Pinpics Groups might be going...

[Stitch2814]

I dont know if this was posted before so excuse me if it has but I went to make a group for the stitch experiments/other cousins pins with the exception of Reuben and Angel since they have there own groups already and I clicked the make it public as I have no use for a personal group.

Well, a few days go by and I thought hmmm why is it not showing up so I popped the question on pintalk.com and asked why and was told this -

Right now, no pin groups are being made public as we are unsure if they will exist when the new PinPics site is programmed and launched.

I asked if that is new groups or ALL groups and the reply was that is their understanding yes..

Soooo what are your thoughts on this if all groups (that were made years ago) are removed and so that pins could not be put into an area so you can just see the theme you may be collecting rather than individually searching for each pin i.e Characters dressed as other characters.. there is so many it be a while to go from Jessica to stitch to tink to others rather than a quick link to a group.

I personally keep the PTN pins from Paris group up to date I would hate for that group to go as it is a way to them in order of release and is much quicker than searching the whole database as other Paris pins would turn up in the search.

This is a possibility at the moment but would you be sad or disappointed to see them go??

 

[tyleet87]

I for one never use the 'groups' listing but I don't think I have had a need to. I like the idea of it and would understand why people might want it to exist. it seems so much simpler if you collect specific themes. I hope they don't do away with it, it seems a shame.

 

[hopemax]

I'm just guessing that if they are going away, it's because the purpose of Pin Groups can be handled in other ways. For example, if all of the DLRP PTN pins could be tagged with a certain keyword/phrase, then searching for that keyword would bring them up, without bringing up all the other Paris pins. Most of the groups could easily be replaced if tagged with a character, and movie title. Others, if they belong to a specific series, and can be tagged as being part of that series, those could also go away (like DL Hidden Mickey 2012 phase 2).

Now, I hope private groups aren't going away, because I often use them to make shopping lists and other lists that I'm not sure could be handled by keywords. Although, I know one of the features someone mentioned seeing was being able to drag and drop pins so they appear in the order someone wants them to appear. If there would be away to make a list and then email the list to someone, print or something. Then maybe they can go away too.

 

[Chilikitty]

I use the groups when I don't want to search all over for a pin.

 

[BugCatcherJenna]

I LOVE the groups. It helps me with knowing what pins are released for a movie... I.e. tangled. If those groups were not created I would have not known some pins had existed.

 

[BugCatcherJenna]

Also, the search is so hard to use sometimes... a lot of pins are not properly tagged... It sometimes takes FOREVER to find a certain pin. :/

 

[nWoJeffDW]

I like the groups. In fact I maintain a few. One of the groups I maintain is the Disney Characters dressed as other Disney Characters. I don't think there is a keyword that helps you find those specific pins.

 

[tiggeriffic]

I like and use the groups and would be very unhappy to see them disappear. I would feel really bad for all the people that took the time and effort to make them. I've noticed, however, that some of the groups aren't very well maintained, but a lot of them are.

 

[pinnochiolover]

I too would be very unhappy to see the use of groups disappear. I maintain alot of personal groups, as an additional way of cataloguing my collection. I also use the public groups sometimes as a way of searching for a particular pin, when word searches have brought up nothing.

I agree that some of the groups dont look like they are maintained regularly, which is a great shame, groups are very useful.

 

[AgentOfAnarchy]

I like the groups, I wish they where better maintained but that would probably be an arduos task for whoever undertakes it. I think it may be harder without the groups as often searching brings yp characters compleately un-related to the search.

 

[ohmyitskai]

I like the pin groups, I think you can find some interesting pins and it's fun! I would not be opposed to them finding another thing that would serve the same purpose - the drag and drop thing sounds cool too! Keep moving forward, right?

But I would be sad if they took away private pin groups, I really like to group my wants/grails!

 

[scrumpman]

Its not a big deal for me but its nice to know the info is available (I must have a proper look now hehe)

 

[Psycho Pixie]

They may just not wish to add more until after the change over. There are some duplicate groups with slightly different titles on there that need to be combined or deleted.

 

[markheardjr]

I like the groups. In fact I maintain a few. One of the groups I maintain is the Disney Characters dressed as other Disney Characters. I don't think there is a keyword that helps you find those specific pins.

