Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | sometom  | | Posted: | Apr 21, 2024 23:34 | | Subject: | Catalog Error (Self-Consistency issue) | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Set 76416 Inventory shows part 22385 in Green, but no such item in Dark Green.
This is consistent with the Lego instructions posted on Lego.com, since the
set includes one 6290600 according to the instructions.
The derived item with a sticker, 22385pb304, also in the inventory of that set,
claims it is Dark Green. I believe this needs to be updated to be Green.
|
 |
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Apr 21, 2024 14:19 | | Subject: | Re: Unsuccessful add item attempt? | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Kumquat23 writes:
| | Hi,
On the 19th I tried to add a stickered item to the catalog, and I added an image.
Should those appear in the forum, and if not, does it mean that my request did
not go through?
|
Submitting an inventory change request does automatically generate a forum post,
but adding an item to the catalog does not generate a post.
David
|
|
| Author: | Kumquat23 | | Posted: | Apr 21, 2024 13:13 | | Subject: | Unsuccessful add item attempt? | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi,
On the 19th I tried to add a stickered item to the catalog, and I added an image.
Should those appear in the forum, and if not, does it mean that my request did
not go through?
I was trying to add part 45677pb161 (I can't remember the exact number at
the end, but I looked at recent sticker numbers from that part number and chose
the next one) from D.Va & Reinhardt set 75973. It seemed like it allowed me to
submit it and to submit the image. Just double-checking  Jennifer's link
explaining how to upload stickered parts was super helpful!
Thanks,
Beth
CA Brick Shop
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 21, 2024 07:36 | | Subject: | Re: Do misprinted pieces get catalog entries? | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Nathan123 writes:
| | Do misprinted pieces get catalog entries? I understand misprinted pieces happen
often however if a misprint is listed under a non misprinted item then it doesn't
really reflect the item.
|
No
|
| Author: | Nathan123 | | Posted: | Apr 21, 2024 06:38 | | Subject: | Do misprinted pieces get catalog entries? | | Viewed: | 104 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Do misprinted pieces get catalog entries? I understand misprinted pieces happen
often however if a misprint is listed under a non misprinted item then it doesn't
really reflect the item.
|
|
| Author: | ZELDATOTK | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 19:47 | | Subject: | Re: Help identify a Lego part and color | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, ZELDATOTK writes:
| | What is this Lego part can someone help
|
|
you beat me to it! 
|
Thanks guy I appreciate it.
|
| Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 19:42 | | Subject: | Re: Help identify a Lego part and color | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, ZELDATOTK writes:
| | What is this Lego part can someone help
|
|
you beat me to it!
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 19:42 | | Subject: | Re: Help identify a Lego part and color | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, ZELDATOTK writes:
| | What is this Lego part can someone help
|
|
| Author: | ZELDATOTK | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 19:41 | | Subject: | Help identify a Lego part and color | | Viewed: | 98 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| | What is this Lego part can someone help |
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 15:13 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
You think that’s bad. This sticker was so far off it’s mark that it ended up
on a whole other part.
|
And not wholy on that part
Whom did you get the parts from? Mr Magoo?
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 15:02 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
| | The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job. 
|
|
Dang  and I thought I wasn’t good with stickers
|
You think that’s bad. This sticker was so far off it’s mark that it ended up
on a whole other part.
|
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 15:02 | | Subject: | Re: LEGO® Education Storage (white) Art.Nr. 14473 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Hi,
I had to cancel your post: link to sites selling LEGO are forbidden here.
Also, the Suggestions topic is for suggestions about the website. Questions
about the catalogue are better placed in the Catalog topics or in the more general
Help section.
As for the part you linked to, sorting trays are in the Gear section. You should
find it here: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=G&catString=1092
In Suggestions, DreadHeadDad writes:
| | Hello.
I'm not sure if I post at the right place.
I'm new here, by the way excellent page.
As I started implement my Collection,
I realized I've got gear at home which isn't implemented in your Database.
What kind of gear you can see in the Topic.
Here the current HP where you can purchase these items.
[redacted]
Best regards
|
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 12:14 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
| | The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
Dang and I thought I wasn’t good with stickers
|
I uploaded the images to BL. Now is there an option for someone else who has
the part to add a different main image later? Thanks!
|
Yup! Any image can be updated if a better one is provided
|
That shouldn’t be too hard.
|
|
| Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 12:10 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
| | The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
Dang and I thought I wasn’t good with stickers
|
I uploaded the images to BL. Now is there an option for someone else who has
the part to add a different main image later? Thanks!
|
Yup! Any image can be updated if a better one is provided
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:49 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
| | The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
Dang and I thought I wasn’t good with stickers
|
I uploaded the images to BL. Now is there an option for someone else who has
the part to add a different main image later? Thanks!
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:35 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 23 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | […]
| | The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
Dang and I thought I wasn’t good with stickers
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:28 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
You have to submit images before your parts can be approved.
~Jen
|
The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:27 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
You have to submit images before your parts can be approved.
~Jen
|
The only problem is that the person who applied the stickers didn’t do a very
good job.
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:13 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
You have to submit images before your parts can be approved.
~Jen
|
Ah ok! Thanks Jen!
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 11:10 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
You have to submit images before your parts can be approved.
~Jen
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 05:45 | | Subject: | Re: pi198 and pi199 | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, attadeus writes:
| | Hi there,
Do we have more informations about the set they came from?
As I know, recently added pi198 and pi199 minifigures didn't appears in any
official Lego sets. The specific torso is well-know to be part of some pirates
keyrings that already have been inventoried here on Bricklink few years ago :
The torsos are, in my opinion, unused keyring torsos. I also own these torsos
Regards.
|
https://www.bricklink.com/messageThread.asp?ID=356555
|
|
| Author: | attadeus | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 05:27 | | Subject: | pi198 and pi199 | | Viewed: | 100 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi there,
Do we have more informations about the set they came from?
