Talk:Lego/Archive 10

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lego. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160523050056/https://www.rio2016.com/en/news/mascots-tom-and-vinicius-debut-lego-look-for-rio-2016 to https://www.rio2016.com/en/news/mascots-tom-and-vinicius-debut-lego-look-for-rio-2016

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Official Website section
Does the "Official Website" section not smack of self-promotion? It seems full of ad-speak, and all three citations lead to Lego itself. NewkirkPlaza (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article may be prone to a degree of bloat related to enthusiasm for the product. The Official website section seemed informative to me, but you raise a good point about citing the company's site - if it is notable there should be some secondary sources. To me it doesn't seem like something that needs to be removed though. —DIYeditor (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lego. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120707025218/http://www.ccpit-patent.com.cn/News/2003041001.htm to http://www.ccpit-patent.com.cn/News/2003041001.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:32, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lego. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150906083454/http://www.lego.com/en-us/duplo/about/baby-in-bloom to http://www.lego.com/en-us/duplo/about/baby-in-bloom
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150905053411/http://papercutz.com/comics/bionicle to http://papercutz.com/comics/bionicle

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:21, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Merger discussion
Formal request has been received to merge: History of Lego into Lego and/or The Lego Group; also: should a merge occur with The Lego Group and Lego? Request(s) dated: 2/24/2017. Proposer's Rationale: ''as I see no reason to keep it separately. Most of the content is included in both, but it requires cleanup and minor expansion.''. Discuss here. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Based on notability, they can exist as separate entities. Based on precedent, they can also; "History of" articles are very common. But most importantly, based on the volume of content, any merge would make the resulting article far, far too large. Honestly, this looks like WP:SNOW. ɱ  (talk) · vbm  · coi) 02:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think that either article would grow to large, as the content of "History of Lego" is partially present in both articles, and would be split accordingly to whether its corporate affairs or about the toy itself. Consider also the problem that we summarized "Lego" and "The Lego Group" under one banner that is "History of Lego", wherefore, by your saying of commonness, we should actually have a "History of Lego" and a "History of The Lego Group" article, which would each have about half the content of the current article, and would later by consensus be merged anyway, as they would not be notable indepdendently. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 08:15, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The history of the company vs the bricks themselves is so very intertwined that we'd have a ridiculous amount of overlap, and still have to add a ton of content to two already long articles. This is ridiculous. ɱ  (talk) · vbm  · coi) 19:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose as above. These are potentially large articles and I see no benefit to a merged form. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Guinness World Record
Lego is so popular that it has the tallest Lego tower and it measured 35.05 meters. The Italian children donated in approximately 550,000 Lego bricks. It has also the largest Lego structure which is the Lego version of London Tower Bridge for Land Rover to launch their new discovery. Contessamarieko (talk) 04:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)June 21,2017 6:32 pm
 * Hi, do you have a source for this? Thanks! Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 06:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the user left out the subject and meant to say that 'Italy' and 'Italians' have created the tallest and largest Lego structures. Then, I'm not sure if that's relevant information for the article, anyhow. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Danish pronuncation
The pronunciation is based on the phrase leg godt (compare Wiktionary entries and listen to the audio here), which is what the name "Lego" is based on. However, the pronunciation in this video, which is from the official Lego YouTube channel, is closer to, and it also reflects the pronunciaton in the Forvo entry I cited.

