Comment by @cesare • Hey

I am wondering if the lack of collection-level metadata could be the cause of this wallets behaviour. @lens/paulburke I know you expressed an opinion on t

Stats

Comments

I suspect that most of these apps and wallets are using the OpenSea API, so that's why they're widely hidden. It's still unclear to me what criteria OpenSea uses to hide them. When Lens first launched they were shown there, so it seems there was a specific effort to identify and hide them. It might be as simple as matching any title starting with "Lens Collect" or perhaps more robust looking at the deploy transaction. I don't believe it has anything to do with the metadata of the actual item, itself, as I've tested collectibles with full marketplace metadata created with @lens/focalize and they're still hidden. It's possible it's related to the collection metadata. I suppose the only way to test that would be to use a `CollectNFT` that transfers contract ownership to the author. Maybe I'll run a couple of tests with a completely custom Collect Action (not using `CollectPublicationAction`), as well as an ownable `CollectNFT` and see if it's still hidden.
I think having a standardised metadata would really help, especially in terms of re-sell potential. For example, the wallet that sells should be the wallet named as the creator of the collect and the collect should be linked to the posters wallet in the same way an other NFT collection would. This would allow clear attribution of creation and give peace of mind to any buyers on secondary.