This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks again! Now to find that park... J S Ayer ( talk) 03:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome.  Stepho   talk  03:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I saw your hatnote revert at Buggy (automobile). Since the page is a non-ambiguous title and the reader presumably came from the disambiguation page already, it seems circular to point them back to the general disambiguation page instead of limiting the hatnote to other automobile-like buggies they might have missed. Regards.— Bagumba ( talk) 02:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

But how do you know what type of buggy they were interested in? How do you know they came from the disambiguation page? How do you know if they were interested in radio control models? Or horse and buggies? Or any of the other types of buggy? Without mind reading skills we can only send them to the disambiguation page, which lists all of the topics they might be interested in.  Stepho   talk  02:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps I am missing something, but is it not reasonable to expect that they are looking for automobiles when they enter WP:NAMB-title Buggy (automobile) instead of plain Buggy?— Bagumba ( talk) 02:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Possibly. But they might also be looking for vehicle related topics such as Horse drawn buggy. Or maybe Gravity racer. Or maybe radio-controlled car. Its hard to tell. As it stood before my revert, it assumed RC cars - which was not neccessarily a true assumption. The disambiguation page is the only thing that has a high probability of being true. If they came from there and didn't like Buggy (automobile) then it is still a fairly safe assumption that they would like to try something else on the disambiguation page. It's a safe bet.  Stepho   talk  12:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

It'd be fair to add Gravity racer to the hatnote. I don't see Horse drawn buggy as being mistaken for an automobile. Cheers.— Bagumba ( talk) 15:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Personally, I've never heard of a gravity racer as being called a buggy. My own natural thoughts would have led me to horse and cart as a type of vehicle. It's not self propelled, but neither is a gravity racer. Others will have different thoughts depending on their background.  Stepho   talk  21:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Hatnote_for_Buggy_(automobile) to get further input. Regards.— Bagumba ( talk) 12:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

i was the one who added most of the sales data and decided to later removed all my entries to restore the previous state to before i started tampering, defacing and adding to it.

also i have no referencing info re badging, undercarriage and other edits. so removed those as well.

-- 99.110.183.132 ( talk) 21:07, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stevo, Woops, that was a Freudian slip by me! Thanks for fixing it up. Cheers, 1292simon ( talk) 01:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

No problem.  Stepho   talk  09:28, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your input to my edit at Toyota 86 re the Toyota 86 Racing Series. Please see my revised edits with references. GTHO ( talk) 10:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I will check it out tonight after work.  Stepho   talk  21:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stepho. Sorry for making the date format inconsistent. I have no preference for which date format is used in any article, the inconsistency is simply due to the citation template using that format, so it isn't something I consciously do. Cheers, 1292simon ( talk) 06:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

No worries. It looks like the {{ Use dmy dates}} template has been modified to transform all references into DMY anyway, so it probably doesn't make a difference any more. Thanks for your hard work sorting the article into shape.  Stepho   talk  10:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Ahhh, good to know. Thanks for your kind words. Cheers, 1292simon ( talk) 11:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Greetings and felicitations. I noticed that you reverted my edit to the Toyota 2000GT article, with the comment "Revert. Spaced dash was better. A website is not a publisher."

Regarding your two points:

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Other dashes, it is incorrect to use hyphens spaced hyphens for interjections; see MOS:DASH for why I used em dashes. If you want I can provide additional citations from printed style guides, such as The Chicago Manual of Style.
• It's true that Help:Citation Style 1#Work and publisher agrees with you, but per MOS:ITALICTITLE:

Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features. Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized ( Salon or HuffPost). Online non-user generated encyclopedias and dictionaries should also be italicized ( Scholarpedia or Merriam-Webster Online). Other types of websites should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

See also WP:5P5. In the spirit of those points, I disagree that a domain name i.e., 007.info) or the name of an organization (in this case The James Bond International Fan Club) should be treated as a "work", i.e., italicized, as the CS2 field "website" does. — DocWatson42 ( talk) 03:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Doc. Please excuse my tardiness in replying. I will give a proper answer tomorrow.  Stepho   talk  14:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, saw your revert, not going to fight it.

