02:3902:39, 24 August 2016diffhist−220
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
This is getting crazy. The citation for the independently verified time for the 2016 P100D is taken from a review of the 2015 P90D extrapolated to that year's P100D. An independent or even manu verified time will come, til then this is a press release
21:4121:41, 23 August 2016diffhist−579
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
Again, please refer to the Talk page. When the Tesla P100D time is verified and not announced as an "expected performance" in a press release. There's no objection to it being where it belongs - _when_ this is the case
20:2420:24, 23 August 2016diffhist−602
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
Please look at the Talk page. Again, this is NOT a verified timing. It is, by Tesla's OWN WORDS, "expected" performance, and by that standard, does not meet the article's requirements for inclusion, at least not yet.
07:2607:26, 21 December 2009diffhist−1,177
Cinemax
Removed 'carriage controversies' - failing to add one channel mentioned in a press release is hardly a 'controversy', and of dubious note. Irrelevant is the second para about other channels and HD
02:3902:39, 24 August 2016diffhist−220
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
This is getting crazy. The citation for the independently verified time for the 2016 P100D is taken from a review of the 2015 P90D extrapolated to that year's P100D. An independent or even manu verified time will come, til then this is a press release
21:4121:41, 23 August 2016diffhist−579
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
Again, please refer to the Talk page. When the Tesla P100D time is verified and not announced as an "expected performance" in a press release. There's no objection to it being where it belongs - _when_ this is the case
20:2420:24, 23 August 2016diffhist−602
List of fastest production cars by acceleration
Please look at the Talk page. Again, this is NOT a verified timing. It is, by Tesla's OWN WORDS, "expected" performance, and by that standard, does not meet the article's requirements for inclusion, at least not yet.
07:2607:26, 21 December 2009diffhist−1,177
Cinemax
Removed 'carriage controversies' - failing to add one channel mentioned in a press release is hardly a 'controversy', and of dubious note. Irrelevant is the second para about other channels and HD