Slot Cars Forum banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
DT
Joined
·
5,195 Posts
We have mentioned the link-up to ToyPedia last year in May (Link to news)

The project will make use of ToyPedia's cataloguing technology, specially developed to create databases of collectable toys and models, and will cover everything from vintage Triang Scalextric and Aurora to modern high-detail models from SCX, Le Mans and the like. The database design allows for images of all entries, and their individual variants and operates as a wiki, so once items have been added, community members can add description, history details and images, as well as links to forum discussions or even external sites of note. The site's advanced filtering system will ultimately also allow for easy research as users will be able to view data by manufacturer, type of car, country of origin, driver, race and many other criteria.
The slotcar section of ToyPedia will become a direct part of SlotForum as a new section like the Blogs or Galleries in a few months (i.e. it will be available on both ToyCollector and SlotForum).

We are looking for SlotForum members who have slotcar collections to come forward and help build the database with information and photos.

Adam Woolhouse from ToyCollector (Adamwoo on SlotForum) will explain what sort of content is required and the best way to submit it to ToyPedia.

Adam is going to post updates on what brands are covered with lots of news coming up in the next few weeks.
 

·
Adam Woolhouse
Joined
·
28 Posts
Thanks Doug,

The plan for ToyPedia is to show on all sites that cover toys or models. I have started working with the folks on www.HobbyTalk.com, an American forum with a section on slot cars on American slotcar brands such as Aurora (see for their entry here). I have also put up a portal page for SlotForum on ToyPedia here.

Check it out, say you want to find the 60s German slotcar brand Rasant (nice HO cars such as Ford Taunus Fire Chief), you start typing it in the module on the left like that:



You can then use the words to see the respective page of that maker, range, model or variant or you can use the little plusses to see what information we already have (which is a fast way of browsing). We are working on an equally good way to search through the now already 220,000 ToyPedia entries.

We have 2 type of pages in ToyPedia:

1. Catalogue pages (principally items you can own, like sets, cars, track parts or spare parts), the best so far and therefore a good example is this page on the Corgi Batmobile and
2. "Non-catalogue" pages (we are still looking for a better name for these) such as a glossary, a model designer, a club, a theme etc. - here for example the Slot Car Glossary or How to build water features (which was written by a train modeller but could be a good resource for a slot car layout as well) pages.

Doug and I have met all the brands that were in Nuremberg and you can expect to see their ranges soon to appear on ToyPedia (and to be announced here). I also work with some volunteers on historic brands (for example The Minic Road/Rail Shop has just send me 20,000 images of Minic items he has sold over the years!).

Do ask questions, pontificate here, give advice in PMs, suggest possible sources of data or offer help yourself up (by the Slotcar gods we need every help we can get!). As this is a wiki you do not need to be the ultimate expert, all data can be checked and double-checked, edited and discussed here on the forum. Just try adding information to an existing entry and if you want to add new entries (no matter if those are Bad Dog or Scalextric) contact me.

Adam
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
836 Posts
As a regular user of the Vintage and Collectors area I would prefer it if the Toypedia section was set up as a separate forum area straight away - this seems to be the eventual intent so why not do it now?

Otherwise I fear that the existing enjoyable V and C traffic may be swamped by the Toypedia traffic, cataloguing the many thousands of models out there.

Giving Toypedia its own area will allow setup of its own dedicated threads, moderators, topics and regular contributors and lurkers.

Best regards,

Rob
 

·
Christian Braun
Joined
·
20 Posts
Hi roblees,

ToyPedia will become its own section on the site like the current Reviews, Blogs or Gallery on the top menu bar. Until then I do not foresee to many if any threads here besides the current poll and this update thread (this thread will have posts of new brands or other slotcar related subjects in ToyPedia with a link to them). If I am wrong I assume we can set up a separate forum for it quite quickly.

Christian
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,640 Posts
Extremely incomplete, and not very accurate.. but really doing a slot car glossary is a major undertaking!

Don
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,640 Posts
Total immersion!

And keep an eye on all the literature, whether print or electronic. That way you see what terms are really being used, so you know what needs to be defined.

For instance, one of our favorites, SCM...

Acronyms are a whole other field, but probably should be included as well ...

Don

PS: as usual, you also need to define your scope: everything slot related? only home racing? only commercial? modern and/or vintage?
 

·
Adam Woolhouse
Joined
·
28 Posts
Those are some interesting points to consider. Thanks for suggesting acronyms, that's a vital tool that should also be included, but like you said, it would need some order and structure. Let the research begin...

Adam
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,640 Posts
PS: Adam, just thought of something else: there are at least two of these that exist already, one by John Ford of Scale Auto Racing News, probably available through his website, and another by, I think, Ray Gardner, former president of TOA (Track Owner's Association of America). Not really sure about who published the other one, but a good basis does exist already!

Don

http://www.scaleautoracing.com/slotfaqs/g3.html
 

·
Adam Woolhouse
Joined
·
28 Posts
QUOTE (dgersh @ 9 Mar 2012, 17:03) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>PS: Adam, just thought of something else: there are at least two of these that exist already, one by John Ford of Scale Auto Racing News, probably available through his website, and another by, I think, Ray Gardner, former president of TOA (Track Owner's Association of America). Not really sure about who published the other one, but a good basis does exist already!

Don

http://www.scaleautoracing.com/slotfaqs/g3.html

That's a great link Don, thank you! Look's like a good jumping off point.

Adam
 

·
Christian Braun
Joined
·
20 Posts
Adam, we added two yesterday, the one from John and one more (at the bottom there is a section for other glossaries), please add a link to Ray and ask him if we can incorporate.

Don, as we plan to make this for all slot cars - so we do not need to "out"-define what is not covered, even local terms could be added, maybe with a proviso that they are only used in say Australia so far. Try adding a term for a laugh, it is really easy (you have to have an account on Toy Collector).

Christian
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,300 Posts
Best of luck to you Adam and Christian.

Do you require citations for submissions? And what about original research, or "common knowledge", or POV? Does ToyPedia follow a format similar to Wikipedia regarding submissions? Who is the arbiter of the scope and tone of the material?

To clarify my line of questioning by using an example:
In the main article, Slot Cars - Section 9: Motors, Bodies, and Accessories, there is substantial, and relatively detailed information about the modern Mabuchi "can" motor. Though mentioned, there is little information about other type of motors, such as the open frame motors, or Aurora pancake motors, or strap motors.

In my opinion, more information about these motors should be included, because they contribute to the foundations of the hobby. However - I am not an expert. I don't have any reference materials to cite. I think that these non-can motors are common knowledge, but is that good enough?

Is it okay to add basic, fundamental information without citations?
 

·
Adam Woolhouse
Joined
·
28 Posts
QUOTE (ThaiRacer @ 12 Mar 2012, 15:47) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Best of luck to you Adam and Christian.

Do you require citations for submissions? And what about original research, or "common knowledge", or POV? Does ToyPedia follow a format similar to Wikipedia regarding submissions? Who is the arbiter of the scope and tone of the material?

To clarify my line of questioning by using an example:
In the main article, Slot Cars - Section 9: Motors, Bodies, and Accessories, there is substantial, and relatively detailed information about the modern Mabuchi "can" motor. Though mentioned, there is little information about other type of motors, such as the open frame motors, or Aurora pancake motors, or strap motors.

In my opinion, more information about these motors should be included, because they contribute to the foundations of the hobby. However - I am not an expert. I don't have any reference materials to cite. I think that these non-can motors are common knowledge, but is that good enough?

Is it okay to add basic, fundamental information without citations?

Hi ThaiRacer

Yes it is okay to add common knowledge, basic, fundamental information without citations. We differ from Wikipedia in that regard, so even though you're not an expert, please feel free to edit and contribute to the main article.

Adam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,568 Posts
QUOTE (ThaiRacer @ 12 Mar 2012, 15:47) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Best of luck to you Adam and Christian.

Do you require citations for submissions? And what about original research, or "common knowledge", or POV? Does ToyPedia follow a format similar to Wikipedia regarding submissions? Who is the arbiter of the scope and tone of the material?

To clarify my line of questioning by using an example:
In the main article, Slot Cars - Section 9: Motors, Bodies, and Accessories, there is substantial, and relatively detailed information about the modern Mabuchi "can" motor. Though mentioned, there is little information about other type of motors, such as the open frame motors, or Aurora pancake motors, or strap motors.

In my opinion, more information about these motors should be included, because they contribute to the foundations of the hobby. However - I am not an expert. I don't have any reference materials to cite. I think that these non-can motors are common knowledge, but is that good enough?

Is it okay to add basic, fundamental information without citations?
It seems to me the Section 9 on motors has a lot to say about motors in the 1960s and very early 1970s, but doesn't have much to say about the can motors that appear in current RTR home set type cars, nor about current higher performance slot cars.

A problem Wiki suffered from was contributors with conflicting views about what was "common knowledge". There were quite a few sort of ping pong game with one contributor inserting his "facts", and somebody else replacing that with their conflicting "facts", then back to the first set of "facts" and so on. The only thing you cold be sure of was at least one of these sets of "facts" was wrong!
Best of luck to Adam with resolving that sort of thing.
 

·
Christian Braun
Joined
·
20 Posts
Hi 300SLR,

Indeed we are just starting with engines and lots of other areas. The plan is to have champions that can deal with a section (say early Aurora) and make level-headed calls. We can always add both claims ("some members believe, other do believe" kind of thing). I have started adding a section for engines with the first page on the Mabuchi engines. If you like to get involved PM me and I show you the engines and give you Sysop permission (a wiki term for somebody who can create new pages and do a few other things).

Christian
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top