This article is part of WikiProject World Rally, an effort to create and improve
rallying related articles on Wikipedia, including the FIA
World Rally Championship. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page for more information.World RallyWikipedia:WikiProject World RallyTemplate:WikiProject World RallyWorld Rally articles
Hi
Pelmeen10 - The issue is not whether or not the article is a proper article. The issue is one of proper attribution as per
WP:SPLIT. Normally I would simply have self-reverted, and provided that attribution, but the editor who split the article incorrectly has done this in the past. I felt it better to allow them the opportunity to revert and provide that attribution. You can feel free to also revert me, as long as you provide proper attribution as per WP policy. I think it's better that we let the editor who did the original split do it, so they will learn how to do it correctly.
Onel5969TT me22:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Obviously, it's not
WP:SIZESPLIT. It is
WP:CONSPLIT. The page where I spilt from is a section, which needs additional refs for verification, which is why I add several refs to the article per
WP:V. Moreover, the car has competed in the championship, so
WP:N as well. In fact, all
World Rally Cars should have their own article as long as we provide enough reliable sources.
Unnamelessness (
talk)
01:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
I'm tempted to use terms like, "I'll use small words...", but I won't. This isn't a big thing, just simply look at the attribution requirements of
WP:SPLIT and follow them. Not rocket science. Not even rudimentary 1+1=2 science.
Onel5969TT me01:48, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
An't I explaining clearly enough? I do follow the attribution requirements of
WP:SPLIT. Per
WP:CONSPLIT, which is a sub-policy of
WP:SPLIT,
"When two or more distinct topics with the same or a similar titles are being written about on the same page, even if they are closely related, a content split may be considered, and a disambiguation page created to point readers to the separate pages."
The rally car is just use the model of the road car, but beneath it, that is a total different machine — They are two topics, but written in one page, so it should receive a content split.
Unnamelessness (
talk)
07:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
The issue is not one of splitting the article, but of providing correct attribution. See
WP:CORRECTSPLIT, particularly in this case #4. That's all you have to do, which is now the fifth time this is being explained to you.
Onel5969TT me11:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Just to be clear, I have no issue with the split, but I do have an issue with you not following the proper WP policy. This isn't a content dispute, it's a policy error. You did the same thing on another article,
Toyota Corolla WRC, I reverted you there, and then self-reverted with the proper attribution in an effort to give you an example of how it should be done properly. Not sure why you are simply refusing to provide attribution.
Onel5969TT me11:47, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
First, I want to apologize for my uncivil comment to you in my response to your initial response to me above. That was uncalled for. Second, I did say it to you, several times. First in
this edit summary; Second, above in the second sentence on this talk page; and Third, in
this edit summary. Regardless, now it's been handled, so all's good.
Onel5969TT me12:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
This article is part of WikiProject World Rally, an effort to create and improve
rallying related articles on Wikipedia, including the FIA
World Rally Championship. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page for more information.World RallyWikipedia:WikiProject World RallyTemplate:WikiProject World RallyWorld Rally articles
Hi
Pelmeen10 - The issue is not whether or not the article is a proper article. The issue is one of proper attribution as per
WP:SPLIT. Normally I would simply have self-reverted, and provided that attribution, but the editor who split the article incorrectly has done this in the past. I felt it better to allow them the opportunity to revert and provide that attribution. You can feel free to also revert me, as long as you provide proper attribution as per WP policy. I think it's better that we let the editor who did the original split do it, so they will learn how to do it correctly.
Onel5969TT me22:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Obviously, it's not
WP:SIZESPLIT. It is
WP:CONSPLIT. The page where I spilt from is a section, which needs additional refs for verification, which is why I add several refs to the article per
WP:V. Moreover, the car has competed in the championship, so
WP:N as well. In fact, all
World Rally Cars should have their own article as long as we provide enough reliable sources.
Unnamelessness (
talk)
01:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
I'm tempted to use terms like, "I'll use small words...", but I won't. This isn't a big thing, just simply look at the attribution requirements of
WP:SPLIT and follow them. Not rocket science. Not even rudimentary 1+1=2 science.
Onel5969TT me01:48, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
An't I explaining clearly enough? I do follow the attribution requirements of
WP:SPLIT. Per
WP:CONSPLIT, which is a sub-policy of
WP:SPLIT,
"When two or more distinct topics with the same or a similar titles are being written about on the same page, even if they are closely related, a content split may be considered, and a disambiguation page created to point readers to the separate pages."
The rally car is just use the model of the road car, but beneath it, that is a total different machine — They are two topics, but written in one page, so it should receive a content split.
Unnamelessness (
talk)
07:18, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
The issue is not one of splitting the article, but of providing correct attribution. See
WP:CORRECTSPLIT, particularly in this case #4. That's all you have to do, which is now the fifth time this is being explained to you.
Onel5969TT me11:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Just to be clear, I have no issue with the split, but I do have an issue with you not following the proper WP policy. This isn't a content dispute, it's a policy error. You did the same thing on another article,
Toyota Corolla WRC, I reverted you there, and then self-reverted with the proper attribution in an effort to give you an example of how it should be done properly. Not sure why you are simply refusing to provide attribution.
Onel5969TT me11:47, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
First, I want to apologize for my uncivil comment to you in my response to your initial response to me above. That was uncalled for. Second, I did say it to you, several times. First in
this edit summary; Second, above in the second sentence on this talk page; and Third, in
this edit summary. Regardless, now it's been handled, so all's good.
Onel5969TT me12:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply