This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article needs to be restarted from the ground up. The entire text is unencyclopedic heavily POV. -- Milkmandan 09:05, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
I agree. I am a Honda tech of 7 years, but also a Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki tech -- this article is not only biased, but inaccurate. Needs to be revised with better knowledge of the 900RR's history. --[User:kinako mochi] 04:34, 2005 Jun 17
Sounds a bit like a bike review rather than an entry. -- Leitmotif 12:35, 2005 Jul 6 (GMT+2)
Have done my best to remove some of the more glaring emotive language. I'm not completely certain of the technical details, so I'll leave those for some more qualified soul to improve upon. -- Leitmotif 22:11, 2005 Aug 18 (GMT+2)
The text here would pass for unbiased in any bike magazine, but there is another problem. The CBR900 series is the same thing as the Honda Fireblade series, which already has a large and detailed article. This article should just redirect to [ [23]]
Did some re-working of the article based on the 20th Anniversary articles on http://world.honda.com/CBR1000RR/history/index.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.98.106 ( talk) 23:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
I moved (i.e. changed the name of) the article to include 'Fireblade'. Now this was revised saying "The CBR 1000RR is aslo calle fireblade in some countries but that page is not called CBR1000RR fireblade". Sorry, I don't see the point. All bikes mentioned in this article were called 'Fireblade' by the producer, media and most users. And you mean that this word should not appear in the title, because it was not always used for a certain CBR1000 in all countries? -- Edoe ( talk) 09:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article needs to be restarted from the ground up. The entire text is unencyclopedic heavily POV. -- Milkmandan 09:05, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
I agree. I am a Honda tech of 7 years, but also a Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki tech -- this article is not only biased, but inaccurate. Needs to be revised with better knowledge of the 900RR's history. --[User:kinako mochi] 04:34, 2005 Jun 17
Sounds a bit like a bike review rather than an entry. -- Leitmotif 12:35, 2005 Jul 6 (GMT+2)
Have done my best to remove some of the more glaring emotive language. I'm not completely certain of the technical details, so I'll leave those for some more qualified soul to improve upon. -- Leitmotif 22:11, 2005 Aug 18 (GMT+2)
The text here would pass for unbiased in any bike magazine, but there is another problem. The CBR900 series is the same thing as the Honda Fireblade series, which already has a large and detailed article. This article should just redirect to [ [23]]
Did some re-working of the article based on the 20th Anniversary articles on http://world.honda.com/CBR1000RR/history/index.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.98.106 ( talk) 23:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
I moved (i.e. changed the name of) the article to include 'Fireblade'. Now this was revised saying "The CBR 1000RR is aslo calle fireblade in some countries but that page is not called CBR1000RR fireblade". Sorry, I don't see the point. All bikes mentioned in this article were called 'Fireblade' by the producer, media and most users. And you mean that this word should not appear in the title, because it was not always used for a certain CBR1000 in all countries? -- Edoe ( talk) 09:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)