![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Congratulations that the Holden Commodore article is now listed as a good article. Are you planning for it to be a featured article? Senators Talk | Contribs 00:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Congratulations on raising Holden Commodore to GA status and also tirelessly working on a wide range of other Australian car articles. VectorD 05:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC) |
The picture you added to the Holden WM Caprice article is a really great image. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The359 already moved the page back to Nissan Motors, also the edits made by Ddgonzal ( talk · contribs) can be reverted using the rollback feature (for admins that is). It's marginally faster than reverting with a script like Twinkle or popups, but generally disapproved of in cases like this because it leaves an automatic edit summary. I'll undo the changes with AWB unless there is a piped link, so I leave an edit summary and don't make unnecessary changes. This way Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. can remain as a redirect, I'll only change the ones with the full Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. actually visible in the article. James086 Talk | Email 12:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, eventually I want the Toyota Aurion article to be classed as a Good article so on the way there I have started this thing that list the tasks that need to be completed on a article it will look like this. So I need your help to list just below here, to list tasks that you think need to be done on the Toyota Aurion article. I will then add the to do template to the Aurion discussion page and your comments to it. Senators Talk | Contribs 00:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
OSX, I would like to questio you why you reverted some of my previous edits on the Toyota Aurion article. Why? Both Senators and I agreed that it we should have a Toyota Avalon photo in the article, and in my opinion the 'Design' should have it's own section, and not be a part of the 'History of Development' section. Why do you think otherwise? HarrisonB Speak! 09:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Rather than getting the Aurion to GA status, I would like to get it to FA status, for the purpose of having 3 or 4 FA aticles for the portal. What do you think? HarrisonB Speak! 01:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
Thanks for helping us at GAC backlog elimination drive OhanaUnited Talk page 01:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC) |
Hi, I've just popped in to say I am most grateful for all your work on the Chrysler 180 article - I guess it really needed it. I see it is currently, apparently, being reviewed, so I am really hoping your efforts will be rewarded by a GA promotion. I am thankful either way! Gracias, PrinceGloria 19:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Do you live near a Toyota dealership? HarrisonB Speak! 04:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The picture you uploaded to Wikipedia looks really good, but unfortunately I don’t think that the TRD Aurion is going to be a successful car for Toyota. Having a supercharger in a car is really impressive even to people that don’t know much about cars but 241kw of power is simply not enough considering you have to pay $58,000 to get the base model TRD Aurion. You can get a turbocharged Ford Falcon for less then $45,000 that has 245 kw of power. Toyota claim that it is trying to target the Asian sports cars, like the Nissan 350Z and the Skyline but these cars are GT not family cars. The TRD looks good though. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have just undone the actions taken to redirect "Statesman" to "Holden Statesman" and it got me thinking that perhaps the HQ to WB Statesman text should be moved from "Holden Statesman" to "Statesman" leaving only the real Holden Statesman model details on the "Holden Statesman" page. It may cause some drama initially but should improve matters in the long run. What do you think? GTHO 10:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes you are right in that Statesman was a seperate make (ie not a Holden model) from it's introduction in 1971 through to it's demise in 1985. The name was revived by GM in 1990 for a new model within the Holden range, ie the Holden Statesman. The original Statesmans were based on the 1970s Holden Belmont/Kingswood/Premier platform whereas the Holden Statesmans were/are based on the Holden Commodore, so they are quite different cars. The very fact that you had never heard of this before is all the more reason why we need to make it crystal clear in our articles. And what better way of doing that than having a Statesman page and a separate Holden Statesman page, suitably cross-referenced of course. Cheers GTHO 10:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) To be honest I don't know. I can see your point with all good intentions, but there may be some objections and other contentious issues. But then if you look at the opposite end of the spectrum, the two vehicles are like specification levels, so a merge would be more than suitable. I personally would like to hear the opinions of others before we rush out and merge the two. Cheers OSX ( talk • contributions) 08:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll have a look at the referencing issues for the Statesman article. I think we still need the "List of Statesman Vehicles" as it plugs the gap that some may think they can see in the "List of Holden Vehicles" but perhaps it could be be merged with the "Statesman" page. Cheers, GTHO 10:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I think that both Lists are well worth keeping whether they are part of the main articles or otherwise. Some people find tables more informative than lots of words. Some don't. Let's have both. GTHO 08:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I had meant to pass it and totally forgot about it, it's probably better that you took it over. Thanks. Laxplayer630 01:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Do you think it is time for it to be nominated? HarrisonB Speak! 09:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) I am not going to write out a list. I'm sorry to say that your going to have to work that one out for yourself. Maybe this recent revision of mine may give you an insight of what I mean. OSX ( talk • contributions) 11:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I never knew about it, where did you find out about all those locations?
