Fact boxes for the Dinosaur Toy Blog

[DinoToyForum]

I've had the idea that I can add a fact box to each Dinosaur Toy Blog review. Something akin to the boxes on the genus pages of my Plesiosaur Directory site: e.g. https://plesiosauria.com/directory/genera/elasmosaurus/ For authors, there will simply be some separate fields to fill in on the back end. I think this could provide a handy resource at a glance and provide some consistency across the site. It could include the following data:

Company name(s)
Line name(s)
Year of release
Year retired
Length (cm)
Height (cm)
Width (cm)

Two questions. 1, what do you think of this idea - any problems with it? 2, if I go ahead with this idea, is there any other data that we could or should add?

[Loon]

I love the idea, it would help streamline the reviews themselves a bit more. But, for a backwards American like me, it would be nice if the dimensions were also listed in inches.

Maybe also add scale too?

[DinoToyForum]

I love the idea, it would help streamline the reviews themselves a bit more. But, for a backwards American like me, it would be nice if the dimensions were also listed in inches.

Maybe also add scale too?

Oh, scale is a great idea! And it is easy enough to add measurements in both cm and inches.

[stargatedalek]

Measurements are also potentially subjective. Some people will measure a figure along the spine to get a sense of scale, while others will measure it "as is" to know how much volume on a shelf or in storage it requires.

Aside from the dates and size (which is usually somewhere in the body of a given entry) this information is also already covered in the tags/categories at the top of a given blog post. So while it's a very nice idea visually to use a separate display box, it might be better at least for now to focus on a new date system, and one to keep track of if a figure is retired. Once all of that is present on the back end displaying it like this would probably be a very nice way to go about it.

I believe I suggested at one point on the ATF trying to use a topic to keep track of discontinued figures in a given year, but now that the ATB exists handling that through both blogs is probably an easier way to go about it.

[Faelrin]

I really like this idea, particularly the scale, if known, but also year released and year retired. I do agree about the concerns about the sizes (which I try to get for most of my reviews, but well haven't done it for all of them).

Edit: That isn't to say I dislike the idea of the rough or approximate size being represented up top. I guess for figures that have dimensions on product pages like from Safari Ltd, perhaps those could be used by default?

Btw speaking of scale and Safari Ltd, I compiled a list of known scales for most figures in Doug Watson's collection thread a while back, mostly from scavenging the forum here for posts regarding the new releases. Just figured mentioning that in case that would be handy.

http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3118.msg256477#msg256477

Of course many members here also take note of scale in various collection threads, if not the reviews themselves.

[DinoToyForum]

Thanks for the feedback. I agree that measurements might vary depending on who is taking them, and the same toy can even vary from sample to sample if the tail or neck is distorted. But the measurements don't need to be super accurate to still be helpful, so I'd still be inclined to include them.

The measurement would be of the toy, not of the animal nose to tail along the spine. The latter, or some other anatomical measurement, would be used for calculating the scale.

On the topic of cm vs inches, when I was on a dinosaur dig in Montana I had the task of drawing the excavation map...on graph paper in inches. What a nightmare. My brain couldn't break out of thinking in the decimal system.

[Halichoeres]

I generally like this idea. It offers a little bit of standardization, as well as some at-a-glance information for readers who don't want to pore over the whole review (I expect most people visit for the photos and little else). I assume active authors would be responsible for adding this to their existing reviews?

[DinoToyForum]

I assume active authors would be responsible for adding this to their existing reviews?

Only if they wanted to, but I would be grateful if they did!

I'll try and set up the fact box soon.

[brontosauruschuck]

 

[Stegotyranno420]

I've had the idea that I can add a fact box to each Dinosaur Toy Blog review. Something akin to the boxes on the genus pages of my Plesiosaur Directory site: e.g. https://plesiosauria.com/directory/genera/elasmosaurus/ For authors, there will simply be some separate fields to fill in on the back end. I think this could provide a handy resource at a glance and provide some consistency across the site. It could include the following data:

Company name(s)
Line name(s)
Year of release
Year retired
Length (cm)
Height (cm)
Width (cm)

Two questions. 1, what do you think of this idea - any problems with it? 2, if I go ahead with this idea, is there any other data that we could or should add?

This is a great idea. I was hoping for something like this. Maybe a "family group", "scale range" and "extra facts"(optional) will be some interesting additions. I hope this can be added to all the previous reviews, but thats alot of pages. I might be able to help though

[indohyus]

I agree with @Stegotyranno, would be more than happy to have that on figures. Will see what I can do going forward and for previous ones.

[Halichoeres]

I think the easiest way would be laying it on a cutting mat (https://www.thearchitectsguide.com/blog/best-self-healing-cutting-mats), but if you don't have one maybe you could lay it against a piece of paper and mark all the highest/lowest/farthest points with a pencil, then measure the distances between the marks.

[DinoToyForum]

I am currently writing the Mesozoo Allosaurus review, should the fact box be included already?
Also if anyone has suggestions on how to make measuring height and width easier it would be very welcome.
It somehow worked but it was very annoying to do.

I haven't set it up yet, but you can include the data in the many body of the review, so it can be picked out later.

[DinoToyForum]

@dinotoyforum I have already sent the review in but the data is included in the text.

Thanks ? @Stolpergeist

Tonight I set up the fact boxes as an experiment. They are visible at the top of each review, although they haven't been populated with data yet. Authors should be able to see and edit the data fields on the back end. But let's consider this as an experiment before we push ahead with this. If reviewers want to complete just a few entries it will help us see what they look like, decide if anything should be removed or added, and ultimately help us decide if this is something we should pursue.

Any feedback?

[Loon]

@dinotoyforum so, should I be following the list in the original post, or has anything else been added?

[DinoToyForum]

@dinotoyforum so, should I be following the list in the original post, or has anything else been added?

Just one more added

Company:
Line:
Year released:
Year retired:
Length:
Height:
Width:
Scale:

Take a look at the blog to see the style. I'd welcome feedback on that as well.

[DinoToyForum]

What if the company has no line, should the fact box state "-" or "none" or "main" or something of the likes?

"N/A" (not applicable)

[DinoToyForum]

What do members think of the appearance and position of the new fact boxes?

I'll leave them for a few days for you to take a look and provide feedback, but then I will turn them off - there's no point in displaying empty fact boxes. We can populate the boxes behhind the scenes and then 'turn them on' when they are ready.

[ceratopsian]

I quite like them. Quite handy, even though the information is usually available elsewhere. I think the box also helps make the sundry reviews look part of a cohesive whole.

[Loon]

In all honesty, I find that they get in the way, at least on mobile. I kind of preferred when they were on top of the review text to how they are now, which just seems to get in the way of the actual review.

It's worse on the homepage.