Just to expand on my too brief edit note, I found the use of 'decades' gave a suggestion of a longer time period than the reality (really only back to the 1880s for petrol powered automobiles, so only just managing to be multiple decades). That's why I made the change but I was at a bit of a loss for how better to phrase it. Perhaps it should explicitly mention how long automobiles had existed before the Model T rather than a general time period reference? Oska ( talk) 02:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I had the same problem. "Decades" seemed too long but "some time" seemed too vague. I'm open to suggestions.  Stepho   talk  10:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello Stepho, Good points there. Hope you don't mind me clarifying a couple of things, all based on material written by people in the industry so no personal interpretations/opinions. The compressor, CC and turbine as a combination is called a gas generator. The output is gas power which is only able to do anything because its pressure is higher than the surroundings. It gets to ambient pressure either through a propelling nozzle, hence the thrust. Alternatively it gets to ambient through that other use of nozzles the turbine (turboshaft). Or a bit of both for the prop or bypass engine. As you say, the gas generator is the central part of the engine and can be fitted with various loads, the simplest of which is just a nozzle. In fact the same gg with minor modifications can be fitted with any of the loads.

As regards the afterburner, the gas generator provides all the compression only when not moving, progressively less as the intake ram builds up with speed, and ultimately none at all at about Mach 3.2, actual speed depending on particular engine design. At this point the intake is the compression stage for a/b. Cheers Pieter1963 ( talk) 00:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marionette, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Hamilton ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Would you like to respond to a discussion in Talk:Toyota Avanza regarding the use of car names? The names differ due to the store name that car was sold in. 182.30.104.122 ( talk) 09:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Just to confirm, you would say "watch a film on TV tonight" or "watch a film on my phone"? —[ AlanM1( talk)]— 02:33, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I would say either "watch a movie on TV tonight" or "watch a film on TV tonight" - both would feel comfortable to me. However, I would probably never say "watch a film on my phone". Possibly something to do with our mobile phones being designed and marketed mostly by Americans (Android or Apple) and also me being a bit older (ie, not watching media on my phone). Also, with so much media coming from America, Australian youth are using more American words than British words nowadays.  Stepho   talk  10:53, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but I'm cautiously hopeful that a(nother) difficult Toyota-connected question for me might be an easy question for you.

This van had a Toyota badge on the back and another on the steering wheel. And when I look it up on the public face of the UK tax office vehicle database it's been registered as a Toyota. But that's not a Toyota badge on the front and I don't recognise the shape. Presumably from a UK perspective - I found it in England - it's a grey import, first registered in England a number of years after the "declared" date of manufacture at first UK registration. Incidentally, the name I gave it till now is simply copied off what was written on the left-front wing. It look like something that wikipedia calls Toyota Noah, but there's no mention in that entry of any "Elceo edition". Anyhow, not worth losing sleep over, but if you are able, relatively easily, to navigate me through the complexities of the relevant Toyota model ranges, sub-brands etc., I would be grateful. Thank you Best wishes Charles01 ( talk) 15:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, that's a new on for me. Here's what I found: http://www.goo-net-exchange.com/catalog/TOYOTA__NOAH/10014905/ Seems to match the Noah R60 faceelift, including the Noah logo.  Stepho   talk  21:20, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

