Welcome!
Hello, PrinceGloria, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
12:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Please do not remove the comments made by the BBC during the telecast. I have tried the best I can to remove an obvious PR article and put in some relevant facts. Wogan and co are famous in eurovision circles and their comments are relevant. Please watch the clip yourself if you need to see how she was received. As a performer myself she wasn't very good ( and I have a common friend so this is not bias). Eurovisionman ( talk) 18:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I again ask you to contribute to the discussion pages as per wiki rules. Critic responses is not POV. Further breaches of wiki rules may result in a complaint being made.
Eurovisionman (
talk)
19:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions!
Nishkid
64
15:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I know you dislike a few things about this page, and now that an Austin Rover car nut has begun obsessively adding uncited figures for every mediocre seller the company's produced, I'm getting rather sick of it myself. I've half a mind to plunder the Volvo reference source and swamp the page, just to see how he likes it... Grrr.
Anyhoo, I had a quick look at Wikipedia:Featured lists, since I'd rather set my standards high, and over the past couple of days I've been working on an improved version. It's still a work in progress with plenty to be done (layout, factchecking and referencing, section headings, prose text to introduce each table), but once finished can probably be created at the more accurate " List of bestselling automobiles". After that, I reckon the old page could be moved to List of automobiles by sales, with the vehicles arranged alphabetically. That'd have the side benefit of overcoming what I feel is original research: ranking the cars when it's not a definitive or comprehensive list. For example, although the article's been cited by the NZ Herald, which wrote a story on the Lada being one of the top 10 bestsellers ever, I don't know if the Chevrolet Impala or Honda Accord could have demoted it in the last decade. I have the same concern about the two "top ten bestsellers" tables in the new page, which are entirely based on the old article. They may end up disappearing.
Looking forward to feedback, -- DeLarge 23:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
What did you mean by hoaxing? I simply updated the links to point to the correct article rather than the redirect page.
Why you changed the Eurovan names to generations? It reads in the text section anyway, it looks stupid to have car name as 1st gen and aka consist all the official names.--— Typ932 T | C 06:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
hey sweetheart whats the problem with you?? you just doing undids and something else nonsense, try to even make clear why you changin the articles--— Typ932 T | C 13:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I have edited all the automobile model articles in the Spanish-language Wikipedia (that include infoboxes, which are only around 50) to turn the engine field into prose text and merge the length, width, height and wheelbase fields into one (codenamed "dimensions", labelled "length / width / height / wheelbase"). The engine swap is easy, I come to the English-language Wikipedia and read the engine information; then I write a full text with each engine including capacity, maximum output, fuel and sometimes Xcharged/aspirated and valve number stuff.
The dimensions change is more difficult because some models have many body styles ( es:Peugeot 307, es:Renault Mégane) and listing all of them takes a lot of space. But the merge makes the list shorter -- a single quartet takes only two lines.
Perhaps the best way to spare space is to remove the engine field, given the almost infinite quantity of automobile model articles. -- NaBUru38 04:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I have made many of the changes you have suggested. The article is certainly better as a result of your guidance. I am not sure if I have achieved the WP:WIAGA standard, but it is certainly closer. I am going to repost as a WP:GAC. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 16:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I've edited the article and hope it meets your expectations. Regards, howcheng { chat} 19:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
An article that you have expressed interest in, Qian Zhijun, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun. Thanks. ALTON .ıl 23:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
You commented on
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun. It has been closed early after a confusing and IMO unfortunate sequence of events. I have now listed it on
Deletion Review. You may wish to express your views there.
DES
(talk)
01:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I cleraly understand what you are saying. The problem is that the HHR and PT Cruiser are cars hard to classify. These models are clearly not "authentic" sport utility vehicles, given their few to none off-road capabilities and lack of four-wheel drive.
But I don't see in the HHR (even though I've never crossed the Caribbean and Andes) any seating and structural distribution as a Altea or Scénic, its hood is too square and long, and the seats are as high as the floor, so the legs go more folded than in a minivan. I would classify it as a compact crossover SUV
The PT Cruiser can be considered a minivan, I agree, but some Americans don't because they think minivans must be large. That is the reason why I have heavily edited the minvan article to show other sizes.
If you really think otherwise, you can go to the talk pages... but some models are too controversial, so I don't guarranty any results ;) -- NaBUru38 16:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. I see that you put a NOPV tag on the top of the first generation section on the Ford Taurus article. Well, in case you don't know, I am pushing for that article to be featured, so I will do anything I can to improve that article. I just want to know what you see in that section that is POV, so I can fix it and get that ugly tag out of there. Or, if you feel that the entire section needs a going over, I will be willing to do that too. Just please let me know what I will need to do. Thanks! Karrmann 19:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello again, PrinceGloria. I just wanted to let you know that I am going to work on the Oldsmobile article, and I would like your help on it, as you noted that you would be willing to help anyone who was willing to work on the article. SO, any help will be a ppreciated to make the load a bit lighter. ENjoy this beautifful SUnday! Karrmann 15:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the review on Paul Cornell (Chicago). Your review has caused me to reevaluate myself as a nominator. I have found the following statistics (to the best of my recollection).
For WP:CHICOTW, 8/17 plus three current GACs (one at 2nd round). 6/15 on first nominations.
As an individual, 9/19 plus 2 current GACs (both at 2nd round). 9/17 on first nominations.
What is the GAC promotion rate? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{ GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. -- Nehrams2020 00:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I could not pass this article due to the majority of the article being sourced from only one reference. On that reference I couldn't find substantial references on it either. Please expand references with more verifiable ones and resubmit. Jazznutuva 15:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
On that reference I couldn't find substantial references on it either.
The main reference www.rootes-chrysler.co.uk does not seem to be a definitive source. It appears to be written by one individual as his personal blog. I believe the article as a whole meets WP:WIAGA but for some reason I was hung up on the fact the majority of the article was a rewritten summation of one reference that did not source any references himself. Jazznutuva 16:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
i have finished editing on the page. can you please review the article namely- Himachal Pradesh Sushant gupta ( talk · contribs) 11:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I would be interested in what you feel are good GAs. You should keep a page like this. I would like to see your pass rate.