--maczkopeti (talk) 20:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Linking Denmark
Per WP:OVERLINK most country names should usually not be linked. I've adjusted Template:Infobox toy/doc to reflect this as well. --John (talk) 16:43, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you? The example over there, which is Rubik's Cube, shows Hungary as linked? Maybe there should be a discussion over there? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Only if anybody seriously thinks linking Hungary on the Rubik's Cube, or Denmark on the Lego one, is actually useful to our readers. This argument has been had many times though, hence the consensus embodied in WP:OVERLINK. --John (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I see it has now been changed. Not sure why toys and games would need these links, but someone might have a valid argument. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I doubt it, but let's see. --John (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have restored the link in the syntax sheet, as it is still up for discussion here (also revamped the entire doc along the way). Since infoboxes usually act as overview for key points, everything linkable should be linked once, as is the case with 90% of infoboxes I come across. Although a country might not directly be related to a toy topic, a user might still be interested in the country when reading about the toy, that is for whatever reason. Since that fraction, however, is rather small, it's kept to the infobox; accroding to WP:OVERLINK, it is fine to repeat a link in image captions, infoboxes, etc. for the sake of being an eye-catcher that bears ready appropriate links, so having an eye-catcher link the country but avoid it in the prose for overlinking reasons. I know my opinion is controversial, but I believe the discussion should not be held to a circle this small (the article really doesn't have any editing traffic and as such not a lot of watchers), rather as a minor matter of public opinion. P.S.: Regarding the Hungary link removed from the Infobox doc, it still is on the actual product's page, as pointed out by Martinevans123. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 19:30, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Quite right - the discussion should be had at Template:Infobox toy/doc. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Lordtobi, for the detailed response, and thank you too for realising that your opinion is a controversial one. The key of course lies in Although a country might not directly be related to a toy topic, a user might still be interested in the country when reading about the toy, that is for whatever reason. Consensus is that unless the topic is of direct relevance to the top-level article, we don't link it, because, for each of the tiny minority of readers you describe, there will be several or many who will find the profusion of links off-putting. In the case of Lego, there is a link to Billund, Denmark in the first sentence and following this link will take you to the Denmark article. Two clicks. Likewise on the Rubik's Cube article, we have a prominent link to Ernő Rubik, linking to Budapest, which links to the Hungary article. Three clicks. There is good research evidence that having too many links inhibits people from clicking on the links; what we need is just the right number. Most times, this means unlinking countries. --John (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I see your point, farily, toys are not really that harshly related to their home countries, so I won't stand in your way if you wish to unlink countries on the Lego, Rubik's Cube and Template:Infobox toy/doc pages (as well as others, of course). Though for a second thing, how would you judge the same question for companies? Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 12:56, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Same for companies. --John (talk) 13:04, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The fact that Lego is a huge cultural element of Denmark, with its prominent inclusion in the article on the nation itself (compare cultural elements photographed on the United States article) makes the link very directly important, in my opinion. ɱ  (talk) · vbm  · coi) 14:13, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've had a similar discussion (still not fully resolved) about whether Arvo Pärt deserves to be linked as an Estonian in the opening sentence of his article. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2017
Under the video games header, please replace the typo'd reference:

With the untypo'd and more informative:

Thanks! 192.88.255.9 (talk) 22:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done –72 (talk) 01:18, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2018
The Brand Finance article [6] link is broken and needs changing to this http://brandfinance.com/press-releases/lego-overtakes-ferrari-as-the-worlds-most-powerful-brand/ 86.0.77.43 (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 11:48, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Needs re-archive? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Demographics?
No mention of the fact that Lego is preeminently a boy’s toy. Consider this inadvertent admission of such in the 2015 article from Bloomberg: "Lego Is for Girls: Inside the world's most admired toy company's effort to finally click with girls.” Orthotox (talk) 23:57, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2018
Lego ideas is website run by the Lego group, which allows all users to submit ideas for lego products to be turned into potential products available commercially, through votes done by the community the original designer winner receiving social recognition and a prize. Yashaban (talk) 12:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * ❌ Please make your requested edits in the form "Please change X to Y". Side note: We have an article on Lego Ideas already. Iffy★Chat -- 13:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

ABC Replacement.
The EU announced quite a while ago it was going to ban ABS plastic "soon", so Lego hass looking for a replacement material. As of 2018, it had had no success. Last time I looked, there was some info on this on the Lego website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.136.34.40 (talk) 08:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

What year was Lego invented?
I reckon 1958. Especially if “Lego” means the stud-and-tube bricks. I would like the article to reflect this.

In 1932, the creator of Lego began making wooden toys (and other wooden products). It doesn’t seem to have been a “company” until at least a year later (possibly after 1934).

In 1934, the name Lego was coined, and adopted.

In 1949, the first Lego bricks (Automatic Binding Bricks) are sold.

In 1958, the current LEGO stud-and-tube coupling system is patented. 1st sold in US in 1961; seems (to me) this Lego was not sold (anywhere) til 1961.

. Can someone incorporate this? (... into the article).

MBG02 (talk) 00:29, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Lego Mould showing the gating and spruce.png

Edit request
Change end of first paragraph to: "Lego pieces can be assembled and connected in many ways to construct objects, including vehicles, buildings, and working robots. Anything constructed can be taken apart again, and the pieces reused to make new things."
 * ✅. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 20:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2019
Change:

The clothes are for boys and girls from 0 to 12 years old and the partnership also ties in with other Lego products such as 'Ninjago', 'Hero Factory' and the new 'Friends' theme for girls.[94]

To:

The clothes are for boys and girls from 0 to 12 years old and the partnership also ties in with other Lego products such as 'Ninjago', 'Hero Factory' and the 'Friends' theme.[94]

Reasons: Lego Friends is not a new theme, and it is not exclusively for girls. HomeImprover (talk) 17:32, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I don't understand what you were talking about. And please provide reliable sources for these contents. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 22:56, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done It appeared that the user wished to have a sentence appearing near the end of the article changed to reflect that the Friends theme is neither new nor restricted to girls. Because the sentence felt out-of-place anyhow, I altered it significantly. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 09:03, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Translation of motto "Det bedste er ikke for godt"
Just want to restate here as I did in the commit message to this edit: "Det bedste er ikke for godt" literally means "the best is not too good", and I see no reason to try to rephrase that as "only the best is the best" or similar. If it's due to a fear of the reader misunderstanding "not too good" as having a negative meaning of 'not very good', the Danish words actually have the exact same possible negative meaning, so it's kind of weird and misunderstandable in Danish too. So I see no reason to weed out the weirdness when translating it. --Jhertel (talk) 12:46, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit request - amount of amusement parks
The text "Merlin Entertainments operates *seven* Legoland amusement parks" should be changed to "Merlin Entertainments operates *eight* Legoland amusement parks" - as the parks list that follows contains eight items. Nimrodzim (talk) 07:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for the information, . I also corrected wrong information about a park in China that doesn't exist yet but is only being built, and added a park in Japan that wasn't mentioned, as well as a future park in New York. --Jhertel (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2019
Change all instances of "Lego" to "LEGO" in accordance with the company's guidelines. Joconz (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ❌: Since "Lego" is not an ancronym and "LEGO" is only a stylization, Wikipedia spells the name in normal title-case, per the guideline WP:TMRULES and others. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 13:34, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2020
Replace all Lego with LEGO Per Brand guidelines 71.254.13.212 (talk) 10:57, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌. Looking at Manual of Style/Trademarks, the following advice is given:
 * Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one:
 * use: Time, Kiss, Asus, Sony Mobile. (Capitalize IKEA, IBM, as acronyms/initialisms.)
 * avoid: TIME, KISS, ASUS, SONY Mobile
 * So I think LEGO falls under this guideline. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:27, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * p.s. the article seemS to be missing any kind of etymology/ explanation of the origin of the name, presumably from the Danish language. I have assumed it was not an initialism. Martinevans123 (talk)
 * – re your PS, is that not covered by the second sentence of "History"? cheers DBaK (talk) 13:16, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, so it is, thanks. I see that at da.wiki the article is actually called Legoklods! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:40, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2020
Change the LEGO motto from the literal translation, "The best is not too good", to the more colloquial and accepted translation, "Only the best is good enough". This is the way that LEGO uses the motto. Mattolbert (talk) 14:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Goldsztajn (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Lego's plural
In the first episode of Lego Masters, Will Arnett was apparently told that the plural form is "Lego", not "Legos". Is that a notable detail worth adding to the article? Is a bit like that a reliable source, being played for laughs, but part of a licensed production? CTRL+F does not find "Legos" in this article, so no edits needed in that regard. 96.244.220.178 (talk) 05:56, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The Lego company maintains that the products are called Lego bricks, not Lego (singular or plural).  Stepho  talk 10:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


 * However, it is a matter of common knowledge that in the UK, Lego is used as a mass noun that is invariable as to grammatical Number; but that in the US, the Lego system and Lego bricks are both referred to as Legos ("leh goes"). This is such a widely known cultural peculiarity, it must be a simple thing to ferret out citations for both usages.


 * Nuttyskin (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I find that very strange. Duskflower43 (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2020
The article currently includes the excerpt: The games vary from simple to complex, some are similar to "traditional" board games, while others are completely different. which is two free-standing sentences mashed together with a comma. A comma cannot do this in standard grammar. Please replace it with "The games vary from simple to complex. Some are similar to "traditional" board games, while others are completely different." Thankyou. 49.195.105.244 (talk) 04:28, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: Instead of splitting into two sentences, I replaced the comma with a semicolon. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Brickipedia?
Is Brickipedia a reliable source? https://brickipedia.fandom.com/f 24.14.45.36 (talk) 02:24, 18 September 2020 (UTC)


 * If the data is mostly contributed by fans, then WP:FANSITE (point 11) would apply. In general, the site needs to be either by an trusted expert or to have some form of editorial, fact checking oversight (most companies don't like being sued, so they check their facts).  Stepho  talk 21:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2020
The phrase of the lego motto that you put in means, "The best is not too good." The correct phrase would be, " Kun det bedste er godt nok" Meaning, "Only the best is good enough." It is very offset, and if people follow this article and repeat your version, the danish-speaking may think LEGO changed their phrase. It kind of makes sense, but as they say at LEGO: Only the best is good enough. My source is a translation on the google search engine. The brick of the build (talk) 15:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * They do use that motto in English . The direct translation isn't what you'd normally see in English, but I've added it in for clarity. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:49, 25 September 2020 (UTC)