LEGOscum

It's going to get to a point where Disney will have to buy Google so that they can wipe out all the search results from their database. https://www.google.com.au/?gws_rd=ssl#q=lego+star+wars+rumours+2017

Well done to EB Admins for weathering the storm and not taking down the 2017 rumour list. Plenty of other sites (including the one I write for) have retreated under C&D emails from LEGO IP department but you guys, who've been quoted as the source, stand firm. Obviously your cajones are made of sterner stuff than the rest of us's are!

Not that it matters but it's from Scholastic. https://www.amazon.com/Use-Force-Lego-Star-Ninjago/dp/1338047450/

There are members of the Rebelscum forums who have contacted their local Brand Stores and have been told "yes". Most get a "no" though, but it is worth a go.

Dang, a week earlier and this would have been a great April Fools/Rogue One tie in gag!

I realise this is a very cheeky reason to reboot my old account - one that I haven't used in half a decade - but I'm selling off my entire LEGO Star Wars collection and I'm in Oz. Brisbane in fact, and it was the collection used for DK's first edition of LEGO Star Wars: The Visual Dictionary, on which I was a consultant author and the principal photographer. Anyway, I'll chance it and post the link here: http://forum.rebelscum.com/t1124799/

This image is not new, nor is the explanation. Back around 2002 The LEGO Co. had a domain called legos.com that would show this image and then redirect the viewer to lego.com. The LEGO Co. publish proper usage guidelines in all their press kits and has a permanent web page instructing people on how to use "LEGO".

Without a doubt the Boushh helmet is from a vintage Kenner action figure.

Damn straight. These are as rare as hen's teeth. I've got the stop watch, official instructions and 20 clones to go with mine. If I was parting with it I'd be selling my entire collection off at the same time. Not something I ever want to see.

Shiney!

More of a MOC than a mod, but either way it is a nice creation. But I don't get why you bought a core vehicle set knowing you didn't like the colour scheme, and then went a totally rebuilt it. As far as I can tell you only used the engine pods and the canopy from the original. Confusion aside I still like what you've done. It would look great with some kind of front armament or battering ram.

One year membership at least - 3 years Minimum of 200 posts - 229 posts Minimum of 25% of all posts within the Star Wars Forum - 88% in SW forum "Hit me baby one more time!"

Lovely. It's quite possibly the most faithful design I've seen yet. I'd love to build one but I've got my fingers crossed for a Midi-scale Frigate from LEGO. My only criticisms are the engines, which are a bit bland, and lack of colour (possibly mix some other greys in). Jeremy

My mistake, I was looking at a small thumbnail of the set and it looked like a Death Star in the background. The 4504 Millennium Falcon is listed in Ep5 because it is clearly an Ep5 set. Do you want me to tell the publishers you think they got that wrong too? As much as I/we/they appreciate people pointing out the errors there are times when it comes down to a difference in opinion. ANd you can't please all of the people all of the time.

This is almost the correct answer. It's been known for a long time that the lenses in the helmet looked red. It's because the plastic had a strange tint under the studio lights. As for sets that appeared in more than one movie, like the TIE Fighters or Star Destroyers, the publishers decided to list them in the movie they first appeared in, which is why the TIE Fighters and Star Destroyer are listed in Ep4. The problem of 6212 is that while it does appear first in Ep4 and its packaging is Ep4, it does have some Ep5 minifigs.

Oh, the youth of today.

Would those be the same clones that attempted to assasinate Yoda on Kashyyyk? The clonetroopers created by the Kaminoan cloners weren't programmed with "codes". The orders were taught to them as part of their education, and were part of a contingency plan should the chain of command break down - http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Contingency...s_1_Through_150 . Also, the Jedi Order were not the masters of the clones. The clonetroopers were part of the Grand Army of the Republic, not the Grand Army of the Jedi. The Jedi were demilitarised, but were given command of the clone army due to their experience in battle and leadership skills. Does no-one pay any attention to the movies anymore? All of this was quite clearly covered in Ep2 and 3.

Thanks for the list guys, it is by far the most cmprehensive collection of errors I've seen to date. Many of the pooints you have raised have been addressed for correction. There are a few I'd like to take time to correct: 5 Time line Placement What makes 7106 TIE Fighter Episode IV? Death Star Background? ** It first appeared in Ep4 and the packaging shows the DS surface 5 Time line Placement What makes 8008 Technic Stormtrooper Episode IV? Death Star interior background? ** It first appeared in Ep4 and the packaging shows the DS background 6 Time line Placement - What makes 3219 Mini TIE Fighter Episode IV? Box has Episode V background ** Because it made its first appearance in Ep4, but you're right about the Ep5 background 6 - Time line Placement - What makes 8010 Technic Darth Vader Episode IV? Box has Episode V background ** Because it made its first appearance in Ep4, but you're right about the Ep5 background 6 - Time line Placement - What makes 7194 Ultimate Collector's Series Yoda Episode IV? Box has Episode IV background ** Huh? It's in the Ep5 band and it has an Ep5 background 6 - Time line Placement - What makes 4488 Mini Millennium Falcon Episode IV? Box has Episode VI background ** Because it made its first appearance in Ep4, but you're right about the Ep6 background 6 - Time line Placement - What makes 4489 Mini AT-AT Episode V? Box had Episode V background ** You just argued yourself into a corner there! The set is an Ep5 set because it was first seen in Ep5 and it has an Ep6 location (Hoth) in the background 6 - Time line Placement - What makes 4494 Mini Imperial Shuttle Episode VI? Box has Episode VI background ** You just argued yourself into a corner there! The set is an Ep6 set because it was first seen in Ep6 and it has an Ep6 location (Death Star II) in the background 7 - Time line Placement - What makes 10131 TIE Fighter Collection Episode IV? It has an Expanded Universe ship included ** The packaging shows the DS trench and 2 out of 3 of the vehicles are Ep4 7 - Time line Placement - What makes 10134 Y-Wing Attack Starfighter Episode IV? The Box has a Death Star background. Ship was also in Episode VI ** It first appeared in Ep4 and the packaging shows the DS surface 7 - Time line Placement - What makes 4492 Mini Star Destroyer Episode IV? Box has Episode IV background ** You just argued yourself into a corner there! The set is an Ep4 set because it was first seen in Ep4 and it has an Ep4 location (Tatooine) in the background 7 - Time line Placement - What makes 6963 Mini X-Wing Fighter Episode IV? ** It first appeared in Ep4 7 - Time line Placement - What makes 7263 Tie Fighter Episode IV? Box has Episode IV background. ** You just argued yourself into a corner there! The set is an Ep4 set because it was first seen in Ep4 and it has an Ep4 location (Death Star) in the background 9 - Timeline placement - 8017 Darth Vader's Tie Fighter is listed as a 2008 set when it was released in 2009 ** it came out in some places in Europe in 2008 9 - Timeline placement - 30006 Mini Clone Walker is listed as a Clone Wars set when it is actually EU ** because it is in CW packaging and the promo was linked to the start of CW season 2 9 - Timeline placement - 8014 Clone Walker Battle Pack is listed as a Clone Wars set when it is actually EU* ** because it is in CW packaging and the promo was linked to the start of CW season 2 9 - Timeline placement - 8015 Assassin Droids Battle Pack is listed as a Clone Wars set when it is actually EU* ** because it is in CW packaging and the promo was linked to the start of CW season 2; also, the assasin droids on swoops were seen in the original 2002 animated TV series 20 - Picture - An Anakin Skywalker minifigure with printed pockets on the legs never existed ** I'm scratching my head over this. I thought this photo came from my collection. I'll have to check my collection top see what's up 47 - Picture - The picture of 7264 Imperial Inspection is horrendously fuzzy ** odd, because mine is fine 52 - Description - In the description of the snowtrooper, the word "inbuilt" is used instead of "built-in" ** these two words mean exactly the same thing 63 - Descriptions - In both snowspeeder descriptions, Dack Ralter's name is spelled "Dak" ** the original spelling of his name was Dack, but DK checked with LFL and they agreed on Dak. 65 - Caption - There's a dash in between the words "trap door" (in the book it's "trap-door") ** it is spelled differently in different countries. DK is a British publishing company. Hence "lightsabre" instead of "lightsaber". 75 - Data box - The data box of 8014 Clone Walker Battle Pack has a spot where some ink is missing (may only be in my book) ** it must be a printing error, but curiously I have a smudge over part of the Y in Year 85 - Label - A label for 10019 Tantive IV reads: "Stickers add details" when in fact there are no stickers for the set ** the book was written and sent to the publishers before any info on this set was released 95 - Label - The Mos Eisley MOC has a mislabel. It reads: "Some aliens have heads sculpted from modeling clay" When in fact there are no custom heads. It's a Green Goblin head. ** the picture was labelled by the people who built Mos LEGO, so I'm guessing that somewhere on the diorama there are some custom heads

The only one I regret is the only one I don't have: 7191 UCS X-Wing. Jeremy

Such as? I am collating the errors for DK. Do you mean the promo one that came out earlier this year? Nope, LEGO did that all themselves. Not with all the sets coming out! Maybe you could start a collection?

Very nice. There's a set of instructions in an issue of BrickJournal from earlier this year. They differ slightly to yours. I have to say I prefer the one you made :)

All the timeline shots up to 2004, all the minifig closeups to 2007, all the set shots up to 2003! I also wrote the Community and Merchandise pages at the back, and fact checked about a quarter of the pages. There's probably a guy called Craig or Cliff working in DK but he didn't have any direct input into the writing/photographing/compilation of the book. There were only 100 made of the TF Vader and they go for $500 at the moment!

I'm mentioned in the book because I was involved with the book - check out the title page. And it was Simon Beecroft who wrote the book and wishes he could get me a Toy Fair Vader.

You could ask yourself the same question! Send it to me! Remember to include a Sharpie (which I will keep as my fee) ;)

Funny that there is no-one called Craig in the credits of the book! Did he say how he was involved?