Cheers, Alphabeta777 10:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Well then, what can we do about it? HarrisonB Speak! 11:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations, the Toyota Aurion article is now being considered for GA status. HarrisonB Speak! 05:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, I know I am being unfair and unprofessional, but I don't have enough time to give you a full roundup now, which I duly owe you. I guess I will offer a full review in due course - could you hold on until the weekend (Saturday/Sunday CET)? Thank you for your understanding... PrinceGloria 07:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
What was wrong with the image!? It wasn't cropped too tight; it needed some of the background to be taken out and maybe it would be a little courteous to the owner of the car to blank out the rego. HarrisonB - Conributions 12:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello OSX, I was just reading the Holden Suburban article which has compelled me to ask some questions about it, I chose you because that you have contributed to it quite a bit. Why would they let such a 'gas guzzler' into the country? 159L fuel tank and 5.2m length? For example a 55L tank costs around $70 dollars to fill with 98 Octane fuel, so it must cost over $200 to fill (I know it would be a little cheaper using regular 91 Octane or even 95 Octane) but it still is expensive. Also it has terrible fuel consumption (roughly 20L per 100Km); so why would anybody buy it? HarrisonB - Conributions 02:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Do you spend your time here watching my contributions, waiting for someting to come up to 'partial-revert' my edits? I don't know why I bother, the only thing my work counts for is you making me look stupid in the article history, for example on the Toyota Aurion article. HarrisonB - Conributions 07:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) Already done. HarrisonB - Conributions 10:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I personally think it should not be a sports model, but I think it should be at least a picture of the Aurion and not the ASEAN Camry. (main difference being grille design) This is because the article tends to focus on the Australian side of things.
Alphabeta777 09:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
All this time searching the archives for a trace of the reference that I used the same information was repeated in the existing references! Anyhow, I've renominated AIL Storm, so if you still remember and want to review that would be great, else I suppose I'll queue with everyone else. Tewfik Talk 02:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
OSX, do we have to use the Camry photo, rather than the blue AT-X photo for the main picture? HarrisonB - Conributions 02:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Just a suggestion, I think that your page needs archiving because it is getting quite long. HarrisonB - Conributions 09:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I noticed that you have archived your page :). Looks alot better now, cleaner. Anyway, is there anything that we can do for the Toyota Aurion article? HarrisonB - Conributions 06:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello OSX/Archive 2, I will not be available to edit for the next couple of days due to being on a school camp. Hopefully the Toyota Aurion article will not pass for GA at this time ;) Anyway, feel free to leave comments but I will not be able to answer them until Friday night on the 16th. Kudos HarrisonB - Conributions 20:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh my god, it passed :) Thanks OSX for all of your help to bring the Aurion article to GA. Kudos HarrisonB - Conributions 08:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I came across this today after the post in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles, and noticed your sensible edit was reverted. There's now the small mess of Category:Getrag transmissions and Category:GETRAG transmissions both existing, as well as the associated articles. If you're concerned enough to want to have another go at this I'll help you out. Two users talking to the editor in question instead of one will probably work better, and besides, apart from the basic copy/paste fixes, I think there's copy/paste page moves which need undone with admin assistance (see [2]). ---- DeLarge ( talk) 20:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Please see Manual of Style (trademarks)discussion regarding issues such as GETRAG and SAAB, which are capitalized registered acronym trademarks, but are not strict acronyms. I'm starting a discussion to modify the manual to address the issue of these names. Too many people disagree, and it appears you have some interest in participating. BTW - I'm sorry about making such a mess of the above mentioned article :-/ . Nicholas SL Smith ( talk) 02:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Sure. Sorry it took a while to get back to you. HarrisonB - Conributions 05:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the Aussie Cars portal, would you say that this car could be included in the 'group'? HarrisonB - Conributions 05:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have aquired a new digital camera so there will be some good pictures coming in. Check harrison's talk page for two pictures I have already added. Also my family is getting a brand new 2007 Holden VE Commodore SS and there will be many good pictures coming through from this car. If you want any picutres of my car please tell me. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I will try to give it a look, but it will probably be another 36 hours or so before I can comb my way through the entire thing. — TKD:: Talk 11:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I've done part of it and will finish up sometime today. Dylan ( talk) 15:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Still working through; unfortunately, I've been a bit busy in real life. Thanks for double-checking my work. I often cut a lot of perceived redundancy on my first pass, and sometimes err a little too much. Plus, automotive matters are not my most familiar topic. :) — TKD:: Talk 10:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, I have a few suggestions on this article. I won't have time in the next couple of weeks as work pressure is taking all of my energy (this is written while waiting for the coffee to cool !). After my experience with the FAC for Trams in Adelaide earlier this year I think what is most needed is strategic distance as anyone who is as close as you are to the article may not see the forest for the trees. User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a has some very good tips, particularly those on redundancy and the value of strategic distance. I'll see if I can get some time this weekend for a full look through but not promising anything. Perhaps you're best to work on something else for a while then come back to this with fresh eyes ? Peripitus (Talk) 02:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I have finally got my SS and the pictures will start coming through, also my focus on Wikipedia is changing to pictures although I maybe only adding 2 - 3 in a two week period the pictures will still be very much need for what ever article they are in. Just check my contributions for what pictures I have added. Also have brought foward a potential problem with the VE Commodore article, I have adressed the problem on the articles talk page. Senators Talk | Contribs 00:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I am also devoting myself to adding news articles to the Australian Cars portal. Also I will be on vacation for two weeks in the start of January (Check my userpage for more info on my vacation). I will be changing the news articles once a week, maybe twice a week. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
