|
 |
| | | Author: | wyvern  | | Posted: | Aug 22, 2021 20:52 | | Subject: | Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 118 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | | For: | Catalog Associate | | Status: | Completed | |
|
|
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such. It's also similar to these weapons
that you attach to bars and whatnot:
The shape is not that of a conventional saw, like the one below (which does belong
in utensil):
The part in question is meaner, more alien; it looks like it's made for battle.
It's reminiscent of the famous Halo energy sword. I can't imagine someone
would search Utensil before Weapon when trying to find this piece (I speak from
a frustrating personal experience!) Am I alone? Why is it considered a utensil?
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Aug 22, 2021 22:22 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such
|
I agree. This makes perfect sense.
David
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Aug 23, 2021 04:12 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such. It's also similar to these weapons
that you attach to bars and whatnot:
The shape is not that of a conventional saw, like the one below (which does belong
in utensil):
The part in question is meaner, more alien; it looks like it's made for battle.
It's reminiscent of the famous Halo energy sword. I can't imagine someone
would search Utensil before Weapon when trying to find this piece (I speak from
a frustrating personal experience!) Am I alone? Why is it considered a utensil?
|
+1
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | tons_of_bricks | | Posted: | Aug 23, 2021 06:12 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2021 14:36 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, firestar246 writes:
| | While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
After looking through things myself and trying to understand where the part would
most coherently fit, I am in agreement with this assessment. I believe the part
makes the most sense in the Energy Effect category.
For reference, here is the current category definition for "Energy Effect":
Energy Effect - For items that are the effects of energy production, release,
or transformation such as flames, water, polymers, and plasma.
I would like to hear other opinions on this if there are others.
In the meantime, I will be adding this to the parts proposed to be moved on October
1:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
(I just need to come up with a name for it first...)
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2021 14:54 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, firestar246 writes:
| | While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
After looking through things myself and trying to understand where the part would
most coherently fit, I am in agreement with this assessment. I believe the part
makes the most sense in the Energy Effect category.
For reference, here is the current category definition for "Energy Effect":
Energy Effect - For items that are the effects of energy production, release,
or transformation such as flames, water, polymers, and plasma.
I would like to hear other opinions on this if there are others.
In the meantime, I will be adding this to the parts proposed to be moved on October
1:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
(I just need to come up with a name for it first...)
Cheers,
Randy
|
Well, since I happen to be the one who came up with the energy effect category
 :
That only makes sense as long as it's transparent. There are more (maybe
most? lol) parts that would become energy effects should they be transparent
but it doesn't make the design an energy effect.. the shape is not "energy-based"
(like a flame, a splash, a lightning bolt..), it would be just energy perfectly
shaped like a blade/saw. So I think Weapon makes sense.
And if we'd go by their first appearance (although I guess that isn't
catalog policy, but anyway) it could even be animal/minifig bodypart.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | wyvern | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2021 15:49 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| | Even the Father of Energy Effect agrees |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2021 16:49 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, firestar246 writes:
| | While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
After looking through things myself and trying to understand where the part would
most coherently fit, I am in agreement with this assessment. I believe the part
makes the most sense in the Energy Effect category.
For reference, here is the current category definition for "Energy Effect":
Energy Effect - For items that are the effects of energy production, release,
or transformation such as flames, water, polymers, and plasma.
I would like to hear other opinions on this if there are others.
In the meantime, I will be adding this to the parts proposed to be moved on October
1:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
(I just need to come up with a name for it first...)
Cheers,
Randy
|
Well, since I happen to be the one who came up with the energy effect category
:
That only makes sense as long as it's transparent. There are more (maybe
most? lol) parts that would become energy effects should they be transparent
but it doesn't make the design an energy effect..
|
What color a part is made in has no effect on where it is categorized.
| | the shape is not "energy-based"
(like a flame, a splash, a lightning bolt..), it would be just energy perfectly
shaped like a blade/saw. So I think Weapon makes sense.
|
It is basically a plasma or ice effect, so I think energy effect works just fine.
| | And if we'd go by their first appearance (although I guess that isn't
catalog policy, but anyway) it could even be animal/minifig bodypart.
|
Parts should never be categorized by first appearance. They should be categorized
where they fit properly. Now that we have category definitions, we don't
have to play this game anymore, and I think the category definitions work to
place it in Energy Effect.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2021 03:01 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, firestar246 writes:
| | While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
After looking through things myself and trying to understand where the part would
most coherently fit, I am in agreement with this assessment. I believe the part
makes the most sense in the Energy Effect category.