Here is my review record to the best of my recollection. You may add anything I may have forgotten. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 13:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Since you will likely not be the reviewer next time this goes up for WP:GAC, I know articles are suppose to be written for an international audience. I think most Chicagoans woud like to see the skyline because they would like the pic. Additionally, it is not included in every article. See Image:Chicago_Skyline_Crop_Labeled_2560_ver2.jpg#File links. If you would prefer, I would be willing to use the WP:FP Image:Chicago Skyline Hi-Res.jpg instead. However, I like the labelled buildings and the fact that it is easy to locate the Blackstone in the lower left of the chosen picture. Would you suggest we switch to the featured picture version from the cropped and labelled version? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello PrinceGloria, thanks for commenting at WP:GA. You made some good points, which exposed some flaws in my original proposal. However, the second proposal is rather different, and does require editors to be uninvolved. So I took the liberty of moving your comment up to the relevant section. I hope this is helpful and does not cause any annoyance. Feel free to undo my edit if you think that is appropriate, or comment further as you see fit. Once again, thanks for your contribution to the discussion. Geometry guy 21:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm don't know if you saw this before you undid my move, but I hope we can work together, rather than at cross-purposes. Geometry guy 21:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you reverted my addition of a {{ non-free logo}} tag to Image:Lancia logo.jpg and Image:Logoautobianchi1.gif, but I don't understand why. Are you claiming that the logos of these car companies are ineligible for copyright or that the copyright has been released into the public domain? If you are not claiming this, then the images are guaranteed to be copyrighted, since they are derivative works (i.e. a close up photo of a copyrighted work is still subject to copyright). Best, nadav ( talk) 11:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
There's just too much stress with it. There was already the issue with editors not wanting to take GAC reviews seriously. Add to that the recent drama with the mathematic adolescents academics at GA/R and it's just not worth it. I told Jayron that I was considering taking a break. It seems he has decided to as well. We're going to focus our efforts at
WP:PR and
WP:FAC where editors value reviews more, and we won't have to deal with morons who have nothing better to do than mess with other people because they're bitter... at least that's the hope. As I said in my last post at whatever hijacked page it was, I'll probably be back once the new kids go back to their own playground. Until then, you can find me (and Jayron) utilizing our review skills at the previously mentioned projects.
Regards,
LaraLove
T/
C
04:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I will be reporting you to the wiki admins because you are going around and deleting post of the Buick Enclave site that should stay up. So I will be reporting you for overstepping your powers. Thanks!
As an editor who is generally successful at WP:GAC, I have a good feel for what is reasonable and when someone has an axe to grind. If you have a problem with me I would prefer if you would say it rather than run around and fail every article I list and delist those that pass after others acknowledge meritorious contributions. This was by no means a credible delist. I understand you may be frustrated with the fact that I am having success in spite of your efforts. I also understand your frustration at not being able to successfully get my articles delisted using the WP:GA/R procedure. I am getting tired of you failing my articles by holding GACs to WP:FA standards. Given that another editor has passed Chicago Theatre and you disagree, I suggest we take it to WP:GA/R. In short, I contest your delist which was not done properly. There was no line added to the {{ ArticleHistory}}. I was not noticed. I suppose the passing editor was not noticed.
I would appreciate a talk page message the next time you run around behind another reviewer in an attempt to delist my nomination. Unlike your no class back door axegrinding attempt to fail I am telling you my problem with you and the action I am, taking to your wikiface. If you have done so on any other articles please send me a list of such actions. TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure how others feel about this, so I only speak for myself, but your comments at Wikipedia talk:Good article review seem rather immature. I would appreciate it if you could act a bit more respectful, constructive, and civil. We're trying to improve the process. If you disagree with our ideas, by all means, counter them. But don't do it respectfully. We're in the beginning stages here. Throwing out ideas and commenting on them. It's not as if we're just making changes without talking them out. So respect others and their ideas rather than make fun of or insult them. LaraLove T/ C 15:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{ GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.
You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. -- Nehrams2020 23:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted your edit to this article. I don't think it is necessary to completely remove the list. I think it falls under the exemption of "Not all lists are trivia sections" mentioned in WP:TRIVIA. It is quite a concise list, and presents information that by itself is interesting but doesn't really warrant a paragraph in the article. Regards -- Rpvdk 12:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
You requested reference to the current JDM Inspire being made in Japan (as opposed to made in USA) for the Japanese market, pls see the following:
http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/auto/INSPIRE/200306/14.html
This document is in Japanese, & the remark at the bottom of the page (製造事業者:本田技研工業株式会社) says it's made by Honda Japan. Senna6094 10:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Howdy. You may want to pop in over at Talk:Mazda_Axela and explain why you undid the move without participating in the discussion. Friday (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
By the way, I really don't appreciate you repeatedly referring to some "standards" for car naming when you've previously failed to tell me where I can read about the supposed standard. It comes off sounding like you're being intentionally misleading, which I sincerely hope is not the case. Friday (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed that you are a frequent reviewer at that Good Articles project. good article reassessment is experiencing a considerable backlog problem. There are several articles dating from August that still have not generated enough discussion to close. Could you please take a look at the oldest articles and make some fresh comments on them? Please note that some of these have undergone signigicant changes since they first came to GA/R; please judge the article only on its merits as of its current version. If you reviewed an earlier version of any of these articles, please also consider re-reading them and either revise or endorse any earluer comments you have made. Thanks for your help with this! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 02:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I am just here to ask what the " numerous flaws" that you can see with the Toyota Aurion article. I am not asking you to do a full-scale review for me, but just to note down briefly what caught your eye as being bad. Cheers OSX ( talk • contributions) 06:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. In going over the GA daily report, I saw that you've had this article marked under review for about 10 days. Just a reminder, in case you've forgotten. Lara ❤ Love 04:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
uhh, what gives you 'custody' of articles? just wondering. you seem like a bit of a diva. and you seem to get some strange pleasure out of reverting people's articles. that's a bit odd. just my observation. what's your background? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.133.211 ( talk) 01:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Thank you very much. (That's been gnawing at me for a long time, and I'm clearly not the only one.) Charles01 ( talk) 20:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Points taken, thanks for the feedback, good working with you... though you need to define "POV expression" if you and I are going to have an understanding.
Sorry that you are tired -- I hope that doesn't predispose you to cut and snip without noticing how the intro relates to the body of the article -- you might take another look.
There is actually quite a bit in the article about the design of the interior of the Kalos and its packaging: seat height, tall roof, class-leading headroom -- with citations... ie, the car is classified as a subcompact by the EPA though it actually falls over their volume index for a subcompact. I'll do better about qualifying these statements.
And there are several paragraphs in the article devoted to the generations, configurations and engines. I'll find back up for "high equipment level" and the "modest performance,"
But it is important with the introduction to place the car as fully as possible into context.
We'll get there. Again, thanks for the feedback, and thanks for keeping an eye on things. At some point, I can tell you're going to be a great resource for other articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 842U ( talk • contribs) 02:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the articles get split again, as the two cars are not related apart from the name. Poeloq ( talk) 13:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 05:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I refined my entry so it would not contain the "misleading and borderline untrue" statements, with which I factually agree with you. It should be not so misinformed now, all the while massively improving upon the version you keep reverting it back to. I would prefer that you make modifications to my modifications, not completely undo my edits and call them "misleading and borderline untrue". Now that is thoroughly unnecessary. Also, I had about 20 small edits throughout the article fixing spelling, grammer, and consistency errors.
