|
 |
| | | Author: | SezaR  | | Posted: | May 28, 2020 04:53 | | Subject: | Train wheels | | Viewed: | 153 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I recently submitted a part variant for
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
The other variation of this part has red central pin
instead of black. Currently, an extra photo for this item is included to show
this second variation and a note is also added.
My submission is rejected since CatAdmins are working on guidelines to figure
out when the split variations of a part, but I am informed that "the likelihood
of adding these as catalog entries in the future is rather low."
I thought a discussion on the forum about this part can be more helpful.
While I am in general against adding variation of parts as separate entries,
I do not know why this variation was not added in the past 15 years, and why
my two attempts in adding them in the past 3 years has been rejected. I started
to list reasons I know for why it is important to split this part and for doing
this, I checked the listing of
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
Catadmins have some criteria for when to split an entry and will even work on
it. For this particular part, I am wondering if they have checked how many sellers
have included in the description of their 4180c01 "red pin?"
We can assume some sellers who currently have these wheels for sale may not know
variations or the importance of variations for buyers, so why they did not mention
it in the description.
Since 4180c01 with red central pin was produced for one entire year (1986) and
the other variation for 10 years (1980-85 and 1987-90) we expect to see about
%9 of wheels 4180c01 that are ever produced to have red central pin. We can
also see that currently, 34 lots out of 163 lots for sale have "red" in the description.
This is about %20 of all listings. (the number of items in each lot is different,
and we do not know how fast wheels with red central pin are sold)
Does this show that almost all sellers know the importance of the color of pin
for buyers? Based on this observation, I would say definitely.
The note for the entry of 3443c07 is probably not correct:
This part also exists with red axle pins, but this is considered to be a production
error. Variants with red pins may be listed in the item description.
This wheel with red central pin was produced for one entire year, coming in seven
sets. This was most likely a decision of TLG rather than an error. Black pins
could not be out of stock for 12 months. The same for this part
* | | 3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch
* | | 3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
Were red switch out of stock for one year? I don't think so. For some strange
reason, TLG produced this battery wagon with black switch in 1987 but after,
they went back to red-switch version again.
If you have had trains from 80's, please add your comments if you think this
part should, or should not, be replaced by two more specific entries, red or
black central pin.
This discussion will hopefully help the decision CatAdmins will make in the near
future.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | primadeluxe | | Posted: | May 28, 2020 05:13 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| +1
In Catalog, SezaR writes:
| | I recently submitted a part variant for
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
The other variation of this part has red central pin
instead of black. Currently, an extra photo for this item is included to show
this second variation and a note is also added.
My submission is rejected since CatAdmins are working on guidelines to figure
out when the split variations of a part, but I am informed that "the likelihood
of adding these as catalog entries in the future is rather low."
I thought a discussion on the forum about this part can be more helpful.
While I am in general against adding variation of parts as separate entries,
I do not know why this variation was not added in the past 15 years, and why
my two attempts in adding them in the past 3 years has been rejected. I started
to list reasons I know for why it is important to split this part and for doing
this, I checked the listing of
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
Catadmins have some criteria for when to split an entry and will even work on
it. For this particular part, I am wondering if they have checked how many sellers
have included in the description of their 4180c01 "red pin?"
We can assume some sellers who currently have these wheels for sale may not know
variations or the importance of variations for buyers, so why they did not mention
it in the description.
Since 4180c01 with red central pin was produced for one entire year (1986) and
the other variation for 10 years (1980-85 and 1987-90) we expect to see about
%9 of wheels 4180c01 that are ever produced to have red central pin. We can
also see that currently, 34 lots out of 163 lots for sale have "red" in the description.
This is about %20 of all listings. (the number of items in each lot is different,
and we do not know how fast wheels with red central pin are sold)
Does this show that almost all sellers know the importance of the color of pin
for buyers? Based on this observation, I would say definitely.
