To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.databaseOpen lugnet.admin.database in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / Database / 1370
1369  |  1371
Subject: 
Re: Once again the suspicious set 371....
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.database
Date: 
Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:45:15 GMT
Viewed: 
129 times
  
In lugnet.admin.database, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
On Saturday, January 26, 2002, at 11:59  PM, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:

[snip]

I really would like to see a discussion started again now, if set 371
is in
fact a set which is worth to be published at Lugnet in the database. If
it is,
it should at least put into the year 1967 instead of 1976. (But why
1967 and
not 1966 or 1968?) What has been the reason for taking 371 into the
year it
appears in?

I agree that this set:
    http://guide.lugnet.com/set/371_2
appears to belong with these sets:
  http://guide.lugnet.com/set/?qy=1967

From year 1967. I imagine someone entering the data simply transposed
the year numbers.. It has been pointed out that the paperwork resembles
that seen here:
  http://guide.lugnet.com/set/343_1
but I don't see identification of the year's source data in the admin
notes. I'll look it up in my catalogs when I get a chance.

thanks.

-Suz

While tweaking it, you (or whoever) may want to also tweak the
Brickshelf(tm) instructions link as it links to a (very cool!!! but
apparently different) seaplane set. Or it did for me anyway.

The link you might want to consider linking to is this one:

http://www.brickshelf.com/scans/0000/0371/index.html which looks like this set.

Now, Ben is saying, if I understand him correctly, that he thinks there's a
chance this set is a fake. I have no idea about that.

But I did want to say that I think it's neat how the instructions for this
set (fake or no) assume the builder knows a lot more about the building
process.. the steps are not at the "place every brick separately" level,
they make big jumps, assuming the builder can figure stuff out. That's cool!



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Once again the suspicious set 371....
 
(...) set. (...) Thanks Suz an Larry for taking your time! I had contact with the former owner of the sets instruction a few month ago (long time after the 371 had appeared). He really made me believe the building instruction does exist and seems to (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.database)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Once again the suspicious set 371....
 
On Saturday, January 26, 2002, at 11:59 PM, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote: [snip] (...) I agree that this set: (URL) to belong with these sets: (URL) From year 1967. I imagine someone entering the data simply transposed the year numbers.. It has been (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.database)

7 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    
Active threads in Database

 
LUGNET Guide updates (Sat 18 May 2024)
6 hours ago
Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR