Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | Kenopolis  | | Posted: | Apr 5, 2024 01:02 | | Subject: | Re: 61287c01pb02 inventory Color correction? | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, Turez writes:
I see. I think I understand why it happens, but not sure if the fix I tried
to enter will work.
|
 |
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Apr 5, 2024 00:49 | | Subject: | Re: 61287c01pb02 inventory Color correction? | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, Nubs_Select writes:
Yes, when you have the tab selected, it works, but when you click on the inventory
to open a new page, the pictures don't show.
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?P=61287c01pb02
Is this just a quirk of how the catalog is set up? or is something missing from
the inventory?
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Apr 3, 2024 00:48 | | Subject: | 61287c01pb02 inventory Color correction? | | Viewed: | 61 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
| 61287c01pb02 Cylinder Hemisphere 2 x 2 with Armillary Sphere Pattern (Inv)
When the inventory page is opened for this item, there are no images for the
items.
I thought maybe it is because a color was not entered? Color should be 69, Dark
Tan.
This item is the whole sphere, the contents of the inventory are each half of
the sphere.
I tried to do a change inventory request, but it would not work.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Mar 5, 2024 17:00 | | Subject: | Re: Please change item note for Duplo 4066pb417 | | Viewed: | 27 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | |
| Thank you!
In Catalog Requests, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog Requests, Kenopolis writes:
| | 4066pb417
Please change the additional note that currently says "Item distributed at
the LEGOLAND Discovery Center in Atlanta, GA."
|
It has been removed.
| | It is obvious that it was handed out at LEGOLAND Discovery Center.
(Since it says LEGOLAND Discovery Center)
I also know that it was handed out in KC, Missouri as well. I would assume it
was at most if not all LDCs.
|
| | So how about just remove the note that says it was handed out at LDC Atlanta,
and replace it with:
"Please note that there are Different versions of this part with different
Colors, different languages, and even different copyright years. Each unique
image has has a separate entry."
|
The note was not needed since all relevant parts have been added to the same
relationship.
| | The same note could go on each?
Perhaps add these to the "Item is similar to:"
4066pb417
4066pb424
4066pb436
4066pb501
76371pb128
76371pb142
76371pb143
76371pb148
76371pb150
76371pb151
76371pb156
76371pb180
76371pb220
76371pb238
Sorry, I was cleaning out my drawer where all my LDC bricks were hiding.
|
|
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Mar 5, 2024 05:00 | | Subject: | Please change item note for Duplo 4066pb417 | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Catalog Requests | | For: | Catalog Associate | | Status: | Completed | |
| 4066pb417
Please change the additional note that currently says "Item distributed at
the LEGOLAND Discovery Center in Atlanta, GA."
It is obvious that it was handed out at LEGOLAND Discovery Center.
(Since it says LEGOLAND Discovery Center)
I also know that it was handed out in KC, Missouri as well. I would assume it
was at most if not all LDCs.
So how about just remove the note that says it was handed out at LDC Atlanta,
and replace it with:
"Please note that there are Different versions of this part with different
Colors, different languages, and even different copyright years. Each unique
image has has a separate entry."
The same note could go on each?
Perhaps add these to the "Item is similar to:"
4066pb417
4066pb424
4066pb436
4066pb501
76371pb128
76371pb142
76371pb143
76371pb148
76371pb150
76371pb151
76371pb156
76371pb180
76371pb220
76371pb238
Sorry, I was cleaning out my drawer where all my LDC bricks were hiding.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 23, 2024 06:12 | | Subject: | Re: Add Forum Topic - Politics | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
| In Suggestions, Familybuild writes:
| | In Suggestions, Emperor_Penguin writes:
| | Who would want to discuss politics on a lego selling website, it has nothing
to do with it. The discussion forums are wild enough 🤦♂️
|
+1
Also.. the cross border makes a going discussion mostly useless for a lot of
users
|
^^THIS^^
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 11, 2024 03:12 | | Subject: | Minifig name clarification and correction | | Viewed: | 85 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Hi,
I have submitted 2 Minifigure name change requests.
For Ron Weasley from Harry Potter
Figs hp113 and hp123
The torso, used in two sets, represents the Ron from Order of the Phoenix.
The Red Plaid or Tartan sweater he wore had brown sleeves. It was not a vest.
The Hogwarts express set had Black legs, Diagon Alley had Reddish Brown legs.
