|
 |
| | | Author: | DeLuca  | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 13:37 | | Subject: | Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 185 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | TheCuteGiraffe | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 18:44 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I put in a request some time ago and mine didn't get in either. It was change
additional notes for this minfigure. Here-
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1356646
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 22:12 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, TheCuteGiraffe writes:
I know that changes are sometimes not approved; what I find odd is that I submitted
a large number of changes, some of which were approved, many of which are still
pending, but with only these four rejected.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | TheCuteGiraffe | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 22:21 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Ah yes,
I though my change was a good idea but it was my first try and I was REALLY hoping
it would get approved.
Too bad its still open.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 22:25 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, TheCuteGiraffe writes:
| | Ah yes,
I though my change was a good idea but it was my first try and I was REALLY hoping
it would get approved.
Too bad its still open.
|
It has not been discarded, though, so there is still a (high) chance that it
will be approved. I am not sure why, but it seems that the catmins are operating
rather slowly right now (maybe someone is on vacation?), so I would recommend
just giving it time.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | TheCuteGiraffe | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 23:58 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Thanks,
Appreciate the motivation. It would make me happy to feel like I contributed
to the catalouge.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 00:15 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | | It has not been discarded, though, so there is still a (high) chance that it
will be approved.
|
+1
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Yo_Yo_Flamingo | | Posted: | Aug 14, 2022 23:39 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
My guess is the names you proposed are just too long. Description is good, a
paragraph per figure makes things harder. Tags are coming soon, I suspect they're
waiting on that to handle more searchable terms.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 13:33 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Yo_Yo_Flamingo writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
My guess is the names you proposed are just too long. Description is good, a
paragraph per figure makes things harder. Tags are coming soon, I suspect they're
waiting on that to handle more searchable terms.
|
The names fit into the editor, and the format is the same as my other (currently
pending) submissions, so that seems unlikely to me.
Additionally, while I mean no offence to the BL admins, tags have been “coming
soon” for years, so I would rather title Minifigs descriptively now, and
address tags when they actually arrive.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 00:17 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Probably since they are more so “named” characters from a set and not unnamed
figures like the other castle ones as these were from a fan made set which is
where their names are likely from (I probably butchered my explanation so sorry
in advance if I just confused you)
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 13:37 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Nubs_Select writes:
| | Probably since they are more so “named” characters from a set and not unnamed
figures like the other castle ones as these were from a fan made set which is
where their names are likely from (I probably butchered my explanation so sorry
in advance if I just confused you)
|
No worries - I get what you mean. This does not seem to be the case, though,
as the product description written by the set’s designer reads “The model
has 6 minifigures : 3 forestmen, 1 peasant and 2 black falcon knights”, so
names like “Smuggler”, “Farmer”, and “Archer” were created by the catmins.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 13:45 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 58 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nubs_Select writes:
| | Probably since they are more so “named” characters from a set and not unnamed
figures like the other castle ones as these were from a fan made set which is
where their names are likely from (I probably butchered my explanation so sorry
in advance if I just confused you)
|
No worries - I get what you mean. This does not seem to be the case, though,
as the product description written by the set’s designer reads “The model
has 6 minifigures : 3 forestmen, 1 peasant and 2 black falcon knights”, so
names like “Smuggler”, “Farmer”, and “Archer” were created by the catmins.
|
The term "smuggler" was suggested by the designer:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1333792
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 14:37 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nubs_Select writes:
| | Probably since they are more so “named” characters from a set and not unnamed
figures like the other castle ones as these were from a fan made set which is
where their names are likely from (I probably butchered my explanation so sorry
in advance if I just confused you)
|
No worries - I get what you mean. This does not seem to be the case, though,
as the product description written by the set’s designer reads “The model
has 6 minifigures : 3 forestmen, 1 peasant and 2 black falcon knights”, so
names like “Smuggler”, “Farmer”, and “Archer” were created by the catmins.
|
The term "smuggler" was suggested by the designer:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1333792
|
Ah, OK. I did keep that in my revised name, though, since I liked it and found
it fitting. 👍
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 01:19 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| I don't really see the need to describe every bit of clothing in a minifigure
name. The name needs to be descriptive enough to differentiate it from similar
figures and not replicate the descriptions of the individual parts. My preference
is to search for parts rather than figures when using minute details, then looking
at which figures that torso or legs appear in.
I also don't think it is a good idea to change names from archer to hunter,
for example.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 12:07 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 81 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
The BrickLink Designer Program minifigures are a special group. They were created
by fan designers and not an internal division at the LEGO Group that is reponsible
for themes such as Classic Castle. Therefore, they should not be officially grouped
with other LEGO minifigures. The parts used should be a enough of a connection.
The formula for BrickLink Designer Program minifigures is the Set Name followed
by as short a description as possible to distinguish it from other minifigures
in the set. In some cases, the description has been prescribed by the designer,
so it's best to leave them as they are.
And as others have mentioned, what you are wanting to do is to use the Item Name
field as a repository for tags. The tag system is coming soon - it really is!
- and at that time you will be able to add complete tagging information without
extending the Item Name.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 12:55 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
| Location: USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
|
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
|
| | In some cases, the description has been prescribed by the designer
|
As an example, take a look at the last two images of Venetian Houses:
https://www.bricklink.com/v3/designer-program/designer-sets-for-adult-fans-of-lego/215680/Venetian-Houses
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 13:05 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
Hmm, ‘Tourist’… I wonder in what countries this is a firstname 
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | DeLuca | | Posted: | Aug 15, 2022 14:27 | | Subject: | Re: Please Explain Rejected Changes | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, DeLuca writes:
| | I am not sure why the changes to the names for Minifigs (adp013), (adp014), (adp015),
and (adp016) were rejected - The changes that I made were to provide more searchable
details and to make them consistent with the names of other Castle Minifigs,
so I cannot see a clear reason for them to be rejected. If the issue is that
they should have “Castle in the Forest” in the name, a catmin could simply add
that in parentheses at the end of the names, though the inclusion of set names/numbers
in Minifig titles is not standard practice. 😕
I would appreciate some clarification on this, as it will help me improve my
submissions.
Thank you.
|
The BrickLink Designer Program minifigures are a special group. They were created
by fan designers and not an internal division at the LEGO Group that is reponsible
for themes such as Classic Castle. Therefore, they should not be officially grouped
with other LEGO minifigures. The parts used should be a enough of a connection.
The formula for BrickLink Designer Program minifigures is the Set Name followed
by as short a description as possible to distinguish it from other minifigures
in the set. In some cases, the description has been prescribed by the designer,
so it's best to leave them as they are.
|
Ah. I was unaware that BDP Minifigs had their own naming system. Odd, but I suppose
that it makes a degree of sense. 😕
In light of the need to differentiate these Minifigs from official Minifigs and
themes, should (adp011) and (adp012) include the term “Black Falcon”? It associates
them with an official faction, so perhaps it should be removed for consistency?
| | And as others have mentioned, what you are wanting to do is to use the Item Name
field as a repository for tags. The tag system is coming soon - it really is!
- and at that time you will be able to add complete tagging information without
extending the Item Name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Australia, Victoria
Canada, Ontario
United Kingdom, England
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
