User talk:Bravada/Archive1

Welcome!

Nice to meet you here! FSO car factory is awaiting your contributions - you could use the text from that really long GMI post... he he ;) --Dmitry 18:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GMI

Sorry for the lack of comments, I'm too busy with work... maybe I'll find some time after the weekend. --Dmitry 19:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ed g2s • talk 23:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ming, going through and looking for GM related articles to add to / edit. --Michitakem 14:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition

To Bravada, for being able to articulate what I wasn't able to. On behalf of all people who learn using alternative methods, I award you this well earned barnstar Stude62 19:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Bravada has said that he really didn't deserve this (and) taht it would be OK for me to remove the barnstar. Kindness, such as his, deserves to be mentioned and duly noted. Thus I will not remove the barnstar! Stude62 19:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opel templates

See User_talk:Pc13#Opel_timeline for the reworked templates. THanks for the suggestions! --SFoskett 14:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Award

Thank you very much for the award you gave me, I appreciate it a lot! =) --ApolloBoy 01:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liftback

Hi - thanks for communication - yes, I am East side of the Atlantic and in the UK we do not have a term 'liftback', so far as I know. We use the term 'hatchback' for a car-like vehicle with a lifting rear hatch (usually including the rear window). We use the term 'estate car' for the 'vertical back' type of vehicle, which is designed for load-lugging. What would you like to propose, for this entry (which must be relevant to many automobile articles)? I look forward to the discussion. - Ballista 06:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a useful way forward - I look forward to seeing developments. - Ballista 07:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really liked the liftback article. However, I'm not sure it won't earn a 'proposed merge' template, to be combined with hatchback. I've taken the liberty of making a few minor edits and I stumbled over the caption edit (see 'history')! Let's see what happens ... - Ballista 11:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for 'liftback combi-coupe', I have no objection - ref. the edit I did in Saab 900, of course I woudn't have deleted your 'liftback' annotation - that would have been unfriendly and very un-WP! Cheers! - Ballista 11:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've just read your message(s) - a) Your English is GREAT! b) I don't feel that I'm any sort of authority to grant or to deny you the 'green light' to integrate the liftback article - I can't see why not, though. c) I am afraid I didn't follow the Toyota Camry issue. What exactly were you asking me - I'm not sure how to apply the automatic translation from Google, to the Japanese Toyota article to which you referred. Ballista 11:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref. 'Black Hole', yes, it would cause me to crack up, too! I've not ventured into Japanese translations yet - I suspect it's fll of pitfalls like the one you've discovered. Could be worth a 'trivia' entry but might be removed as being a bit POV and negative! Oh well. Ballista 11:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Audi A6; Isuzu Aska; Mitsubishi Diamante; Isuzu i-Series; Nissan VH engine; Chevrolet S3X/T2X; BMW 3 Series; Nissan J engine; Infiniti QX56; Toyota Corona; Pontiac Solstice; Acura Vigor; Asüna; Nissan Avenir; Daewoo Tosca; Chevrolet Uplander; Subaru; Nissan 100NX; Nissan President

Cleanup: Toyota Vitz; Nissan Patrol; Volkswagen LT
Merge: List of GM platforms; Nissan L engine; Saab Sonett IV
Add Sources: Chevrolet Cavalier; Nissan Sunny; FF layout
Wikify: Halo vehicle; Allathur hanuman temple; Nina Kraft
Expand: Tata Indica; Super Sport; Distributor

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:56, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Take Me Higher

The RfC on Take Me Higher was begun by Karmann today. I have asked him to sign it, considering that he started it. Could you hop on over and take a look at the content of my addition (but please, do not alter it) and if you agree with I have said, you may sign in the appropriate area. You may also include any issues that you have with his contributions. But I have to emphasize that I want this RfC to be one that both shares the problem with the community, but takes the high road in aspects. I've left the same message for Apollo Boy.Stude62 17:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bravada!

I live in Russia and specialises on japaneese car's catalogues. My aim is to create a great catalogue of all japaneese cars in the world. The large problem for me is to summarise an information about all specifications of cars which were prodused in european and american markets (especially in Europe). I find much informations in Wikipedia and want to share of mine. I can offer some fotos (copyrighted) of Isuzu cars for speedy completing of encyclopedia. I hope to be accepted to Wiki community.

With the best regards, Shyrish.