The note for the entry of 3443c07 is probably not correct:
This part also exists with red axle pins, but this is considered to be a production
error. Variants with red pins may be listed in the item description.
This wheel with red central pin was produced for one entire year, coming in seven
sets. This was most likely a decision of TLG rather than an error. Black pins
could not be out of stock for 12 months. The same for this part
* | | 3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch
* | | 3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
Were red switch out of stock for one year? I don't think so. For some strange
reason, TLG produced this battery wagon with black switch in 1987 but after,
they went back to red-switch version again.
If you have had trains from 80's, please add your comments if you think this
part should, or should not, be replaced by two more specific entries, red or
black central pin.
This discussion will hopefully help the decision CatAdmins will make in the near
future.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | evvdu95 | | Posted: | May 28, 2020 05:17 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SezaR writes:
| | I recently submitted a part variant for
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
The other variation of this part has red central pin
instead of black. Currently, an extra photo for this item is included to show
this second variation and a note is also added.
My submission is rejected since CatAdmins are working on guidelines to figure
out when the split variations of a part, but I am informed that "the likelihood
of adding these as catalog entries in the future is rather low."
I thought a discussion on the forum about this part can be more helpful.
While I am in general against adding variation of parts as separate entries,
I do not know why this variation was not added in the past 15 years, and why
my two attempts in adding them in the past 3 years has been rejected. I started
to list reasons I know for why it is important to split this part and for doing
this, I checked the listing of
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
Catadmins have some criteria for when to split an entry and will even work on
it. For this particular part, I am wondering if they have checked how many sellers
have included in the description of their 4180c01 "red pin?"
We can assume some sellers who currently have these wheels for sale may not know
variations or the importance of variations for buyers, so why they did not mention
it in the description.
Since 4180c01 with red central pin was produced for one entire year (1986) and
the other variation for 10 years (1980-85 and 1987-90) we expect to see about
%9 of wheels 4180c01 that are ever produced to have red central pin. We can
also see that currently, 34 lots out of 163 lots for sale have "red" in the description.
This is about %20 of all listings. (the number of items in each lot is different,
and we do not know how fast wheels with red central pin are sold)
Does this show that almost all sellers know the importance of the color of pin
for buyers? Based on this observation, I would say definitely.
The note for the entry of 3443c07 is probably not correct:
This part also exists with red axle pins, but this is considered to be a production
error. Variants with red pins may be listed in the item description.
This wheel with red central pin was produced for one entire year, coming in seven
sets. This was most likely a decision of TLG rather than an error. Black pins
could not be out of stock for 12 months. The same for this part
* | | 3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch
* | | 3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
Were red switch out of stock for one year? I don't think so. For some strange
reason, TLG produced this battery wagon with black switch in 1987 but after,
they went back to red-switch version again.
If you have had trains from 80's, please add your comments if you think this
part should, or should not, be replaced by two more specific entries, red or
black central pin.
This discussion will hopefully help the decision CatAdmins will make in the near
future.
|
Dear Reza,
I totally agree with you and I would be annoyed to recieve wheels with red pins
when I order ones with black pins. These shows a very noticeable appearence difference
and would look wrong in many situations. So it is important to differenciate
these wheels in the database, especially if you have gathered all the data about
cataloguing the sets with these wheels.
This difference is much more noticeable and may create more problems than the
color of the switch of 7722 battery car, and shall have its own entry.
Evans
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | May 28, 2020 12:25 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| For what it's worth, I believe that this variant is easily worthy of its
own catalog entry. I honestly do not understand why it would be rejected twice.
Cheers,
Randy
In Catalog, SezaR writes:
| | I recently submitted a part variant for
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
The other variation of this part has red central pin
instead of black. Currently, an extra photo for this item is included to show
this second variation and a note is also added.
My submission is rejected since CatAdmins are working on guidelines to figure
out when the split variations of a part, but I am informed that "the likelihood
of adding these as catalog entries in the future is rather low."
I thought a discussion on the forum about this part can be more helpful.