I will revert this page once more; do not, I repeat DO NOT undo my edits. Modify them so they meet your critera. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sydtron ( talk • contribs) 22:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 06:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
So why does Infiniti M and Nissan Gloria have their own pages when they are the same car. Shouldn't there be one article named with the latter name? Grk1011 ( talk) 00:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash ( talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hi, PrinceGloria. I'm trying to move the ball forward on this topic and hold namecalling and invective to a minimum here on WPA. If you have a moment and can add your thoughts, the odds of a productive outcome would likely improve. Thanks. — Scheinwerfermann ( talk) 22:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I have given you several clear examples of medium to large sedans sold around the world with transverse straight 6s long before the Daewoo Tosca. The cited ref is a press release that uses words like "unique", "dynamic" and "exciting" like they're going out of fashion. The Tosca's configuration is unusual, certainly, but not unique. 202.7.183.132 ( talk) 10:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok I've logged in. The Volvo S80 has been around since 1998 and has always been available with a straight 6. The Volvo is a bit bigger (and a lot more expensive) than the Daewoo, so how about this:
The Tosca is unique in its class in that it is available with transversely-mounted straight-six engines.
There are also I4 petrol and turbodiesel engines in some markets. Karldoh ( talk) 22:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I take your point about unique having other meanings. Every dictionary I consult also lists other meanings, such as "unusual", "highly original" or "out of the ordinary", but the #1 listed meaning (and the one I adhere to) is "one of kind", "like no other". I confess in casual conversation I might say something like "somewhat unique" meaning "unusual", but would never use it in writing. But then English is a very fluid language, the lingua franca of the internet and we should strive to avoid confusion.
I am by nature a nitpicker, prone to find fault in anything, and abhor ambiguity. This could be why I wasn't open to other, less absolute, definitions of unique. I think we can agree that the Tosca is unique in its class, according to any definition. Or we could replace the word unique with unusual, notable or something similar.
I wish all Wikipedians were as pleasant as you! Karldoh ( talk) 10:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Is uncommon strong enough for you? Because it's neutral enough for me. Karldoh ( talk) 09:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, uncommon is out. But I find words like unique and remarkable in this context read too much like a sales brochure. How about noteworthy? It means the same thing, and I think it's more encyclopedic. Karldoh ( talk) 10:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I think we've wasted enough words on one little word already. The factual content of the article is fine, though I might like to rewrite the whole thing for flow and readability. But not today :) Karldoh ( talk) 11:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Informal mediation has been opened at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-15 WikiProject Automobiles at the request of Dddike, with you being named as a party to the dispute. The dispute is over the adoption of this process page without adequate consensus and other tangential issues. Named parties to the dispute are: Dddike, user:IFCAR, user:Scheinwerfermann, User:Daniel J. Leivick, user:PrinceGloria, User:842U. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 19:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Prince, it looks like the new user is unfamiliar with our policies and is also pretty wound up. I'd hate to see the article locked downa nd people getting blocked. Could we try an informal dispute resolution technique? I'd be glad to help. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 21:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Also, your header was fine - but using the one I sub'd just gets to the various pages more quickly. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 11:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Re your message, since the major edit warriors are established accounts there is little to be done except file an SSP report. I think Polishchick99 is probably one, but as the ANI thread says "but who (cares)", but only possibly Isgreatestman. I have also asked Isgreatestman about the sock allegation about you, and warned them not to repeat it if there is no evidence. If you are able to advise me of any suspicion you have been under and any result, or any other basis of the claim, this would help me. Thanks. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 22:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
You're being talked about at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:PrinceGloria. Gwen Gale ( talk) 20:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad that it's resolved. I'm surprised because this is the first headache of this sort (I can count three separate times similar massive sockpuppetry and edit warring messes) that didn't involve a "Ricky81682 must be desysoped and banned immediately" comment at AN. Probably because that would only increase the importance of the checkuser (which is ungodly slow around here). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 09:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, PG. Just wondering what your current thoughts are: Do we have consensus to go ahead and add the proposed text to the conventions? Also, just FYI, you may want to see here and here, as well as this. I have a little trouble keeping track of which of these users (if in fact they're not one and the same) objects to my having agreed with IFCAR regarding the Subaru Forester lead infobox image...whee! — Scheinwerfermann ( talk) 17:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
For me is best looking and more functional the template similar to other italian automobile manufacturer template like Template:Alfa Romeo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.33.243.160 ( talk) 10:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm cross-posting at the talk pages of the participants at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. After the article was deleted, I requested that it be userfied so that I could attempt to improve it. I've now made some small alterations, which are explained in greater detail at User talk:DeLarge/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. Basically, I've flipped the page so that the latest years are at the bottom (to make the TOC more intuitively navigable), and converted the 2005-2007 data into tables which now include precise sales figures.
The work done so far was quite labour-intensive, so before I commit more time to this, I'd appreciate any feedback to say whether it's worthwhile continuing with the years prior to 2005. Thanks in advance for any comments you can offer. Regards, -- DeLarge ( talk) 23:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Prince, I have taken a stab at integrating into the Suzuki Cultus article sections pertaining to the Chevrolet Sprint, Geo/Chevrolet Metro and Pontiac Firefly... such that those articles could be "deleted" and redirected to the Suzuki Cultus article. I believe this would bring the articles more into conformance with the WPA guidelines. Could you take a look, and weigh in on the discussion page with any comments you have? Thanks 842U ( talk) 03:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by the automated Giggabot ( stop!) 02:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
You have been involved in mediation at: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-15 WikiProject Automobiles. Discussion has subsided, and I think that the issues have been resolved if not specifically, more by identifying the reality of an apparent consensus. Is there any need to continue or should we close this process? Thanks! -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 15:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind thoughts and words at my talk page. Please let me know when and if I can help again. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 21:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I just replied to you on the Kia Mohave/Borrego talk page, and am interested in getting your input again. Thanks. NMS Bill ( talk) 00:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
PrinceGloria, I recently translated information about the car that you named yourself after, and found images on the Japanese side of Wikipedia that look better than the rear shot of a Prince Gloria Super 6 you are currently using. I found the same car in gold with a front view and a 4 door hardtop from the mid 70's. Have a look.( Regushee ( talk) 14:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC))
You never replied back on Mercury Grand Marquis's talk, but I was wondering if you could help me out on Ford Crown Victoria, I want to possibly get it up to GA, but if not at least improve it. I'm not a member of WP Autos, I only own a Crown Victoria so I don't know any of the guidelines. Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 16:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, PG. I'd thought the new consensus had put the issue of how to handle cubic inch displacement to bed, but a new call to strike out a convention has been issued. Thought you might want to stop by and take a look. —01:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your insightful criticism of the chaptalization article over a year ago. I just wanted to let you know that (finally) the problems you identified have been addressed, and the article has once again been nominated for GA review. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
PrinceGloria, please discuss on Talk:Pontiac Vibe before making any more reverts.-- Flash176 ( talk) 22:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I just read an old reply of yours on Talk:Isis Gee about admitting to being Isis Gee LOL. I almost died of laughter! Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 16:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I have a fairly straightforward (but very long-winded) solution to this problem, although it'll most likely require a bit of consensus building at the WP:CARS talk page. I've noticed you've not made edits in the last week or so; are you still available? If you'd like to discuss it off-wiki I can be reached by e-mail. Regards, -- DeLarge ( talk) 09:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 07:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, PG. Mind dropping by and commenting? — Scheinwerfermann T· C 02:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Good to see you back! YellowMonkey ( cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Considering that I am currently in discussion with you at Talk:Chevrolet Cruze, I thought now might be a good time to recommence discussions about the WP:CARS naming convention. I believe all discussions stalled over a minor disagreement between yourself and User:IFCAR.
