• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by plastic.ati

  1. Sounds good to me. I support this suggestion. This way people who are not interested in B-models, won't need to run across them all the time, when they search for a category which contains a number of them.
  2. @Simon I will need to re-upload some BIs, as my older links seem to be broken. However, the set 6801 works well
  3. @thea Thanks for the shortening, and I think You're right, that we wont need this kind of linking at the main model. However, I will submit the B-models first, and then transfer the shortened links there. I am just wondering if the photo of the back showing the B-model could work as a set image, instead of my photos. What do you think? An example (red rectangle shows the exact B-model):
  4. Thanks for the info @Simon, I will run through the links.
  5. FYI, Nathan re-imported the formerly (in RB v.2) active B-models and the links for their instructions, as well as he fixed the B-model listings under the "Alt models" tab, handled separately. For example: For the moment, it will do the job very well, but the recent questions are still there. (Back of the box photo, possible new category...)
  6. I have uploaded a few other box photos (front and back too) In case you say okay for them, I can change their main photos and even make a link to B-models. There will be more but at the moment I have other tasks link:
  7. plastic.ati

    Unknown piece

    You're welcome
  8. I've just uploaed a photo cutout for the set 6881. Later I can try to take better photo, and align the pic, but even at the moment it seems to be better than the earlier one.
  9. Thea, I will take a few photos later today, and give them a try. I think a photo/scan of the box front would work well, as the instructions have been folded originally.
  10. I took this photo of the back of my box:
  11. Thea, do you mean I should attach a photo of the backside? In case yes, I would need some advice, how? I even couldn't use simple HTML tags to make better looking links I'm also about to change the main pic. That seem to be easier, as it's a simple drag&drop, however I don't want to delete someone other's contribution without a word/approval
  12. check this:
  13. plastic.ati

    Unknown piece
  14. FYI I created some BIs for the set 6881-1 (also some Alt builds, but those are under the approval process at the moment). Can you check my temporary solution if it's okay or not? link: This way it's visible, whatever tab you choose, and once Nathan finds the final soluton, it can be easily removed.
  15. What about the following ones: LAB/LAC - Lego Alternate Build/Creation LOI - Lego Own/Original Idea MLRC - My Lego Re-creation LIRC - Lego Idea Re-creation and so on. I just wanted to give some ideas to start from I would use "Lego" in the final form, so giving credit to the company that made these builds/ideas originally
  16. For me, personally, the fact that I can make these LOCs and show them is encouraging enogh to contribute with free content, but people are different, so some of them might need more than this
  17. Huh, premium LOCs? I Never thought of that, but why not? The other thing in my head is that larger LOCs can be made in several different ways, so one LOC might offer different BIs on its page. Even from several authors, and some of them might ask some money for their implementation, so Premium BI for a LOC might be better, than a premium LOC. However it will mean more work again...
  18. I can completelly agree with biodreamer, as we would need this LOC category. Some of the critical points have been pointed on, and at the moment I can add one more: LOCs would need a bit different method of approval, as for backside models one should use only parts from the original set, for idea book model one should use parts existing at that time, and so on. I think it would need more work than accepting a MOC, so we may find "some" resistance Until the possible implementation of the LOCs, I will use the comment section of the original models to link to a backside model's BI , as it seems to be the least problematic method in the long run.
  19. So there is vacuum again: The backside models/ideas from the Classic era are clearly true alternatives for the main models, but there were no official LEGO instructions for them, and - at the same time I can't call them MOC. So what they are? I think they should be called B-models, but others might think else. Let's make a common admin's decision, or wait for Nathan's word, and I will follow that. Example: I made this backside model 2 years ago, and at that version of Rebrickable I could link my BI for it. Now the link has been gone, and can use only the comment section to reactivate it. However it is not a MOC of mine, so why should I move it to my list of MOCs, even that the BI could be linked far more easily.
  20. Simon, thanks for the idea! That example you gave me is excellent, containing nice pieces of information, as well as photos... I think it will work fine
  21. Hi Simon, Do You mean I should use the main model's comment section for linking to B-models? That would make sense...
  22. As I am getting back, I've asked Nathan about the same problem, and just found out that there's a running thread about it. I wanted to continue uploading B (C, D, E, etc) models (can be found on the back of the boxes) for the Classic Space/Castle/City sets, but hit that wall. Also my previously uploaded B-models lost the links to the BIs. Okay this latter problem can be resolved, but anyway, this should be resolved somehow.
  23. Never delete the old ones. They are still nice sources for inspiration, and Dulsi is right: better versions might require more and/or more rare pieces which might decrease the overall value for some people, and increase it for some others.
  24. Correct, it's locked now so it's invisible. I'll wait for it to show up and then I'll change the BI link and BI type for the older MOCs