While I am in general against adding variation of parts as separate entries,
I do not know why this variation was not added in the past 15 years, and why
my two attempts in adding them in the past 3 years has been rejected. I started
to list reasons I know for why it is important to split this part and for doing
this, I checked the listing of
* | | 4180c01 (Inv) Brick, Modified 2 x 4 with Black Wheels, Train Spoked Small (23mm D.) and Black Pins (4180 / wheel3 / 2344)
Parts: Wheel |
Catadmins have some criteria for when to split an entry and will even work on
it. For this particular part, I am wondering if they have checked how many sellers
have included in the description of their 4180c01 "red pin?"
We can assume some sellers who currently have these wheels for sale may not know
variations or the importance of variations for buyers, so why they did not mention
it in the description.
Since 4180c01 with red central pin was produced for one entire year (1986) and
the other variation for 10 years (1980-85 and 1987-90) we expect to see about
%9 of wheels 4180c01 that are ever produced to have red central pin. We can
also see that currently, 34 lots out of 163 lots for sale have "red" in the description.
This is about %20 of all listings. (the number of items in each lot is different,
and we do not know how fast wheels with red central pin are sold)
Does this show that almost all sellers know the importance of the color of pin
for buyers? Based on this observation, I would say definitely.
The note for the entry of 3443c07 is probably not correct:
This part also exists with red axle pins, but this is considered to be a production
error. Variants with red pins may be listed in the item description.
This wheel with red central pin was produced for one entire year, coming in seven
sets. This was most likely a decision of TLG rather than an error. Black pins
could not be out of stock for 12 months. The same for this part
* | | 3443c07 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Black Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
produced in one year (1987) but before (1985-86) and after (1988-1990) TLG produced
them with red switch
* | | 3443c08 Train Battery Box Car with Three Contact Holes, Red Switch Lever, Black Magnets, and Black Wheels
Parts: Train |
Were red switch out of stock for one year? I don't think so. For some strange
reason, TLG produced this battery wagon with black switch in 1987 but after,
they went back to red-switch version again.
If you have had trains from 80's, please add your comments if you think this
part should, or should not, be replaced by two more specific entries, red or
black central pin.
This discussion will hopefully help the decision CatAdmins will make in the near
future.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | lego.12vtrains | | Posted: | May 29, 2020 11:18 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Hi everybody,
I just would like to support Reza's point of view concerning that addition
to the Catalogue, I don't have anything to add about it, he and Evans already
explained well enough why it should be done.
I really can't understand why it was rejected, at most twice, so please could
any catalogue Admin take part in this discussion and explain us the reasons of
this decision?
Thanks,
lego.12vtrains
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | May 30, 2020 00:58 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, lego.12vtrains writes:
| | I really can't understand why it was rejected, at most twice, so please could
any catalogue Admin take part in this discussion and explain us the reasons of
this decision?
|
Here is the most relevant part of the PM I sent to Reza when I rejected his pending
submission:
Right now we're rarely splitting part variants. We want to get our guidelines
figured out for these before we put more work into them. We expect that to occur
by the end of 2020. We already had an additional note for this part and it was
already listed on our part variant page.
Speaking of the part variant page, please take a look at it now:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=940
Which ones of those 267 part variants should we split? This train wheel set
is just one of them. And what criteria should we use to decide? We have no
guidelines at all on this.
What about the 85 known print variants? And when are the 76 part variants that
we've already split going to be finished for inventories? Some of them were
split as far back as 2004 and 16 years later they're still not completed.
As I explained to Reza: if the CAs could have a little room right now to figure
out where the site is going with variants of all kinds, then it would be appreciated.
I also told Reza that the likelihood of adding these wheel variants as catalog
entries in the future is rather low, because I suspect they are. But in truth
I cannot know for certain what the exact chances of getting them in are.
