Posted under Tags
On that note though, what do we want the relationship between LEGO, LEGO brick/LEGO minifig and The LEGO Group to even be?
Per earlier in the thread, there was an initial plan to seperate LEGO between The LEGO Group and LEGO brick/LEGO minifig, the former containing all the copyrights and the latter containing the actual toys themselves, and you'd tag the latter on the former as appropriate. But the unimplying of Ninjago has thrown that into question.
when it comes to company tags like mihoyo and nintendo theyre generally used for things not focused on a single copyright that they own. so things like art of ROB post #11360167 and crossovers post #11311762
so applying that to the lego group, that would mean things like post #10927521 (fanart for the game lego party), post #10701575 (crossover between two lego shows), and post #1527983 (art depicting the actual toys)
but then that raises some questions. like what about art that portrays lego-copyrighted characters in their lego minfigure forms (e.g. post #10812040)? for things like that, i think thats a bit overkill. but for posts like post #7876217 i'd be okay with having the lego group tag applied. but there's also art like post #10877217 which is fanart of a lego ninjago set (71819 Dragon Stone Shrine). so would that get the lego group tag?
sorry that this isn't an actual solution, i more or less just want to get the ball rolling for someone smarter to figure this out lol
Updated by sabisabi
The bulk update request #59846 (forum #440885) has been approved by @evazion.
BUR #59995 is pending approval.
deprecate lego
With the unimplication approved, to actually inspire discussion on the above point, I'll put in a deprecation for LEGO.