{{User: HarrisonB/Sandbox2}}
HarrisonB - Conributions 04:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. OSX ( talk • contributions) 06:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
{{ helpme}}
An IP user keeps editing the Toyota Aurion article and changing it to say that it is a full-size car, when a consensus was reached to classify it as a mid-size car. I know that the user comes Jakarta, Indonesia because I used the IP tracing tool, but each time he/she edits the page they use a different IP address (I have had to revert at least ten times). This means that I can't even try to talk to them about it on their talk page. Would it be possible to lock the article from being edited by IP users to stop this from happening in the future? OSX ( talk • contributions) 07:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Category:Australian cars Portal. The reason is:
For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX, long time no see. Do you know where the ISBN is located in Wheels magazine? HarrisonB - Talk 01:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I need you to vote in support for the Ford Falcon article in Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive. I am sure that you would agree that this article is in need to become FA status not just for the fact that it is a very important Australian car but for the portal's sake too. Thanks HarrisonB - Talk 07:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you consider giving your feedback on the discussion happening at Talk:Daewoo Kalos? Your advice and council would be most appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 842U ( talk • contribs) 21:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
842U ( talk) 23:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, could you please check out the discussion page for the Holden Crewman, regarding your recent edit to that page. Thanks Tinkstar1985 10:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX, in your recent edit you removed the whole paragraph concerning the VE Ute. Any particular reason for this? Thanks, -- 328cia ( talk) 04:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
You may want to edit your BA Mk2 Falcon image (Image:2004-2005 Ford BAII Falcon XT 01.jpg) and cover the number plate. Someone could use that to get your details. Mister macphisto ( talk) 06:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Infact you were lucky to catch me because I've been very busy lately and not had much time for Wikipedia. I've never heard of the Daewoo Royale and a google search brings up only 2310 results. There are several sources that indicate that it's not a hoax though. Perhaps this article won't be anything more than a stub although I'm sure someone who owns/owned one will eventually expand the article. James086 Talk | Email 10:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Been away for a week and catching up now with what has been going on on wp in the meantime. Please let me say that I greatly appreciate your work on Australian cars! I do have a knack for them although, being German, I won´t ever set eyes on one, sadly. Cheers, -- 328cia ( talk) 20:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Done, done and done. The old title is used throughout the Toyota Kluger article but I don't have much time right now so I can't fix it. I will get around to it fairly soon (next week) however if it isn't done. already checked for double redirects and changed the lead sentence of each article though. James086 Talk | Email 01:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you tagged Image:Mitsubishi 9th gen lancer.jpg by transcluding {{ copyvio}}. I've removed the tag because it's the wrong tag and the linked page appeared to have been created after the 2006 upload of the image. For future reference, the tag you wanted is {{ imagevio}}, which is transcluded. {{ copyvio}} is for articles where it is used by replacing the entire article with the template and due to recent changes must now always be substituted. Thanks.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 05:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry but I can not help you with the Holden article primarily due to the fact that I have been very busy lately with my last year of high school. Senators Talk | Contribs 04:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you really think it's NPOV to take once source of safety ratings and pump it through the article? Your POINT is less than transparent, and somewhat... er... biased, perhaps? 842U ( talk) 01:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
The Toyota Camry is a car sold in America, the Toyota Scepter is the car made identical to the Camry in America, but sold in Japan. The Toyota Camry was made in America and sold in America. The Toyota Scepter is made and sold in Japan. If anything the Toyota Scepter should be redirected into the 3rd generation Camry section on the older revision of the Toyota Camry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camryluvr ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I added the tag as the page doesn't follow the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) style. However I do realise that there are some pages for which the style manual doesn't apply (e.g Lists of ships of the same name) but I don't know whether that applies in this case. As it is clearly all your own work I'll let you decide what changes need to be made, if any Tassedethe ( talk) 16:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX. I've had a look at your sandbox's collection of info on the VE's running changes. While I agree a series II of the VE is unlikely to happen, I'm not entirely convinced the model year system is the best way to explain it. The dates on which the changes are introduced seem random. I also suspect there's been a few changes that haven't been included on your list (e.g: Calais with new lip spoiler on boot). The MY system is mostly a North American system and adding 0.5MY at different times makes things a bit messy in my opinion. As far as I know, Holden hasn't publicly announced what their plans are with regards to updates, so it makes things a bit difficult to ascertain at this stage. I think more information would need to be gathered. VectorD ( talk) 12:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting, so comparisons were OK until it was no longer the leader? laughs Greg Locock ( talk) 06:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Stop exerting your anger on Holden articles thank you very much. So you are telling me it's alright to remove the word "superior" from an article, which in a way glorifies the VE, but heaven forbid if there is any sort of criticism directed to the AU Falcon ( [3])? Lets end this saga here, before it gets out of hand. My patience here is running very thin. Thanks OSX ( talk • contributions) 03:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Looking at this edit, you are in error if you think your changes conform to WP:DATE. Firstly, Australia uses the day-month-year International Dating format, second, linking dates is now deprecated by the Manual of Style. Please check before edit-warring. -- Pete ( talk) 05:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi - sorry to but in here but I don't think you are correct. I have noticed the newspapers using American style date formatting, but I think that is their attempt to conform to international (dominated by US conventions). There is a style guide for Austrlaia - used to be published by the AGPS and has now been taken over by Snooks &Co. I can't find a freely available internet verions. The best I can do is http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/info.aspx?page=766 -
Shortened forms on the Web
Abbreviations, Contractions, Acronyms, Initialisms, Symbols and other things.
