Forum:Part IDs

Forums: Index →

→ Part IDs

We need to decide which Part ID we use for part articles and inventories. Often sites we use for reference (such as Bricklink, Peeron etc.) give conflicting Part IDs. For example, I recently created Inventory:Plo Koon, and Bricklink, Peeron, and part articles on Brickipedia gave different Part IDs. For the head of Plo Koon: Bricklink and the article on Brickipedia gave Part 61200pb01, however Peeron gave Part x1939px1. For the torso: The part article on Brickipedia gave Part 4529197, Bricklink gave Part 973pb504c01, and Peeron gave Part 973px624. For the legs: The part article on Brickipedia gave Part 4529672, even though the legs do not have printing and are clearly Part 970c00, the standard minifigure leg piece, which both Bricklink and Peeron confirmed.

All of these conflicting references made the Inventory rather difficult to create. So, which Part ID do we use? Please discuss. -tradeylouish (talk|contribs|mln) 04:39, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

OMGZ HE POSTED IN THE FORUMS! Also, I agree 110%. I preferably use Peeron.com, as that site is more inventory-based anyways. We shouldn't create our own numbers (These may be from bricklink however). -N B P 12:51, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

We could use The LEGO Group's official part ID numbers found in the back of instruction booklets?

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 20:41, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

I use Bricklink as it has a much bigger database. SKP, that would be very confusing, as the LEGO Group has different numbers for parts in different colours. Using that method would confuse the fanbase. I propose we have a vote between Bricklink and Peeron. --

15:40, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

True, I would use Bricklink as that is where parts can be bought and they have an inventory for almost every set where as Peeron is out of date with few inventories for 2010 and none I think for 2011.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 11:43, September 2, 2011 (UTC)

I second. -N B P 15:21, September 2, 2011 (UTC)

I third. -

10:46, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

I tend to use Peeron. Couldnt we ask LEGO? - nxt 09:06, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
- That's a good idea NXT.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 09:35, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and we could use LDD. That is made by LEGO, after all. - nxt

Last time I looked, LDD didn't have part numbers. -

07:28, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure it does. Or maybe they're element IDs? - nxt

I would vote Peeron if it was needed to choose between them, however aren't we still meant to be using Design ID's? For example, Plo's leg piece:
- We have Part 4529197. This is the element ID
- Bricklink gave Part 973pb504c01, and Peeron gave Part 973px624. Isn't the Design ID Part 973, ie a minifigure leg, and all the other numbers and letters after that numbers the individual sites give to certain pieces that have printing or some other special colour scheme to them?

If we are doing Design ID's shouldn't we just have a page for Part 973 and leave it at that? I'm not a "part expert" though, so all what I said could be wrong :S NightblazeSaber 12:17, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

The no.s before the letter are the ID. the numbers after refer to printing mostly, or other slight variations. (like when they took a shade of plastic of the bottom of the 2 to 1 stud converters. You probably didnt notice that anyway.) So the ID no. is clear, even if the printing no. isn't. NXT. (PC problems)