1995 Walt Disney Productions Disney Movies Pogs Non-Sport Forum

Doing some research.

1. We know that the 2 Panels listed are for real. So, at least 2 sets of 6. The Walt Disney POGS seem to be produced in sets of 24. So, just guessing, there are 2 more similar Panels.....but guessing without proof.

2. My 12 punched POGS might just belong to different sets based on the "Walt Disney ID" or lack of it on the bottom of the POG. I'm going to match same with same and see What I have.

3. Complicating matters might be the fact that some Disney POGS were produced for 1 Movie only [ex. Snow White Movie only.] Also with most having blank backs also clouds the getting these POGS in the right set.

I'm leaving things as is for the time being, until I unravel the different sets. My Bad, My Fix!

Maybe the checklists should just come down until they're well documented?

Agreed.

I have submitted the IRs to remove the checklist of POG base set and the Panels set. Since the images were loaded so quickly, we'll now have to get Admin involved. 

I needed them up to to help me sort them out. WHATEVER ! Leave the Panels they are correct.

But, they can be taken down quicker than I put them up....LMAO

OMG, everybody makes mistakes on here, Much worse than this, yet ............nevermind, it's well documented.

While the IRs are flying, it appears that: The Panels are OK [I can add to them], but the punched POGS may have come from 4 different sets. More research needed.

After seeing the images and panels, how are these even listable? 

Crazy site!

I tried to follow this post by Dan:

So, once again, I don't think I was wrong, just maybe a little hasty. lol.

"POGS are simply round trading cards"

That post still holds.  Nobody has reversed course on whether pogs are listable or not.

Checklists need to be complete and accurate.

And I'm not changing what I said, and stand by it 100%.

The checklist was added in haste (your term, not mine) and was highly incorrect. You've now said that this "set" could actually be stuff from 4 different sets. That is completely unacceptable.

You did not do the research required for this set (or these sets) to be listed here (yet).

And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES do you list a set here, post a checklist because that's how you can get it sorted out in your head. That is the worst excuse I have ever heard.

And again, if you have the COMPLETE checklist for a POG set, that set would be listable here. If you do not, it remains unwelcomed.

Bob-

Those of us who build checklists of obscure or poorly documented items don't get the information handed to us on platters.  I've tried to give you examples of the information that is out there that you can and should use in your research.  It's not just about the items you have in front of you.  I don't have any mysterious or arcane methods of finding information.  Do you want to know the search I used on eBay and Worthpoint to find those images?  "Disney POG"  It took a couple minutes of perusing the results to spot some of the POGs you scanned in their original, unpunched form.  It seemed so straightforward that I wondered if you didn't know to look, so I posted the pics for your information.

Once I saw the scans you posted, the differences in the picture styles and copyright verbiage made me question whether they were actually a set.  That is the kind of critical eye you need to have when creating checklists for these items.

Everybody makes mistakes, yes, but it gets frustrating watching someone make mistakes that they were warned not to make.  I hope you can see in retrospect that you would have had a much better outcome if you had made the original post in the Card Identification forum and posted a photo of the POGs and panels.  I believe that if you had done that, we would have arrived at this conclusion a week ago in less than a page of replies.  There are still plenty of people here willing to help and advise, as long as you are willing to learn.  

Based on your snarky "Mr. Supersleuth" comment, I think I'm done offering my help with this set.  I've got projects I care about to work on.  If you wany my advice on seeking out information, you know how to reach me by PM.

-Tom