For reference, here is the current category definition for "Energy Effect":
Energy Effect - For items that are the effects of energy production, release,
or transformation such as flames, water, polymers, and plasma.
I would like to hear other opinions on this if there are others.
In the meantime, I will be adding this to the parts proposed to be moved on October
1:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
(I just need to come up with a name for it first...)
Cheers,
Randy
|
Well, since I happen to be the one who came up with the energy effect category
:
That only makes sense as long as it's transparent. There are more (maybe
most? lol) parts that would become energy effects should they be transparent
but it doesn't make the design an energy effect..
|
What color a part is made in has no effect on where it is categorized.
| | the shape is not "energy-based"
(like a flame, a splash, a lightning bolt..), it would be just energy perfectly
shaped like a blade/saw. So I think Weapon makes sense.
|
It is basically a plasma or ice effect, so I think energy effect works just fine.
| | And if we'd go by their first appearance (although I guess that isn't
catalog policy, but anyway) it could even be animal/minifig bodypart.
|
|
You lost me there... those two statements seem like a direct contradiction to
me. If nothing about the part except for the colour makes it an energy effect
then surely it isn't an energy effect...
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2021 09:10 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, firestar246 writes:
| | While I agree it doesn't quite fit in the utensil category, looking at how
its used in sets, perhaps energy effect would be a better category for this piece.
|
After looking through things myself and trying to understand where the part would
most coherently fit, I am in agreement with this assessment. I believe the part
makes the most sense in the Energy Effect category.
For reference, here is the current category definition for "Energy Effect":
Energy Effect - For items that are the effects of energy production, release,
or transformation such as flames, water, polymers, and plasma.
I would like to hear other opinions on this if there are others.
In the meantime, I will be adding this to the parts proposed to be moved on October
1:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
(I just need to come up with a name for it first...)
Cheers,
Randy
|
Well, since I happen to be the one who came up with the energy effect category
:
That only makes sense as long as it's transparent. There are more (maybe
most? lol) parts that would become energy effects should they be transparent
but it doesn't make the design an energy effect..
|
What color a part is made in has no effect on where it is categorized.
| | the shape is not "energy-based"
(like a flame, a splash, a lightning bolt..), it would be just energy perfectly
shaped like a blade/saw. So I think Weapon makes sense.
|
It is basically a plasma or ice effect, so I think energy effect works just fine.
| | And if we'd go by their first appearance (although I guess that isn't
catalog policy, but anyway) it could even be animal/minifig bodypart.
|
|
You lost me there... those two statements seem like a direct contradiction to
me. If nothing about the part except for the colour makes it an energy effect
then surely it isn't an energy effect...
|
Well yes to me as it stands its almost certainly a weapon foremost and I would
refer to it as a bladed weapon at that and therefore use the term blade rather
than saw
However whichever way it goes I do think parts like these should all be in the
same location even if that means expanding the energy effect category and naming
it something like:- Energy Effects/Blades
because even if parts like this exist in plain silver or gold whilst this
would make them seem more weapon like they are still essentially just a blade
or energy bolt that usually requires a handle extension before it becomes a full
blown weapon and no matter whether your attaching one of these bolt/blades to
the back of a spaceship, the end of a weapon or directly in the hands of a minifigure
they all still kind of serve the same purpose
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | wyvern | | Posted: | Aug 24, 2021 15:45 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| I can somewhat see it being Energy Effect, but let's be honest, would you
still say so if it wasn't trans-light blue? If it was flat silver (or dark
red, which it does also come in), it wouldn't resemble any kind of energy.
Looking at all the energy effects, they're elemental and more abstract in
shape. The part in question doesn't really resemble any kind of "flame, water,
polymer, or plasma." I'd say it's very clearly a jagged blade with
a handle, that just so happens to be most common in a transparent color. And
just because it's transparent doesn't mean it can't be a weapon.