So ... some kind of Toyota Noah "special edition". And thanks for identifying the "Noah logo". But probably not, from your reaction, one that ever got sold in Australia. (My logic: I have you down as a man who (1) notices Toyotas and (2) lives in Australia.) I wonder if it was just sold like that on the Japanese market, or / and somewhere else round the pacific rim. I should have checked to see if there was any sign of it having had a mirror pointing downwards at the back: but I didn't. Never learn. I used to think that a Japanese market car would have the model name on the side and the name of any special edition using Kanji, but my children, who know more about these things than I do, indicate that even in Japan cars can be badged using Latin script. The MacArthur legacy again. Anyhow, thanks again. Food for thought and a link to some more answers: what's not to like? Best wishes Charles01 ( talk) 06:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Your guesses about me are correct. The Noah never officially got to Australia - it sometimes finds its way here via the grey market but I've never seen one myself. Japanese use Latin-based words the same way that English speakers use French words - a mark of worldliness and sophistication by using phrases from a culture that is (often incorrectly) seen as more successful than their own. Vans aren't really my thing - I prefer mass-market (ie cheap) sports cars.  Stepho   talk 

Hi Stepho-wrs. As you edit many Toyota articles, may as well ask this to you: What do you think of a Toyota Auto Body article? I requested a G7 of an article I created on the topic after someone said to me it could be a copyright infringement, albeit involuntary. It turned out it wasn't. So, I was wondering if it's worth either a WP:REFUND or a recreation. You can read how the article was in this Wikipedia repository. The fact no-one seems to care about its deletion (or tried a recreation) may indicate that an article on the topic isn't neccessary at all. What do you think?. -- Urbanoc ( talk) 21:35, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I have no problem with such an article existing. If I didn't say anything about it being deleted it was probably because I never knew it existing. I probably would have backed keeping it if I knew. My only major critique of it is that it relies mostly on company histories. If there is still trouble reinstating the article then you can always make it a section of one of the existing Toyota articles. Another thing to do is to have appropriate some vehicle articles link to Toyota Auto Body, which has a simple redirect to a small section in Toyota. Once enough articles link to it, then the redirect can e turned into a proper article of its own. That avoids the orphan argument that deletionists often make (ie, that nothing links to it, which is natural for a new article).  Stepho   talk  22:19, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. In view of what you said, I'll request a refund as a draft and submit it to the draft review process. I'll try to address your sourcing concerns. If the draft is rejected, I'll consider integrating the content to an existing Toyota article. Regards.-- Urbanoc ( talk) 15:09, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

The article is in Draft:Toyota Auto Body, if you want to chek it and/or make changes to it. -- Urbanoc ( talk) 02:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

@Urbanoc, Congrats on having it accepted. I added it to {{ Toyota Motor Corporation}}. It will probably take a few days before the servers push it through the page caches or until a page is edited.  Stepho   talk  02:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

The external combustion section needs to be split into 2 sections Indirect Firing - where heat exchngers are used to impart the energy int the turbine External combustion chamber where the combustion chamber sits remotely from the engine - The Compressor, turbine and power recovery turbine in the fluid catalytic cracking unit of most oil refineries in the world are example of large external combustion chambers powering a brayton cycle (with electrical energy output).

I have so good gif files of an indirectly fired cycle that would be good to add to the page but I do not yet know how too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter1975 ( talk • contribs) 12:46, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi! External combustion is not concerned with the location of the combustion chamber - it is concerned about whether the working fluid passes through the combustion chamber. As the article stands, the working fluid passes through a compressors, then a heat exchanger, then the turbine. The combustion process is external to the passage of the working fluid and the heat from an external source is passed in via heat exchanges. Similar to a steam locomotive where the working fluid is water - the working fluid (water) isn't part of the combustion process except for the heat it picks up.

The process you are describing is still internal combustion. Air is sucked in through the compressor, routed to a remote (but still counted as internal) combustion chamber and then the hot combustion products are routed back to turbine. This is similar to a turbo on a car where the piston assembly is reached through some tortuous piping. If the combustion products are going through the turbine then it is an internal combustion engine.  Stepho   talk  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

