I just opened 3 new sets 30537. Several parts differed from current inventory
list but consistent between all 3 sets.
No idea how many times it needs to be found in sets before it warrants an inventory
add/change request.
Zero.
All that has already been explained to you multiple times. BL only splits entries
if there’s a functional difference. That the moulds have different numbers inscribed
onto them doesn’t change that.
I just opened 3 new sets 30537. Several parts differed from current inventory
list but consistent between all 3 sets.
No idea how many times it needs to be found in sets before it warrants an inventory
add/change request.
Zero.
All that has already been explained to you multiple times. BL only splits entries
if there’s a functional difference. That the moulds have different numbers inscribed
onto them doesn’t change that.
I thought the goal of community engagement was to problem-solve and improve the
experience for avid afficiandos, so I do so hope youre expressing your own understanding
and not an official response of Brinklink. Your response of “get a magnifying
glass and find the tiny numbers” was… unnecessary at best.
Because if im understanding you correctly YOUR understanding is that Bricklink
doesnt care about what would be considered the accuracy of an exact numbered
parts list straight out of a new box…. as long as the parts are the same shape
and same colour.
That would be tantamount to stripping a ferrari, replacing its factory installed
parts with cheap aftermarket parts that serve essentially the same function,
and still trying to sell it at the value of a true ferrari. 😱
I’m not saying your viewpoint is wrong… but shouldn’t this community work together
to strive for improvement to the system if it isn’t the best it can be?
Isn’t the end goal for Bricklink to become THE go to source for all things Lego
based on accuracy and completeness? And aren’t we, the community, responsible
for working towards that goal instead of providing snarky responses to legitimate
issues?
Because if im understanding you correctly YOUR understanding is that Bricklink
doesnt care about what would be considered the accuracy of an exact numbered
parts list straight out of a new box…. as long as the parts are the same shape
and same colour.
Yes, bricklink is not worried about which exact unsplit variant is found in sets,
to do so would add enormous amounts of work to the catalogue, which would mean
many sets might never get inventories, if they had to be done to such standards.
Bricklink is a not just a database, but also a marketplace, as such they have
to balance between the 2. Saying “same shape and color” is a bit misleading,
if the part has no functional difference and is the correct color, then yes it’s
not something bricklink is worried about splitting, or if lego just decides to
put a different number on the part but nothing actually changes, they still aren’t
worried about splitting. But if they make a noticeable cosmetic or functional
difference, then it’s split. If there isn’t a noticeable cosmetic or functional
difference, then 99% of users aren’t worried about having it split, so they don’t
want to split it
That would be tantamount to stripping a ferrari, replacing its factory installed
parts with cheap aftermarket parts that serve essentially the same function,
and still trying to sell it at the value of a true ferrari. 😱
No, it’s not the same, a better comparison would be if you have 1 Ferrari, and
it’s got a broken window or such, and then a newer, still genuine Ferrari, and
you take a window from it, according to Ferrari it’s the same window, but they
may have slightly updated the creation process for the window, but it still serves
100% same job.
I just opened 3 new sets 30537. Several parts differed from current inventory
list but consistent between all 3 sets.
No idea how many times it needs to be found in sets before it warrants an inventory
add/change request.
Zero.
All that has already been explained to you multiple times. BL only splits entries
if there’s a functional difference. That the moulds have different numbers inscribed
onto them doesn’t change that.
I thought the goal of community engagement was to problem-solve and improve the
experience for avid afficiandos, so I do so hope youre expressing your own understanding
and not an official response of Brinklink.
This is the official word on variants for BrickLink:
Your response of “get a magnifying
glass and find the tiny numbers” was… unnecessary at best.
Because if im understanding you correctly YOUR understanding is that Bricklink
doesnt care about what would be considered the accuracy of an exact numbered
parts list straight out of a new box…. as long as the parts are the same shape
and same colour.
BrickLink doesn't care about any numbers or molds once it's decided that
the part is not worthy of a new Catalog entry.
That would be tantamount to stripping a ferrari, replacing its factory installed
parts with cheap aftermarket parts that serve essentially the same function,
and still trying to sell it at the value of a true ferrari. 😱
This site is not set up for hyper accurate set lists. LEGO parts are treated
interchangeably if they fit within a single Catalog entry. If you want more detail,
find a seller who specializes in older parts and indicates more details with
their store listings.
I’m not saying your viewpoint is wrong… but shouldn’t this community work together
to strive for improvement to the system if it isn’t the best it can be?
Isn’t the end goal for Bricklink to become THE go to source for all things Lego
based on accuracy and completeness? And aren’t we, the community, responsible
for working towards that goal instead of providing snarky responses to legitimate
issues?
LEGO is in charge now and not the community. But this Catalog was never meant
to serve the needs of extreme collectors. We've followed the middle-ground
most of the time.