by Dr Sofia Celic, Web Accessibility Consultant, Accessible Information Solutions at National Information Library Service.
Introduction: The impetus for this study was the result of observations made during user-based screen reader accessibility testing and from recent studies in technical writing.
Unexpected or undesired pronunciation by screen readers of some web page content was identified. This was mainly in regard to contractions and initialisms because these are rarely desired to be pronounced as a word.
When she gets to date format, sheis quite specific on the use of dd/mm/yyyy - I think there is no question that that is the format used by convention in Australia. Should you wish to dispute that format is the convention, I think this should be promptly escalated to a wider audience, for example at WP:AWNB to get more diverse views. -- Matilda talk 05:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I note you have made the same revert three times in a 24-hour period ( Holden VE Commodore: [4] [5] [6]; Ford Falcon (Australia): [7] [8] [9]). Although I believe you to be wise enough to avoid making a fourth, perhaps you should consider whether it is worth getting blocked over a matter so trivial. It is worth noting, also, that three is not an entitlement. Orderinchaos 12:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello OSX, first of all many thanks that you categorized the Holden photos in Commons according to model names. As I just spent 4 weeks in Australia I noticed but that in some sources Holden cars are referred in model generations (FB, FC etc.) rather than in model names (Special, Standard, Commodore etc.). Yesterday I categorized the Holden category according to model generations in surplus to your categorization because I think that some users will find the desired photo better like this. Today I found that you removed my categorization again without giving any reason. I suggest that we should keep both types of categorization for better service to the users and therefore ask you to revert your last changes. Many thanks in advance. -- MartinHansV (Germany) ( talk) 14:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I am beginning to draw a close to the end of the year so my workload at the moment is probably, without doubt, the highest it has been the whole year. When my holidays start (November-December) I am thinking of returning to Wikipedia for some small to moderate edits. So if you need any help (probably on a LOW PRIORITY automotive/aircraft related article) please tell me now it would be greatly appreciated. I will start editing now then eventually my edits will start to rise as the holidays draw closer. -- Senators Talk | Contribs 02:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- OK then -- Senators Talk | Contribs 02:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX,
First off thanks again for your help in identifying my shots, but I would like to discuss a little the image usage in Holden and Holden Commodore. Let me explain why I think my image makes a better illustration:
1. Better Perspective: My image was taken with a 400mm lens. This creates an image with vastly improved perspective. If you look at your image (which by the looks was taken at a relatively wide angle) the nose of the car is heavily accentuated and the proportions of the car are consequently distorted. My image, with the benefit of being taken at a long focal length, has no such perspective issues and the car appears well proportioned.
2. Better Composition: Your image, which appears to be taken at a carpark, has many other cars in the background (and indeed four cars in the foreground). This distracts from the focus of the image (the VE) and hence makes a worse illustration than my shot which shows only the VE.
3. Improved Interest: Flowing from my previous point is that your image shows a very stagnant and somewhat dull scene of the car parked. In no way do I wish to insult you but it's somewhat of a "snapshot". My image on the otherhand shows a much more dynamic scene, showing the car in it's primary function: driving. The sense of motion is enhanced with well controlled motion blur. This (IMO) creates a far more compelling illustration.