I hope this fully explains the decision, but please ask if you have further questions.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | bje | | Posted: | May 30, 2020 03:26 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I am going to come in from another angle regarding variants. When you look at
messages like these: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1200217
you cannot help but think that the catalogue should be the first place where
buyers and sellers should get answers. Probably a user who is savvy enough to
request these specific wheel assemblies, will know about the difference in colour,
but this is not guaranteed.
You say there are no proper guidelines as to what must be done from the catalogue
point of view for variants at this time. I do not think that you would need those
guidelines. I do not think you actually need to write guidelines at all regarding
variants. You merely need to answer which of these failures would be better for
sellers, buyers and users of the BrickLink catalogue to live with:
The BrickLink catalogue recognises all parts produced by TLG and found in a set
(fail); or
The BrickLink catalogue recognises an item as a part if TLG made the part (fail);
or
The BrickLink catalogue recognised an item as a part only if TLG included it
in a set (fail); or
The BrickLink catalogue exists so that sellers can list all items found in sets
(fail); or
The BrickLink catalogue allows comparison of various parts found in sellers'
inventory through its price guide (fail).
There are two basic questions you should answer as a catalogue associate when
deciding on if a variant must be recognised and included in the catalogue:
1. A part can only be recognised when it factually appears in a set and can be
proven to appear in a set; or
2. A part can be recognised as a catalogue entry if TLG produced that part.
If you go with 1, you will always have the problems you have now. 2 Is, respectfully,
where you should be moving to and where the catalogue should end up if it wants
to be the premier catalogue of all things LEGO.
LEGO now owns the catalogue. Surely it must be very much easier now to get a
heads up of mold changes and variants than before? Surely if LEGO wants to help
the adult community thrive, then it can choose to be more involved in the catalogue
of all things LEGO?
Sellers sell lots, and while they may refer to the catalogue listing and indeed
feature on the price guide with an incorrect listing or deliberately obtuse
listing, no seller has ever sold a single catalogue item. The argument that it
would be disruptive to sellers to split variants is therefore a non starter.
The argument that you need catalogue guidelines as to how to cope with variants
is, likewise, a non starter if the catalogue goal is to be a catalogue of items
produced by TLG. If the argument is that the catalogue is only a collection of
items TLG produced and recognised by the catalogue associates, inventory admins
and the catalogue administrator as being in a set, then again you do not need
guidelines - any one of you can simply say that an item must not be recognised
and the goal is accomplished.
Of course it is disruptive to undo 20 years of work, however incorrectly that
work was done. Of course it is difficult to have a catalogue of all things LEGO,
but that is why you have contributors who spend vast amounts of money and time
to make catalogue contributions.
If you cannot split the variants out properly, you must get on to a system where
there is a single help page with comparative images of variants for each part
and with decent notes, and make sure every listing reference those pages. Over
time that will evolve into an accurate as possible catalogue of items TLG produced
with a proper timeline and then sellers can refer to the catalogue to list their
inventory.
What you will never succeed in is if variants are recognised on some questions
such as is this functional or is this an improvement. How would you know? Whatever
guidelines you might write will always be a subjective measurement of the objective
question: did TLG produce this part? If they did, it is a part that must be recognised
as a part, a seller should be able to list it accurately and a buyer should be
able to buy with confidence. This might be a lot of work, but think for a second
if any seller would like to be hit for $2500 damages claim by PayPal as of the
end of June for selling fakes on the back of an uniformed claim for some ignorant
buyer, such as my first example. How much time do you think stores should spend
on these sort of issues, when such could have been dealt with decent catalogue
entries?
If not for any other reason, the catalogue should move forward and decide what
it wants to be. If it fails as reference guide, if it fails as a priceguide,
if it fails as a catalogue of all things LEGO, then why bother? Just have seller
make his own catalogue. You do not need for parts to be in inventories to have
them recognised as variants. It is nice if the inventories are correct, but a
seller parting out a set for listing purposes, must still anyway check his inventory
or at least note that the BL inventory at such date as used to list these items.