As I know, recently added pi198 and pi199 minifigures didn't appears in any
official Lego sets. The specific torso is well-know to be part of some pirates
keyrings that already have been inventoried here on Bricklink few years ago :
The torsos are, in my opinion, unused keyring torsos. I also own these torsos
Regards.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 20, 2024 00:00 | | Subject: | Re: 553b | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Bond writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
Ah. So...I could just use the plain 553 entry to add that part in Set 22011 to
my inventory -- assuming that entry also pertains to any 553 having axle
holes -- and no need for a CCR?
Hoping that this is the case.
- B
|
Yes. 👍
|
|
| Author: | Bond | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 22:17 | | Subject: | Re: 553b | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
Ah. So...I could just use the plain 553 entry to add that part in Set 22011 to
my inventory -- assuming that entry also pertains to any 553 having axle
holes -- and no need for a CCR?
Hoping that this is the case.
- B
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 20:42 | | Subject: | Re: 553b | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Bond writes:
| | During parting out and adding to my inventory this set:
I noticed that 553b (aka Brick, Round 2 x 2 Dome Top, C = Magenta or 71) is without
either catalog entry or image. I was about to submit a Cat Change Request and
then I remembered the ongoing headaches regarding the Variant Project as detailed
in this message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1451828
So, is the image and entry merely and temporarily 'down' due to Variant
Project implementation? Or is 553b entry actually gone-gone and a CCR needs
to be completed in order to make 553b part of 553? Note that there are currently
only two catalog entries for Brick, Round 2 x 2 Dome Top. One is while
553a is listed as "without Bottom Axle Holder".
FWIW, the 553 in Set 11022 has a blocked open stud.
I'm uncertain what action to take, or if I even should.
- B
|
The inventory is correct as is since 553b is gone, gone as of April 12:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogReqList.asp?nID=&viewDate=Y&viewType=E&viewStatus=1.2&itemType=P&viewAction=M
|
|
| Author: | Bond | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 20:28 | | Subject: | 553b | | Viewed: | 91 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| During parting out and adding to my inventory this set:
I noticed that 553b (aka Brick, Round 2 x 2 Dome Top, C = Magenta or 71) is without
either catalog entry or image. I was about to submit a Cat Change Request and
then I remembered the ongoing headaches regarding the Variant Project as detailed
in this message:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1451828
So, is the image and entry merely and temporarily 'down' due to Variant
Project implementation? Or is 553b entry actually gone-gone and a CCR needs
to be completed in order to make 553b part of 553? Note that there are currently
only two catalog entries for Brick, Round 2 x 2 Dome Top. One is while
553a is listed as "without Bottom Axle Holder".
FWIW, the 553 in Set 11022 has a blocked open stud.
I'm uncertain what action to take, or if I even should.
- B
|
|
| Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:28 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
P.s. If you haven’t guessed already this is my first attempt at adding items
to the catalog. 
|
it's lots of fun! for me its anywhere from a couple months to about a year
(tho several times they were approved within a week but that is rare)
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:27 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
It took around a week maybe to get a decorated part approved
|
Link to parts pending approval
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?itemPend=Y&catType=P
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:27 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 21 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:
| | In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
It took around a week maybe to get a decorated part approved
|
Thank you!
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:26 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 19 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
P.s. If you haven’t guessed already this is my first attempt at adding items
to the catalog.
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:26 | | Subject: | Re: Add item | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, The_Boyz_Bricks writes:
| | Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
It took around a week maybe to get a decorated part approved
|
|
| Author: | The_Boyz_Bricks | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 19:23 | | Subject: | Add item | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hello all! Does anyone know how long it takes for a new item to be approved to
the catalog? For instance I added a few snickered parts for the Lego Ideas Tribute
to Galileo Galilei this afternoon. How long will it take to get approved?
Thanks all!
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 17:29 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, pcthurman writes:
| | In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
I didn't think that a set bought USED was allowed to be used as proof to
change or update / add to an inventory. Did this policy change?
Cass T
|
We found out long time ago (based on original set contents) that 10040 had the
torso with black buckle, but we couldn't correct the inventory due to the
missing minifigure entries.
|
|
| Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 06:39 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | […]
How much data space would it take to have two catalogs? One for detailed data
and one for generalized marketplace?
|
The problem isn’t space, it’s consistency and workload.
Basically, you’re doubling the workload.
If you make a change in one of the catalogues, should it be echoed on the other
one? To which extent? Can that be automatized?
In the software world, that’s called a fork (external / by another team) or a
branch (internal / by the same team).
We have tools and procedures to follow and “port” (transfer, apply) changes between
branches / versions / forks (‘diffs’ and ‘patches’ and ‘version control system’
(git, bitkeeper, mercurial…)).
And those tools are good and ‘smart.’ They can work around other changes and
differences that shouldn’t change (and (good) devs are lazy: everything that
can be automatized is automatized).
But we ALWAYS need to check the changes. The changes may apply without a hitch…
but they may break the program because they contradict an older change. That
can also be automatized, to some extent. But it’s work again and you can never
predict everything so you always need to check.
Duplicating a database and the changes on the database can be automitized in
the same way: changes are just instructions, like a program. So the same porting
solutions & problems apply: Should that change be applied? Can it be applied?
Should another change be applied instead? And you always need to check, check,
check.
Also, you first need to record these instructions. AFAIK, BrickLink’s changelogs
aren’t complete / sufficient.
TL;DR: It’s the same as the work done by Rebrickable: another catalogue, with
conversion tables, with changes to follow / apply or not, with errors or misses…,
and with a full team to manage it.
It could be a bit simpler and you could save a bit by keeping it inside BrickLink,
but that won’t remove most of the work needed.
Another possibility is to handle that in only one “catalogue,” with two (or more!)
different ways to present its info. The work would be done only once, in the
more detailed catalogue, and there would be mechanisms to hide the details to
the users. But that’s the same as the “umbrella part” solution: you need to
change the whole structure of the database and the way the site works. That
can’t be patched onto what exists now (which is already patched enough with spaghetti
and sauce as it is).
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 19, 2024 05:42 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
How much data space would it take to have two catalogs? One for detailed data
and one for generalized marketplace?
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 18, 2024 21:33 | | Subject: | Re: Technic Turntable 60T Redesign - 88738 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Duq writes:
| | So, Catalog admins, will this get updated?
|
Yes.
| | At the moment you have 18938 and 88738 as alternate numbers for the same part,
and 48168 as a mold variant. How anyone could have entered a 60 tooth gear as
mold variant of a 56 tooth gear is a question for another day...
From what I can see the mold variant link should be removed - Z56 and Z60 are
different.
The alternate number link should also be removed, and the descriptions of the
part should be updated to reflect the bevel teeth on one of them.
Or does all this fall in your recent program of dumbing down the database...
|
That had nothing to do with the catalog administrators.
|
|
| Author: | Duq | | Posted: | Apr 18, 2024 18:19 | | Subject: | Re: Technic Turntable 60T Redesign - 88738 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| So, Catalog admins, will this get updated?
At the moment you have 18938 and 88738 as alternate numbers for the same part,
and 48168 as a mold variant. How anyone could have entered a 60 tooth gear as
mold variant of a 56 tooth gear is a question for another day...
From what I can see the mold variant link should be removed - Z56 and Z60 are
different.
The alternate number link should also be removed, and the descriptions of the
part should be updated to reflect the bevel teeth on one of them.
Or does all this fall in your recent program of dumbing down the database...
|
|
| Author: | custommike | | Posted: | Apr 18, 2024 13:14 | | Subject: | Re: 30118pb03 - Add known color - Light Gray | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, custommike writes:
| | Picture on the catalog is of a light gray piece but no known color information
is listed.
|
If that part ever appeared in a set, then it would need to be added to the set
to get known color information to show up.
However, I think it is just the print from
* | | 30119pb01 Wing Plate Bi-level 8 x 4 and 2 x 3 1/3 Down with Silver/Orange/Black UFO Logo Pattern
Parts: Wing |
printed on the wrong part.
In that case, the part should probably not even be in the catalog.
Cheers,
Randy
|
I actually think this part should be deleted. It looks like I found it in error.
The part that I have on hand is actually 30119pb01 (up vs. down). It also appears
that the 30118pb03 pictured in the inventory is a printed on the wrong part.
|
|
| Author: | shonboi | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 21:38 | | Subject: | Set 42044, part 42044stk01 alternate part # | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Part number 42044stk01, sticker sheet for set 42044. Please add alternate item
number 24672/6134420
|
| Author: | shonboi | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 21:31 | | Subject: | Set 60071, part 60071stk01 alternate part # | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Part number 60071stk01, sticker sheet for set 60071. Please add alternate item
number 19445/6099713
|
| Author: | shonboi | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 21:21 | | Subject: | Set 60110, part 60110stk01 alternate part # | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Part number 60110stk01, sticker sheet for set 60110. Please add alternate item
number 24518/6133148
|
| Author: | shonboi | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 21:19 | | Subject: | Set 70323, part 70323stk01 alternate part # | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Part number 70323stk01, sticker sheet for set 70323. Please add alternate item
number 26712/6152338
|
| Author: | shonboi | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 21:13 | | Subject: | Set 70738, part 70738stk01 alternate part # | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Part number 70738stk01, sticker sheet for set 70738. Please add alternate item
number 21059/6112822
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 20:35 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | | |
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
|
The catalog panel was informed of this merge project months before it was announced
publicly. But the purpose of the panel is to bring community voice to the development
team, not contribute to catalog policy.
|
Unless there was a meeting I missed somehow, I do not recollect that we were
informed of this project or asked to give any input or suggestions. There was
a brief mention that there was a variant project but no details or timetables
were ever given. Considering that many people on the Panel were among those who
expressed surprise and dismay when this was all introduced, I would think that
those meetings would indeed have been an ideal place to breach the subject with
the members at large.
|
The only thing I recollect is talking about the need to tackle the variants on
the catalog, but nothing specific, I must have missed it too.
| |
| | We do address catalog policy when it comes up, but it's definitely a sideline
issue, as are all issues that relate to other BrickLink teams, like Marketplace
and Studio. Panel meetings are not the place to debate proposed variant merges.
The Forum is, and there was plenty of debate and even opportunity for more debate.
|
Perhaps it was not the place to discuss the exact specifics of each part being
looked at. But it would have been good to know how the project would be introduced
and carried out. We are supposed to be looking out for the community and sharing
out expertise after all.
Thanks,
~Jen
|
|
He only claims that we were informed of the project and that is the truth. We
were told that it existed.
|
|
| Author: | Saitobricks.ca | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 19:53 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, UTLF writes:
| | cool, what about the help desk backlog that people have been talking about for
the past month?
|
Apparently destroying years of peoples hard work is more important than helping
others.
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 19:52 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
Disgusting.
|
At least they are getting it done
|
| Author: | Saitobricks.ca | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 19:51 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
Disgusting.
|
|
| Author: | Nathan123 | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 18:52 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, pcthurman writes:
| | In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
I didn't think that a set bought USED was allowed to be used as proof to
change or update / add to an inventory. Did this policy change?
Cass T
|
It isn't the only proof. There is only one set that occurred after the underside
torso design changed and that is 10040. The black buckle torso has the modern
underside so there isn't much possibility it could be any other set.
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 18:34 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:
| | In Catalog, pcthurman writes:
| | In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
I didn't think that a set bought USED was allowed to be used as proof to
change or update / add to an inventory. Did this policy change?
Cass T
|
|
“ For the first year after a set was originally released, inventories will only
be accepted from sealed set contents. Exceptions may be made for bundle packs,
certain accessory sets or service packs which only contain very few items, and
also for sets that were distributed in an open (non-sealed) packaging. If no
inventory was created during the first year, then any source may be used to create
an inventory.”
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=199
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 18:33 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, pcthurman writes:
| | In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
I didn't think that a set bought USED was allowed to be used as proof to
change or update / add to an inventory. Did this policy change?
Cass T
|
I think that that only applies if the set is only 1 year old
|
|
| Author: | pcthurman | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 18:24 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
I didn't think that a set bought USED was allowed to be used as proof to
change or update / add to an inventory. Did this policy change?
Cass T
|
|
| Author: | Nathan123 | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 16:28 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Turez writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
Thank you! I submitted two, one for white pants and one for blue.
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 11:21 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | | |
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
|
The catalog panel was informed of this merge project months before it was announced
publicly. But the purpose of the panel is to bring community voice to the development
team, not contribute to catalog policy.
|
Unless there was a meeting I missed somehow, I do not recollect that we were
informed of this project or asked to give any input or suggestions. There was
a brief mention that there was a variant project but no details or timetables
were ever given. Considering that many people on the Panel were among those who
expressed surprise and dismay when this was all introduced, I would think that
those meetings would indeed have been an ideal place to breach the subject with
the members at large.
|
The only thing I recollect is talking about the need to tackle the variants on
the catalog, but nothing specific, I must have missed it too.
| |
| | We do address catalog policy when it comes up, but it's definitely a sideline
issue, as are all issues that relate to other BrickLink teams, like Marketplace
and Studio. Panel meetings are not the place to debate proposed variant merges.
The Forum is, and there was plenty of debate and even opportunity for more debate.
|
Perhaps it was not the place to discuss the exact specifics of each part being
looked at. But it would have been good to know how the project would be introduced
and carried out. We are supposed to be looking out for the community and sharing
out expertise after all.
Thanks,
~Jen
|
|
|
| Author: | Turez | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 10:42 | | Subject: | Re: Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, Nathan123 writes:
| | As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
This can only be fixed by replacing the minifigure in the set inventory. But
the correct minifigure (with 973pb0280c01) must first be added to the catalog.
You can submit it here:
https://www.bricklink.com/wantedCatalog.asp?catType=M
The number would be pi198.
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 10:39 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | | |
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
|
The catalog panel was informed of this merge project months before it was announced
publicly. But the purpose of the panel is to bring community voice to the development
team, not contribute to catalog policy.
|
Unless there was a meeting I missed somehow, I do not recollect that we were
informed of this project or asked to give any input or suggestions. There was
a brief mention that there was a variant project but no details or timetables
were ever given. Considering that many people on the Panel were among those who
expressed surprise and dismay when this was all introduced, I would think that
those meetings would indeed have been an ideal place to breach the subject with
the members at large.
| | We do address catalog policy when it comes up, but it's definitely a sideline
issue, as are all issues that relate to other BrickLink teams, like Marketplace
and Studio. Panel meetings are not the place to debate proposed variant merges.
The Forum is, and there was plenty of debate and even opportunity for more debate.
|
Perhaps it was not the place to discuss the exact specifics of each part being
looked at. But it would have been good to know how the project would be introduced
and carried out. We are supposed to be looking out for the community and sharing
out expertise after all.
Thanks,
~Jen
|
|
| Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 10:22 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 63 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I would like to see an update on this grooved variant that was merged:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1457688
Thanks,
~Jen
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 05:43 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 69 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
The important thing moving forward, though, is that no
| | one is going to keep investing in that handful of variants that we removed.
|
This is a serious understatement. From now until I don't know when, I'm
not investing in any of the variants.
|
| Author: | Nathan123 | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 02:26 | | Subject: | Attach 973pb0280c01 to set 10040 | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| As title says can be attached to set
I recently purchased a used copy of the reissued Black Seas Barracuda and this
torso was there, also the torso has a modern underside and that is in common
with all the figures that came with the re-released set.
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Apr 17, 2024 00:53 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 89 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, rickcraine writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud 
|
32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
|
The catalog panel was informed of this merge project months before it was announced
publicly. But the purpose of the panel is to bring community voice to the development
team, not contribute to catalog policy.
We do address catalog policy when it comes up, but it's definitely a sideline
issue, as are all issues that relate to other BrickLink teams, like Marketplace
and Studio. Panel meetings are not the place to debate proposed variant merges.
The Forum is, and there was plenty of debate and even opportunity for more debate.
| | There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.
|
We knew the hardest thing about this project was having to undo some work that
the community had done. The important thing moving forward, though, is that no
one is going to keep investing in that handful of variants that we removed. This
will also force us to consider more closely the addition of variants in the future,
to avoid this happening again.
And, like I said clearly before, we have a complete record of all modern inventory
change requests. They are all preserved in the Forum for those that want to see
what you discovered in your sealed sets. And the vast majority of your work is
still completely intact and helping other members, so let's not paint this
as a total loss.
|
|
|
| Author: | here4bricks614 | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 22:45 | | Subject: | Re: Please add note | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:
| | and as for the only dark orange 4010px1, there is this:
It is the best complete copy out there. According to the seller, the animals
are all the pb01 variant.
|
156000152927 ?
Note how the animals are well hidden on the picture.
Why would you hide precious parts to better show bricks?
And it's New, but opened and still partly assembled.
Much more the title is "Lego Duplo Set like 2445": like?
|
The seller probably didn’t think too much about it. I wouldn’t have been able
to tell you that this set was rare if not for the fact that I know a little more
about these older DUPLO sets. The parts all seem to be there.
|
|
| Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 22:16 | | Subject: | Re: Please add note | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, here4bricks614 writes:
| | and as for the only dark orange 4010px1, there is this:
It is the best complete copy out there. According to the seller, the animals
are all the pb01 variant.
|
156000152927 ?
Note how the animals are well hidden on the picture.
Why would you hide precious parts to better show bricks?
And it's New, but opened and still partly assembled.
Much more the title is "Lego Duplo Set like 2445": like?
|
| Author: | here4bricks614 | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 21:25 | | Subject: | Re: Please add note | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| and as for the only dark orange 4010px1, there is this:
It is the best complete copy out there. According to the seller, the animals
are all the pb01 variant.
|
|
| Author: | here4bricks614 | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 21:22 | | Subject: | Please add note | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| To the following parts:
“The rust version of this part is actually LEGO color 13 Red Orange, a color
not recognized on BrickLink.”
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 21:12 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, rickcraine writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud
|
32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.
|
This minifigure seems fine after touching it
|
I brought some in and set it on my desk. I really don't know what all the
fuss is about. It's like a long skinny leaf?
|
Essentially. The only things is it makes white parts stain green
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 20:59 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Dhobeck writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, rickcraine writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud
|
32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.
|
This minifigure seems fine after touching it
|
I brought some in and set it on my desk. I really don't know what all the
fuss is about. It's like a long skinny leaf?
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 20:54 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, rickcraine writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud
|
32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.
|
This minifigure seems fine after touching it
|
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 20:48 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, rickcraine writes:
| | In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud
|
32064b could go on a hollow stud. I would have spoken up on it, but I didn't
realize it was on the block.
We definitely could have talked about it on the catalog panel if the catalog
panel had EVER been consulted about this.
There went a double handful of my catalog work and all the give-a-darn that I
had stockpiled. I think I'll go touch grass and see if it is everything
people talk it up to be.
|
|
| Author: | rickcraine | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 20:41 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, axaday writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
Wasn't there that whole controversy with that guy who claimed to have used
it in a "moc on top of a stud so therefore it was useful" even though
it cannot fit on top of a stud
|
|
| Author: | axaday | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 20:34 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - April 16 | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
I didn't realize 32064b was on the chopping block.
|
|
| Author: | jice | | Posted: | Apr 16, 2024 14:27 | | Subject: | 783 storage case with packaging | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| I was able to find this case I had as a child for sale on Facebook. It has the
original packaging including a price tag from Farm and Fleet.
|
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 14:16 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3001old or 3001special? | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, nando10081969 writes:
| | Hello all Bricklinkers!
I found this 2 x 4 brick, in pink color (I guess...) without cross supports.
In the 3001old entry, there are no pink parts. However, I can find it at the
3001special entry (special bricks, test bricks and/or prototypes). The thing
is, all the pictures in this entry have a letter on the studs (f, c, etc). My
part have a old 'lego' logo printed on the studs. Is this still a 3001special?
Or is another kind of 3001 brick that I can't find?
Thanks in advance for your help!
(An yes, the part needs a serious bath ... )
|
3001special.
3001old was never made in this color.
|
Older test bricks were made in molds that were previously used for regular production.
The test bricks with letters and other markings are more recent.
|
|
| Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 14:14 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3001old or 3001special? | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, nando10081969 writes:
| | Hello all Bricklinkers!
I found this 2 x 4 brick, in pink color (I guess...) without cross supports.
In the 3001old entry, there are no pink parts. However, I can find it at the
3001special entry (special bricks, test bricks and/or prototypes). The thing
is, all the pictures in this entry have a letter on the studs (f, c, etc). My
part have a old 'lego' logo printed on the studs. Is this still a 3001special?
Or is another kind of 3001 brick that I can't find?
Thanks in advance for your help!
(An yes, the part needs a serious bath ... )
|
3001special.
3001old was never made in this color.
|
|
| Author: | WildBricks | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 13:03 | | Subject: | Re: Movements in Item Type and Category #7 | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| | +1 |
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 12:32 | | Subject: | Re: Color name tweak | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Skafte writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
Hi, sorry to dig up an old thread, but the blue iridescent one I have is definitely
not Bright Light Blue, the coating is put on a Medium Blue brick. All pics I
can find seem to be Medium Blue as well, they do not get brighter or lighter
by the coating.
I propose a name change for this gear (Key Chain 853993)
from
2 x 4 Brick - Bright Light Blue with Iridescent Coating Key Chain
to
2 x 4 Brick - Medium Blue with Iridescent Coating Key Chain
Thanks
|
I agree. It is definitely darker than Sweet Mayhem's hair piece which really
is Bright Light Blue. I have updated the item name.
|
|
| Author: | Skafte | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 12:23 | | Subject: | Re: Color name tweak | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
Hi, sorry to dig up an old thread, but the blue iridescent one I have is definitely
not Bright Light Blue, the coating is put on a Medium Blue brick. All pics I
can find seem to be Medium Blue as well, they do not get brighter or lighter
by the coating.
I propose a name change for this gear (Key Chain 853993)
from
2 x 4 Brick - Bright Light Blue with Iridescent Coating Key Chain
to
2 x 4 Brick - Medium Blue with Iridescent Coating Key Chain
Thanks
|
|
| Author: | Stuart9 | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 07:29 | | Subject: | Re: Part 3001old or 3001special? | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| 3001special, it’s a 3001old in a non standard colour, nice find.
In Catalog, nando10081969 writes:
| | Hello all Bricklinkers!
I found this 2 x 4 brick, in pink color (I guess...) without cross supports.
In the 3001old entry, there are no pink parts. However, I can find it at the
3001special entry (special bricks, test bricks and/or prototypes). The thing
is, all the pictures in this entry have a letter on the studs (f, c, etc). My
part have a old 'lego' logo printed on the studs. Is this still a 3001special?
Or is another kind of 3001 brick that I can't find?
Thanks in advance for your help!