GMI project

Dmitry, you appear to be online. Perhaps you might drop in at the GMI subpage? Thx --Bravada 00:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but it looks like I won't be available for anything but very quick'n'dirty contributions until at least mid-May (I'm currently preparing my unexpected ten day foreign vacation which starts in less than two weeks). --Dmitry 21:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ming is in the house, as user Michitakem. -- Michitakem 9:17, 20 May 2006 (CST)

Bravada, regarding what you said about the Jackaroo/Monterey - I remember that for a time there was a 4x4 that Holden sold a while back called the Nullarbor. What was it? Was it another version of the Jackaroo? And why is it that the Holden Rodeo redirects to the Isuzu Rodeo even though the Holden Rodeo is just another version of the D-MAX/i-Series? -Daniel Blanchette 00:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isuzu Aska article

Hello again, I see you left a message on my talk page regarding the Isuzu Aska article. Anyway, the reason why I listed all of the cars related to the third and fourth generation Aska is because there weren't much to begin with; I wouldn't dare list all of the cars related to the J-body Aska, because that would be an even bigger list. After all, most of the North American J-cars were simply redone Chevrolet Cavaliers, whereas the Opel Ascona C, Vauxhall Cavalier and Camira are different in one way or another. Also, I added the other infoboxes just to give a general overview of the second through fourth gen Askas. Hope all of this answers your questions. --ApolloBoy 05:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I edit in a higher resolution - 1152 x 864 to be exact. As for where I got the "Florian Aska" name, I looked at Isuzu's corporate history page. --ApolloBoy 23:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ford E platform

That the E platform is Volvo-based comes from numerous media sources, but I'm not sure I believe it. The specific models and timeline came from Automotive News' Product Cycle report. Again, all insider stuff and not necessarily true. --SFoskett 13:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To expand on this, witness the numerous media outlets that still insist that the new Ford Mustang's Ford D2C platform is based on the Ford DEW platform... And thanks for the award! It's on my main page now! --SFoskett 14:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chair HKDRT award

Hi Bravada. Thanks for the award. Not quite sure if i understood it correctly, but I was wondering which page in your opinion might be the best Wikipedia article ever. Thanks and happy editing -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your good wishes on my birthday. Bobo is soft 20:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks! I love that you noticed, I was surprised actually. Wikipedia really does have great users. Bobo is soft 22:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, brought on here by a hard-core Wikier. Yes, I've been changing up that Corolla page, it has alot of information, and it'll take alot of time to "perfect". Thanks for the greeting!

Mr krisp 09:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry if this isn't the right place to put this, but kewl, thanks. Wan30ate 14:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese articles

Bravada, feel free to send me links to the Japanese articles you want translated. If there's a ton of technical jargon and numbers I may hesitate, but if its basic car info, no prob. -Ming--Michitakem 20:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images in signatures

For what it's worth, images in signatures are discouraged for a number of reasons, listed at that link. Also for what it's worth, users seeking more personalized signatures more typically experiment with unusual HTML entities, colors, fonts, or CSS instead. Some examples:

--Interiot 03:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lancia Template

Hello, it's CBecker. Thank you for explaining the nuances of the template specific to Lancia. I am going to attempt a Volkswagen template using a similar style. But I don't want you to think I am infringing on your creative and technical efforts when I say this. My goal is not to change a few words and call it my own. My goal is to use your template as the preverbial "bowl of fruit" from which to study as an example while creating an interpretation based on it. And when completed, to submit it for approval/use without asking for credit of any kind. You are correct when you say there is a lot of formatting involved! However this is not intimidating for me as disecting code is the easiest way for me to learn it and I have done so on various personal projects in the past. The Wikipedia code is what is currently throwing me off the most, but no worries as it does not seem too complex. And I still have some memory of HTML and CSS for the rest of it. If you have any further concerns, please do not hesitate to address them. --CBecker 02:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lmao! Well hello again Bravada! Good to see I'm not working alone on anything here, hahaha!

Thank you very much for your comments. I think I've got a good start on this. I'm very interested in the Volkswagen model line and history, so that's why I started with this company. I was trying to do as much as possible in one day Saturday, so I rushed some things (with the intention to polish it all up before submitting it), and certainly would not yet call it complete.

In regards to the image: it can be changed at any time by simply re-uploading. I personally own both a digital camera and a Volkswagen, so I can take a *good* shot of the grille emblem no problem. The image I put in there was more for an example for myself to get the size and basic look right. I'm assuming you are talking about the photo of the rear of the B6 Passat Wagon, not the text "Volkswagen" or "Volkswagen AG." I actually did make those both from scratch (not that hard, haha).

In regards to the layout: thank you for pointing out my category mistake. I'll fix it immediately. Oops! As for "further splitting/rearranging models in the template for easier navigation," if you have more specific suggestions I'm all ears. I took a look at the old, clumsy template and decided I'd clean it up considerably. I went through and changed some of the pipe link names, put them all in chronological order of their release, and read at least parts of almost every model page, on the English and German Wikipedias (to make sure I wasn't screwing anything up). Comparing the old and the new, I think you'd agree there is noticeable improvement. However, like I said, it sounds like you might have some hints. Please share!

In regards to my notes: well I certainly did not expect anyone other than myself to be reviewing those, haha! There are a few I definitely want to do, but the majority of them I simply wanted to throw out as ideas on the respective talk pages. Referring back to where I said I was trying to get as much done as possible in one day, I couldn't have read every single page thoroughly or become an expert on every model overnight! That's why I wanted to simply see how others felt about those ideas.