The Japanese Patent Database has been updated and upgraded significantly, to the point that it now outshines the European Patent databases and USPTO. I am ridiculously giddy, because it connects so many dots and confirms so much hearsay over the years. I also have the story of development for the original Toyota Avalon, but yesterday I discovered so many early 90s patents filed by various Japanese automakers. Many of the "historic" patents are not available in European, UK, nor USA databases. This design patent for the Avalon, was filed on a date I never expected to see of February 17, 1992 (usually does this very last minute, close to intro). It showcases a fully designed 1:1 representation of the Avalon, which takes months to reach a patent after settling on the final styling.
Crosschecking both my Motorfan source and the patent, the design of Avalon concluded rather early (for a late 1994-1995 release), by the middle of 1991 and the design freeze was completed by early 1992. Toyota lawyers then filed for patent on the 17th of February, it seems. Seems that Japanese manufacturers had ridiculously high lead times in the 90s, considering that the Avalon barely entered production in September 1994. Usually Europeans were guilty of taking that long (ie W140 S-Class was finished in 1986).

Not only that, a design patent filed in 1988 for the ES 300 for an alternate design proposal, which echoes second generation LS 400 and pre-dates the final design finished in late 1988.

Anyway, I really recommend you use the patent database, if of use to you. Just use the category "G2210" for classification, to narrow your search and then for dates "20190101" to "20190615" for example. I have never seen so many automotive design patents ever, because it includes those for various global automakers and dates back into the 1980s. I'm going to find more, plus maybe one of these coming weeks (time permitting), start dissecting my library of MotorFan vehicle development stories and making them publicly accessible, with design photos, timelines, and etc.-- Carmaker1 ( talk) 04:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

That's excellent news. Always good to have more (and earlier) sources.  Stepho   talk  21:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Do you know where https://www4.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/eng/ishou/iskt_en/ISKT_EN_GM402_ToItem.action is supposed to point to? I found it in Lexus ES.  Stepho   talk  22:28, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed that you reverted my edit on Toyota Century. The link was in fact broken, and I actually fixed the redirect some time ago. The edit on Toyota Century was made before I fixed the redirect itself. I hope that clears up any confusion. Thanks. William2001^{( talk)} 08:28, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

I must be missing something. If the redirect was fixed a long time ago then how was the link broken? I tried it out just before I did the revert and it goes to the correct place.  Stepho   talk  08:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

I see your revert of my recent edit. I took it out of that sentence because the other types that are listed there are specific rail car types that are and have been historically used in regular service in regularly scheduled passenger trains worldwide. While I don't doubt that prisoners have been transported by rail, in 40 years of model railroading and research, I have never seen or heard of a prisoner car being used as a regular part of a regularly scheduled passenger train. More clarification is needed for its inclusion in the article. Slambo (Speak) 18:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion about an article are better done on the article talk page so that other editors can contribute. I have answered at talk:Passenger car (rail)#Prisoner transport by rail.  Stepho   talk  22:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Re:your post irt 1/2 vs ½ and letter spacing, I've added the following to my userCSS which helps me a lot that and increasing line height may help u2 --GSMC(Chief Mike) Kouklis U.S.NAVY Ret. ⛮🇺🇸 / 🇵🇭🌴 17:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

#bodyContent { letter-spacing: 1px ; }

Thanks but I get a similar effect by running the browser at 110% zoom. I also did a pixel count using Windows built-in zoom lens at 800% (which I don't normally need to read). With anti-aliasing turned on, default fonts and using no browser zoom (ie 100%), a normal 2 takes up 6 pixels, the 2 in ⁠1/2⁠ takes 5.5 pixels, the 2 in 1⁄2 takes 5 pixels and the 2 in ½ takes a mere 3.5 very blurry pixels. At 110%, add 0.5 to each.  Stepho   talk  19:40, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Toyota Supra ren0 ^talk 08:06, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

?  Stepho   talk  10:13, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Good morning. Can you please join the discussion at Talk:Toyota Yaris (XP150) to talk about the Yaris lineage? Thank you. 180.252.236.111 ( talk) 23:27, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stepho, thanks for the message.

I found them on some online articles that publish the sales figures from VFACTs.

