Unofficial File parts/3039p14.dat
part image
File Header:
0 Slope Brick 45  2 x  2 with Phone and Minifigure Pattern
0 Name: 3039p14.dat
0 Author: N. W. Perry [Plastikean]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !KEYWORDS console, telephone, tape reels, monitor, buttons
0 !KEYWORDS police, emergency, rescue, command
0 !KEYWORDS BrickLink 3039px14, set 6398, set 4012

Status:
1 subfile isn't certified. (CSN)
Size: 46512 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=novote
RainbowDolphin=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Tue Oct 20 05:00:02 2020, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: Plastikean
At Tue Oct 20 17:20:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Excellent short description. Many good keywords.

Unmatched edges, around 2 of the buttons:
2 4 -5.834 3.27311 -13.2731 -4.71 3.27311 -13.2731
2 4 -5.834 16.6071 -26.6071 -4.71 16.6071 -26.6071
2 4 -3.835 3.27311 -13.2731 -3.835 2.65439 -12.6544
2 4 -4.71 3.27311 -13.2731 -3.835 3.27311 -13.2731
2 4 -6.709 2.65439 -12.6544 -6.709 3.27311 -13.2731
2 4 -6.709 3.27311 -13.2731 -5.834 3.27311 -13.2731
2 4 -3.835 16.6071 -26.6071 -3.835 15.9884 -25.9884
2 4 -4.71 16.6071 -26.6071 -3.835 16.6071 -26.6071
2 4 -6.709 15.9884 -25.9884 -6.709 16.6071 -26.6071
2 4 -6.709 16.6071 -26.6071 -5.834 16.6071 -26.6071

Do you know that Edger2 is a good tool to use, in finding these kind of error?

At Tue Oct 20 22:10:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
I'm aware of Edger2, but I'm not familiar with the unmatched edges error--how it occurs, how to solve it, how to find it (when I run Edger 2, it shows all of the buttons as having unmatched edges, not just those you flagged). I'll re-read some stuff and see what I can figure out.

At Tue Oct 20 23:00:01 2020, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
Got it; it's the precision difference between the subfiles and the polys surrounding it. They either didn't snap precisely in LDPE, or were rounded off during cleanup. Unificator is the fix.

By the way, I have to give credit to BL for the concise description. But I did make the conscious choice not to elaborate it, opting instead for more keywords. :-)

At Wed Oct 21 01:35:01 2020, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Plastikean
Comments:
Unificated

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Mon Mar 8 07:10:02 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Cheenzo
Comments:
Applied Unificator and fixed unmatched vertices
Added Set keyword

At Mon Mar 8 17:20:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
Unificator was already run on this part. Were there additional unmatched vertices, so it was needed to run it again?
Also, if adding set keywords, I built this specifically for set 4210, and it probably occurs in other sets too. I'm happy to make necessary edits like these, if reviewers suggest it.

At Tue Mar 9 18:15:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Cheenzo
Certification: novote
Comments:
I did these modifications because they were necessary after modifying the subfile.
The reason I did the subfile modification is that there was a comment since last October without any action but sorry and feel free to take it back from your own version to do it as per your wish.

At Tue Mar 9 18:45:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
Oh, I see it now; I didn't notice you'd also changed the subfile. I did note the comment, but since it wasn't a hold I didn't make any changes pending the input of other reviewers. No harm done, I just didn't know whether I'd missed something that was holding up the part!

At Wed Mar 10 12:20:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: RainbowDolphin
Certification: certify
Comments:
Do you mean set 4012 (Wave Cops), not 4210?

This part enables us to correct the set 6398 in OMR, currently released using wrong pattern.
Thanks.

At Thu Mar 11 04:25:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
4012, yes.

At Tue Mar 23 16:50:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Isn't this a grey/black/blue print on a white brick?
If so the white in this file should be uncoloured.

At Wed Mar 24 05:20:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
That's difficult to discern from the available photos. From the reference images I used, it appears there may actually be a white overprint in at least some places, especially the face and jacket details. However, one can also find images where these areas appear unprinted. And we can also imagine that, if TLG wanted to add a fourth printing color, they'd choose yellow instead of white, for the MF's face. (Has anyone got a real copy?)

Since it was ambiguous, I gave it the benefit of the doubt and colored these areas white, on the assumption that if somebody used this part in a color other than white, they would at least remain that way. But then, maybe you'd want an orange or green or purple policeman...

At Wed Mar 24 05:45:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
But yes, this part was only ever produced as a white brick.
However, I don't know for sure whether it is a gray/blue/black print, or a gray/blue/black/white print.

At Wed Mar 24 17:00:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Yes, I agree, this rule is stupid.
But, if in doubt, the white should be eliminated.
At Wed Mar 24 21:00:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: RainbowDolphin
Certification: novote
Comments:
Judging from this picture, the entire white area including minifig face is unprinted.
A bleeding of blue ink can be seen.
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3039px14&idColor=1#T=C&C=1

Sorry for overlooking it, thanks Magnus.

At Wed Mar 24 21:25:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Plastikean
Certification: novote
Comments:
What/where is that rule, anyway? Someday, I may actually compile some of these rules into one place...maybe!

At Wed Mar 24 21:55:01 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Plastikean
Comments:
Color 15 to color 16. Added set 4012 keyword.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Mar 25 14:55:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: RainbowDolphin
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.

At Sun Sep 26 17:35:01 2021, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
Minifigure => Minifig