BrickLink Discussion Forum

In Catalog, bje writes:

Rest of the B's, C and D. I'm assuming you want catalog change requests
and not forum posts like the colors, correct?

Okay, so you're taking Bionicle through Duplo. And yes, catalog change requests,
please.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 25, 2018 03:02

Subject:

Seventh Catalog Project - Action Plan

Viewed:

70 times

Topic:

Thank you all for caring enough to provide the fascinating discussion and for
listening as I tried to formulate my own thoughts on figure titles with that
rather convoluted set of rules which I posted.

Some of you were for set numbers and some were against. The only thing we really
all agreed on was that set/book/gear numbers should be in figure titles until
that figure is added to an inventory.

The only point that I haven't yet addressed (I think) is the mention that
Brickset uses item numbers in the titles to link back here. I've checked
this for some figures without set numbers in the titles and Brickset still
links back to us on those figures, so I don't think that would be a valid
reason for keeping item numbers.

So here's what I've done:

Added Figure Title Standardization to the Catalog Roadmap

We absolutely need to standardize figure titles catalog-wide and we will. However,
this particular project was only to decide if we should have set numbers in titles
and I've decided on that. The members who said that we should start at the
beginning with figure titles are right - and in an ideal world we would. For
now, though, we're just going to address the issue at hand.

Progress sometimes comes in fits and starts and we are making slow progress
with catalog issues, even if we're not doing it in the most efficient way
possible.

Updated the Help Center Section to Address Figure Titles

See here:

https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=179

This section had not been updated in over eight years. I added the following
sentence:

Figure titles should not include set, book, or gear numbers; these are only allowed
in the figure title until that figure is added to an inventory and must then
be removed.

Updated Project

I waffled back and forth on set/book/gear numbers in figure titles, but in the
end I don't think we gain much from keeping them. They are something which
need continual management (meaning occasional review and corrections when necessary)
to remain correct and members simply aren't doing this. I certainly don't
have the time to do this regularly and clearly other administrators don't
either. I found an error, BTW, fairly early when selecting a figure at random
which the title said appeared in two sets when it only appeared in one set.

We gain little by keeping numbers in the title once a figure is inventoried,
they must be changed when occurrences of figures change, no one is reviewing
them periodically for corrections, they're something else members have to
think about when looking at titles (and titles don't explain what these numbers
mean), they would need an additional identifier such as (Multiple Sets) to be
consistent catalog-wide, and they lessen the aesthetic appeal of figure titles.

So we are removing set/book/gear numbers from every figure in which they appear
except those figures not yet inventoried. Please submit catalog requests as
necessary if you'd like to help and do not submit any other changes with
your requests unless a serious error is discovered (include a note to me with
your request in that case). The colors project wasn't coordinated so well,
so I'm doing something different here.

Please use this thread to claim some categories which you are checking and correcting.
This should make things go more smoothly. We will go in alphabetical order,
so here are the categories I am claiming and will correct myself:

4 Juniors
Adventurers
Agents
Alpha Team
Aquazone
Atlantis
Avatar
Basic
Batman 1
Belville

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 14:35

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

35 times

Topic:

In Catalog, mfav writes:

I break it down here.

Thank you very much for making a chart. This kind of in-depth, serious analysis
is greatly appreciated. I haven't had time to look it over completely, but
I wanted to explain the first title section in more detail.

The Minifigs section of the catalog is an item type wherein we group most sizes
and types of figure that TLG has ever made with the exception of a few which
we consider parts:

spa0012 (Inv) Giant-Man - Set 76051
Parts: Special Assembly

and those we consider gear:

displayfig01 Display Figure 7in x 11in x 19in (blue jacket, red pants, white T-Shirt with Lego logo, construction helmet)
Gear: Retail Display

and those we don't include at all:

7920-1 (Inv) McDonald's Sports Set Number 5 - Blue Hockey Player #4 polybag
3 Parts, 1 Minifigure, 2004
Sets: Sports: Hockey

Item types are different than categories and we only have one item type (Minifigs)
to use for a wide variety of figures of differing sizes and types. Some of these
we have given descriptive names (statuette, big figure, microfigure, etc.).
Others we have not (Technic figure, Duplo figure, 4 Juniors figure). The first
part of the title is intended to indicate the type of figure, not the theme (although
theme names are used).