Hope that explains my reasoning -- Fir0002 00:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX. Per last year, we are now closing in on another milestone for AUS, with 178 current GAs. Well, since you participated in the GA drive last year, perhaps unwittingly, by contributing some Australian car articles, you might want to participate again. This is another rallying cry to WP:AWNB/A. YellowMonkey ( bananabucket) 03:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm dropping you a line because I notice you originally began Category:Toyota concept vehicles. I've started a personal mini project of moving cars from Category:Concept automobiles into a relevant manufacturers subcategory. I did Holden some months ago, and have done Toyota and Honda this week. I'm bringing it to your attention on the basis that you look like you'd have an interest in this direction (and so might help out ;) -- .../Nemo ( talk) 01:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi - At least with my window width (and browser) the current version of Template:Holden timeline ends up with two horizontal scroll bars - one for the browser window and the one embedded in the template. This is really, really bad web page design. If you can't get the table to be the same width as the browser window (which I suspect is not possible with IE if you're actually using table markup), I suggest you not use an internal scroll bar in the template (I mean, rely only on the browser scroll bar). -- Rick Block ( talk) 15:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I added lines to the template... see the template talk page. JBarta ( talk) 19:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Congratulations that the Holden Commodore article is now listed as a good article. Are you planning for it to be a featured article? Senators Talk | Contribs 00:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Congratulations on raising Holden Commodore to GA status and also tirelessly working on a wide range of other Australian car articles. VectorD 05:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC) |
The picture you added to the Holden WM Caprice article is a really great image. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The359 already moved the page back to Nissan Motors, also the edits made by Ddgonzal ( talk · contribs) can be reverted using the rollback feature (for admins that is). It's marginally faster than reverting with a script like Twinkle or popups, but generally disapproved of in cases like this because it leaves an automatic edit summary. I'll undo the changes with AWB unless there is a piped link, so I leave an edit summary and don't make unnecessary changes. This way Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. can remain as a redirect, I'll only change the ones with the full Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. actually visible in the article. James086 Talk | Email 12:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, eventually I want the Toyota Aurion article to be classed as a Good article so on the way there I have started this thing that list the tasks that need to be completed on a article it will look like this. So I need your help to list just below here, to list tasks that you think need to be done on the Toyota Aurion article. I will then add the to do template to the Aurion discussion page and your comments to it. Senators Talk | Contribs 00:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
OSX, I would like to questio you why you reverted some of my previous edits on the Toyota Aurion article. Why? Both Senators and I agreed that it we should have a Toyota Avalon photo in the article, and in my opinion the 'Design' should have it's own section, and not be a part of the 'History of Development' section. Why do you think otherwise? HarrisonB Speak! 09:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Rather than getting the Aurion to GA status, I would like to get it to FA status, for the purpose of having 3 or 4 FA aticles for the portal. What do you think? HarrisonB Speak! 01:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
Thanks for helping us at GAC backlog elimination drive OhanaUnited Talk page 01:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC) |
Hi, I've just popped in to say I am most grateful for all your work on the Chrysler 180 article - I guess it really needed it. I see it is currently, apparently, being reviewed, so I am really hoping your efforts will be rewarded by a GA promotion. I am thankful either way! Gracias, PrinceGloria 19:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Do you live near a Toyota dealership? HarrisonB Speak! 04:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The picture you uploaded to Wikipedia looks really good, but unfortunately I don’t think that the TRD Aurion is going to be a successful car for Toyota. Having a supercharger in a car is really impressive even to people that don’t know much about cars but 241kw of power is simply not enough considering you have to pay $58,000 to get the base model TRD Aurion. You can get a turbocharged Ford Falcon for less then $45,000 that has 245 kw of power. Toyota claim that it is trying to target the Asian sports cars, like the Nissan 350Z and the Skyline but these cars are GT not family cars. The TRD looks good though. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have just undone the actions taken to redirect "Statesman" to "Holden Statesman" and it got me thinking that perhaps the HQ to WB Statesman text should be moved from "Holden Statesman" to "Statesman" leaving only the real Holden Statesman model details on the "Holden Statesman" page. It may cause some drama initially but should improve matters in the long run. What do you think? GTHO 10:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes you are right in that Statesman was a seperate make (ie not a Holden model) from it's introduction in 1971 through to it's demise in 1985. The name was revived by GM in 1990 for a new model within the Holden range, ie the Holden Statesman. The original Statesmans were based on the 1970s Holden Belmont/Kingswood/Premier platform whereas the Holden Statesmans were/are based on the Holden Commodore, so they are quite different cars. The very fact that you had never heard of this before is all the more reason why we need to make it crystal clear in our articles. And what better way of doing that than having a Statesman page and a separate Holden Statesman page, suitably cross-referenced of course. Cheers GTHO 10:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) To be honest I don't know. I can see your point with all good intentions, but there may be some objections and other contentious issues. But then if you look at the opposite end of the spectrum, the two vehicles are like specification levels, so a merge would be more than suitable. I personally would like to hear the opinions of others before we rush out and merge the two. Cheers OSX ( talk • contributions) 08:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll have a look at the referencing issues for the Statesman article. I think we still need the "List of Statesman Vehicles" as it plugs the gap that some may think they can see in the "List of Holden Vehicles" but perhaps it could be be merged with the "Statesman" page. Cheers, GTHO 10:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I think that both Lists are well worth keeping whether they are part of the main articles or otherwise. Some people find tables more informative than lots of words. Some don't. Let's have both. GTHO 08:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I had meant to pass it and totally forgot about it, it's probably better that you took it over. Thanks. Laxplayer630 01:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Do you think it is time for it to be nominated? HarrisonB Speak! 09:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) I am not going to write out a list. I'm sorry to say that your going to have to work that one out for yourself. Maybe this recent revision of mine may give you an insight of what I mean. OSX ( talk • contributions) 11:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I never knew about it, where did you find out about all those locations?
