D 2543 which I would have
thought would be more useful displayed in the prominent spot here and within
the order picking page?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 06:32 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| | | In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
And it’s clear I’m saying “official colour description” is not far from “official
part description” so why stop at the colours? Part names are as visible as the
colours on S@H or Brickset.
First, Design IDs are visible, and searchable if they are not used as the primary
BL ID. Element IDs are searcheable.
Then, “colours, Design IDs, Element IDs, but not part names,” why?
|
SylvainLS you may be very knowledgeable on the subject of Lego and you may be
a forum moderator because of that good knowledge (among other things) but you
don’t sell Lego, you don’t have to sort, organise and inventory that Lego for
selling purposes, you don’t have to locate parts and pick orders, you don’t have
to use Bricklink as a reference source to buy parts for stock, You don’t have
to worry about customers being able to correctly identify and locate what your
trying to sell in your store, you don’t have to accommodate returns or refunds
when a customer expects one thing but receives something else and you don’t have
to worry about receiving negative feedback because of these kinds of misunderstandings
and catalog mis-matches?
Therefore as a seller that does have to worry about these things I can just tell
you that whilst the official Part descriptions you mention are not necessary
on Bricklink a clear understanding between a newbie customer and a seller about
the exact colour they think they’re ordering is in my opinion essential likewise
clearly displayed element I.D’s and Design I.D’s I think are also essential and
yes fortunately it seems that much of the good work on this front is already
being added by the catmins for which I am grateful however it would be helpful
if all these references were displayed in the primary spot for instance in this
minifig part breakdown:-
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?M=sw0246
The Black Epaulette looks good with Design I.D 2526 clearly displayed but the
Bandana and Legs should also be displayed with the correct Design I.D and yes
you can click into each of the parts to find these other references but additional
clicks are not ideal for buyers and sellers who I expect more commonly use Lego
I.D’s
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2021 05:38 | | Subject: | Re: Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | However whilst only in the early stages of sorting I've already noticed this
part only available to list in 'Blocked Open Stud' yet I also have some
of these in 'Hollow Stud' too?
Its a 10 year old part and so is there any reason both options are not in the
catalog and can I expect more of the same or have I just been unlucky?
|
Both options are not in the catalog because no one has ever added the other version
to the catalog. And, yes, you may find more from between the years 2010-2013.
| | If stud type is so important to people how is it that its gone unnoticed for
so long?
|
Not everyone who uses the site contributes to it. In fact, only a very small
percentage of users are actually contributors. You will be doing the whole BrickLink
community a service by adding this part to the catalog.
Cheers,
Randy
|
Contributing seems like a worthwhile cause but when that means I'd be contributing
towards something I'm against i.e splitting the heads so that one stud type
does'nt properly link to the minifig inventory I'm not so sure about
that but neadless to say I have submitted the hollow stud version anyway and
made my first contribution!
but just a couple of questions:-
I took part ref 3626 from inside the head and I assume catmins will add on the
extension of the part ref?
I may have submitted it twice as I expected to be prompted to upload the image
which it did'nt do? Either way speaking of which when I took the photo I
noticed that all my Draco heads appear to have Dark eyebrows on one side and
light on reverse not just on this Hollow stud version but on all my Blocked Open
Stud ones too yet this does'nt appear to be the same for the current photo
in the catalog 3626bpb0491?
Speaking of which since the stud is'nt visible would it not have been possible
to re-use the exisitng catalog image for both Hollow stud and Blocked version
or does it still need a different image? Is my image even suitable when the eyebrows
are different?
|
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 19:16 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
Beware with “official description.”
Do you also want “Pavilion” to be added to
because “Pavilion 6X3X5” is TLG’s name for the part?
It’d make sense.
Then what about “Animal Ass. For No.14” and “Animal Ass. For No.14 No.2” to
They are official names, surely they should be searchable?
“Animal No.8 Body” is also so explicit, I’ll let you find what it is….
Nah, my favorites are “Mini Wig, No.153”, “Mini Figure Wig No. 93” (note the
consistency), and all the dozens of them.
And I didn’t even cite mispelled names or Danish names. “Figur Hjelm No 2” what’s
that? Actually not a helmet.
TLG’s names (parts or colours) are so awful, it’s been said even TLG don’t use
them: they use the numbers.
That being said, colour names could be in the colour guide: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=635575
|
Unless Lego colour refernces are clearly visible when searching for parts a colour
reference guide alone is not enough. The site needs to be clear and translateable
to all users NEW and old alike not just translatebale for all those old timers
to this site who have it all memorized!