I am however unsure as to how to add them in as a reference

Kind Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by GT3911 ( talk • contribs) 02:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Send me the URL of the first reference and I will format it for you. You can then use it to figure out the rest. It's not hard once you get past the first one.  Stepho   talk  10:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

-- User:Martin Urbanec ( talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the edit to Nissan Leaf regarding model years. I'm all for WP:WORLDVIEW. I'm looking at model year and I'll try to update Leaf accordingly. Is there any WP policy / discussion / consensus on dealing with model year? Asking because I see you take an interest in the topic. -- Cornellier ( talk) 21:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the message. The convention is at WP:MODELYEARS as part of WP:AUTOCONV.  Stepho   talk  21:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Guess we gotta get cracking.  Mr.choppers |  ✎  23:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Here's an archive of an old Geocities page for police/ambulance vehicles using the B and F engines. https://web.archive.org/web/20100725092654/http://www.geocities.jp/toyota_corolla1200/crown-pc/crown-pc.html  Stepho   talk  09:46, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

And some more F engined police cars:

• http://nostalgicpc.jp/fhbh26.html
• http://nostalgicpc.jp/nichimo01.html
• Japan WP Patrol cars (with a severe lack of references)

And of course Japan WP F engine gives a nice list of the trucks from FA5 onward.  Stepho   talk  10:07, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

And also of course https://forum.ih8mud.com/threads/toyota-fq-15.87882/  Stepho   talk  10:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Those cop cars are weird and make me uncomfortable, like the KGB's V8 Volgas and rotary-engined Ladas. The early models look like something Vogons would drive...  Mr.choppers |  ✎  13:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Resistance is futile! Yep, I've got the trilogy in 5 parts. Loved the TV series when it came out in the 80s.

Imagine knowing that most of your colleagues have a 1.5 L engine and you have a 3.8 L in essentially the same car. I've heard similar stories for cops really enjoying the early BJ and FJ's as cop cars. There's also the BH28 and FH28 ambulance.

Rotary engines in Ladas is new to me. That's gonna keep me occupied for an hour or 2 ...  Stepho   talk  13:52, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Unconfirmed: the two-rotor engine (1146cc, if that sounds familiar) was also installed in the RAF-2203 - finally a Mazda Parkway competitor.  Mr.choppers |  ✎  15:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stepho - I was looking for some info on the F engine and got bogged down in 1938 thanks to the marvelously informative Toyota website (see my contributions). Anyhow, I reached the Toyota BX, which spawned BZ/FX/FZ derivatives. Then these got a new grille and became the BA and FA, with shorter BC and FC models added briefly thereafter. So far so good. But then the BA was discontinued in 1956 while the FA (and later diesel-engined DA models) went on to be produced until 1978 for Japan and 2006 globally. I had been adding BA/FA information to the BX page, but the FA definitely needs its own article - what do we call it? I'm thinking Toyota FA/DA, but perhaps you have a better suggestion? The BA is but a footnote and I don't think it should be represented in the title. Best,  Mr.choppers |  ✎  04:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

The Toyota ID manual lists the "Heavy Duty Truck" covering the DA110, FA100/, FC100, DB100, FB100. Each is listed as being from March 1969 onwards (with a note saying that they actaully started earlier but that the manual only started from 1969). The FC seems to be the short chassis version of the FA and the FB/DB is the same chassis with a full-size cab-over bus body (not a bonnet bus). These seem to be the successors to the BX/FX. I'm 50/50 whether to create an article called Toyota Heavy Duty Truck or Toyota FA to cover them all, with redirecions covering the other model codes.  Stepho   talk  06:14, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