Cheers, Alphabeta777 10:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Well then, what can we do about it? HarrisonB Speak! 11:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations, the Toyota Aurion article is now being considered for GA status. HarrisonB Speak! 05:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, I know I am being unfair and unprofessional, but I don't have enough time to give you a full roundup now, which I duly owe you. I guess I will offer a full review in due course - could you hold on until the weekend (Saturday/Sunday CET)? Thank you for your understanding... PrinceGloria 07:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
What was wrong with the image!? It wasn't cropped too tight; it needed some of the background to be taken out and maybe it would be a little courteous to the owner of the car to blank out the rego. HarrisonB - Conributions 12:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello OSX, I was just reading the Holden Suburban article which has compelled me to ask some questions about it, I chose you because that you have contributed to it quite a bit. Why would they let such a 'gas guzzler' into the country? 159L fuel tank and 5.2m length? For example a 55L tank costs around $70 dollars to fill with 98 Octane fuel, so it must cost over $200 to fill (I know it would be a little cheaper using regular 91 Octane or even 95 Octane) but it still is expensive. Also it has terrible fuel consumption (roughly 20L per 100Km); so why would anybody buy it? HarrisonB - Conributions 02:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Do you spend your time here watching my contributions, waiting for someting to come up to 'partial-revert' my edits? I don't know why I bother, the only thing my work counts for is you making me look stupid in the article history, for example on the Toyota Aurion article. HarrisonB - Conributions 07:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) Already done. HarrisonB - Conributions 10:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I personally think it should not be a sports model, but I think it should be at least a picture of the Aurion and not the ASEAN Camry. (main difference being grille design) This is because the article tends to focus on the Australian side of things.
Alphabeta777 09:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
All this time searching the archives for a trace of the reference that I used the same information was repeated in the existing references! Anyhow, I've renominated AIL Storm, so if you still remember and want to review that would be great, else I suppose I'll queue with everyone else. Tewfik Talk 02:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
OSX, do we have to use the Camry photo, rather than the blue AT-X photo for the main picture? HarrisonB - Conributions 02:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Just a suggestion, I think that your page needs archiving because it is getting quite long. HarrisonB - Conributions 09:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I noticed that you have archived your page :). Looks alot better now, cleaner. Anyway, is there anything that we can do for the Toyota Aurion article? HarrisonB - Conributions 06:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello OSX/Archive 2, I will not be available to edit for the next couple of days due to being on a school camp. Hopefully the Toyota Aurion article will not pass for GA at this time ;) Anyway, feel free to leave comments but I will not be able to answer them until Friday night on the 16th. Kudos HarrisonB - Conributions 20:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh my god, it passed :) Thanks OSX for all of your help to bring the Aurion article to GA. Kudos HarrisonB - Conributions 08:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I came across this today after the post in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles, and noticed your sensible edit was reverted. There's now the small mess of Category:Getrag transmissions and Category:GETRAG transmissions both existing, as well as the associated articles. If you're concerned enough to want to have another go at this I'll help you out. Two users talking to the editor in question instead of one will probably work better, and besides, apart from the basic copy/paste fixes, I think there's copy/paste page moves which need undone with admin assistance (see [2]). ---- DeLarge ( talk) 20:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Please see Manual of Style (trademarks)discussion regarding issues such as GETRAG and SAAB, which are capitalized registered acronym trademarks, but are not strict acronyms. I'm starting a discussion to modify the manual to address the issue of these names. Too many people disagree, and it appears you have some interest in participating. BTW - I'm sorry about making such a mess of the above mentioned article :-/ . Nicholas SL Smith ( talk) 02:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Sure. Sorry it took a while to get back to you. HarrisonB - Conributions 05:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the Aussie Cars portal, would you say that this car could be included in the 'group'? HarrisonB - Conributions 05:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have aquired a new digital camera so there will be some good pictures coming in. Check harrison's talk page for two pictures I have already added. Also my family is getting a brand new 2007 Holden VE Commodore SS and there will be many good pictures coming through from this car. If you want any picutres of my car please tell me. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I will try to give it a look, but it will probably be another 36 hours or so before I can comb my way through the entire thing. — TKD:: Talk 11:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I've done part of it and will finish up sometime today. Dylan ( talk) 15:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Still working through; unfortunately, I've been a bit busy in real life. Thanks for double-checking my work. I often cut a lot of perceived redundancy on my first pass, and sometimes err a little too much. Plus, automotive matters are not my most familiar topic. :) — TKD:: Talk 10:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi OSX, I have a few suggestions on this article. I won't have time in the next couple of weeks as work pressure is taking all of my energy (this is written while waiting for the coffee to cool !). After my experience with the FAC for Trams in Adelaide earlier this year I think what is most needed is strategic distance as anyone who is as close as you are to the article may not see the forest for the trees. User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a has some very good tips, particularly those on redundancy and the value of strategic distance. I'll see if I can get some time this weekend for a full look through but not promising anything. Perhaps you're best to work on something else for a while then come back to this with fresh eyes ? Peripitus (Talk) 02:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I have finally got my SS and the pictures will start coming through, also my focus on Wikipedia is changing to pictures although I maybe only adding 2 - 3 in a two week period the pictures will still be very much need for what ever article they are in. Just check my contributions for what pictures I have added. Also have brought foward a potential problem with the VE Commodore article, I have adressed the problem on the articles talk page. Senators Talk | Contribs 00:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I am also devoting myself to adding news articles to the Australian Cars portal. Also I will be on vacation for two weeks in the start of January (Check my userpage for more info on my vacation). I will be changing the news articles once a week, maybe twice a week. Senators Talk | Contribs 23:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
