Hello!
To use the forum, login or register above.
(If you are already logged in above, please click here)
Catalog points prizes
We have just contacted the winners for the 2022 catalog points prizes. I want to thank everyone that has contributed to the catalog in 2022. For 2023, we are changing the prize system so that the prizes are allocated each quarter. The total prize pool available has therefore increased and gives everybody more of a chance through the year.
We still have quite a few items with missing information which can be seen here https://www.brickowl.com/search/catalog?query=All&show_missing=1
I would be happy to hear any suggestions to further incentivise improving the catalogue
We still have quite a few items with missing information which can be seen here https://www.brickowl.com/search/catalog?query=All&show_missing=1
I would be happy to hear any suggestions to further incentivise improving the catalogue
Powered by Vanilla
Comments
First, would you be so kind as to define “improve the catalog”? “Improve the catalog” seems to be an area as vast and deep and dark as the night sky.
One area for improvement is part ID and inventory. With regard to part ID some degree of elaboration could take place relative to the description. To illustrate this point, I will pick LEGO Mini Head No. 43.
To confound the issue, the pattern for this head is used on at least three different issues of the head. There is a single-sided “pink lips” version, a single-sided “red lips” version and a dual-sided “red lips” version. See attached image.
At this point, I believe LEGO Mini Head No. 43 refers to the single-sided red lips design…in both the safety stud and solid recessed stud versions. At least I’m proceeding with that as a premise.
Follow my journey:
Starting at rebrickable
https://rebrickable.com/parts/3626bpr0043/minifig-head-mary-jane-brown-thin-eyebrows-white-pupils-and-short-eyelashes-wide-smile-with-red-lips-print/
This catalog entry links to:
one BrickLink record
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3626bpb0205
five BrickOwl records:
https://brickowl.com/catalog/919131
https://brickowl.com/catalog/206431
https://brickowl.com/catalog/211015
https://brickowl.com/catalog/552152
https://brickowl.com/catalog/960293
and three Brickset records:
https://brickset.com/parts/design-99197
https://brickset.com/parts/design-14750
https://brickset.com/parts/design-82131
With regard to this one part, all four catalogs have their problems.
Rebrickable:
With regard to the BrickLink links, Rebrickable does not catalog the companion 3626cpb0205 solid recessed stud version.
Brickset:
-99197 links to an un-illustrated record of the part with reference to it being in only one set, the 853340 Wedding set. Given the year of production of this set, we might be inclined to think that this head design-99197 would define it as having the solid recessed stud mold.
-14750 links to an empty record.
-82131 links to an illustrated record of the part with reference to it being in 15 sets. Given the earlier years of production for these sets, we might be inclined to think that this head design-82131 would define it as having the safety stud mold.
BrickOwl
Record 960293 is named LEGO Town Head (Recessed Solid Stud) (14750 / 82131). This record has a photo of the part. It has a tag of “Disc”. It is shown as Comes In (30) records and Colors (2).
• The Design ID on this page lists as follows: 3626, 14750, 82131, 82131, 99197 (note 82131 listed twice)
>> 3626 is the LEGO part number (minifig head)
>> 82131 is presumably a Design ID for single-side red lips pattern safety stud version
>> 14750 is presumably a Design ID (brickset: empty record)
>> 99197 is presumably a Design ID for single-side red lips pattern recessed solid stud version
The potential improvement to this record would be:
1) Change the Design ID listing to 3626, 99197
2) Change the Comes In tab to include only the minifigure from the Wedding set
3) Change the Colors to (1) Yellow. I believe the light flesh color is available only as a safety stud version.
4) Change the Name to LEGO Town Head (Recessed Solid Stud) (99197)
5) Eliminate the “Disc” tag. I have no idea what that might refer to nor what benefit it provides here.
Record 919131 is named LEGO Town Head (Recessed Solid Stud) (14750 / 82131). This record has a render of the *safety stud* version of part. It does not have a tag. It is shown as Comes In (27) records.
• The specifics for this record are nearly identical to the 960293 record with the exception of the tag, the Comes In value of 27, and the Color of 1. Either this is a near-duplicate of 960293, suggesting that it needs to be merged with 960293, or it possibly *should be* for the pink lips version of the head. Brickset links their pink lips version record
https://rebrickable.com/parts/3626bpr0019/minifig-head-brown-thin-eyebrows-white-pupils-short-eyelashes-wide-black-smile-and-pink-lips-print/
to 919131. The pink lips version of the head presumably comes in different sets than what are listed, or perhaps there is some conflation of red lips versions with pink lips versions with regards to the Comes In lists. As far as I can tell at this point LEGO doesn’t offer a different ID for the pink lips version. If record 960293 is the red lips version and record 919131 is the pink lips version, then “red lips” and “pink lips” would be beneficial to include in the titles.
