from "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with 2 Ball Joints and Axle Hole"
to "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6
Holes in Each Ball". This was rejected without any explanation.
Seeing as these holes are a fairly visible feature of this part as compared to
from "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with 2 Ball Joints and Axle Hole"
to "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6
Holes in Each Ball". This was rejected without any explanation.
Seeing as these holes are a fairly visible feature of this part as compared to
from "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with 2 Ball Joints and Axle Hole"
to "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6
Holes in Each Ball". This was rejected without any explanation.
Seeing as these holes are a fairly visible feature of this part as compared to
from "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with 2 Ball Joints and Axle Hole"
to "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6
Holes in Each Ball". This was rejected without any explanation.
Seeing as these holes are a fairly visible feature of this part as compared to
from "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with 2 Ball Joints and Axle Hole"
to "Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6
Holes in Each Ball". This was rejected without any explanation.
Seeing as these holes are a fairly visible feature of this part as compared to
57909b Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6 Holes in Ball Parts: Technic, Brick
Why can these holes not be in the name of this part?
Just curious.
Niek.
I really don't think the name needs to include any more information than
it already does. Adding the addition text just makes the name longer and more
complex than it needs to be.
The reason the text is in
*
57909b Technic, Brick Modified 2 x 2 with Ball Joint and Axle Hole with 6 Holes in Ball Parts: Technic, Brick