It’s been an ongoing issue through multiple threads.
The point is trying to reach a consensus on which exact part number goes to a
specific set.
ie: while 3023 is the base number, if i bought 100 sets off the shelf and opened
them all, would i find a single 3023 among them or would i find that ONLY 28653
exists in that specific set?
I’m starting to think that most people respond to the issue based on semantics
and nomenclature specific to this website rather than the actual question. cf-
4085a/b/c/d do not exist as actual part numbers… they are a made up way of differentiating
between the various parts despite no such numbers appearing on ANY of the pieces.
That distinction is part of the Bricklink pantheon and does not exist as such
beyond this website. While it’s handy for people to refer to, its not accurate
(4085d has actual part numbers on it in at least two alternate ID numbers even
though they are otherwise indistinguishable).
Yet the difference between the base part number 3023 and the part number actually
found in a specific set— 28653– is NOT simply a matter of this phenomenon. That
same set, assembled with strictly the base numbered part, was not what Lego Group
ACTUALLY packaged it as.
So the discussion remains: Is it better to refer to merely a base part like
3023 (which is often inaccurate based on what you’d find if you bought a set
and opened it) or should we as a community strive to improve the system by
determining what exact part number would be found in a sealed set and differentiating
between them in the inventory lists?
It’s been an ongoing issue through multiple threads.
The point is trying to reach a consensus on which exact part number goes to a
specific set.
ie: while 3023 is the base number, if i bought 100 sets off the shelf and opened
them all, would i find a single 3023 among them or would i find that ONLY 28653
exists in that specific set?
I’m starting to think that most people respond to the issue based on semantics
and nomenclature specific to this website rather than the actual question. cf-
4085a/b/c/d do not exist as actual part numbers… they are a made up way of differentiating
between the various parts despite no such numbers appearing on ANY of the pieces.
That distinction is part of the Bricklink pantheon and does not exist as such
beyond this website. While it’s handy for people to refer to, its not accurate
(4085d has actual part numbers on it in at least two alternate ID numbers even
though they are otherwise indistinguishable).
Yet the difference between the base part number 3023 and the part number actually
found in a specific set— 28653– is NOT simply a matter of this phenomenon. That
same set, assembled with strictly the base numbered part, was not what Lego Group
ACTUALLY packaged it as.
So the discussion remains: Is it better to refer to merely a base part like
3023 (which is often inaccurate based on what you’d find if you bought a set
and opened it) or should we as a community strive to improve the system by
determining what exact part number would be found in a sealed set and differentiating
between them in the inventory lists?
I once watched an 80k classic car sell for under 20k because someone replaced
the engine with the exact same model but not matching numbers. I freely admit
that 100% accuracy might be a stretch for this website to manage. Thanx to Jennifer
for her post about “middle of the road” for providing some perspective. 🙂
I once watched an 80k classic car sell for under 20k because someone replaced
the engine with the exact same model but not matching numbers. I freely admit
that 100% accuracy might be a stretch for this website to manage. Thanx to Jennifer
for her post about “middle of the road” for providing some perspective.
100% accuracy is impossible for an open set, especially if you put a set together
from bulk. You might be able to put all the parts together with the correct mould
numbers but that doesn't give you a set exactly as released by LEGO. You
might have put together a set from 1990 using parts manufactured in 1980 mixed
with parts from 2000. You might have the right parts but made in the wrong factory
compared to where the rest of the set was manufactured. That is not 100% accurate.
It may be impossible to tell but it is still not exactly what LEGO released.
or should we as a community strive to improve the system by determining what exact part number would be found in a sealed set and differentiating between them in the inventory lists?
Bricklink is not a "we as a community" property, never has been. It is
a secondary Lego marketplace owned by The Lego Group. It will be run the way
TLG chooses to do so.
I am sure as you continue your Lego/Bricklink journey, will soon discover what
you ask for is, for all practical purposes, impossible to know with any certainty,
especially for out of production sets. Set contents can vary from factory to
factory, production run to production run, even bin to bin.
or should we as a community strive to improve the system by determining what exact part number would be found in a sealed set and differentiating between them in the inventory lists?
Bricklink is not a "we as a community" property, never has been. It is
a secondary Lego marketplace owned by The Lego Group. It will be run the way
TLG chooses to do so.
I am sure as you continue your Lego/Bricklink journey, will soon discover what
you ask for is, for all practical purposes, impossible to know with any certainty,
especially for out of production sets. Set contents can vary from factory to
factory, production run to production run, even bin to bin.
Good to know. Someone finally put it in simple terms that the inventory list
is not 100% accurate (and never will be) and gave a (non-condescending) explanation
why.
I have 300+ sets prepped for sale. Sticking point has always been parts wo numbers
on them and trying to get them as precise as possible. Seems that was stress
in vain.
USA, Pennsylvania
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Canada, Ontario
United Kingdom, England