Yes, it is inconsistent. However, the alternative is to come up with non-themed
names to describe each size/type of figure. And yes, as I explained in the original
posting, technically this section should be included for all figures and it should
be organized like this:

Figure, Minifigure
Figure, Technic
Figure, Statuette
Figure, Microfigure
Figure, Big
Figure, Primo
Figure, Duplo Brick
Figure, Duplo, Early Brick
Figure, Duplo, Doll
Figure, Duplo LEGO Ville
Figure, Mini Doll
Figure, Belville
Figure, 4 Juniors
Figure, Quatro
Figure, Fabuland

And so on. The word "figure" is necessary to avoid the appearance that these
are just themes. Since we're genuinely stuck with throwing all figures into
one place, I tried to make the best of it. We should retitle that item type
Figures instead of Minifigs and I will ask if this can be done
(I can't change item types like Sets, Books, Catalogs, etc.).

As for the different sizes and giving every one of those different sizes/types
of figures its own name instead of a theme name, I despair.

BTW, don't take my thoughts on figure titles as any sort of gospel. It's
only a starting point for a discussion. If you came up with your own titling
system independently, then what would it look like?

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 14:03

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

38 times

Topic:

In Catalog, mfav writes:

I'm just noting that there's a mix of apples and oranges in this column.

Right, and I did think of that and disliked it. I have most of the 4 Juniors
sets done now according to the guidelines:

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogListOld.asp?catType=M&catString=516&itemBrand=1000

Honestly, when I see all those set numbers together on one page I don't much
care for the idea of including them at all. For those of you who want set numbers
added to the titles, do you like the way they look?

We could go with including them for one set only and use (Multiple Sets) after
that. This would fix the issue mfav pointed out. But, if I were the only person
deciding, I'd just leave them off completely except for figures which hadn't
yet been included in an inventory. They just look messy to me.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 07:14

Subject:

Re: Inventory Change Request for Part Dragon03

Viewed:

15 times

Topic:

Inventories Requests

In Inventories Requests, Give.Me.A.Brick writes:

Please make changes to the following inventory:

Dragon03 (Inv) Dragon, Fantasy Era, Dark Green Head with Armor
Parts: Animal, Air

* Delete 1 Part 40379 Dark Green Dinosaur Tail End Section

Comments from Submitter:
The end of the Tail is not Part 40379 but part 51874pb03 (already in the inventory of this Dragon).

I think that part may be used at the back of the head.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 05:57

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

41 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

may I please you to consider fianlly changing their numbers to sw... as all others
Sw minifigs have.

Taking a hard look at item numbers is another huge project which is on my distant
radar. Item numbers aren't changed very often because it can have negative
effects in a number of ways, but I think it's a little foolish to still be
using item numbers from other websites.

This is a project where we will have to tread carefully, but it is something
which needs to be done.

Following these above this one should also have part number left because it has
it own part number: 87561
Now if it is sw978 these two with parts number should be changed to sw... it
the same case

I left the part number in place for Han Solo in Carbonite, but changed it to
an alternate item number. The word didn't crumble or anything, so it may
not hurt to give these two figures SW numbers and move the existing numbers to
additional item numbers.

Do this for me, please. Submit a separate forum catalog request so that I can
have it handy and reference it when asking higher up.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 05:31

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

I would leave only
Clone Trooper Episode Three (7261, 7655)
his occupation is being Clone Trooper

Right, but adding trooper at the beginning of all troopers will group them all
together and fit in with the larger plan for all minifigures. As I said, this
initial identifier doesn't have to be an occupation. It can be a type of
theme-specific minifigure like trooper or droid.