I won’t get into the three other BrickOwl listings because things only get more complicated, suffice to say that this is an area where the catalog could be improved.
I have no idea how to fix this, or suggest how to fix this provided the complexity of the situation and the forms at hand. I have suggested changes in regards to specifically the trans-neon-green “ghoul” heads from the Hidden Side sets in the past. Those suggestions which took quite a while to compile and sort out were met with indifference. The time involved in sorting these things out is substantial. Given the effort involved relative to the response from management put me in a frame of mind to “just not bother” any more. I don’t want to make more of this than what it is, but my enthusiasm for contributing was emphatically diminished by that episode. So while I don’t know how to incentivize this kind of contribution I can attest as to how to disincentivize this kind of contribution.
If “improve the catalog” is not the kind of clarification of the confusion similar to what is described above, but only “filling in missing data points” then I have this to offer:
Make it easier to find specific missing data points. The link provided above returns 2210 pages containing 132596 items. Every one of these needs to be clicked individually. Then it is another click to the Edit tab. Then we have to figure out what the missing data is. Then we have to figure out whether or not we can provide the missing data. If a record has dimensions but not weight and we do have calipers and rulers but not a scale, then we’ve wasted time. Now there is no way back to the list of items with missing data points. Just getting around the interface is a chore.
If there were a vastly simplified interface or interfaces with specific purposes…that provision would facilitate participation. For example, if there were a list view with a thumbnail and title and empty dimensions fields where one could simply go down the list and input dimensions and click, line-by-line, to submit, I think that might encourage me to bother. If the lists were further reduced into bite-sized chunks like:
minifigs needing weights
minifigs needing dimensions
minifigs needing pictures
sets needing weights
sets needing dimensions
sets needing pictures
parts needing…
instructions needing…
boxes needing…
…and so on, that would be helpful. This is as opposed to clicking around through 2210 pages trying to find some item that I do have and could provide info for and having to drill down two or three clicks to see if the info I do have is even needed. At which point, needed or not, I then need to start again at page 1 of 2210 pages.
That’s what I have to offer for suggestions.
Heads being the first one of them - the BO catalogue does not differentiate between the old safety stud and the newly introduced - but different - safety stud, which means ID numbers for the new ones being added to parts that are in some cases many years old. The longer this goes on, the harder and more time-consuming it will be to untangle. My preferred solution here would be to remove all distinctions of heads, and allow those sellers who wish to do so to note which head they have available for sale. I only differentiate head types because the catalogue forces me to; I believe the vast majority of buyers honestly don't care, and those that do will seek out sellers who are happy to differentiate. I realise this impacts on the price guide but if the head issue is not being kept on top of, it's messed up anyway.
The various ID numbers are the second thing - they're too liberally spread around. Lego usually has different ones for trans and solid versions of the same part, but the BO catalogue often conflates them and adds them to the wrong colours.
I've noticed that recent set inventories sometimes include ancient mould variations without showing the correct modern version as an alternative. Bar with clip is a good example, modern set inventories show the clip without hole rather than with hole. I suspect the reason for this is an incorrectly logged ID number somewhere down the line, but I haven't had chance to investigate.
Maybe BO needs to bite the bullet and introduce a dedicated catalogue team to work through the issues. The BL catalogue volunteers tackled the errors in the various Clickits colours a year or so ago, and have recently begun to tackle flat silver/pearl light grey/the other silver colour that most sellers aren't even aware of (even me until recently) - but I don't see the same endeavour to tackle that and other issues here, and the primary reason for that is probably just a lack of co-ordination and direction amongst those who contribute to the site.
Having said all that, I absolutely appreciate what all contributors offer and will continue to do my little bit as I always have, but I will openly admit that most of my contributions are driven by a desire to sell what I have rather than create a historical record of Lego's history (I think that's best achieved elsewhere, and I don't mean BL).
@mfav I apologise if we were dismissive with regards to the ghoul heads. Unfortunately I've not been able to find reference to this in my email or catalog rejection notes. Feel free to forward anything to us for us to look at again.