{{User: HarrisonB/Sandbox2}}
HarrisonB - Conributions 04:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. OSX ( talk • contributions) 06:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
{{ helpme}}
An IP user keeps editing the Toyota Aurion article and changing it to say that it is a full-size car, when a consensus was reached to classify it as a mid-size car. I know that the user comes Jakarta, Indonesia because I used the IP tracing tool, but each time he/she edits the page they use a different IP address (I have had to revert at least ten times). This means that I can't even try to talk to them about it on their talk page. Would it be possible to lock the article from being edited by IP users to stop this from happening in the future? OSX ( talk • contributions) 07:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Category:Australian cars Portal. The reason is:
For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX, long time no see. Do you know where the ISBN is located in Wheels magazine? HarrisonB - Talk 01:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I need you to vote in support for the Ford Falcon article in Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive. I am sure that you would agree that this article is in need to become FA status not just for the fact that it is a very important Australian car but for the portal's sake too. Thanks HarrisonB - Talk 07:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you consider giving your feedback on the discussion happening at Talk:Daewoo Kalos? Your advice and council would be most appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 842U ( talk • contribs) 21:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
842U ( talk) 23:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, could you please check out the discussion page for the Holden Crewman, regarding your recent edit to that page. Thanks Tinkstar1985 10:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX, in your recent edit you removed the whole paragraph concerning the VE Ute. Any particular reason for this? Thanks, -- 328cia ( talk) 04:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
You may want to edit your BA Mk2 Falcon image (Image:2004-2005 Ford BAII Falcon XT 01.jpg) and cover the number plate. Someone could use that to get your details. Mister macphisto ( talk) 06:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Infact you were lucky to catch me because I've been very busy lately and not had much time for Wikipedia. I've never heard of the Daewoo Royale and a google search brings up only 2310 results. There are several sources that indicate that it's not a hoax though. Perhaps this article won't be anything more than a stub although I'm sure someone who owns/owned one will eventually expand the article. James086 Talk | Email 10:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Been away for a week and catching up now with what has been going on on wp in the meantime. Please let me say that I greatly appreciate your work on Australian cars! I do have a knack for them although, being German, I won´t ever set eyes on one, sadly. Cheers, -- 328cia ( talk) 20:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Done, done and done. The old title is used throughout the Toyota Kluger article but I don't have much time right now so I can't fix it. I will get around to it fairly soon (next week) however if it isn't done. already checked for double redirects and changed the lead sentence of each article though. James086 Talk | Email 01:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you tagged Image:Mitsubishi 9th gen lancer.jpg by transcluding {{ copyvio}}. I've removed the tag because it's the wrong tag and the linked page appeared to have been created after the 2006 upload of the image. For future reference, the tag you wanted is {{ imagevio}}, which is transcluded. {{ copyvio}} is for articles where it is used by replacing the entire article with the template and due to recent changes must now always be substituted. Thanks.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 05:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry but I can not help you with the Holden article primarily due to the fact that I have been very busy lately with my last year of high school. Senators Talk | Contribs 04:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you really think it's NPOV to take once source of safety ratings and pump it through the article? Your POINT is less than transparent, and somewhat... er... biased, perhaps? 842U ( talk) 01:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
The Toyota Camry is a car sold in America, the Toyota Scepter is the car made identical to the Camry in America, but sold in Japan. The Toyota Camry was made in America and sold in America. The Toyota Scepter is made and sold in Japan. If anything the Toyota Scepter should be redirected into the 3rd generation Camry section on the older revision of the Toyota Camry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camryluvr ( talk • contribs) 20:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I added the tag as the page doesn't follow the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) style. However I do realise that there are some pages for which the style manual doesn't apply (e.g Lists of ships of the same name) but I don't know whether that applies in this case. As it is clearly all your own work I'll let you decide what changes need to be made, if any Tassedethe ( talk) 16:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX. I've had a look at your sandbox's collection of info on the VE's running changes. While I agree a series II of the VE is unlikely to happen, I'm not entirely convinced the model year system is the best way to explain it. The dates on which the changes are introduced seem random. I also suspect there's been a few changes that haven't been included on your list (e.g: Calais with new lip spoiler on boot). The MY system is mostly a North American system and adding 0.5MY at different times makes things a bit messy in my opinion. As far as I know, Holden hasn't publicly announced what their plans are with regards to updates, so it makes things a bit difficult to ascertain at this stage. I think more information would need to be gathered. VectorD ( talk) 12:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Interesting, so comparisons were OK until it was no longer the leader? laughs Greg Locock ( talk) 06:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Stop exerting your anger on Holden articles thank you very much. So you are telling me it's alright to remove the word "superior" from an article, which in a way glorifies the VE, but heaven forbid if there is any sort of criticism directed to the AU Falcon ( [3])? Lets end this saga here, before it gets out of hand. My patience here is running very thin. Thanks OSX ( talk • contributions) 03:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Looking at this edit, you are in error if you think your changes conform to WP:DATE. Firstly, Australia uses the day-month-year International Dating format, second, linking dates is now deprecated by the Manual of Style. Please check before edit-warring. -- Pete ( talk) 05:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi - sorry to but in here but I don't think you are correct. I have noticed the newspapers using American style date formatting, but I think that is their attempt to conform to international (dominated by US conventions). There is a style guide for Austrlaia - used to be published by the AGPS and has now been taken over by Snooks &Co. I can't find a freely available internet verions. The best I can do is http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/info.aspx?page=766 -
Shortened forms on the Web
Abbreviations, Contractions, Acronyms, Initialisms, Symbols and other things.