As for destroyer droid, I don't think we need to be that specific (although
we certainly could, I suppose). "Destroyer droid" is an identifier which could
only be applied to a few figures, while "droid" is more inclusive. But I'm
always open to reconsidering anything.

So I can help you with Star Wars category

I would, of course, appreciate it.

I will later also look what else can be made more consistent in there.

Once we get the final rules agreed upon and in place, they should take care of
any inconsistencies on their own if applied correctly to all figures. The Star
Wars category is fairly well titled as a whole and the only changes in many cases
would be adding occupation or type identifiers at the beginning of the titles
and set numbers to the ends.

If you find any figures for which this approach would cause problems, please
let me know. And be aware that we're not making any changes right now except
to 4 Juniors figures.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 05:05

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

32 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

So you like see this
[m=sw432] as
Farmer, Luke Skywalker

This is his occupation, this is what he was doing on Tatooine
I don't Like it after change according to this rule

For this we'd probably do something like:

Hero, Luke Skywalker, Additional Descriptors as Necessary (Set Number)

And:

Villain, Darth Vader, Additional Descriptors as Necessary (Set Number)

We can definitely discuss those terms, though. They don't necessarily have
to be any one specific thing like occupation. Or, we could simply go with this
if you preferred (and maybe this would be a better approach anyway):

Character Star Wars, Luke Skywalker, Additional Descriptors as Necessary (Set
Number)

In the past specific themes appear to have been titled independently of the whole,
at least in some cases, and that's what catalog-wide figure title standardization
would correct. I'm thinking in terms of all 10,000 figures and not just
one theme.

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 04:39

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project - Titles Update

Viewed:

33 times

Topic:

In Catalog, Hygrotus writes:

I'm against it and I don't like it.

I almost get the sense that you simply don't care for it.

But you're definitely right: I got my examples wrong.

It complicate too much in nicley
named in my opinon Star Wars minifigs, many of them have their on specific names
which function quite well, why change them?

Yes, this was my own problem, too. It reduces the aesthetic appeal of some titles
and I'm with you - I don't like it either.

But in Star Wars the droids, for example, are scattered everywhere and some of
them won't even appear when you search for droid:

[M=sw441]

Darth Vader is Darth vader adding something like supervillain or Dark Lord of
Sith (which suit better in this case

is completly unnecessary

Yes, it is unnecessary for this figure. The only thing it would be necessary
for is across-the-board standardization. You mention later in your post that
we should not mess with licensed lines, but I'm unsure why these figures
deserve special treatment that other figures are denied.

Star Wars figure titles are, generally speaking, usually just the figure name,
sometimes with a set number and sometimes not. Literally the only things I'm
suggesting adding to that are type classifications at the beginning and set numbers
where they don't already exist.

No this is Clone Trooper not Trooper, Clone

You're right. Please consider these titles and see if you would consider
them acceptable:

[M=sw522]

Trooper, 212th Battalion Trooper (75036)

[M=sw374]

Trooper, Death Star Trooper (9492)

[M=sw126]

Trooper, Clone Trooper Episode Three (7261, 7655)

As a side note, why are we using Ep.3 in that title? Ep. is a poor substitute
for Episode and the number 3 is stripped from searches anyway.

So hopefully these examples will demonstrate that almost nothing would change
with Star Wars titles and the change would be an improvement in that it would
group similar figures together. I do apologize for the misleading examples I
gave.

By the way, here are some Star Wars examples of poor titling which need to be
standardized. How does adding non-searchable numbers like 1, 2, and 3 at the
end give anyone an idea which figures these are? Essentially these figures have
identical titles and I, not being very familiar with Star Wars, would have to
examine the photos closely to find the differences. There are more besides just
these, too.

[M=sw678]
[M=sw708]
[M=sw734]

Author:

StormChaser

Posted:

Nov 24, 2018 03:52

Subject:

Re: Seventh Catalog Project Underway

Viewed:

25 times

Topic: