Talk:Construction set

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Toys Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ToysWikipedia:WikiProject ToysTemplate:WikiProject ToysToys articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Toys To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Barbie Queen of the Prom, Eve The Second Genesis CCG, More... Assess : Rate the Unassessed Toys articles and Unknown-importance Toys articles. Expand : Expand the doll pages, Expand Larami article Infobox : Toys articles needing infoboxes Photo : Request images that are needed from Wikipedia requested photographs of toys to included in each articles. Stubs : work on stubs in Category:Toy stubs Other : * Tag the talk pages of Toys-related articles with the {{WikiProject Toys}} banner. Help out with articles placed in Category:Toys articles needing attention Lego Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lego, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lego on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LegoWikipedia:WikiProject LegoTemplate:WikiProject LegoLego articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from Psychological benefits of construction toys was copied or moved into Construction set with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

For the 1 July 2005 Vote for deletion resulting in move (keep), see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Constructions set. -- Jonel | Speak 03:12, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My major revision was prompted by my realization that I have never seen a strut system based on a D_6h node. Eassin 21:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be worthwhile to explain what the notation in the examples means, e.g. C2v (*22) nodes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.36.192.101 (talk) 14:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider adding Cleversticks to the list of construction toys Arlington row (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should divide the article content between "toys" and industrial components. --70.142.41.253 (talk) 14:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please make a graph which compares:

1. What each set does or does not have
2. The size of each of the units it has

I want to buy the best set I can for some novice practise engineering but am not sure what is the best novice option
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.124.73.132 (talk) 05:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is useful to list sets by category like that. Most systems have components in more than one category - for example Technical Lego is listed separately from Lego, althhough it is compatible with the Lego brick-and-stud system. Similarly Fischertechnik is listed only as a brick-and-stud system, but it also has panels and struts held together by plastic twist fasteners in a similar manner to the Meccano nuts and bolts. So I agree we need a matrix to say what features each system has and doesn't have, rather than the division into (somewhat arbitrary) categories. Philbelb (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would add Bayko, but I don't know how best to describe its connection method. Maproom (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The first image, labeled "Kiddicraft and Lego building blocks in different colors" is obviously a 3D model. I believe it should be removed or replaced by a real photograph. Leosdad (talk) 13:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't another commons image comparing Kiddicraft and Lego bricks. Although this one is a 3d model, it appears to accurately show the difference, so I don't see a reason to remove it. (Hohum ^@) 14:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]