Just trying to make it easier to notice the difference and similarities between
the two figures.
Thanks.
(Deleted original post, and resubmitted with repetition removed)
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 10, 2024 18:41 | | Subject: | Re: How much do you think this is worth? | | Viewed: | 70 times | | Topic: | Price Guide | |
| In Price Guide, Kenopolis writes:
| | I was wondering when that would show up here.
Jeez... $33,001.00!!!
That's insane. Spot price for the gold weight of that is less than $300.
|
Correction, sounds like it's over an ounce in weight. Spot price for 14K
gold is $1,184.21 USD per ounce. I thought it was a lot less than an ounce.
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 10, 2024 18:02 | | Subject: | Re: How much do you think this is worth? | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Price Guide | |
| I was wondering when that would show up here.
Jeez... $33,001.00!!!
That's insane. Spot price for the gold weight of that is less than $300.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2024 04:39 | | Subject: | Re: New inventories added for some books. | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Kenopolis writes:
| | Hey,
I added inventories for several books.
b23hp02
b21hp14
b22hp15
b19hp11
b21hp04hu
They are all based off of new copies of each book.
Yes, that last one is hungarian. I obtained it on line. I ran across it completely
by accident, and the price was right. If pictures are needed, please let me
know. It's identical to the picture already there for that item.
Thank you!
|
We have definitely seen them, and we know they are waiting to be approved. Although,
compared to verifying new set inventories, book inventories are much farther
down on the priority list. 
Having said that, I will try to take a look at them shortly. 
Cheers,
Randy
|
I get it. There is a ton to do right now.
I just wasn't sure if protocol was to mention it or not, so I mentioned it
because I've got nothing better to do.
Much appreciated.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2024 04:29 | | Subject: | Re: What is #44814 Glitter Trans-Clear coated in? | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I think I have one of those floating around somewhere, I'll have to look
into it.
It sounds like LEGO used a drum lacquered process to coat those. Similar to the
Metallic gold and silver.
Glad I ran across this. Interesting stuff.
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2024 01:38 | | Subject: | New inventories added for some books. | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| Hey,
I added inventories for several books.
b23hp02
b21hp14
b22hp15
b19hp11
b21hp04hu
They are all based off of new copies of each book.
Yes, that last one is hungarian. I obtained it on line. I ran across it completely
by accident, and the price was right. If pictures are needed, please let me
know. It's identical to the picture already there for that item.
Thank you!
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2024 01:08 | | Subject: | Re: Advent Calendar discrepancies. | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| By the way, I submitted my change request, before I saw your response.
Just for the record. I wouldn't have submitted it had I seen your response
first.
Sorry.
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 9, 2024 01:02 | | Subject: | Re: Advent Calendar discrepancies. | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| | |
^ This one would have to be discussed.
^ Definitely would stay.
^ This one would most likely be removed.
^ Definitely would stay.
|
I am not completely sure I understand your reasoning.
Is is because they have printed parts?
The Gonk droid doesn't even have printed or unique parts that identify it
as a gonk droid. It's just kinda... Well... Cute.
I'm really trying to understand here. It seems very arbitrary.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2024 20:17 | | Subject: | Re: Advent Calendar discrepancies. | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | Unfortunately, most of the snowman builds should have never been entered into
the catalog as minifigures, and the ones that are already in the catalog will
most likely be removed at some point in the future.
As a general rule, we are no longer accepting it if it is just a generic snowman
and not meant to represent a specific festive version of another minifigure (such
as the snowman R2-D2).
|
Okay, this makes sense to me.
So the Iron Man Snowman would stay,
Rebel Pilot Snowman,
R2-D2 Snowman,
Imperial Pilot Snowman,
Gonk Droid Snowman?
These would all stay, as they represent a festive version of another minifig.
Wouldn't that mean that
76267-6 should have a minifig entry (Iron Man Snowman with top hat)
76231-18 (Snowman in Thanos Armor)
I would create an entry, but I don't own either of those, so...
| | The numbers are unimportant due to the fact that many of them will most likely
be removed at some point (for example, hol161).
|
Since none of the um... (for lack of a better word) effigies will be affected,
okay, that makes sense to me as well.
Perhaps someone who owns those sets will create an entry for those, and someone
can finally complete their Snowman effigy collection.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2024 18:37 | | Subject: | Advent Calendar discrepancies. | | Viewed: | 102 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
| I was looking at the advent calendars for Harry Potter, and I noticed a discrepancy.
the 2019 advent calendar lists the snowman as a minifig, whereas the 2023 one
does not.