The previous discussions can be found at: User talk:OSX/Archive 4#WP:NAME and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 20#Article title convention proposal.
Basically, as far as I see both IFCAR's and your own proposal have their faults. I've long been umming and arring over which is the better. Basically, I think the best solution is to accept the "Rev 5" convention (yours and Scheinwerfermann's):
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
Home market means the market where the automaker is headquartered.
Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
...but... allow an option to make an exception on a case-by-case example with ALL discussions to be held at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. This way we won't have to worry about problematic outcomes such as the Toyota ist which we both know should be the article's title. Another example would be the Chevrolet Cruze that we are currently discussing. Is Daewoo Lacetti Premiere (South Korea) or Chevrolet Cruze (Europe/North America) the original name? The car was revealed and announced as a Chevrolet, but it was released in Korea long before anywhere else and much of the development was centralised there despite the car being a global GM effort. When you consider that Holden (in Australia, English official language) also markets the car as the "Holden Cruze" the whole issue becomes problematic. In such a case, the exception option would sever any issues and dictate that "Chevrolet Cruze" is in fact the correct name. Because there are incongruities with both revision 3 and 5, I feel that my revision 6 below will best counteract such ambiguous examples. The number or articles requiring such discussions would be quite low, so I believe that case basis exceptions will not become unwieldy and unmanageable.
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
- Home market means the market where the automaker is headquartered.
- Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
Application notes and examples:
- The Mazda Axela is known as such only in its original home market of Japan, where English is not an official language. In all English-speaking markets, the car is called the Mazda3. Therefore, the article shall be titled Mazda3.
- Vehicles badged Lexus worldwide were branded as Toyota in Japan until 2006. Under this naming convention, the articles shall be titled Lexus.
- The Daewoo Lacetti in South Korea is known elsewhere as the Buick Excelle, the Chevrolet Lacetti, the Chevrolet Nubira, the Chevrolet Optra, the Chevrolet SRV, the Holden Viva, the Pontiac Wave, the Suzuki Forenza, and the Suzuki Reno. Under this naming convention the original Daewoo Lacetti name shall be selected for the article title.
- Some automakers have substantial national operations remote from their corporate seat, e.g., Ford Australia, Toyota North America. Use care to discern a vehicle's home market and its manufacturer headquarters from the location of the corporate seat. The Holden Commodore, for example, was designed and built by Holden and its home market is Australia, despite Holden's corporate parent being the U.S.-based General Motors. Under this naming convention, the article shall be titled Holden Commodore.
How about it? OSX ( talk • contributions) 12:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for. Where no direct statement from the manufacturer regarding such can be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered.
(Indent reset) Okay, Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
Shall we invite IFCAR to the discussion to see if he approves of revision 67.
OSX (
talk •
contributions)
15:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
- Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for, which is usually the country that the vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
- Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
Application notes and examples:
- The Mazda Axela is known as such only in its original home market of Japan, where English is not an official language. In all English-speaking markets, the car is called the Mazda3. Therefore, the article shall be titled Mazda3.
- Vehicles badged Lexus worldwide were branded as Toyota in Japan until 2006. Under this naming convention, the articles shall be titled Lexus.
- The Daewoo Lacetti in South Korea is known elsewhere as the Buick Excelle, the Chevrolet Lacetti, the Chevrolet Nubira, the Chevrolet Optra, the Chevrolet SRV, the Holden Viva, the Pontiac Wave, the Suzuki Forenza, and the Suzuki Reno. Under this naming convention the original Daewoo Lacetti name shall be selected for the article title.
- Some automakers have substantial national operations remote from their corporate seat, e.g., Ford Australia, Toyota North America. Use care to discern a vehicle's home market and its manufacturer headquarters from the location of the corporate seat. The Holden Commodore, for example, was designed and built by Holden and its home market is Australia, despite Holden's corporate parent being the U.S.-based General Motors. Under this naming convention, the article shall be titled Holden Commodore.
Tweaked just a tad, and includes the "where vehicle was launched first" clause. OSX ( talk • contributions) 15:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
PrincGloria, why remove the exceptions part? It's going to be necessary, because as IFCAR states, "it means a different name in one tiny obscure market could cause an article to be renamed". Common sense would suggest that if for example in the case of the Chevrolet Cruze, that while its sold as a Daewoo in Korea and as a Holden in Australia/NZ, the "Chevrolet Cruze" title is in fact the correct name, and not "Daewoo Lacetti Premiere" because not all markets use the Chevrolet branding.
IFCAR, please take a look at List of countries where English is an official language. This is a very long list, but why don't we narrow it down for arguments sake to the 10 countries listed at the English-speaking world article?
Take note of the ordering too, as it goes in order from country with the most number of people who "speak exclusively English at home" and not by population. There is a reason why I have stated that all discussions are "to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page", because this way any anomalies can logically argued by people with the knowledge as opposed to those more likely to come up with more biased answers such as those produced at Talk:Isuzu Trooper. OSX ( talk • contributions) 00:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in English-speaking markets, and the home market is not English-speaking. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in English-speaking markets.
Definitions:
- English-speaking refers to the "main" countries of the English-speaking world; that is, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Ireland.
- Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for, which is usually the country that the vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
- Manufacturer headquarters refers to the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
10 months later... I have added what has become consensus to WP:CARS/Conventions. It's not perfect due to it having to be scaled back to cater for the slight disagreements, but it is better than what was written previously (which suggested Mazda3 should revert back to Mazda Axela and Lexus IS to Toyota Altezza). OSX ( talk • contributions) 11:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Bank Millennium branch Poland.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Ronhjones
(Talk)
23:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bank Millennium branch Poland.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello PrinceGloria - I have always supposed you to be a new version of Bravada, if I am wrong please take no offense. In any case, a number of pictures you uploaded back in the days have since been deleted for missing certain small details. If you are indeed the same, please help protect your photos here. Best regards in either case, ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 08:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Zilverparkkade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penthouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 04:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, PrinceGloria, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
12:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Please do not remove the comments made by the BBC during the telecast. I have tried the best I can to remove an obvious PR article and put in some relevant facts. Wogan and co are famous in eurovision circles and their comments are relevant. Please watch the clip yourself if you need to see how she was received. As a performer myself she wasn't very good ( and I have a common friend so this is not bias). Eurovisionman ( talk) 18:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I again ask you to contribute to the discussion pages as per wiki rules. Critic responses is not POV. Further breaches of wiki rules may result in a complaint being made.
