Siegfried

Oh yes, we chambered the last account by mistake so there's no reason why we'd mind you creating another. Ooops, looks like it's going to happen again.

Is there really any need for swearing in this instance? Don't make me add every word to the swear filter...

Testing... http://www.bbcode.org/images/lubeck_small.jpg[/img] Nah, it may be a "standard" but IPB doesn't support it. To be honest I'm glad it doesn't; it'd be abused and we'd find it harder to notice oversized images.

No, it's not supported. Is that supported anywhere? That looks more like HTML than BB Code...

I've merged them. Here's my answer; what's more important to you, value or getting both? If in time you want all of the sets I'd buy the Star Wars ones as Diagon Alley should be around longer. But Diagon Alley looks to be the better set in terms of part value. But it's more complicated than that, for example I'd personally buy the Star Wars sets as I'm not a huge Harry Potter fan yet I already own half of the current line.

From what I've heard this is a licensed only policy. But I'm super perplexed about the wheel. Where did you ask this? I've never had a problem over a common piece, but it's been over a 2 years since I had any missing pieces.

Have you been taking the blue pills again?

Me too. I don't even see the code anymore; all I see is styles, images, links...

Updated!

Turn off Rich Text Editing, RTE. Click here; it's the fourth control from the bottom.

According to Peeron (which is missing a few sets I have); 424 Sets (395 unique), 156,963 Parts, 999 Minifigs. Not too bad considering that;

Make another one in "Website and Forums". On topic, it's a pretty funny video. Amazingly "G" rated though.

I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but in any case the review number should be 100% accurate. It's (automatically) calculated by just the reviewers fields. The search is just a quick add on and thus is... flawed. Look forward to it! (I think I have him...)

Yeah. Well to avoid further cases of deliciousness I've merged them all.

Yeah, but regardless of your preference we are one website so I'm moving this to General. As a FYI there's at least one old topic on this.

I tend to agree. Yes, at the moment there's no detail view. The search will probably be changed to show just the set number, name and parts, a small image, and links to the reviews and a detailed view. Thanks very much for your input.

I do somewhat agree. What do you suggest? Bigger text? Header? Different colour? Repositioning? Move them to a separate column? A mix of everything? At this stage nothing of the index design is permanent, and much of it, especially the main image, is just a placeholder.

Yes, I noticed that one but hadn't got around to adding it... and I've yet to comment in it either. (I love that set!) BTW, that's the second review of yours I've added today (Train Chase); you're moving up! (I'll upload the additions in a few days.) Well that's up to KimT... and yeah, he's done a great job there. Thanks for sharing your opinion though.

That's my plan. Already the Technic, Sci-Fi and Licensed indexes are redundant and out of date. What exactly happens depends on how successful this is and if the respective forum staff want to keep updating the old indexes. Do you have a preference?

Indeed. Western Train Chase in the Set Index is missing it too. I'll add it.

They are "blind" wheels. They are used when you want to have three big wheels in a row. Without a blind in the middle the train will no be able to go around the track. It seems TLG mold these as a three wheel set and they decided to give them free instead of keeping them. Have a look at Emerald Night for more details of how the wheel is used. More details are here.

Indeed, I'm with DarthSion; the sequel storyline should be obvious! The first was a bit first and was annoying at times (unskipable boss fight intro for example) but overall I liked it. I did wait until it was on sale though. I'll be looking forward to this one!

Yeah, I know. It's because he has such a short name so every thing with "def" in it is returned. I think all are variants of "defend". I don't see this as a problem yet as all the results still fit on one page, but in time I'll probably enhance that so it searches within the "reviewer" fields only. On a side note, this is why the EB search is so unhelpful. Because it returns so much it's of little use unless you're looking for something uncommon.

I realise you've realised there was, but is it unclear? Should I change anything? I just realised; the last update bumped me out of the top 25 reviewers.

Thanks and fixed! That section was done by Hinckley; it's hard to get good help these days. I found a few missing reviews while I was correcting that. I've also added some of the 2011 sets, but the details are sparse.