I know that statues are listed as minifigs, so it stands to reason that snowmen
would be too.
Is there a reason the 2023 snowman is not a minifig? Or is it simply because
no one has entered it as such? Even the snowman from the Christmas Accessories
polybag is listed as a minifig. Hol170
It seems to me, that these Advent Calendar days should have a listing for the
snowman as a minifig.
76418-25 Harry Potter
76267-6 Avengers
76231-18 Guardians of the Galaxy
Also, ID conventions...
The Harry Potter "Snow Wizard" is cataloged as generic hol161.
But other licensed themes are listed as follows.
sh759 "Snowman Iron Man"
sw1134 "Snowman - Rebel Pilot Helmet"
sw0424 "Astromech Droid, R2-D2, Snowman"
sw1133 "Snowman - Imperial Pilot Helmet"
sw1120 "Snowman Gonk Droid (GNK Power Droid)"
The Harry Potter snowman should be renamed to match this ID convention.
If this is something that I can do, I will start working on it.
Thanks.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Feb 2, 2024 12:43 | | Subject: | Re: Comment from seller missing from invoices | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Technical Issues | |
| Same issue.
I was wondering why they changed it the other day.
I wrote this long reply, but thought better of it.
I know very little about html. Probably enough to mess things up.
The Comments from seller section is just empty. It does not retrieve.
The print button does the same thing.
This really needs to be fixed.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Jan 15, 2024 03:25 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, Kenopolis writes:
| | Inside Supports - Ex. Part 32064c: Why would you merge the part when the notches
on the inside do not fit over a stud. This is clearly a function variation.
In addition, the + vs x shapes are also an important variation. Look at the
windows in set #76419 (New Hogwarts micro castle) you can't use an X shaped
brick here.
|
Very true. I forgot that the 1x2 brick with axle hole has also been used cosmetically
in the past. I definitely wouldn't want an x-shaped axle hole when the +-shaped
axle hole is what is needed.
This is the one reason I don't like the idea of just arbitrarily getting
rid of some variants. You never know when a feature of the current variant of
a part is going to be an absolute requirement for the build of a set as designed.
For example, see 6628a and 6628b. Many of the modern, highly collectible Technic
sets absolutely require 6628a to be able to be built as designed by placing a
bar into the pin end of the part.
|
OH!!! I was wondering why that warranted a variation. (I don't have a lot
of technic sets.)
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Jan 12, 2024 20:07 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 112 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| I've spent the last several hours reading almost all of the comments.
I've thought it over, and I have changed my initial knee jerk reaction of,
"OH NO!" to something more like, "Hmm, okay, that makes sense, but
did you think about..."
Here are my thoughts.
Frosted bricks: Okay, I get it.
Smooth Slopes: Okay, I get it. I often wondered if they were just worn out molds
to begin with.
Connections between studs: Someone made the point that there is a block inside
the stud to prevent bars from going too far into the stud. This seems more functional
than cosmetic. I wonder if this variant should be retained.
Sprue marks: I never understood why this was a thing on the chairs. (More on
variations like sprue marks and mold pips later)
Torsos with Ribs: I am very much opposed to this change. I am fine with making
the new one the default, but this is a very important difference. If I understand
correctly the old one will be retained, but I believe this one needs further
clarification. Classic space is too beloved and sought after to be merged with
new figures.
Inside Supports - Ex. Part 32064c: Why would you merge the part when the notches
on the inside do not fit over a stud. This is clearly a function variation.
In addition, the + vs x shapes are also an important variation. Look at the
windows in set #76419 (New Hogwarts micro castle) you can't use an X shaped
brick here.
X-Shaped Axle Holes: I can agree with this one, IF the hole is on the top of
the brick.
See example above. On the sides of the brick I have to disagree.
Hinges with Teeth - Ex. Part 39893: I can agree with this one.
Duplo Bricks with Bottom Tubes: I can agree with this one, however there is a
distinction in regular bricks, why not duplo?
Blocked and Vented Studs: combining blocked and vented with hollow makes sense
to me, and I can understand it. Minifig heads are the worst. (more on this)
Determined Entries for Very Common Parts - Ex. Part 3068b: Tiles. I can understand
this. New with groove, being simply tiles, and older "without groove"
makes sense to me.
Now I have a few comments.
First of all, understanding variants.
I frequently list vintage parts with terms such as; Pat Pend, Pat Pend Obscured,
void, mold pip side, Slotted tubes, and so on. Your average AFOL probably has
no idea what those mean, but people who are trying to find missing parts to a
vintage set, and want it to be period accurate, look for those. I can understand
getting rid of unnecessary variants, and letting people search for them. Vintage
parts collectors have been doing this for years. However there is one point I
want to make.
This WILL make it harder to find them.
For example: You have Fred and Jane, both looking to buy the same part. However
Fred wants the one with a particular variant, because the others in his set have
that variant. Jane really doesn't care, because she is making a MOC, and
it won't be visible. Fred is using the advanced search to find the parts
he wants, adding the search term. Jane is using a wanted list.
Jane finds a seller who has all the parts she needs using the easy buy feature.
But that seller had listed the part Fred wants with the variation noted. Jane
buys the parts. Now Fred can't find any results because the only person
with that variant just sold it to someone who didn't need it.
The seller doesn't care, because they still made a sale, but the buyer now
has to try to find someone else, and probably pay an even higher premium for
it, if they can even find it.
I'm sorry, that's an extreme example, but you get the point.
There needs to be a universal glossary of search terms that people can put in
notes to find the specific variations you are doing away with. One that is easy
to find. That way sellers who care know what to put in their notes.
Vented/Blocked stud heads listed as alternates in sets:
I wanted to share a thought about this one.
The only reason one is listed as the alternate, is because someone added it as
such.
We really have no idea how many sets have the alternate. By adding it as an alternate,
people automatically think it's more rare, when in reality, they might have
had a 50/50 distribution rate. A note added that says something like, "This
Minifig has been found with both hollow and blocked studs. would go a long way.
I had a few other thoughts, but I wanted to share these while they were on my
mind.
Thanks for the time and effort you put into the list, and I want you to know
that I do appreciate the thought you have put into this, but even the best-laid
plans of mice and men often go awry. Even the most well thought out idea might
miss something important.
|
|
| Author: | Kenopolis | | Posted: | Jan 12, 2024 18:23 | | Subject: | Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| |
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2626
For the Duplo bricks and the Blocked and Vented studs, there are just too many
to list at this time, but people can do a search for them in their stores.
We will need a full list to send out the notification next week though, so that
will be coming.
Concerning the removed vs changed, nothing will technically be removed from the
catalog. All items will be merged to a similar item and the lots in stores will
be preserved. In some cases, just the Item Name and Item Number will be adjusted,
and that may not require any text to be added to the comments section.
But the easiest thing would simply be to add notes to every listing on the list.
I have found it helps buyers have confidence that a variant is correct when a
note is present, even if the note simply duplicates the info in the Item Name.
|
It is also extremely important to retain and update all comparison images. The
submitter's work should be lost in this process. Just adding an Additional
Note is insufficient as the image is more accurate and useful. (Especially for
non-English speakers.) Also, many members have Collapsed their Notes and never
see them.
The comparison images will be even more important going forward as, without distinctions
in the Catalog, many inexperienced members will pick up an odd mold and immediately
call: Fake.
I can just imagine it now: selling a rare 'Hollow' stud SW head, only
to be confronted by a buyer claiming it's fake due to the absence of the
LEGO logo and 'some weird triangle top'. Every single head that comes
in multiple variants needs to be publicly documented for this purpose.
What is going to happen if the Minifigure, Head image that is retained has an
inset showing its Stud variant? Buyers will assume that that is the correct version
going forward.
Which of these images will you choose, what happens to the other one, and what
happens to the inset?
* | | 3626bpb0748 Minifigure, Head Alien with SW Klatooinian Dark Green Facial Lines, Dark Bluish Gray Eye Shadow, and Sharp Teeth (Kithaba) Pattern - Blocked Open Stud
Parts: Minifigure, Head |
* | | 3626cpb0748 Minifigure, Head Alien with SW Klatooinian Dark Green Facial Lines, Dark Bluish Gray Eye Shadow, and Sharp Teeth (Kithaba) Pattern - Hollow Stud
Parts: Minifigure, Head |
Thanks,
Jen
|
This is a very good point.
Default image should be just face (and alternate face)
Additional images can be with the stud.
The comparison you posted in reply would be good too.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