The original BA/FA arrived in 1954 (diesel-engined DA in 1957), the second generation in 1964 (that's the one covered in your manual). I support Toyota FA except it is called ja:トヨタ・DA型トラック in Japanese WP as that was the most numerous model.  Mr.choppers |  ✎  13:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I have a preference for the FA article because the series started off as the FA5, then FA60, FA70, etc with the D engine a relative late comer. BUt I don't feel strong enough about it to rock the boat. I'm also don't have a lot more info about the trucks and books seem to be lacking. I looked in a "50 years in motion" an d"the first 50 years" but trucks don't come up much in them (except the G1/GA). Japanese WP doesn't have lots of references, so it's hard to use the facts there except as keywords in internet searches. I will dig through my older 1950s brochures to see what I've got but I'm sure I have only 1 or 2 trucks mentioned in total.  Stepho   talk  14:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I guess since the BA and FA were introduced simultaneously that will work. The FA5 was an upgraded model released seven months after the initial series. I am going to a Lucia party now but might start work later tonight. Best,  Mr.choppers |  ✎  15:31, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Just saw the work you did at Toyota FA. Excellent!  Stepho   talk  07:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

G'day Stepho,

Thank you very much for fixing the problem with something in my table formatting in the Long combination vehicle article on 6 December ("You broke something. Let's try it a different way.")

As is my habit when doing something like that, I checked the display with two browsers, but that didn't reveal anything; however I use a Mac and very occasionally it will function differently from Windows machines.

I'm contacting you to see whether you could add a top cell, equivalent to what I had done in my coding, so that instead of two differently worded cells being visible, only one overall "heading" cell appears. That would improve the accessibility, I think.

I forget why I looked at the article -- I'm only (very) peripherally interested in the subject. I see there may be some controversy about whether or not to display the graphics of trucks. As a compromise, it might be worth considering putting them in a container -- as with the several examples at https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Editing_Wikitext/Pictures/Images_in_Containers

Cheers, Dugald.  :-) DAHall ( talk) 03:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I would just like to point out that when you undid my edits on the gallery, you undid what would have been the final reversion of the section. Urbanoc and I found middle ground when he undid my massive gallery (which has been removed before by Cornellier, but for the wrong reasons) saying that there were too many photos, so I undid their edit, reduced the amount of gallery photos from 21 to 14, and then I was sent a thank from Urbanoc.

I just that I'd point that out before the section was locked.

Have a good Christmas. WaddlesJP13 ( talk) 11:06 PM EST, December 25th, 2019 / 4:06 UTC, 26 December 2019.

Personal agreements between 2 editors that is done outside of the article talk page is 1) confusing to other editors, and 2) not binding to other editors. I'm happy to discuss things at talk:pickup truck.  Stepho   talk  06:33, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

I affirm images should be kept at a minimum and for illustrative purposes only. We shouldn't be worried to let out some, and I do thanked WaddlesJP13 because he trimmed his list. People always will be dissapointed if the thing that they find interesting/important isn't included. In any case, that's the guideline here, if people want to have German Wikipedia-style articles, that should mean a change to the guidelines themselves. I'll comment in the article's talk page -- Urbanoc ( talk) 13:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Could you please help me to know how to reach consensus about which measure units for wind speed to use for European storms? UK users pretend to show mph forst, whreas contributors from other countries use SI units (km/h or m/s).-- Carnby ( talk) 10:50, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Consensus is always hard to reach because everybody believes the units they use are the best and that everybody else is mistaken. If the wind speed is for the UK or the US then mph first is appropriate. For the rest of the world, metric is first. Grey area is for storms crossing between the UK/US and international borders. WP:UNITS covers this. The latest discussion of this was at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers/Archive_159#Wind_speed with no real resolution. You can start it again at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers if you feel the need but it will probably get a a chorus of "not again!"  Stepho   talk  11:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

The problem in this case is that a storm usually affects more than one country, i.e. a storm hitting the UK likely has effects also on Ireland and some Continental Europe countries, which are metric. My proposal was to use mph for a storm that mainly hits the UK and metric in other cases.-- Carnby ( talk) 11:59, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

All that is true and your proposal sounds reasonable. Now all you have to do is to convince editors who believe their method is better than true and reasonable by virtue of it being their method. You may detect some jadedness in my answer :)  Stepho   talk  12:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)