There are plenty of other transparent weapons already in there:
That last one especially. If that sword with a flame of ghostly fire belongs
under Weapon rather than Energy Effect, so does 11601, which doesn't have
nearly as much elemental about it.
I'm still strongly siding with Weapon for 11601. But I definitely would rather
see it in Energy Effect than Utensil, since Utensil is for non-violent parts.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2021 12:46 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such. It's also similar to these weapons
that you attach to bars and whatnot:
The shape is not that of a conventional saw, like the one below (which does belong
in utensil):
The part in question is meaner, more alien; it looks like it's made for battle.
It's reminiscent of the famous Halo energy sword. I can't imagine someone
would search Utensil before Weapon when trying to find this piece (I speak from
a frustrating personal experience!) Am I alone? Why is it considered a utensil?
|
After doing a bit more research among similar parts and listening to the others
here, I have changed my mind. When it came down to it, I finally came to the
conclusion that it isn't necessarily a weapon in its own right but part of
a weapon (like an axe head, or sword blade that doesn't have a hilt, or a
weapon extension, etc.) I will set it for a proposed movement to the "Minifigure,
Weapon" category. 
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2021 16:53 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such. It's also similar to these weapons
that you attach to bars and whatnot:
The shape is not that of a conventional saw, like the one below (which does belong
in utensil):
The part in question is meaner, more alien; it looks like it's made for battle.
It's reminiscent of the famous Halo energy sword. I can't imagine someone
would search Utensil before Weapon when trying to find this piece (I speak from
a frustrating personal experience!) Am I alone? Why is it considered a utensil?
|
After doing a bit more research among similar parts and listening to the others
here, I have changed my mind. When it came down to it, I finally came to the
conclusion that it isn't necessarily a weapon in its own right but part of
a weapon (like an axe head, or sword blade that doesn't have a hilt, or a
weapon extension, etc.) I will set it for a proposed movement to the "Minifigure,
Weapon" category.
Cheers,
Randy
|
First of all, thanks for the update, and for reconsidering 
But even if you had not agreed, I think a majority is enough to put it on the
list? Although it's hard to establish such a thing as "majority" on this
forum... I wish there was some kind of voting infrastructure where even non-forum
visitors would toss in a vote. That way we end up with a pretty clear mandate
for moving a part or keeping it where it is...
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 25, 2021 18:29 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | […]
But even if you had not agreed, I think a majority is enough to put it on the
list? Although it's hard to establish such a thing as "majority" on this
forum... I wish there was some kind of voting infrastructure where even non-forum
visitors would toss in a vote. That way we end up with a pretty clear mandate
for moving a part or keeping it where it is...
|
I don’t. Or at least not the way you make it sound.
It’s not a beauty pagent, it’s a technical matter and we have knowledgeable experts
to decide.
We bring them the problems we see, they ponder on them, they decide, they explain,
all that based on rules.
Polls can be useful if they want the input of the community but polls shouldn’t
rule them.
Yes, that’s a dictatorship, but a benevolent one
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2021 04:44 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | […]
But even if you had not agreed, I think a majority is enough to put it on the
list? Although it's hard to establish such a thing as "majority" on this
forum... I wish there was some kind of voting infrastructure where even non-forum
visitors would toss in a vote. That way we end up with a pretty clear mandate
for moving a part or keeping it where it is...
|
I don’t. Or at least not the way you make it sound.
It’s not a beauty pagent, it’s a technical matter and we have knowledgeable experts
to decide.
We bring them the problems we see, they ponder on them, they decide, they explain,
all that based on rules.
Polls can be useful if they want the input of the community but polls shouldn’t
rule them.
Yes, that’s a dictatorship, but a benevolent one
|
Really? What you're suggesting is the opposite of how Stormchaser used to
handle it. He always said: Tell me what to do, the catalog is yours.
If I would be in that position and would do it the way you describe, then the
rounded parts that were moved to slope would never ever have been moved to slope
(they are still bricks-in-exile to me, every time I pick them  ). I still feel
it's a logical inconsistency for them to be there (since roundedness is a
meaningful distinguishing parameter in the catalog), but eventually I stopped
protesting when the majority indicated that they would expect to find them there.
In the end, findability is key - I don't think there's much use in having
a 'dictatorship' that follows its own logic if the majority would look
somewhere else... (And I'm really not criticizing Randy here, I think any
person that you could put in charge will sometimes have an opinion that is counter-intuitive
to the majority.)
Or, the catalog should be bricklink-internal, part of the service, not part of
the community, and people could voice suggestions and objections through tickets
but the people in charge run the show, decide the logic, etc. Then the benevolent
dictatorship would at least be consistent
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 26, 2021 09:35 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | […]
| | Yes, that’s a dictatorship, but a benevolent one
|
Really? What you're suggesting is the opposite of how Stormchaser used to
handle it. He always said: Tell me what to do, the catalog is yours.
|
He also pushed to have written rules and for the catalogue to follow these rules.
| | If I would be in that position and would do it the way you describe, then the
rounded parts that were moved to slope would never ever have been moved to slope
(they are still bricks-in-exile to me, every time I pick them ). I still feel
it's a logical inconsistency for them to be there (since roundedness is a
meaningful distinguishing parameter in the catalog), but eventually I stopped
protesting when the majority indicated that they would expect to find them there.
In the end, findability is key - I don't think there's much use in having
a 'dictatorship' that follows its own logic if the majority would look
somewhere else... (And I'm really not criticizing Randy here, I think any
person that you could put in charge will sometimes have an opinion that is counter-intuitive
to the majority.)
Or, the catalog should be bricklink-internal, part of the service, not part of
the community, and people could voice suggestions and objections through tickets
but the people in charge run the show, decide the logic, etc. Then the benevolent
dictatorship would at least be consistent
|
We are both pushing what the other is saying to the extreme:
— I’m seing what you say as wanting a catalogue ruled by the whims of an uncouth
mob¹,
— you’re are only seing “dictatorship,” forgetting that:
1. a benevolent dictactor is benevolent and rules for the good of the community,
not their own goals,
2. they can use polls and referendums,
3. the catalogue has rules that the admins follow, it’s not whimsical, that
greatly reduces the dictatorship,
4. there’s more than one admin, it’s a committee (in a good way), that also
greatly reduces the dictatorship.
The “dictator” part is that they have the final decision, both in applying the
rules and in writing them (they are executive, judicial, and legislative). If
they say “no, because it’s against the rules,” then a poll shouldn’t change that
decision.
That doesn’t mean you can’t lobby or make a petition (so a kind of poll) to change
the rules (the rules, not the decision).
————
¹ I’m getting older (but who isn’t? ), so each year I’m more and more appalled
by the uncouthness of the youth.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2021 04:37 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | […]
| | Yes, that’s a dictatorship, but a benevolent one
|
Really? What you're suggesting is the opposite of how Stormchaser used to
handle it. He always said: Tell me what to do, the catalog is yours.
|
He also pushed to have written rules and for the catalogue to follow these rules.
| | If I would be in that position and would do it the way you describe, then the
rounded parts that were moved to slope would never ever have been moved to slope
(they are still bricks-in-exile to me, every time I pick them ). I still feel
it's a logical inconsistency for them to be there (since roundedness is a
meaningful distinguishing parameter in the catalog), but eventually I stopped
protesting when the majority indicated that they would expect to find them there.
In the end, findability is key - I don't think there's much use in having
a 'dictatorship' that follows its own logic if the majority would look
somewhere else... (And I'm really not criticizing Randy here, I think any
person that you could put in charge will sometimes have an opinion that is counter-intuitive
to the majority.)
Or, the catalog should be bricklink-internal, part of the service, not part of
the community, and people could voice suggestions and objections through tickets
but the people in charge run the show, decide the logic, etc. Then the benevolent
dictatorship would at least be consistent
|
We are both pushing what the other is saying to the extreme:
— I’m seing what you say as wanting a catalogue ruled by the whims of an uncouth
mob¹,
— you’re are only seing “dictatorship,” forgetting that:
1. a benevolent dictactor is benevolent and rules for the good of the community,
not their own goals,
2. they can use polls and referendums,
3. the catalogue has rules that the admins follow, it’s not whimsical, that
greatly reduces the dictatorship,
4. there’s more than one admin, it’s a committee (in a good way), that also
greatly reduces the dictatorship.
