No, the year its most definitely being tracked. Each item page has fields for released and discontinued dates. (They used to be called “produced from” and “produced to” so you might still see that in some of the documentation). If it's known, you can add a month and day, but for mainline Hot Wheels we typically just put the year . Even though the Valentines Beetle I have in front of me on my desk has the N47 code, and thus was manufactured in 2020, it's released year is listed in hobbyDB as 2021 since it's officially part of the 2021 mainline and that's what people will search for, not the 47th week of 2020. It's valuable to have the date codes listed in the description, but I don't think they need a separate field. Christian said they're working on an advanced search that will be able to show search results from text in the description. That will make it possible to search the date codes without them being in a separate field.So my premise is right that HobbyDB is not tracking castings by the year they are made but only by the name of the casting itself.
This is an area that's kind of in transition. Up until recently there was a separate listing for each year of each segment/series (like 2019 Hot Wheels Mainline, 2020 Hot Wheels Mainline, etc.). Now that date filtering and sorting is working well they're going through and combining those pages, so there will be just one Hot Wheels Mainline series which you can then filter to see only cars from specific years like I did with the VW Bug casting above. It is a bit different from what we're used to with other reference sites, but other sites don't have the dynamic filtering that hobbyDB has. It's going to take a bit of getting used to, but I think it'll be much better going forward. Static lists like on Fandom and the old South Texas Diecast site have a lot of limitations. (Although they do have their strengths as well. I think both Fandom and hobbyDB have their place in the collecting world.)I think since I posted my question about this though a year 'varient' has or is being implemented there. But it is only showing up in the associated Series or Segment names - which I find really odd. And against most every collector I know of's 'industry standard' (understanding).
The date codes would give us clues to that, but to create these listings I basically just used what was available in the eBay listings and from the Matchbox wiki, and neither of those sources listed date codes. If we can find someone who has these models in their collection we might be able to get the codes from them. Until then, though, we just have to work with what we've got.Not to bring it up with the HobbyDB folks at this moment, but I believe the 60th Anniversary cards were a shorter run and an exclusive distribution than the others and since they are both 2013 there should be a base plate date code to differentiate them.
Each subvariant does get its own value calculation. There's not a lot of data yet, but each one does have at least one eBay sale connected and you can see that so far it does look like the 60th anniversary card is worth the most, with the 2016 card being the cheapest. This is how the vacuum truck appears in the search results. It shows a range of values for all the subvariants:There should then be a premium value associated with the 60th Anniversary cards over the other 2013 ones which in the valuation algorythms will not be captured properly at the moment.
That’s the standard way to do it. We’re severely lacking in photos of loose castings, though, so that’s why you often see a carded photo at the top. The way subvariants work is one version gets set as the “display subvariant,” and its “show on search” photo is displayed at the top. When photos are uploaded to an item they can be set as “main photo” (large photo displayed on the item page, should be carded), “show on search photo” (shows on search results and at the top of subvariant pages, should be loose), and “detail photo” (should be a close up or a composite of close ups of the specific details that differentiate the subvariants). The detail photos are also lacking right now. The database is definitely a work in progress, which is why we need as many people as possible to help.I do like how you lead with the loose casting as the casting name 1st version (standard)?) and not a carded one.
Well, the Working Rigs vacuum truck has different card types than the 2 Jet Z. The typical card types for mainlines are “USA card,” “international long card,” and “international short card.” I think those are pretty well standardized. If it’s not one of those standard cards they have to be described the best possible way, like some older releases had “instant win” stickers, “snowflake cards,” and for the past several years there are cards with the factory sealed sticker.But you used different names for the card types than was used by the 2 Jet Z. They should be standardized as you also mentioned.
I think using abbreviations like that would make it harder for users to tell which is which. From my admittedly limited understanding of databases, the longer descriptions wouldn’t slow down the site, but having additional fields would. I assume each item is a row in the table, while each data field is a column. Removing unnecessary columns is what will speed up the site, since each cell exists for every item record whether or not there’s any text in it.I think using LC, IC, and SC would save the space that Christian seems worried about and perserve site speed as well with Long Card, International Card or Short Card showing as the information shown for each cell data sub varient on each page the casting appears in.