Tags/Categories on Dinosaur Toy Blog

[DinoToyForum]

I've added the new 'Type' category (it's called "other-category" in the url) for all those misc tags. I've also added a few new tags under it, including "monochrome", which will please some members ( @Libraraptor ).

https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/monochrome/

I'm still populating the "single figure" tag, that will take some time.

I've also experimented with using different colours for each of the four button categories. I might not keep this, see what you think.

[Fembrogon]

I like the different colors; it makes the categories easily distinguishable.

Am I correct that the "single model" tag is meant as the default "type" ...If so, should only figure with no other "type" be labeled as such, or should any to all individual figures be labelled with it? I can start updating my own reviews for the tag either way, to save a little time.

I also think the "knockoff" tag will be a good idea, if it hasn't been included already.

[DinoToyForum]

I like the different colors; it makes the categories easily distinguishable.

Am I correct that the "single model" tag is meant as the default "type" ...If so, should only figure with no other "type" be labeled as such, or should any to all individual figures be labelled with it? I can start updating my own reviews for the tag either way, to save a little time.

I also think the "knockoff" tag will be a good idea, if it hasn't been included already.

Don't worry about updating your reviews, I'm doing them in bulk anyway so it's actually easier for me if none have been tagged yet.

I'm having second thoughts about "single figure". I think we need this to be a category for single-moulded models with no articulation. Typical Safari Ltd-type toys (before they got fancy and adding articulated jaws) So, maybe "single mould" is better?

[Fembrogon]

Just to clarify, would this be excluding figures that do have articulated jaws? If so, would those figures need a category of their own?
I would be inclined to categorize Papo, PNSO, etc in the same manner as Safari and related brands, due to general commonalities in design and intent of the lines (ie, solid "educational" PVC figures, rather than multi-jointed action figures or expensive desktop models/kits).

[DinoToyForum]

Just to clarify, would this be excluding figures that do have articulated jaws? If so, would those figures need a category of their own?
I would be inclined to categorize Papo, PNSO, etc in the same manner as Safari and related brands, due to general commonalities in design and intent of the lines (ie, solid "educational" PVC figures, rather than multi-jointed action figures or expensive desktop models/kits).

Yeah, this tag is to differentiate from multi-jointed action figures, expensive desktop models/kits, and other specific categories of toy (puzzles, papercraft, constructables, etc).

"Educational" is a stretch for Papo but I know what you mean. I'm not sure they're all PVC. Nor are they all necessarily solid (some are hollow). They're all single-piece sculptures, although I think it would have to include those figures with articulated jaws, otherwise it gets messy.

Here are some options but none of them are quite right:
"Single Model"
"Single Mould"
"Single Sculpt"
"Single Figure"
"Single Piece"
"Basic Model"
"Basic Figure"
"Scale model"

This isn't going to be a particularly useful tag, it's really just necessary to avoid hundreds of blank "Type" tags.

[DinoToyForum]

"Figurine"!?

Yep, it's figurine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figurine

It seems so obvious now. Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees!

[Fembrogon]

Oh dear, is that really it? And here I've been using that term more like "minifigure".

Well, I was GOING to say I think "basic model/figure" could work, or maybe something like "standard replica". Figurine does seem much simpler, though; I'll have to mind how I use the terms from now on.

Yeah, Papo is hardly an educational brand, but to the casual eye they probably look most similar to the likes of Schleich and Safari, rather than Mattel.
I would say Safari, Collecta, Papo, Schleich, PNSO, Eofauna, etc. are essentially following the same classic "toy" approach that's been implemented since Invicta, Sinclair, and other brands before them - albeit several steps further evolved by now. Rebor, Nanmu, and the like might be equatable, too, although they more clearly cross the line into explicit display models rather than "toys".

[Gwangi]

I was going to suggest "static figures" but figurine makes more sense.

[DinoToyForum]

I added the types...

"Knock-off": https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/knock-off/
"Papercraft": https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/papercraft/
"Caricature": https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/caricature/
"Kit": https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/kit/

And did my best to populate them. Did I miss any?

[Gwangi]

I think any figure by Salvat can be considered a knockoff.

https://dinotoyblog.com/category/salvat/

EDIT: I think Lindo-Nabisco qualifies as an oldie company. And monochrome.

Sell Rite gifts qualifies as oldies, so does
Tim Mee (I think). Thunder Beasts should be under  action figures.

[DinoToyForum]

I think any figure by Salvat can be considered a knockoff.

https://dinotoyblog.com/category/salvat/

EDIT: I think Lindo-Nabisco qualifies as an oldie company. And monochrome.

Sell Rite gifts qualifies as oldies, so does
Tim Mee (I think). Thunder Beasts should be under  action figures.

Thanks for the suggestions, but keep in mind that I'm still populating a lot of the types, so it is really just the four I raised that I'm ready for feedback on. I'll certainly add Salvat to Knockoffs

[Fembrogon]

The Dilophosaurus I reviewed from Boley/Gosnell fits under knockoff:
https://dinotoyblog.com/dilophosaurus-moveable-toy-by-3rd-party-gosnell/
(as an aside, this Nature World Allosaurus and a few other Nature World reviews should probably be categorized as Boley, too)

Kid Galaxy figures might qualify for knockoff as well.

[DinoToyForum]

Thanks both, I've updated the knock-offs. I wasn't sure about the two Kid Galaxy reviews - what are those specific figures knock offs of?

[Fembrogon]

Those ones are based directly off of artwork rather than a previous toy, so maybe they don't count after all. A lot of the Kid Galaxy figures are like that, so it might depend on how broadly we want to define the term.

[DinoToyForum]

Those ones are based directly off of artwork rather than a previous toy, so maybe they don't count after all. A lot of the Kid Galaxy figures are like that, so it might depend on how broadly we want to define the term.

Oh, I see. Yeah, maybe Knock-off isn't quite right then.

[Libraraptor]

I've added the new 'Type' category (it's called "other-category" in the url) for all those misc tags. I've also added a few new tags under it, including "monochrome", which will please some members ( @Libraraptor ).

https://dinotoyblog.com/other-category/monochrome/

I'm still populating the "single figure" tag, that will take some time.

I've also experimented with using different colours for each of the four button categories. I might not keep this, see what you think.

Thank you Adam, just right up my alley

[bmathison1972]

Not sure if this has been addressed (don't have time to read every post), but why is Megalodon considered a genus for tags? The genus is Otodus...

[Fembrogon]

I'm guessing that's an exception being made due to the animal's species name being more famous than the genus. Most casual or semi-casual viewers will probably recognize "Megalodon" much faster than "Otodus", or even "Carcharodon/Carcharocles".

[Fembrogon]

This has been mentioned elsewhere, but I concur that we should add a new brand category for Haolonggood - and probably MuSee (Mu See? Mu-See?) as well, for accuracy's sake.

[DinoToyForum]

This has been mentioned elsewhere, but I concur that we should add a new brand category for Haolonggood - and probably MuSee (Mu See? Mu-See?) as well, for accuracy's sake.

Haolonggood brand category added. I attributed two reviews to the category but let me know if I missed any.

As for MuSee, I can add that too, but need to know the correct spelling, and which reviews to allocate. Is it "Musee" as in French for museum?