The “dictator” part is that they have the final decision, both in applying the
rules and in writing them (they are executive, judicial, and legislative). If
they say “no, because it’s against the rules,” then a poll shouldn’t change that
decision.
That doesn’t mean you can’t lobby or make a petition (so a kind of poll) to change
the rules (the rules, not the decision).
————
¹ I’m getting older (but who isn’t? ), so each year I’m more and more appalled
by the uncouthness of the youth.
|
Ah well, yes, when it comes to applying the rules, we definitely need good gate
keepers there (and we always had) totally agree that making rules and applying
them is something we really need this 'dictatorship' for
But unfortunately, it leaves us with a whole bunch of parts where it kind of
comes down to.. taste? This saw was one example (at least before we all agreed),
or take for example this part:
To me there's no doubt it's an egg shell, that just happened to be used
as a crown (and not even on the classic "minifigure" minifigure). But to someone
else, it's totally a crown (apparently! ). And rules aren't helping
us here. You can really say both.
In a case like that, I just feel like the majority should count. What if there's
only one person who wants category A and the rest wants category B, but that
first person just so happens to be in charge? In such cases it shouldn't
really be a job of trying to persuade the one guy. Not that B has to be objectively
better than A (it can really just be feeling/taste) but at least the benefit
of B would be that it's where most people would look.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2021 04:47 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| | | But unfortunately, it leaves us with a whole bunch of parts where it kind of
comes down to.. taste? This saw was one example (at least before we all agreed),
or take for example this part:
To me there's no doubt it's an egg shell, that just happened to be used
as a crown (and not even on the classic "minifigure" minifigure). But to someone
else, it's totally a crown (apparently! ). And rules aren't helping
us here. You can really say both.
|
In cases like that, I'd prefer it if it stays where it was put in the first
place but that the name be changed to include the important new key words (here,
Egg Shell) without removing any of the original keywords from the name.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2021 05:58 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Teup writes:
| | […]
To me there's no doubt it's an egg shell, that just happened to be used
as a crown (and not even on the classic "minifigure" minifigure).
|
To me too
And I happen to have looked for it just yesterday and also tried with “egg” and
finally ended looking in the inventory of 21318-1
| | But to someone else, it's totally a crown (apparently! ).
|
Maybe that someone is TLG or knew the LEGO name because it’s “CROWN, No. 1”.
| | And rules aren't helping us here. You can really say both.
|
Except if you have a “well, TLG says it’s a X” rule as a tipping argument.
But, well, knowing a few of TLG names and categorisation, maybe that rule shouldn’t
exist
(The LEGO name should nonetheless be an argument to add “X” as a keyword somewhere
in the BL name.)
| | In a case like that, I just feel like the majority should count. What if there's
only one person who wants category A and the rest wants category B, but that
first person just so happens to be in charge? In such cases it shouldn't
really be a job of trying to persuade the one guy. Not that B has to be objectively
better than A (it can really just be feeling/taste) but at least the benefit
of B would be that it's where most people would look.
|
If the part is new and the admins don’t know where to put it, they can poll us
(well, they can poll the forum).
If the part is older and you think it’s wrongly placed, you can petition them
(put a request) and start a poll to add as an argument.
But in the end, the gatekeepers keep the gate.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | tons_of_bricks | | Posted: | Aug 27, 2021 06:17 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| That's funny, I have never considered that piece to be an egg shell, but
now that y'all mention it, I can obviously see it. When seeing it, I've
always thought it was a crown or flower.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Nov 1, 2021 12:34 | | Subject: | Re: Move Blade from Utensil to Weapon | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, ybtfbiwgw writes:
| |
To me there are many reasons why this should be under Weapon. The landslide majority
of the sets it comes in use it as such. It's also similar to these weapons
that you attach to bars and whatnot:
The shape is not that of a conventional saw, like the one below (which does belong
in utensil):
The part in question is meaner, more alien; it looks like it's made for battle.
It's reminiscent of the famous Halo energy sword. I can't imagine someone
would search Utensil before Weapon when trying to find this piece (I speak from
a frustrating personal experience!) Am I alone? Why is it considered a utensil?
|
This has now been completed per https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2509
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Ohio
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
Netherlands, Utrecht
United Kingdom, England
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
