Site Forum

Sometimes you just reach a breaking point and need to vent. Uploading partial checklists drives me nuts because I know how much extra work is involved in correcting them. The most recent is a 150-card set that someone uploaded as a 5-card set.  I know most, not all but most, are being uploaded by members who just want to catalog the cards they own and don't care about the completeness and accuracy of the database.

Look at it from the viewpoint of someone visiting this website. They search for and find the checklist they are looking for but it only has 5 cards. And know themselves there are many more cards in the set. Their conclusion, "This database is a joke. I can't rely on it for accurate information."

I wish Admin would reconsider allowing partial checklist uploads and remove all offending checklists.

For sets with easy to find checklists, I agree completely, there is little excuse for a mainstream 2016 set to be added a card at a time.  But there are a lot of cases where it may take years to compile a complete checklist.  This is not a one size fits all situation.

Yes, but once a checklist is uploaded it is considered COMPLETE and removed from the "Missing Checklists" in the Things To Do. So nobody else will know to look for the rest of it. And will be forgotten about and probably never get completed. I currently am working on approx a dozen checklists. I had more but someone uploaded 14 incomplete/partial checklists that I had also been working on.

Try this. How would you feel if you were searching for a complete parts list for your car. You go to a website's database, find the "complete" parts list and it only shows 5 parts for the entire car. What would you think of that website? Would you be likely to ever use that website again?

Be sure to call out that user to Admin.  It says right in the permissions section that if you continually break the rules while adding info, you will have your permissions revoked.

On a somewhat related note - I've spent a lot of time adjusting glossary terms. I wish people wouldn't just put the number, and put SN30 for a huge set of cards. I got rid of all the 30's to put SN30 and delete the "30" abbreviation.

i couldnt imagine coming across an incomplete CL like that..that's just unreal. The notes have the biggest thing for thing for me, not so much an incomplete glossary, but the lack of inserting the right subject in the Notes field- like a set may have 300 cards, but the first 100 are SN to 999, then 100-200 maybe SN to 500, and 201-225 maybe AU, SN100, and 226-300 AU,JSY, SN50. But the CL will get uploaded with everything in it as SN999. No reserch prior to, and it won't show up on the glossary because it's not mislabeled or something new.

That's crazy. If part of the checklist is not known (and some are genuinely hard to find) Admin allows TBD in the unknown place. Those I don't think are the problem, though. I've never seen any of these partial checklists referenced, and I hope I don't.

Do it right or don't do it at all.

Finding a checklist where only One player, Roberto Alomar for instance, has an "AU" note attached, but none of the others do when the note covers the whole set, is among my biggest pet peeves here.  It's way more work to add a note to 99 cards than the full 100.  I will say, I'm not above fixing the checklist, then deleting all notes from the troublesome card only, just to mess with the problem member, provided I can see the member is the only one who owns said card. 

I've seen quite a few sets like that, where you can clearly tell the person was only worrying about one particular player for their PC.

While I may only collect one player that is in a set, I wouldn't do such a selfish, inconsiderate thing like that. There are some who could care less, and will continue to do it. When I run across these sets, I try to do what I can to fix them.

well, i can understand the one player getting the correct notes added and no one else on the CL although it's still not the right thing to do, and that i think is coming from a new person adding it. I can remember for the longest time when i started doing it, i would search by player only and after scanning the card in, adding the note to that player-- not thinking of the affect it had on the rest of the set, mainly because i was only collecting the one player and not the set. Now adays, i check the rest of the CL and add or correct if needed- and been going back and checking up on the other sets and correcting as well. In the end, yes, it just takes a little extra time and a little more effort to ensure the CL accuracy. I've emailed people on the side on a few CL and eitehr asked them where they got the info for the notes or that it looked wrong- had no issues with them as they got corrected. Some just don't know or understand, either way as frustrating as it is-- Progress is always good.