Eurovisionman (
talk)
19:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions!
Nishkid
64
15:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I know you dislike a few things about this page, and now that an Austin Rover car nut has begun obsessively adding uncited figures for every mediocre seller the company's produced, I'm getting rather sick of it myself. I've half a mind to plunder the Volvo reference source and swamp the page, just to see how he likes it... Grrr.
Anyhoo, I had a quick look at Wikipedia:Featured lists, since I'd rather set my standards high, and over the past couple of days I've been working on an improved version. It's still a work in progress with plenty to be done (layout, factchecking and referencing, section headings, prose text to introduce each table), but once finished can probably be created at the more accurate " List of bestselling automobiles". After that, I reckon the old page could be moved to List of automobiles by sales, with the vehicles arranged alphabetically. That'd have the side benefit of overcoming what I feel is original research: ranking the cars when it's not a definitive or comprehensive list. For example, although the article's been cited by the NZ Herald, which wrote a story on the Lada being one of the top 10 bestsellers ever, I don't know if the Chevrolet Impala or Honda Accord could have demoted it in the last decade. I have the same concern about the two "top ten bestsellers" tables in the new page, which are entirely based on the old article. They may end up disappearing.
Looking forward to feedback, -- DeLarge 23:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
What did you mean by hoaxing? I simply updated the links to point to the correct article rather than the redirect page.
Why you changed the Eurovan names to generations? It reads in the text section anyway, it looks stupid to have car name as 1st gen and aka consist all the official names.--— Typ932 T | C 06:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
hey sweetheart whats the problem with you?? you just doing undids and something else nonsense, try to even make clear why you changin the articles--— Typ932 T | C 13:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I have edited all the automobile model articles in the Spanish-language Wikipedia (that include infoboxes, which are only around 50) to turn the engine field into prose text and merge the length, width, height and wheelbase fields into one (codenamed "dimensions", labelled "length / width / height / wheelbase"). The engine swap is easy, I come to the English-language Wikipedia and read the engine information; then I write a full text with each engine including capacity, maximum output, fuel and sometimes Xcharged/aspirated and valve number stuff.
The dimensions change is more difficult because some models have many body styles ( es:Peugeot 307, es:Renault Mégane) and listing all of them takes a lot of space. But the merge makes the list shorter -- a single quartet takes only two lines.
Perhaps the best way to spare space is to remove the engine field, given the almost infinite quantity of automobile model articles. -- NaBUru38 04:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I have made many of the changes you have suggested. The article is certainly better as a result of your guidance. I am not sure if I have achieved the WP:WIAGA standard, but it is certainly closer. I am going to repost as a WP:GAC. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 16:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I've edited the article and hope it meets your expectations. Regards, howcheng { chat} 19:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
An article that you have expressed interest in, Qian Zhijun, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun. Thanks. ALTON .ıl 23:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
You commented on
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun. It has been closed early after a confusing and IMO unfortunate sequence of events. I have now listed it on
Deletion Review. You may wish to express your views there.
DES
(talk)
01:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I cleraly understand what you are saying. The problem is that the HHR and PT Cruiser are cars hard to classify. These models are clearly not "authentic" sport utility vehicles, given their few to none off-road capabilities and lack of four-wheel drive.
But I don't see in the HHR (even though I've never crossed the Caribbean and Andes) any seating and structural distribution as a Altea or Scénic, its hood is too square and long, and the seats are as high as the floor, so the legs go more folded than in a minivan. I would classify it as a compact crossover SUV
The PT Cruiser can be considered a minivan, I agree, but some Americans don't because they think minivans must be large. That is the reason why I have heavily edited the minvan article to show other sizes.
If you really think otherwise, you can go to the talk pages... but some models are too controversial, so I don't guarranty any results ;) -- NaBUru38 16:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. I see that you put a NOPV tag on the top of the first generation section on the Ford Taurus article. Well, in case you don't know, I am pushing for that article to be featured, so I will do anything I can to improve that article. I just want to know what you see in that section that is POV, so I can fix it and get that ugly tag out of there. Or, if you feel that the entire section needs a going over, I will be willing to do that too. Just please let me know what I will need to do. Thanks! Karrmann 19:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello again, PrinceGloria. I just wanted to let you know that I am going to work on the Oldsmobile article, and I would like your help on it, as you noted that you would be willing to help anyone who was willing to work on the article. SO, any help will be a ppreciated to make the load a bit lighter. ENjoy this beautifful SUnday! Karrmann 15:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the review on Paul Cornell (Chicago). Your review has caused me to reevaluate myself as a nominator. I have found the following statistics (to the best of my recollection).
For WP:CHICOTW, 8/17 plus three current GACs (one at 2nd round). 6/15 on first nominations.
As an individual, 9/19 plus 2 current GACs (both at 2nd round). 9/17 on first nominations.
What is the GAC promotion rate? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{ GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. -- Nehrams2020 00:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I could not pass this article due to the majority of the article being sourced from only one reference. On that reference I couldn't find substantial references on it either. Please expand references with more verifiable ones and resubmit. Jazznutuva 15:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
On that reference I couldn't find substantial references on it either.
The main reference www.rootes-chrysler.co.uk does not seem to be a definitive source. It appears to be written by one individual as his personal blog. I believe the article as a whole meets WP:WIAGA but for some reason I was hung up on the fact the majority of the article was a rewritten summation of one reference that did not source any references himself. Jazznutuva 16:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
i have finished editing on the page. can you please review the article namely- Himachal Pradesh Sushant gupta ( talk · contribs) 11:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I would be interested in what you feel are good GAs. You should keep a page like this. I would like to see your pass rate.
Here is my review record to the best of my recollection. You may add anything I may have forgotten. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 13:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Since you will likely not be the reviewer next time this goes up for WP:GAC, I know articles are suppose to be written for an international audience. I think most Chicagoans woud like to see the skyline because they would like the pic. Additionally, it is not included in every article. See Image:Chicago_Skyline_Crop_Labeled_2560_ver2.jpg#File links. If you would prefer, I would be willing to use the WP:FP Image:Chicago Skyline Hi-Res.jpg instead. However, I like the labelled buildings and the fact that it is easy to locate the Blackstone in the lower left of the chosen picture. Would you suggest we switch to the featured picture version from the cropped and labelled version? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello PrinceGloria, thanks for commenting at WP:GA. You made some good points, which exposed some flaws in my original proposal. However, the second proposal is rather different, and does require editors to be uninvolved. So I took the liberty of moving your comment up to the relevant section. I hope this is helpful and does not cause any annoyance. Feel free to undo my edit if you think that is appropriate, or comment further as you see fit. Once again, thanks for your contribution to the discussion. Geometry guy 21:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm don't know if you saw this before you undid my move, but I hope we can work together, rather than at cross-purposes. Geometry guy 21:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you reverted my addition of a {{ non-free logo}} tag to Image:Lancia logo.jpg and Image:Logoautobianchi1.gif, but I don't understand why. Are you claiming that the logos of these car companies are ineligible for copyright or that the copyright has been released into the public domain? If you are not claiming this, then the images are guaranteed to be copyrighted, since they are derivative works (i.e. a close up photo of a copyrighted work is still subject to copyright). Best, nadav ( talk) 11:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
There's just too much stress with it. There was already the issue with editors not wanting to take GAC reviews seriously. Add to that the recent drama with the mathematic adolescents academics at GA/R and it's just not worth it. I told Jayron that I was considering taking a break. It seems he has decided to as well. We're going to focus our efforts at
WP:PR and
WP:FAC where editors value reviews more, and we won't have to deal with morons who have nothing better to do than mess with other people because they're bitter... at least that's the hope. As I said in my last post at whatever hijacked page it was, I'll probably be back once the new kids go back to their own playground. Until then, you can find me (and Jayron) utilizing our review skills at the previously mentioned projects.
Regards,
LaraLove
T/
C
04:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I will be reporting you to the wiki admins because you are going around and deleting post of the Buick Enclave site that should stay up. So I will be reporting you for overstepping your powers. Thanks!
As an editor who is generally successful at WP:GAC, I have a good feel for what is reasonable and when someone has an axe to grind. If you have a problem with me I would prefer if you would say it rather than run around and fail every article I list and delist those that pass after others acknowledge meritorious contributions. This was by no means a credible delist. I understand you may be frustrated with the fact that I am having success in spite of your efforts. I also understand your frustration at not being able to successfully get my articles delisted using the WP:GA/R procedure. I am getting tired of you failing my articles by holding GACs to WP:FA standards. Given that another editor has passed Chicago Theatre and you disagree, I suggest we take it to WP:GA/R. In short, I contest your delist which was not done properly. There was no line added to the {{ ArticleHistory}}. I was not noticed. I suppose the passing editor was not noticed.
I would appreciate a talk page message the next time you run around behind another reviewer in an attempt to delist my nomination. Unlike your no class back door axegrinding attempt to fail I am telling you my problem with you and the action I am, taking to your wikiface. If you have done so on any other articles please send me a list of such actions. TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure how others feel about this, so I only speak for myself, but your comments at Wikipedia talk:Good article review seem rather immature. I would appreciate it if you could act a bit more respectful, constructive, and civil. We're trying to improve the process. If you disagree with our ideas, by all means, counter them. But don't do it respectfully. We're in the beginning stages here. Throwing out ideas and commenting on them. It's not as if we're just making changes without talking them out. So respect others and their ideas rather than make fun of or insult them. LaraLove T/ C 15:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{ GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.
You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. -- Nehrams2020 23:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted your edit to this article. I don't think it is necessary to completely remove the list. I think it falls under the exemption of "Not all lists are trivia sections" mentioned in WP:TRIVIA. It is quite a concise list, and presents information that by itself is interesting but doesn't really warrant a paragraph in the article. Regards -- Rpvdk 12:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
You requested reference to the current JDM Inspire being made in Japan (as opposed to made in USA) for the Japanese market, pls see the following:
http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/auto/INSPIRE/200306/14.html
This document is in Japanese, & the remark at the bottom of the page (製造事業者:本田技研工業株式会社) says it's made by Honda Japan. Senna6094 10:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Howdy. You may want to pop in over at Talk:Mazda_Axela and explain why you undid the move without participating in the discussion. Friday (talk) 14:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
By the way, I really don't appreciate you repeatedly referring to some "standards" for car naming when you've previously failed to tell me where I can read about the supposed standard. It comes off sounding like you're being intentionally misleading, which I sincerely hope is not the case. Friday (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed that you are a frequent reviewer at that Good Articles project. good article reassessment is experiencing a considerable backlog problem. There are several articles dating from August that still have not generated enough discussion to close. Could you please take a look at the oldest articles and make some fresh comments on them? Please note that some of these have undergone signigicant changes since they first came to GA/R; please judge the article only on its merits as of its current version. If you reviewed an earlier version of any of these articles, please also consider re-reading them and either revise or endorse any earluer comments you have made. Thanks for your help with this! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 02:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I am just here to ask what the " numerous flaws" that you can see with the Toyota Aurion article. I am not asking you to do a full-scale review for me, but just to note down briefly what caught your eye as being bad. Cheers OSX ( talk • contributions) 06:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. In going over the GA daily report, I saw that you've had this article marked under review for about 10 days. Just a reminder, in case you've forgotten. Lara ❤ Love 04:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
uhh, what gives you 'custody' of articles? just wondering. you seem like a bit of a diva. and you seem to get some strange pleasure out of reverting people's articles. that's a bit odd. just my observation. what's your background? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.133.211 ( talk) 01:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Thank you very much. (That's been gnawing at me for a long time, and I'm clearly not the only one.) Charles01 ( talk) 20:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Points taken, thanks for the feedback, good working with you... though you need to define "POV expression" if you and I are going to have an understanding.
Sorry that you are tired -- I hope that doesn't predispose you to cut and snip without noticing how the intro relates to the body of the article -- you might take another look.
There is actually quite a bit in the article about the design of the interior of the Kalos and its packaging: seat height, tall roof, class-leading headroom -- with citations... ie, the car is classified as a subcompact by the EPA though it actually falls over their volume index for a subcompact. I'll do better about qualifying these statements.
And there are several paragraphs in the article devoted to the generations, configurations and engines. I'll find back up for "high equipment level" and the "modest performance,"
But it is important with the introduction to place the car as fully as possible into context.
We'll get there. Again, thanks for the feedback, and thanks for keeping an eye on things. At some point, I can tell you're going to be a great resource for other articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 842U ( talk • contribs) 02:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the articles get split again, as the two cars are not related apart from the name. Poeloq ( talk) 13:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 05:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I refined my entry so it would not contain the "misleading and borderline untrue" statements, with which I factually agree with you. It should be not so misinformed now, all the while massively improving upon the version you keep reverting it back to. I would prefer that you make modifications to my modifications, not completely undo my edits and call them "misleading and borderline untrue". Now that is thoroughly unnecessary. Also, I had about 20 small edits throughout the article fixing spelling, grammer, and consistency errors.
I will revert this page once more; do not, I repeat DO NOT undo my edits. Modify them so they meet your critera. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sydtron ( talk • contribs) 22:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 06:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
So why does Infiniti M and Nissan Gloria have their own pages when they are the same car. Shouldn't there be one article named with the latter name? Grk1011 ( talk) 00:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash ( talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hi, PrinceGloria. I'm trying to move the ball forward on this topic and hold namecalling and invective to a minimum here on WPA. If you have a moment and can add your thoughts, the odds of a productive outcome would likely improve. Thanks. — Scheinwerfermann ( talk) 22:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I have given you several clear examples of medium to large sedans sold around the world with transverse straight 6s long before the Daewoo Tosca. The cited ref is a press release that uses words like "unique", "dynamic" and "exciting" like they're going out of fashion. The Tosca's configuration is unusual, certainly, but not unique. 202.7.183.132 ( talk) 10:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok I've logged in. The Volvo S80 has been around since 1998 and has always been available with a straight 6. The Volvo is a bit bigger (and a lot more expensive) than the Daewoo, so how about this:
The Tosca is unique in its class in that it is available with transversely-mounted straight-six engines.
There are also I4 petrol and turbodiesel engines in some markets. Karldoh ( talk) 22:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I take your point about unique having other meanings. Every dictionary I consult also lists other meanings, such as "unusual", "highly original" or "out of the ordinary", but the #1 listed meaning (and the one I adhere to) is "one of kind", "like no other". I confess in casual conversation I might say something like "somewhat unique" meaning "unusual", but would never use it in writing. But then English is a very fluid language, the lingua franca of the internet and we should strive to avoid confusion.
I am by nature a nitpicker, prone to find fault in anything, and abhor ambiguity. This could be why I wasn't open to other, less absolute, definitions of unique. I think we can agree that the Tosca is unique in its class, according to any definition. Or we could replace the word unique with unusual, notable or something similar.
I wish all Wikipedians were as pleasant as you! Karldoh ( talk) 10:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Is uncommon strong enough for you? Because it's neutral enough for me. Karldoh ( talk) 09:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, uncommon is out. But I find words like unique and remarkable in this context read too much like a sales brochure. How about noteworthy? It means the same thing, and I think it's more encyclopedic. Karldoh ( talk) 10:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I think we've wasted enough words on one little word already. The factual content of the article is fine, though I might like to rewrite the whole thing for flow and readability. But not today :) Karldoh ( talk) 11:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Informal mediation has been opened at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-15 WikiProject Automobiles at the request of Dddike, with you being named as a party to the dispute. The dispute is over the adoption of this process page without adequate consensus and other tangential issues. Named parties to the dispute are: Dddike, user:IFCAR, user:Scheinwerfermann, User:Daniel J. Leivick, user:PrinceGloria, User:842U. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 19:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Prince, it looks like the new user is unfamiliar with our policies and is also pretty wound up. I'd hate to see the article locked downa nd people getting blocked. Could we try an informal dispute resolution technique? I'd be glad to help. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 21:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Also, your header was fine - but using the one I sub'd just gets to the various pages more quickly. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 11:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Re your message, since the major edit warriors are established accounts there is little to be done except file an SSP report. I think Polishchick99 is probably one, but as the ANI thread says "but who (cares)", but only possibly Isgreatestman. I have also asked Isgreatestman about the sock allegation about you, and warned them not to repeat it if there is no evidence. If you are able to advise me of any suspicion you have been under and any result, or any other basis of the claim, this would help me. Thanks. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 22:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
You're being talked about at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:PrinceGloria. Gwen Gale ( talk) 20:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad that it's resolved. I'm surprised because this is the first headache of this sort (I can count three separate times similar massive sockpuppetry and edit warring messes) that didn't involve a "Ricky81682 must be desysoped and banned immediately" comment at AN. Probably because that would only increase the importance of the checkuser (which is ungodly slow around here). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 09:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, PG. Just wondering what your current thoughts are: Do we have consensus to go ahead and add the proposed text to the conventions? Also, just FYI, you may want to see here and here, as well as this. I have a little trouble keeping track of which of these users (if in fact they're not one and the same) objects to my having agreed with IFCAR regarding the Subaru Forester lead infobox image...whee! — Scheinwerfermann ( talk) 17:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
For me is best looking and more functional the template similar to other italian automobile manufacturer template like Template:Alfa Romeo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.33.243.160 ( talk) 10:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm cross-posting at the talk pages of the participants at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. After the article was deleted, I requested that it be userfied so that I could attempt to improve it. I've now made some small alterations, which are explained in greater detail at User talk:DeLarge/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. Basically, I've flipped the page so that the latest years are at the bottom (to make the TOC more intuitively navigable), and converted the 2005-2007 data into tables which now include precise sales figures.
The work done so far was quite labour-intensive, so before I commit more time to this, I'd appreciate any feedback to say whether it's worthwhile continuing with the years prior to 2005. Thanks in advance for any comments you can offer. Regards, -- DeLarge ( talk) 23:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Prince, I have taken a stab at integrating into the Suzuki Cultus article sections pertaining to the Chevrolet Sprint, Geo/Chevrolet Metro and Pontiac Firefly... such that those articles could be "deleted" and redirected to the Suzuki Cultus article. I believe this would bring the articles more into conformance with the WPA guidelines. Could you take a look, and weigh in on the discussion page with any comments you have? Thanks 842U ( talk) 03:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by the automated Giggabot ( stop!) 02:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
You have been involved in mediation at: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-15 WikiProject Automobiles. Discussion has subsided, and I think that the issues have been resolved if not specifically, more by identifying the reality of an apparent consensus. Is there any need to continue or should we close this process? Thanks! -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 15:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind thoughts and words at my talk page. Please let me know when and if I can help again. -- Kevin Murray ( talk) 21:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I just replied to you on the Kia Mohave/Borrego talk page, and am interested in getting your input again. Thanks. NMS Bill ( talk) 00:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
PrinceGloria, I recently translated information about the car that you named yourself after, and found images on the Japanese side of Wikipedia that look better than the rear shot of a Prince Gloria Super 6 you are currently using. I found the same car in gold with a front view and a 4 door hardtop from the mid 70's. Have a look.( Regushee ( talk) 14:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC))
You never replied back on Mercury Grand Marquis's talk, but I was wondering if you could help me out on Ford Crown Victoria, I want to possibly get it up to GA, but if not at least improve it. I'm not a member of WP Autos, I only own a Crown Victoria so I don't know any of the guidelines. Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 16:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, PG. I'd thought the new consensus had put the issue of how to handle cubic inch displacement to bed, but a new call to strike out a convention has been issued. Thought you might want to stop by and take a look. —01:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your insightful criticism of the chaptalization article over a year ago. I just wanted to let you know that (finally) the problems you identified have been addressed, and the article has once again been nominated for GA review. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
PrinceGloria, please discuss on Talk:Pontiac Vibe before making any more reverts.-- Flash176 ( talk) 22:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I just read an old reply of yours on Talk:Isis Gee about admitting to being Isis Gee LOL. I almost died of laughter! Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 16:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I have a fairly straightforward (but very long-winded) solution to this problem, although it'll most likely require a bit of consensus building at the WP:CARS talk page. I've noticed you've not made edits in the last week or so; are you still available? If you'd like to discuss it off-wiki I can be reached by e-mail. Regards, -- DeLarge ( talk) 09:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 07:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, PG. Mind dropping by and commenting? — Scheinwerfermann T· C 02:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Good to see you back! YellowMonkey ( cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Considering that I am currently in discussion with you at Talk:Chevrolet Cruze, I thought now might be a good time to recommence discussions about the WP:CARS naming convention. I believe all discussions stalled over a minor disagreement between yourself and User:IFCAR.
