General Forum

I've noticed that sets that are issued across multiple product lines are not entered uniformly in our db.  Some sets, like the 1999 UD 500 Club GU and Autos are entered as 1 insert set under the 1999 Upper Deck set.  But other sets, such as the 2000 Fleer 3000 Club GU set is listed in each individual product line with only the cards issued in that particular product line.  Still others, such as the 2000 UD 3000 Club GU and Autos and the 2001 Topps Team Legends Autos are listed both as one combined set under the base 2000 Upper Deck or 2001 Topps respectively, but then the same cards (or at least some of them) are also listed individually with the product they were inserted with, such as Yastremski in 2000 UD Legends and Vern Law in 2003 Topps Opening Day (and I question whether Larsen was issued in that product, another website claims it was with 2002 Topps T206).  This last method is the worst, because it ends up creating two cards in the db where only one card actually exists.  Is there a standard policy from Admin on this?  If not, shouldn't there be?  I prefer the first method myself.  As a collector of some of these sets, it is much easier to find the card and check it off when they are all together, rather than trying to hunt for the card because you don't know which particular product line it came from.  Maybe the product line info could be added to the notes column, similar to what baseballcardpedia tried to do with the 2001 Topps Team Legends Autos.

For ease, although it is not the way they were release, should these sets from multiple releases just be catalogued on their own as a totally seperate set? Would eliminate the doubles.

I agree that any given card must only have one CID.  There are several examples where it would be nice to be able to have the same CID appear on multiple "Inserts and Related" pages, but I dn't think that functionality exists in the database. (yet?) The trouble is, there are multiple insertion methods used by manufacturers that each lend themselves to different listing methods.

If any given card in the multi-product set was only inserted in one product, then it makes sense to split up the checklist amongst the various products they were actually inserted into.  (i.e. Cards 1-5 under Product 1, Cards 6-10 under Product 2, Cards 11-15 under Product 3, etc.)

If every card in the set was available in every product that the set was distributed in, then it makes sense to list the set as an insert under the 'first' product it was inserted into, then include a user comment or release note under the other products that directs readers to the location of the checklist. 

Where it gets confusing is when some cards were included in several products, some in other, others in some, a few in one or the other, etc.  A good example of a set like this is 2002 Press Pass (racing) Signings.  The set is checklisted under the main Press Pass listing, and each card has notes that indicate which product it was available in.  This information is important to collectors who might be buying old boxes hoping to pull a card they are looking for.  In the example above, if someone is looking to get a the Greg Biffle card, they would look at the cheklist and know not to buy boxes of Premium or Trackside because his card was not included in those products. 

I think it is best to list each set in the way that makes the most sense for that set, as opposed to making a bunch of over-arching rules that we have to make oddball stuff conform to.  The flexibility of the database is one of its greatest features.

-Tom

I do believe this is what you are lookign for I literally read it last night, they are to be listed in the product they are pulled from not as a complete set.

http://www.tradingcarddb.com/FAQ.cfm?ITEM=ListingInserts

That helps RF, but unfortunately, that policy only addresses the simplest case, where a card was inserted in a specific product that doesn't necessarily match where other cards of the same set/design were inserted.

It does not address the case where the production run of a card was inserted over multiple products.

-Tom

The site is great but alot of the guidelines are not foolproof, alot of them do answer the questions we have for the "basic" sets but more and more sets are so confusing and/or convoluted there is no easy way to answer a said question. Your points are all very valid Lea thats for sure, sadly my pay grade dont allow to have the best answer. =)

Yup, that's why we discuss them!  ;)

-Tom

This sounds very similar to the thread about the "Topps Woolworth" type sets. Is the database structured in a way that no matter which key-words you search under they would pop-up in the search?

Yes, I just checked. The searches for "Topps Woolworth" or "Woolworth Topps" brought up the exact same results.

I think the bottom line is simple. Every card that is inserted in a product is listed with the product. If it wasn't inserted in the product, it doesn't get listed with the product.  And as Tom said, if it is a broken set put the information in the Release Notes as to where the other cards are listed.

And I for one don't have a problem with duplicate card entries. If the same card(s) were inserted in multiple products, then so be it.