(An yes, the part needs a serious bath ... )
|
|
|
| Author: | nando10081969 | | Posted: | Apr 15, 2024 05:11 | | Subject: | Part 3001old or 3001special? | | Viewed: | 137 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hello all Bricklinkers!
I found this 2 x 4 brick, in pink color (I guess...) without cross supports.
In the 3001old entry, there are no pink parts. However, I can find it at the
3001special entry (special bricks, test bricks and/or prototypes). The thing
is, all the pictures in this entry have a letter on the studs (f, c, etc). My
part have a old 'lego' logo printed on the studs. Is this still a 3001special?
Or is another kind of 3001 brick that I can't find?
Thanks in advance for your help!
(An yes, the part needs a serious bath ... )
|
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 14, 2024 17:08 | | Subject: | Re: 30118pb03 - Add known color - Light Gray | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, custommike writes:
| | Picture on the catalog is of a light gray piece but no known color information
is listed.
|
If that part ever appeared in a set, then it would need to be added to the set
to get known color information to show up.
However, I think it is just the print from
* | | 30119pb01 Wing Plate Bi-level 8 x 4 and 2 x 3 1/3 Down with Silver/Orange/Black UFO Logo Pattern
Parts: Wing |
printed on the wrong part.
In that case, the part should probably not even be in the catalog.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | Ziegelmeister | | Posted: | Apr 14, 2024 16:57 | | Subject: | Re: 30118pb03 - Add known color - Light Gray | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog Requests, custommike writes:
| | Picture on the catalog is of a light gray piece but no known color information
is listed.
|
And it's not the light blue grey or light green in the drop down menu?
|
| Author: | custommike | | Posted: | Apr 14, 2024 16:30 | | Subject: | 30118pb03 - Add known color - Light Gray | | Viewed: | 82 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Picture on the catalog is of a light gray piece but no known color information
is listed.
|
|
| Author: | rsijmons | | Posted: | Apr 14, 2024 12:12 | | Subject: | Set 44042 - New Slope, Curved, Decorated | | Viewed: | 74 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| There are 2x decorated pieces 93273 in set 40442
I've only got a photo of one (found in job lot).
Can someone add this one to the catalogue?
Thanks
Regards
|
|
| Author: | Saitobricks.ca | | Posted: | Apr 13, 2024 21:09 | | Subject: | Re: 42163 extra parts | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | Just bought one copy of the set and received 3 spare,
Should I make a inventory change request?
|
If you built it correctly, then yes.
|
Ok, and yes I double checked the build twice.
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Apr 13, 2024 20:44 | | Subject: | Re: 42163 extra parts | | Viewed: | 39 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Saitobricks.ca writes:
| | Just bought one copy of the set and received 3 spare,
Should I make a inventory change request?
|
If you built it correctly, then yes.
|
| Author: | Saitobricks.ca | | Posted: | Apr 13, 2024 17:23 | | Subject: | 42163 extra parts | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Just bought one copy of the set and received 3 spare,
Should I make a inventory change request?
|
|
|
| Author: | Saitobricks.ca | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 13:13 | | Subject: | Re: Reaction to the R.R. Slugger video | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| Look at what you have done!!!😭😭😭😭😭
https://youtu.be/wtICr7eVIoU?si=hPdPyVKqi3fKDzN9
In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | Hello again everyone,
This is my official response to the video from R.R. Slugger concerning the merging
of part variants in the BrickLink catalog:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGRxNX8Cg_o&t=1s
Here is an initial response to the video, specifically regarding the set inventory
for the Core Magnetizer:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1450164
Here is today's response:
*************************************
I’ll start with a couple points I actually agree with Slugger on:
1) BrickLink certainly is an invaluable tool, and one of the things that has
motivated me to invest in the catalog over the years, long before I became a
community admin or started working in the BrickLink office, was knowing that
whatever corrections or additions I would make would instantly circle the globe
and potentially benefit thousands of fans everywhere.
2) Regarding the suggestion to double down on accuracy – that is actually what
we’re doing, if you look at the big picture. I remember discussing with one of
the authors of the LEGO Collector books that came out a few years ago:
and one of the points we discussed was why certain things weren’t included in
a publication that was so comprehensive. The answer was that if a particular
data field didn’t have at least 80% of the data, then there were questions raised
as to how useful that field would be.
Of course this case does not cover all of the changes being made to the BrickLink
catalog, but it does pertain to some of them. The smooth slopes and frosted bricks,
even after 20 years of accepting data from the community, have a very weak connection
to our inventory system. Many of the parts are not represented even a single
time, and of those that are represented, there are serious questions as to the
accuracy of the inventory change requests.
The biggest obstacle in separating variants on BrickLink, especially the older
ones, is lack of real data. So the question comes up, should we have entries
on BrickLink that can’t or never will be represented sufficiently in the inventory
system?
Being orphaned or partially orphaned from the system is a bad thing, and our
stance on that is one of the things that has really changed since Dan built the
inventory system in the early 2000s. It used to be acceptable to have entries
floating around just for buying and selling, but over time we have realized the
power of our inventory system, to the extent that we now use artificial inventories
to represent certain parts (like BAM parts):
By removing some of these variants, the accuracy and inclusiveness of the inventory
system goes up, and that is the primary driving force behind these current changes.
Why not just fill out the data instead of consolidating entries? Because we simply
do not have the data, and if we did, we couldn’t handle it all anyway. There
is no way we can add thousands of new minifigure inventories to the system simply
to accommodate different types of studs.
Next I’d like to give an actual example or something that WILL be lost in
the transition.
Slugger is right – just because the example he gave may not have been the perfect
example, it doesn’t negate the point that something will be lost. So here goes:
Set 7171 from 1999 (Mos Espa Podrace):
is one of the celebrated early Star Wars sets and as such we may consider it
to be at the pinnacle of collector interest. In that set is a yellow dome with
a “blocked open stud” which is part no. 30151a:
[p=30151a,3]
The next version of that part by all accounts was introduced around 2010,
[p=30151b]
and by that time, the Mos Espa Podrace had long been retired. So we can say with
reasonable certainty that this set came originally with domes with blocked open
studs. If you see a copy of the set sitting on someone’s shelf and the domes
on Anakin’s podracer have hollow studs (no little Mercedes symbol), that is a
sure sign that the parts, and maybe even the whole set, is not original.
So if the BrickLink catalog stops distinguishing the “a” from the “b” version,
someone might build it wrong and wouldn’t even know it! However, as a quiz question
for savvy readers, why would this scenario never actually happen in the real
world? What do we know about these the 30151 variants that puts this problem
completely into the realm of the hypothetical?
Next example, set 4778-1 from 2005 (Desert Biplane):
This is not Star Wars buts it’s still a classic in my book. There is a different
kind of dome on the front of this plane (553), but it has the same issues as
the previously mentioned dome part.
[p=553b,5]
This set is from 2005, so it’s not likely that it ever came with the “c” variant.
The 2008 appearance is in the first UCS Death Star which had a really long production
run and has over 50 lines of variants in the BrickLink inventory:
But if this little set were produced up through 2010, there might be a real possibility
of seeing one with a “c” variant.
[p=553c,5]
So with the current merges, this is data that would be lost. People wouldn’t
know about the stud variants, and someone could get any of 3 different stud types
– blocked open, hollow, or even vented. All three exist in red.
[p=3262,5]
Next up is set 6745-1 from 2009 (Propeller Power).
This also has a red 533 on the nose of the plane, but here the inventory system
says it could have either the “b” or “c” variant. Check the change log to see
if you recognize any of the people who added these variants to the set:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogInvChangeItem.asp?itemType=S&itemNo=6745-1&viewDate=Y&viewStatus=1
We’re pretty sure this came with both “b” and “c” types. It didn’t come with
a vented stud, and someone might mistakenly put one on this model if BrickLink
doesn’t educate them about it, right? That is the premise on why we need these
variants in the catalog, correct?
The thing is, how can we tolerate the difference of stud type in this model,
and not in other models where it is historically incorrect? In this plane model
from 2009, both are correct, so what does that say about the mixing of variants
in other models?
True collectors know that there actually is no replacement part that will ever
perfectly replace a part that is lost. The only truly correct part is the part
the set originally came with. It’s nice to get as close as possible to a correct
replacement part, but it’s a futile attempt.
So I will admit that something is lost in the catalog by harmonizing all the
hollow studs types. But the second message is that whatever is lost is quite
unimportant in relation to the effort it takes for the BrickLink community to
recognize these variants.
We weighed it up, and decided that stud types are not important enough. They
have some importance, and there are some workarounds available for the people
who really want to go down that path. But overall, what we seem to be losing
is less than what we believe we are gaining.
**************************************
One more detail about the video – in navigating around the BrickLink catalog,
I noticed Slugger used the new inventory tab on the catalog page instead of the
proper inventory page accessible by the link at the top of the page.
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=6989-1
There are multiple problems with this version of the inventory. First, there
is no link to the change log, which for specialists is a must. Reading the change
log lets you determine the accuracy of the data you are consuming.
Second, the match IDs do not line up with the inventory notes, so any mention,
for example, of “match ID 99” (which is critical to understanding variant inventories)
doesn’t make any sense.
Indispensable
Some of my colleagues were surprised to see such a strong reaction from our users
on this topic. But the fact is, variants are an indispensable feature of the
BrickLink catalog and they are one of the main reasons for the “sealed set” standard
we maintain for new inventories. Keeping this standard comes at a cost, and it’s
important for people to know that all of this work and energy is appreciated.
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=1103
BrickLink is not descending into a parts oblivion where nothing is distinguished.
I made that very clear from the very first announcement. This is simply a mid-way
correction to enable us to do better at what we already do. I trust that over
the coming months and years you will come around to believing me on that point.
|
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 12:06 | | Subject: | Re: Movements in Item Type and Category #7 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, crazylegoman writes:
| | It's true that those 2 parts are the least similar to the other parts in
the arch category, but I think they fit there much better than they would in
the Plate, Modified or Tile, Modified categories.
-1
David
|
That means we still have 0.000000000000000000000000001
|
| Author: | crazylegoman | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 12:04 | | Subject: | Re: Movements in Item Type and Category #7 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| It's true that those 2 parts are the least similar to the other parts in
the arch category, but I think they fit there much better than they would in
the Plate, Modified or Tile, Modified categories.
-1
David
|
|
| Author: | Dhobeck | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: Movements in Item Type and Category #7 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Leftoverbricks writes:
| | Today we received this update of items that were moved to another category:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2599
I strongly object to the movement of below parts to the Arch category.
and
The definition of an arch according to the Oxford dictionary is:
a curved symmetrical structure spanning an opening and typically supporting
the weight of a bridge, roof, or wall above it.
Neither of those parts fulfil that description. They do not span an opening.
They maybe help to raise an adjoining element.
This becomes more obvious if you look at the 39 parts that are now categorized
as Arch.
There are exactly two parts that don't look like any other part in this category,
the other 37 parts do.
See picture below or this link: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=P&catString=6
I strongly suggest to undo the movement since it is not at all logical, not following
the definition of an arch and certainly doesn't a help a user to search for
an item like 4190 or 73682.
My suggestion is to move these items to Plate, Modified or Tile, Modified.
Please support my suggestion by replying with an upvote -- no need to cite
my post, just say +1
|
+1.0000000000000000000000000010000
|
|
| Author: | Leftoverbricks | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 11:38 | | Subject: | Movements in Item Type and Category #7 | | Viewed: | 78 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Today we received this update of items that were moved to another category:
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2599
I strongly object to the movement of below parts to the Arch category.
and
The definition of an arch according to the Oxford dictionary is:
a curved symmetrical structure spanning an opening and typically supporting
the weight of a bridge, roof, or wall above it.