Even if you make guidelines, how will that help sellers to list parts accurately?
How will that inform buyers? How will that make a catalogue when you have subjective
decisions? Even the decision not to split variants was arbitrary and subjective
as it was taken at a given point, but some variants were still were recognised
after that time and some still before that time.
As a seller I should think it normal that a vintage out of production scarce
part should be easy to list, find and should in fact be priced higher than it
newer counterpart every seller and his cat can offer for sale because they can
go get loads of them at any LEGO store. The opposite should frankly not be the
goal here and should not be allowable.
I personally think that a large part of the backlog of problems lie with the
fact that new PCC's are added without parts being in hand. In my rather limited
experience, PCC changes underpin a change in the part so that is already a starting
point. The guidelines should be for listings using the catalogue, not the catalogue
recognising what is a LEGO item and when it should be recognised as such.
Since this is a catalogue issue, you do not get to pay the 2c worth, it is free
In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, lego.12vtrains writes:
| | I really can't understand why it was rejected, at most twice, so please could
any catalogue Admin take part in this discussion and explain us the reasons of
this decision?
|
Here is the most relevant part of the PM I sent to Reza when I rejected his pending
submission:
Right now we're rarely splitting part variants. We want to get our guidelines
figured out for these before we put more work into them. We expect that to occur
by the end of 2020. We already had an additional note for this part and it was
already listed on our part variant page.
Speaking of the part variant page, please take a look at it now:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=940
Which ones of those 267 part variants should we split? This train wheel set
is just one of them. And what criteria should we use to decide? We have no
guidelines at all on this.
What about the 85 known print variants? And when are the 76 part variants that
we've already split going to be finished for inventories? Some of them were
split as far back as 2004 and 16 years later they're still not completed.
As I explained to Reza: if the CAs could have a little room right now to figure
out where the site is going with variants of all kinds, then it would be appreciated.
I also told Reza that the likelihood of adding these wheel variants as catalog
entries in the future is rather low, because I suspect they are. But in truth
I cannot know for certain what the exact chances of getting them in are.
I hope this fully explains the decision, but please ask if you have further questions.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SezaR | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 03:38 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | Here is the most relevant part of the PM I sent to Reza when I rejected his pending
submission:
As I explained to Reza: if the CAs could ...
I also told Reza that ...
|
There is more to discuss about this and I will add more into it, but here I am
not sure why you referred three times to what you wrote me in private messages.
Were I assumed to send your messages to other members with whom I have regular
communications?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 12, 2020 08:40 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SezaR writes:
| | I am not sure why you referred three times to what you wrote me in private messages.
Were I assumed to send your messages to other members with whom I have regular
communications?
|
I have little interest in drama and I make few assumptions about you or any other
member. I suggest we focus instead on discussing LEGO items.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | lego.12vtrains | | Posted: | Jun 18, 2020 16:27 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Hi StormChaser,
thanks for taking part in the discussion and for explaining us the reasons of
this rejection, I perfectly understand that first of all you Admins want to get
your guidelines figured out before taking some decisions, but from your words
I suspect these guidelines will become more and more restrictive, and this fact
scares me enough: how could more restrictive guidelines help the catalogue to
become more precise and accurate?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | StormChaser | | Posted: | Jun 19, 2020 00:48 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, lego.12vtrains writes:
| | Hi StormChaser,
from your words I suspect these guidelines will become more and more restrictive, and this fact scares me enough
|
The actual catalog guidelines page will be opened for public comment and subsequent
modification before being implemented. So watch for that and take the opportunity
to provide feedback on anything you find objectionable or frightening.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | lego.12vtrains | | Posted: | Jun 19, 2020 06:51 | | Subject: | Re: Train wheels | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | Thanks for reporting this and for the hint. |
|
|
|
|
Canada, British Columbia
Netherlands, Noord-Holland
France, Île-de-France
USA, Ohio
Italy, Veneto
South Africa, Western Cape