The previous discussions can be found at: User talk:OSX/Archive 4#WP:NAME and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 20#Article title convention proposal.
Basically, as far as I see both IFCAR's and your own proposal have their faults. I've long been umming and arring over which is the better. Basically, I think the best solution is to accept the "Rev 5" convention (yours and Scheinwerfermann's):
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
Home market means the market where the automaker is headquartered.
Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
...but... allow an option to make an exception on a case-by-case example with ALL discussions to be held at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. This way we won't have to worry about problematic outcomes such as the Toyota ist which we both know should be the article's title. Another example would be the Chevrolet Cruze that we are currently discussing. Is Daewoo Lacetti Premiere (South Korea) or Chevrolet Cruze (Europe/North America) the original name? The car was revealed and announced as a Chevrolet, but it was released in Korea long before anywhere else and much of the development was centralised there despite the car being a global GM effort. When you consider that Holden (in Australia, English official language) also markets the car as the "Holden Cruze" the whole issue becomes problematic. In such a case, the exception option would sever any issues and dictate that "Chevrolet Cruze" is in fact the correct name. Because there are incongruities with both revision 3 and 5, I feel that my revision 6 below will best counteract such ambiguous examples. The number or articles requiring such discussions would be quite low, so I believe that case basis exceptions will not become unwieldy and unmanageable.
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
- Home market means the market where the automaker is headquartered.
- Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
Application notes and examples:
- The Mazda Axela is known as such only in its original home market of Japan, where English is not an official language. In all English-speaking markets, the car is called the Mazda3. Therefore, the article shall be titled Mazda3.
- Vehicles badged Lexus worldwide were branded as Toyota in Japan until 2006. Under this naming convention, the articles shall be titled Lexus.
- The Daewoo Lacetti in South Korea is known elsewhere as the Buick Excelle, the Chevrolet Lacetti, the Chevrolet Nubira, the Chevrolet Optra, the Chevrolet SRV, the Holden Viva, the Pontiac Wave, the Suzuki Forenza, and the Suzuki Reno. Under this naming convention the original Daewoo Lacetti name shall be selected for the article title.
- Some automakers have substantial national operations remote from their corporate seat, e.g., Ford Australia, Toyota North America. Use care to discern a vehicle's home market and its manufacturer headquarters from the location of the corporate seat. The Holden Commodore, for example, was designed and built by Holden and its home market is Australia, despite Holden's corporate parent being the U.S.-based General Motors. Under this naming convention, the article shall be titled Holden Commodore.
How about it? OSX ( talk • contributions) 12:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for. Where no direct statement from the manufacturer regarding such can be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered.
(Indent reset) Okay, Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
Shall we invite IFCAR to the discussion to see if he approves of revision 67.
OSX (
talk •
contributions)
15:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in all other markets, and English is not an official language in the home market. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in all non-home markets.
Definitions:
- Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for, which is usually the country that the vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
- Manufacturer headquarters means the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
Application notes and examples:
- The Mazda Axela is known as such only in its original home market of Japan, where English is not an official language. In all English-speaking markets, the car is called the Mazda3. Therefore, the article shall be titled Mazda3.
- Vehicles badged Lexus worldwide were branded as Toyota in Japan until 2006. Under this naming convention, the articles shall be titled Lexus.
- The Daewoo Lacetti in South Korea is known elsewhere as the Buick Excelle, the Chevrolet Lacetti, the Chevrolet Nubira, the Chevrolet Optra, the Chevrolet SRV, the Holden Viva, the Pontiac Wave, the Suzuki Forenza, and the Suzuki Reno. Under this naming convention the original Daewoo Lacetti name shall be selected for the article title.
- Some automakers have substantial national operations remote from their corporate seat, e.g., Ford Australia, Toyota North America. Use care to discern a vehicle's home market and its manufacturer headquarters from the location of the corporate seat. The Holden Commodore, for example, was designed and built by Holden and its home market is Australia, despite Holden's corporate parent being the U.S.-based General Motors. Under this naming convention, the article shall be titled Holden Commodore.
Tweaked just a tad, and includes the "where vehicle was launched first" clause. OSX ( talk • contributions) 15:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
PrincGloria, why remove the exceptions part? It's going to be necessary, because as IFCAR states, "it means a different name in one tiny obscure market could cause an article to be renamed". Common sense would suggest that if for example in the case of the Chevrolet Cruze, that while its sold as a Daewoo in Korea and as a Holden in Australia/NZ, the "Chevrolet Cruze" title is in fact the correct name, and not "Daewoo Lacetti Premiere" because not all markets use the Chevrolet branding.
IFCAR, please take a look at List of countries where English is an official language. This is a very long list, but why don't we narrow it down for arguments sake to the 10 countries listed at the English-speaking world article?
Take note of the ordering too, as it goes in order from country with the most number of people who "speak exclusively English at home" and not by population. There is a reason why I have stated that all discussions are "to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page", because this way any anomalies can logically argued by people with the knowledge as opposed to those more likely to come up with more biased answers such as those produced at Talk:Isuzu Trooper. OSX ( talk • contributions) 00:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (automobiles):
Each article shall be titled with the model name used in the subject vehicle's home market, unless a single name other than the home-market name is used in English-speaking markets, and the home market is not English-speaking. In such cases, the article shall be titled with the model name used in English-speaking markets.
Definitions:
- English-speaking refers to the "main" countries of the English-speaking world; that is, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Ireland.
- Home market refers to the market the vehicle was primarily designed for, which is usually the country that the vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered. Where no such market is applicable or cannot be ascertained, it should be assumed the "home market" is the market where vehicle was launched first.
- Manufacturer headquarters refers to the entity chiefly responsible for designing and/or producing the subject vehicle, not necessarily the uppermost corporate parent.
Exceptions: exceptions to the above rule may be granted on an individual case basis to satisfy ambiguous examples. Such discussions are to be held at the WikiProject Automobiles talk page.
10 months later... I have added what has become consensus to WP:CARS/Conventions. It's not perfect due to it having to be scaled back to cater for the slight disagreements, but it is better than what was written previously (which suggested Mazda3 should revert back to Mazda Axela and Lexus IS to Toyota Altezza). OSX ( talk • contributions) 11:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Bank Millennium branch Poland.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Ronhjones
(Talk)
23:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bank Millennium branch Poland.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello PrinceGloria - I have always supposed you to be a new version of Bravada, if I am wrong please take no offense. In any case, a number of pictures you uploaded back in the days have since been deleted for missing certain small details. If you are indeed the same, please help protect your photos here. Best regards in either case, ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 08:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Zilverparkkade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penthouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 04:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, PrinceGloria. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)