Neither of those parts fulfil that description. They do not span an opening.
They maybe help to raise an adjoining element.
This becomes more obvious if you look at the 39 parts that are now categorized
as Arch.
There are exactly two parts that don't look like any other part in this category,
the other 37 parts do.
See picture below or this link: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=P&catString=6
I strongly suggest to undo the movement since it is not at all logical, not following
the definition of an arch and certainly doesn't a help a user to search for
an item like 4190 or 73682.
My suggestion is to move these items to Plate, Modified or Tile, Modified.
Please support my suggestion by replying with an upvote -- no need to cite
my post, just say +1
|
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 06:22 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, elias3 writes:
| | In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, elias3 writes:
| | In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, elias3 writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | Unless I'm missing something, these are the same exact thing yea? One is
listed as a set, the other as a part.
|
One you could buy as a set and the other you could receive in a set, would be
really weird to merge them
|
Fundamentally agree. I assume that means a "new" 88009 would come in
some sort of box? There is an entry for it but no photo or sales history.
|
Hi
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?O=88009-1#T=S&O={%22rpp%22:%22500%22,%22iconly%22:0}
Stefaan
|
In fairness to Thomas, I added the pic just after and in response to his query.
|
Hi
thanks for adding
I was going to take a picture of my set but you beat me to it.😉
Stefaan
|
It's a known fact that folks with cats are always a step behind those without
|
Hi
That's right
Unfortunately, I have to announce that my 19 year old cat passed away last month
(that one in the profile photo)
Stefaan
|
Sorry about the loss of your friend. Sad to hear. Nineteen years old! Long life
for the cat. Though, unjustly short it must seem to you.
|
|
| Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 04:30 | | Subject: | Re: Stickers Package Type | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | In Catalog, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:
| | Sorry if I have missed something, but who and why is changing Stickers Package
Type from Weight To Volume Bound thus making Instant Checkout unavailable?
Thank you.
|
The sticker sheets I have appear to be a mixture of both volume and weight bound.
The majority of the volume bound ones have dimensions, but not all.
Ideally, these probably all should be volume bound. Or at least the larger ones
that might get creased more easily and/or not fit in a regular bubble mailer.
|
All my orders ship in a box.
I set all my stickers' package type to Weight and that works for me.
When someone changes it to Volume Band (without dimensions) it disables Instant
Checkout, which is annoying.
I'm not sure why someone would that? It should be at store's discretion,
right?
|
Volume bound for any parts with large dimensions makes sense to me, and it should
probably be consistent. Individual items are always at the store's discretion
as you can set them manually to weight or volume bound.
|
For some years now, whenever I add a sticker to my Inventory I set Package Type
manually to Weight, and then when someone change it to Volume Bound it changes
my initial setting.
It shouldn't, should it?
|
I think it shouldn't, report the behavior here please:
https://www.bricklink.com/helpDesk.asp?helpDeskID=114
| |
| | Of course, if the dimensions
are entered then the IC issue goes away.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | elias3 | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 04:07 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, elias3 writes:
| | In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, elias3 writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | Unless I'm missing something, these are the same exact thing yea? One is
listed as a set, the other as a part.
|
One you could buy as a set and the other you could receive in a set, would be
really weird to merge them
|
Fundamentally agree. I assume that means a "new" 88009 would come in
some sort of box? There is an entry for it but no photo or sales history.
|
Hi
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?O=88009-1#T=S&O={%22rpp%22:%22500%22,%22iconly%22:0}
Stefaan
|
In fairness to Thomas, I added the pic just after and in response to his query.
|
Hi
thanks for adding
I was going to take a picture of my set but you beat me to it.😉
Stefaan
|
It's a known fact that folks with cats are always a step behind those without
|
Hi
That's right
Unfortunately, I have to announce that my 19 year old cat passed away last month
(that one in the profile photo)
Stefaan
|
|
| Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 03:02 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | Unless I'm missing something, these are the same exact thing yea? One is
listed as a set, the other as a part.
|
One you could buy as a set and the other you could receive in a set, would be
really weird to merge them
|
I still say they're the same thing.  Just one came in it's on bag
and the other doesn't.
|
|
|
| Author: | Ziegelmeister | | Posted: | Apr 12, 2024 02:09 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
| | In Catalog, Ziegelmeister writes:
| | Unless I'm missing something, these are the same exact thing yea? One is
listed as a set, the other as a part.
|
One you could buy as a set and the other you could receive in a set, would be
really weird to merge them
|
I still say they're the same thing. Just one came in it's on bag
and the other doesn't.
|
|
| Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2024 17:30 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | | | Dogs are fine, but it gets tough to sleep with 3 or 4 of them even on a king
size bed
|
|
I love them! Much more, if I don't accept them, then for sure I'll have
a 'cool' sleep.
Alone on the couch*
| | Whether we're talking about cats or dogs, sleep only with you spouse Otherwise,
consider dachshunds
|
I wasn't talking about scale models
*edited, weird typo. Thanks SylvainGPT
|
|
| Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | Apr 11, 2024 17:29 | | Subject: | Re: Merge 88009 and bb0892c01 | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, 1001bricks writes:
| | In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | Whether we're talking about cats or dogs, sleep only with you spouse
|
I love them! Much more, if I don't accept them, then for sure I'll have
a 'cool' sleep.
Alone on the coach
|
I get it
| |
| | Otherwise, consider dachshunds
|
I wasn't talking about scale models
|
Understood that...
Dachshunds just have special place within our hearts:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1153630
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
Canada, Ontario
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Germany, Niedersachsen
Belgium
Ireland, Dublin
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
)
)
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
Sweden, Gotland
United Kingdom, England
Portugal
)
)
United Kingdom, Scotland