Incase you may not have seen, on the "missing data" page there are filters on the left for missing data types
With regards to “Improve the catalog”, I was mainly referring to filling in any missing data. Our priority is having parts available to be sold with an name/image/weight/dimensions
Certainly there are items in the catalog that can get very messy with mold/decoration variations. We are always trying to find a balance between accuracy, and ease of use. We are also limited in that we don't have the physical sets on hand, so we often can't verify anything. When users submit notes about an issue with a particular item, we certainly do look into this, and we will look into those heads.
Just by doing translation on the site, i am trying to fit it in, with my personal life. And then having "bricks" in it self, missing all kinds of stuff, well you just pointed that out, by being able to have that specific brick on hand.
Apart from that, and my personal feeling, "rewards" or not is not why i would do it or not. But maybe for some people it gives them more of a helping hand, if they know there is a "treat" in the end :-)
The conflation of parts exists. And I agree with you in spirit with the heads. I'm pretty sure LEGO is all horseshoes and hand grenades when it comes to parts. Close enough is close enough. The solid stud and the blocked open stud and the recessed solid stud are all 3626 to them, and parts from the 60s work with the parts from the 20s, so what difference does it make?
Some of these “problems” are entirely the making of the AFOLs; right or wrong can be debated ad nauseam.
Relative to the catalog here, though, for me it goes to discovery. If I want to buy the pink lips version, for example, it's hell to find. If I think I’ve found it, then I need to write to the sellers to confirm. And trying to explain these minute differences absent a photograph to detail the differences can be difficult. If you have the guy with the glasses and the brown eyebrows and you want the guy with the glasses and the reddish brown eyebrows…and the seller has one of them but not the other with no basis to compare…neither of you are going to know which one you might get until it shows up.
What I want is clarity so when I go to buy or a seller goes to list there is not ambiguity or opacity or ignorance interfering in the process. With the umpteen underside variations of the 3001 brick it really isn’t a problem; some other parts with a single catalog number but functionally different molds can be a problem.
I’m at a loss for a viable solution when it comes to the listings. New sellers to the game aren’t necessarily steeped in fifty years of parts history and often they are the ones gung ho to list new things and be busy bees with the catalog…and errors occur out of naivete combined with enthusiasm as opposed to intentional malice. Years later an error is uncovered but by then there can be so may related tendrils it’s daunting and challenging to resolve. Absent an overworked grizzled and wisened catalog nazi as gatekeeper I think for much of the catalog we are where we are going to be.
As a buyer for myself, I could care less about the stud type on a head - it's almost always covered by hair or a helmet. If I'm buying for a minifig missing its head that I intend to sell tho, I do care, and have to research which variation is the correct one each time (as best I can), as my store strives to list correct variations.
Was just wondering - I've only fallen down the LEGO rabbit hole 10 years ago, and began selling in 2018, so I always like to learn new things I should watch for! :-)
With regard to the BrickLink links, Rebrickable does not catalog the companion 3626cpb0205 solid recessed stud version."
@mfav Rebrickable has a tab for related parts, there is the head that links to 3626cpb0205.
And if anything, do it bother people that some items might be missing info ?
I did not know there was so many items with missing information.
Sandy, see attached pictures. These “vented” studs I've seen only on the part 28621 trans-color heads.
I believe the term “vented stud” was coined by Axaday over on BL.
And, finally, with regard to specifically improving the catalog BOID 78183-103. This head comes in both 28621 vented and 30001 recessed solid stud versions. I don’t believe I’ve found any of the trans color heads to be 3626, though several undecorated ones appear to be listed on this site as 3626.
One thing I think is huge for me is, weight or dims are unknown for a figure if one part of it is unknown (ie the catalog adds the figure together for the figure dims, weight) however those detail missing information parts do not show up as missing information from your own inventory.
This especially would drive figure sales, for me anyways because the difference from lettermail to package is significant in Canada.
Tyson.
I was just thinking that it might be a big amount of items to view, so would it give anything to make a sort of "ranking" list on the items ?
1. If you have items in-hand with missing pictures, take a photo with a white background and submit it. Items with pics DO sell better than without.
2. When you have time here or there, look at items with Name needs improvement. Those tend to include among them the toughest items for people to find on search as they are using LEGO's native title, some of which are frankly kind of weird. I updated a bunch of Bionicle a few years back, as an example. Keep them short, and save detailed stuff for Tags.
3. I think adding tags to parts would be helpful - anything that helps search helps make it easier for our customers to find what they need. :-)
4. While not the biggest point-getter, completing older inventories for older sets lacking inventories is helpful - I've done a few. You need the set on hand of course, which can be limiting...
My humble two cents!