by Dr Sofia Celic, Web Accessibility Consultant, Accessible Information Solutions at National Information Library Service.
Introduction: The impetus for this study was the result of observations made during user-based screen reader accessibility testing and from recent studies in technical writing.
Unexpected or undesired pronunciation by screen readers of some web page content was identified. This was mainly in regard to contractions and initialisms because these are rarely desired to be pronounced as a word.
When she gets to date format, sheis quite specific on the use of dd/mm/yyyy - I think there is no question that that is the format used by convention in Australia. Should you wish to dispute that format is the convention, I think this should be promptly escalated to a wider audience, for example at WP:AWNB to get more diverse views. -- Matilda talk 05:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I note you have made the same revert three times in a 24-hour period ( Holden VE Commodore: [4] [5] [6]; Ford Falcon (Australia): [7] [8] [9]). Although I believe you to be wise enough to avoid making a fourth, perhaps you should consider whether it is worth getting blocked over a matter so trivial. It is worth noting, also, that three is not an entitlement. Orderinchaos 12:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello OSX, first of all many thanks that you categorized the Holden photos in Commons according to model names. As I just spent 4 weeks in Australia I noticed but that in some sources Holden cars are referred in model generations (FB, FC etc.) rather than in model names (Special, Standard, Commodore etc.). Yesterday I categorized the Holden category according to model generations in surplus to your categorization because I think that some users will find the desired photo better like this. Today I found that you removed my categorization again without giving any reason. I suggest that we should keep both types of categorization for better service to the users and therefore ask you to revert your last changes. Many thanks in advance. -- MartinHansV (Germany) ( talk) 14:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I am beginning to draw a close to the end of the year so my workload at the moment is probably, without doubt, the highest it has been the whole year. When my holidays start (November-December) I am thinking of returning to Wikipedia for some small to moderate edits. So if you need any help (probably on a LOW PRIORITY automotive/aircraft related article) please tell me now it would be greatly appreciated. I will start editing now then eventually my edits will start to rise as the holidays draw closer. -- Senators Talk | Contribs 02:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- OK then -- Senators Talk | Contribs 02:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX,
First off thanks again for your help in identifying my shots, but I would like to discuss a little the image usage in Holden and Holden Commodore. Let me explain why I think my image makes a better illustration:
1. Better Perspective: My image was taken with a 400mm lens. This creates an image with vastly improved perspective. If you look at your image (which by the looks was taken at a relatively wide angle) the nose of the car is heavily accentuated and the proportions of the car are consequently distorted. My image, with the benefit of being taken at a long focal length, has no such perspective issues and the car appears well proportioned.
2. Better Composition: Your image, which appears to be taken at a carpark, has many other cars in the background (and indeed four cars in the foreground). This distracts from the focus of the image (the VE) and hence makes a worse illustration than my shot which shows only the VE.
3. Improved Interest: Flowing from my previous point is that your image shows a very stagnant and somewhat dull scene of the car parked. In no way do I wish to insult you but it's somewhat of a "snapshot". My image on the otherhand shows a much more dynamic scene, showing the car in it's primary function: driving. The sense of motion is enhanced with well controlled motion blur. This (IMO) creates a far more compelling illustration.
Hope that explains my reasoning -- Fir0002 00:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi OSX. Per last year, we are now closing in on another milestone for AUS, with 178 current GAs. Well, since you participated in the GA drive last year, perhaps unwittingly, by contributing some Australian car articles, you might want to participate again. This is another rallying cry to WP:AWNB/A. YellowMonkey ( bananabucket) 03:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm dropping you a line because I notice you originally began Category:Toyota concept vehicles. I've started a personal mini project of moving cars from Category:Concept automobiles into a relevant manufacturers subcategory. I did Holden some months ago, and have done Toyota and Honda this week. I'm bringing it to your attention on the basis that you look like you'd have an interest in this direction (and so might help out ;) -- .../Nemo ( talk) 01:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi - At least with my window width (and browser) the current version of Template:Holden timeline ends up with two horizontal scroll bars - one for the browser window and the one embedded in the template. This is really, really bad web page design. If you can't get the table to be the same width as the browser window (which I suspect is not possible with IE if you're actually using table markup), I suggest you not use an internal scroll bar in the template (I mean, rely only on the browser scroll bar). -- Rick Block ( talk) 15:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I added lines to the template... see the template talk page. JBarta ( talk) 19:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)