+1!, I manage Cars Land and Wreck-It Ralph. And I use the groups for Marquee's and Pin Trader Delights all the time. I'd hate to see them go unless there was some new filtering method but the groups are great because a human decides what goes in them. Seach words and terms always miss some things.

 

[Vixy]

I like the groups because currently the search doesn't match only whole words, it also matches partial words.

For example, there's a group to do with locks and keys. If you search the word "key", you get everything that contains that letter group-- including, for instance, the word MICKEY. Twenty-four THOUSAND results. Oof.

If groups go away, I hope they'll at least improve the search engine.

 

[TiggerNut]

Groups also help when you are looking for more things to collect...as I wouldn't know what pins to look for as Costume Pins -without the Group designation. They would just be in the en mass Cast title.

But alas...I would give up GROUPS in a heartbeat if they would just STOP mislabeling pins with WRONG info and then not bumping them to the WHAT'S NEW page so the information can be vetted. Some "unknown" moderator -keeps eliminating pins from the database and then mislabeling things, such as Pinpics 231 -which is now magically called part of the 1998 Attraction Series -which it IS NOT, and never was....:facepalm:

 

[hopemax]

such as Pinpics 231 -which is now magically called part of the 1998 Attraction Series -which it IS NOT, and never was....:facepalm:

I started that Pin Group, it was one of the first ones I did and I pulled all the information from a website that was put together by Andrew Rich (with assistance from a couple others and posted to the alt.disney.disneyland newsgroup. Of course, many websites are now extinct. The web address was: http://www.project-insomnia.com/misc/dlpins.htm He had them all listed by SKU, with holes for pins that never were released. I may have printouts of the website somewhere but I have a lot of paperwork I would have to sort through. The reason the group is in the order that it is, is because that's what the order was on the website. If a pin is included in the group, it's because it was on that website. And at the time, that website was the definitive list of what was generally accepted to be part of the series. I did find this list posted by one of the other people involved from the alt.disney.disneyland list. Hopefully, the link works https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.disney.disneyland/iZm_uqv7EA4/lBGMvRTp88YJ

 

[TiggerNut]

I don't care where the info was from...it is WRONG and the pin was NEVER part of the 1998 series. I collected the 1998 series pins and that was not one of them.

Do you think it would take until 2012 for pin traders to finally notice that the pin was missing from the 1998 series?? Makes no sense at all.

While, I appreciate information being added and gathered -it should be checked out and not just stated as fact on the site. Like a notation on the bottom like other people post comments -not integrated into the description; thus trying to make it look like fact. And, I do not believe when the description was changed that it was bumped to the top of the What's New Page..so the change could be noticed.... (but I don't check every day..so I could be wrong about this...)

:facepalm:

 

[TiggerNut]

And at the time, that website was the definitive list of what was generally accepted to be part of the series. I did find this list posted by one of the other people involved from the alt.disney.disneyland list.

And definitive list according to WHO?? I have been in Pin Trading Since 1999...and I have NEVER heard of this List. I know Tomart, the DIS boards, etc..I know of one other Pin Guide before that, Dizpins and Pinpics....

Curious that Pinpics is/was not the "definitive source" of Pin information in late 1999 and early 2000s....


Yes, folks..she is coming out of hibernation....

 

[hopemax]

I collected the pin set too, way back in 1998. That's why I knew where to go to get the group info when I built it. And it has been a member of the pin group, since I created it! I think the title of the pin may have been updated. I know I printed the group out years ago, showing its place, with the names underneath. I hope I still have that print out somewhere. But I didn't think I'd have to defend a Pin Group that I quadruple checked, and had to wait to finish in the first place because at the time I started the pin group not all the pins had even been added to Pinpics, twelve years later.

Did you even read the newsgroup post, see how the SKU fits in order with all the other pins? I think it's clear that that pin was assigned a SKU that fits in numerical order with all the other SKU's from the series. Why would Disney do that, if it wasn't meant to be part of the series?

 

[hopemax]

And Yes, Tomarts has the series wrong. I noticed it the first time they published the book, that they did not list all the pins with the group. That doesn't make Tomarts right.

I see now, that you said you started in 1999, and that's the problem. Back in the day, there weren't all these websites. There were the two newsgroups alt.disney.disneyland and rec.arts.disney.parts. Obviously, ADD was for Disneyland, RADP was more for Disney World, although in theory it covered both. Al Lutz used to post his Disneyland Information Guide before he started MousePlanet and before he broke up with the other MousePlanet people and then started MiceAge.com

EDIT: To make clear, these were not pin centric places. They were where you went to get park info, some of which were postings about merchandise including pins. This is all so strange to me to defending this stuff now. I posted regularly from 1996-2000ish, more in RADP, but in both. This was before LaughingPlace.com (the website owners actually met at an ADD Sunday meet & greet which were regular in the park), Mouseplanet and Miceage. Before the DIS (although, Pete might have had the WDWinfo website up at the time, but nothing like it is now), this was before AllEarsNet.com (although Deb Wills had her WDWIG website).

Surely, there has to be someone else on this site that was around long enough to remember alt.disney.disneyland as the central location for all things Disneyland!

 

[hopemax]

And one more thing. Pin Groups show up in the Internet Wayback Machine. http://www.archive.org And even if you aren't familiar with archive.org, I know there are people who are.

Here's the archived page from July 8, 2001 the oldest one it shows for the 1998 Attractions Group http://web.archive.org/web/20010708020402/http://pinpics.com/cgi-bin/group.cgi?group=5 And the Mickey Castle pin was listed, as part of the group. If you click on it, you can see info grabbed on Dec 1, 2011. It does show that the name of the pin was changed to include the 1998 Attraction Series info, at some point after that, you can use the navigation to move forward to July 4, 2012 and it still shows the old name for the pin. You can also use the navigation to go back to 2002 and see what probably was the original entry for the pin. The updated backstamp info must have been added in between 2002-2011.

This will be my last post on this subject, because I've done just about all I can to prove where my information came from and is accurate. I felt like it was important for me to put all this down, because I know that Diana has a lot of influence in the SoCal pin community. But in this case, her information is wrong. And it's not Pinpics credibility that she is calling into question. As owner of the group, it's mine.

 

[Psycho Pixie]

**contemplates some ice cream pictures**

I really do Hope that pinpics keeps their groups system. And I wouldnt need to make private groups for my kids if I could sort my wants list by "how bad I want it" rather than numerical order.

 

[Merryweather]

**contemplates some ice cream pictures**

Your wish is my command Kristine

Who wants to give it a try ?? I heard that they are giving a pin to buyers. It says "Pinning" on it

 

[TiggerNut]

Here's the archived page from July 8, 2001 the oldest one it shows for the 1998 Attractions Group http://web.archive.org/web/20010708020402/http://pinpics.com/cgi-bin/group.cgi?group=5 And the Mickey Castle pin was listed, as part of the group. If you click on it, you can see info grabbed on Dec 1, 2011. It does show that the name of the pin was changed to include the 1998 Attraction Series info, at some point after that, you can use the navigation to move forward to July 4, 2012 and it still shows the old name for the pin. You can also use the navigation to go back to 2002 and see what probably was the original entry for the pin. The updated backstamp info must have been added in between 2002-2011.

This will be my last post on this subject, because I've done just about all I can to prove where my information came from and is accurate. I felt like it was important for me to put all this down, because I know that Diana has a lot of influence in the SoCal pin community. But in this case, her information is wrong. And it's not Pinpics credibility that she is calling into question. As owner of the group, it's mine.

The information is STILL wrong. The grouping by SKU proves NOTHING. SKUs were made chronologically...and just because a pin came out at the same time as part of the 1998 Attraction Series -does not defacto make it part of the series. And as you do know some of the SKUs of the series were changed when select pins of the 1998 set were re-released with the backstamp Released in the Year 2000.

I still point to the FACT that no Pin Trader, No ONE..EVER called the Mickey at the Castle as part of the 1998 Attraction Series UNTIL you did in 2012. Again..you are talking over 12 years where the pin is NOT called into question!? This is somehow newly discovered info; off some other site!? After HUNDREDS.. of people collected the series!? MAKES NO SENSE!!!

Even if there was confusion at the beginning of pin trading...don't you think the true historians would have made mention BEFORE 2012!!?

As further confirmation -I just talked to one of the ORIGINAL Disneyland Cast Super Traders from 2000 -he agrees with me; that the Mickey Castle pin WAS NEVER part of the 1998 Attraction Series.

Diana