Also its clear I'm refering to Official Colour descriptions I've never
suggested implementing all those Mini wig No.... descriptions and what not, besides
we have Lego Design I.D's and Element I.D's which again is something
else that should also be visible alongside the parts
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 18:56 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, Tracyd writes:
| | In Colors, infinibrix writes:
| | In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
Where else in the world is there a Brick Yellow color? It is Tan. TLG should
have called it Tan, but for whatever reason called it Brick Yellow. That doesn't
change the fact that to most people looking for it will call it Tan.
|
But thats not the argument because Whether we like it or not the correct official
colour is whatever The Lego Group called that colour! You seem very sure that
its 'Tan' however others might suggest its beige or cream but in the
end it does'nt really matter what does matter is that the all important colour
reference from the Lego site is directly transferable to Bricklink even if that
means both colours are displayed alongside those relevant parts but not just
for Brick Yellow but Earth Blue, Dark Stone Grey and every other official colour
reference
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 13:39 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
And what happens when these don't match? Some parts have different official
LEGO colours yet have the same BL colour, and vice versa.
|
It does'nt stop bricklink from correcting all those colours that can be corrected
which is the vast majority! Why for instance is Brick Yellow not even mentioned
anywhere alongside all those parts that are Tan? Brick Yellow is an official
description and so its imperative that those official descriptions are highlighted
and searchable within the BL catalog, surely?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 12:19 | | Subject: | Re: Please change "Coral" to "Vibrant Coral" | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Colors | |
|
| In Colors, THEMIDDLEBRICK writes:
| | Sorry to resurrect this dead thread, but as a buyer I find this to be more than
an annoyance. For instance I am in the middle of buying many different color
tiles for a large mosaic. If I am purchasing some from pick-a-brick (thank you
VIP points) and some via rebrickable, it gets very complicated to track and account
for the different color names, almost impossible for some colors. There isn't
currently a good list that cross references the different names and color id
numbers (not one that is kept up to date at least).
Ideally each piece should be identified in the bricklink catalog with all 3 pieces
of info (official color ID#, BL color name and LG color name). That way if a
seller is entering inventory, they could use any one of those identifiers, and
if a buyer is looking for parts they can find the exact color they are looking
for. The BL color name could still remain the default.
|
I could'nt agree with you more!
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1245263
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 19, 2021 07:59 | | Subject: | Catalog missing Head Stud Type (Draco)? | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Whilst it will already be known to many that I'm not a fan of the fact that
the catalog insists that sellers separate their head stud types and with their
being no change in sight I am now begrudgingly starting to sort through my heads
so that I don't run into problems with customers because regardless of what
I state in my store terms about "Not separating stud types" this won't count
for much in the eyes of Bricklink(Admin has already told me as much!) if/when
a customer chooses to complain and leave negative feedback for receiving the
wrong stud!
However whilst only in the early stages of sorting I've already noticed this
part only available to list in 'Blocked Open Stud' yet I also have some
of these in 'Hollow Stud' too?
Its a 10 year old part and so is there any reason both options are not in the
catalog and can I expect more of the same or have I just been unlucky?
If stud type is so important to people how is it that its gone unnoticed for
so long?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 13, 2021 09:29 | | Subject: | Re: Color verification part 40378 | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, eBricksOnline writes:
According to the Lego site as far as silver colours go it only shows up as:-
Description Silver Met.
Category Bricks, Special
Element 6097639
Design Number 40378
and Silver Metalic tranlates to Flat Silver on Bricklink but as already mentioned
not all parts/colours belong to a set or are catalogued on the Lego site indefinitely
The situation is then made worse by Bricklink not using Offical Lego colour names/references
which means people can translate them to the Bricklink site and colour palette
incorrectly and so although the part also shows up on BL in Pearl Light Gray
it may be that it only exists in Flat Silver or as Lego call it Silver Metalic.
This is another important reason why using Legos offical colour names should
take precedence over using colour names just because we like the sound of them
better?
|
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1098690
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1031456
|
In the first link you essentially have 3 different colours and they are described
correctly by TLG?
The fact that some of these are slightly different shades I’m sure you are also
aware is common with many other colours too such as Pearl Gold and Yellow though
we don’t separate those or give them their own name either?
If people feel the need to separate those shades even though their tone can vary
to the point that its non conclusive then the comments can always be used saying
Darker/lighter than usual or if it’s a really old colour from a time before Lego
named their colours then I see no issue with Bricklink keeping its own colour
names for those but to purposely use different colour names for the bulk of colours
when TLG have already provided a name for them will always create ambiguity between
different users interpretation of how that matches to bricklinks description
of colours which is detrimental to the accuracy of the catalog? The name of a
colour is like a part number if it does'nt match exactly then you are always
going to run into problems with people guessing or making their own judgments
about what best fits the colour name given by BL?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 13, 2021 06:58 | | Subject: | Re: Color verification part 40378 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, eBricksOnline writes:
According to the Lego site as far as silver colours go it only shows up as:-
Description Silver Met.
Category Bricks, Special
Element 6097639
Design Number 40378
and Silver Metalic tranlates to Flat Silver on Bricklink but as already mentioned
not all parts/colours belong to a set or are catalogued on the Lego site indefinitely
The situation is then made worse by Bricklink not using Offical Lego colour names/references
which means people can translate them to the Bricklink site and colour palette
incorrectly and so although the part also shows up on BL in Pearl Light Gray
it may be that it only exists in Flat Silver or as Lego call it Silver Metalic.
This is another important reason why using Legos offical colour names should
take precedence over using colour names just because we like the sound of them
better?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 11, 2021 08:17 | | Subject: | Re: Please Change Name of Part (973pb4140c01) | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | BTW, why did you change "Sensei Wu" to "Wu Sensei"?
|
Because some Wus were sorted together by name and others were scattered all over
by name. Now all the Wus are together. If you'd like the title to say "Wu,
Sensei Wu" that's no problem. It still searches just fine no matter the
word order.
But the character's name should be the first word in the title and this fella's
name is Wu. Sensei is an honorific term. That's just a rule I made up,
by the way. Because we have no guidelines.
|
The only danger with using certain definitive rulings like this is that it can
make it very determental to the way the character titles are displayed and read
plus you also have to consider how far it could end up going?
Vader Darth
Maul Darth
Sideous Darth
I beleive Darth is also a form of title?
Then you have:-
Flitwick Professor
Mcgonagall Professor
Lupin Professor
Cody Commander
Ackbar Admiral
Leia Princess
I could go on.....
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: How does a person inventory a minifigure? | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | My thoughts exactly and so is there a long term solution for this in the pipeline
or will the catalog have to remain hindered for the sake of keeping stud types
separated?
|
We've asked for a long-term solution for all part variants. Roughly, it
would involve a single catalog entry that buyers or sellers could customize with
specific variants. This will allow people who don't care about variants
to never worry about them. It will also allow much more specificity and sorting
of variants for collectors. So a major win for everyone.
The only problem is how such a system would integrate with inventories, but I'm
sure that can be solved.
As for whether we'll get what we asked for or not . . . well, we do have
XP. And Studio. And a program for building mosaics. And the ADP. And IC.
And the CEP. So . . . priorities, I guess.
|
As a short term solution is it not possible to merge minifig head types and insist
that people leave the stud type in the comments. I understand it will affect
people from being able to narrow down their wanted list searches but having to
purchases heads manually is a small price to pay if it means having a more complete
and accurate minifig inventory?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 13:06 | | Subject: | Re: How does one inventory a minifig? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| |
And then the site itself has failed here by not designing a way that collectors
can separate these minor differences while the majority of users can ignore them
if they choose.
|
My thoughts exactly and so is there a long term solution for this in the pipeline
or will the catalog have to remain hindered for the sake of keeping stud types
separated?
|
|
| Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Jan 9, 2021 09:06 | | Subject: | Re: How does one inventory a minifig? | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:
| | P.S.
Please also check with your set what type of stud head has.
You submitted it as hollow stud (c type)
[p=3626c]
LEGO rectently changed mold for transparent heads to vented stud
[p=28621]
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?q=28621*
so what type of stud head from this set has?
|
I don't want to sound like I'm being critical over the good work you
guys do but when stud types take such precedence and are so detrimental to the
navigation and linking of correct heads to minifigures it adds very little useful
funtionality in my opinion. I'm sure most just want to know what heads are
intended for what minifigure(s) and if we can cater for those that want to know
stud types then great but when its done at the expense of cataloging certain
heads that supposedly don't belong or link to any minifigure at all or
that are split between different minifigs depending on the stud type you have
to ask why a random stud type that was never inteneded to have any importance
by TLG is so important to the catalog? Please can someone also clarify my question
about selling minifigs here:-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1244104
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
United Kingdom, England