My reason for wanting to split the Polo and Derby is because they are separate articles on the German Wikipedia (and Volkswagen being German I figured they'd know better than an American who has never even seen a Polo or Derby in real life). Their take on it made it seem to me that there was a definite distinction between the two models, whereas the Santana is basically just a different trim level or non-distinct variation of the Passat. The Golf and Jetta are considered distinct, whereas a Jetta Wagon or a Golf Variant are simply non-distinct variations or different trim styles. However, you claim the Derby "didn't have too much life of its own." If that is the case, then I would agree to keep them merged, however I'd like more than one opinion, no offense!

Also, note that the Caddy is actually many models and trims etc., rather than one distinct model line. I consider the first Caddy to be a non-distinct trim/variation of the Golf I and Citi Golf. The same for the second and third (other non-distinct trims/variations of yet different model lines and even companies). However the fourth Caddy, if I understand correctly, is its own model line with many of its own variations. I would make a proposal that the Caddy page be devoted simply to the model line by the actual name "Caddy" (Caddy IV), and merge the non-distinct trims/variations (Caddy I-III) into their respective model pages. If I am unaware of some reason that makes this a bad idea, someone will definitely let me know! Although if I discover that it is in fact produced by VW Commercial Vehicles I will simply remove it from the template altogether and worry about it later!

Good point about separating the CrossFox. I didn't notice how many other model lines had similar variations. I was simply making a note of how different they appeared from each other in the photos.

Also good point about the Country Buggy. There is almost no information (and zero pictures) on Wikipedia about this. If it really was a very different vehicle than the Beetle, I would certainly not merge it with the Type 1. "You don't have Kubelwagen merged into the Beetle do you?" No, but I would support a merge of the Type 1 Cabriolet with the Type 1. Although I don't think the Type 1 Cabriolet even has its own page.

"IMHO, the rule of the thumb should be the amount of information, and currently the info on the Fox page regarding SpaceFox and CrossFox does not merit separate articles." To humbly disagree, I think the rule of thumb should be each separate model line gets its own page, regardless of the amount of information (the idea is to expand the information on each model, yes?), and simple non-distinct variations/trims redirect to their respective model lines (ex: Jetta Wagon -> Jetta). By the way, I didn't know you knew so much about Volkswagen? I think I will enjoy working on this project more knowing I've got someone to give me good pointers along the way. Thank you!

--CBecker 19:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly do not mind the help of a more experienced Wikipedian looking over my shoulder on this project. I could not have asked for a better favor. You are welcome and encouraged to keep on doing exactly what you have been doing. Your description of the Wikipedians involved on the automotive project is somewhat discouraging. I would like to help change that if there's any way that I could. Maybe if just keep working and you keep helping we could get some more people to join in the collaboration and start with that, huh?

Articles: Yes I do understand your point. However it was not my intention to honor any model by praising it with subjective material. I'm not sure if that's what you meant by that or not. Regardless, I think the idea of starting one page per model line is a good idea because it basically personifies the goal of Wikipedia: to build and expand on a single idea to form an ever-increasing database of knowledge. Just because a particular model might not have that much information on it today, doesn't mean that tomorrow an expert on that model won't come along and have a lot to say about it. But I'm in perfect agreement that a simple variation of the base model (like a station wagon version or hatchback version) SHOULD be merged with the main model's article UNLESS it really did live a life all its own (Golf and Jetta are perfect examples).

In regard to your comment about the Santana: I would again like to point out (assuming you are still referring here to my notes) that before merging or splitting an article on a model and its variations, I promise not to simply dive right in and change it (unless I happened to be an expert on the matter). Regarding the Santana, CrossFox, etc., I had not even heard of them until Saturday, which certainly does not put me anywhere near the level of expert on the matter. Before carrying out any bold measures like merging/splitting an article, I will first make a proposal on the talk page and see how others (with better knowledge and expertise on the subject) feel about it.

In regard to your comment about the Caddy: Again you surprise me with your knowledge of Volkswagens! You may be right about the Golf I Caddy. But even if that is the case, I would still recommend limiting the Caddy article to the Mk1 and Mk4. The Mk2 and Mk3 seem to be nothing more than variations of other cars (which should therefore be merged with their appropriate articles).

In regard to the Template: I know exactly what text VW uses in their marketing. It's called "VW Futura" font. I read somewhere it is unavailable anywhere. However, I am always of the opinion that the Internet is an infinitely large space, where anything and everything can be made "available" depending on how determined you are. I found the next closest thing, your basic "Futura Bold" font. And that is what I used. Now, if you think you could locate "VW Futura", it would take me all of ten minutes to redo the text "Volkswagen" and "Volkswagen AG". I will continue looking so that I can perhaps find it before finalizing the VW template. Colors are also easy to redo. I have a program that tells you the HTML value (and several other values) of any color which the tip of your cursor passes over. It would take no time at all to pull the exact color values off any VW picture I find that fits better than the Passat one I have on there right now. But I think I will wait to change the colors until after I have a better photo. Also, for the model lists, well I think having them in order of release is more educational than alphabetical order. Subdividing into classes might work but it raises the question of where the list of models would then be relocated to, and to answer that question I would recommend a template as the most convenient solution. A template that has to link to another template probably isn't doing its job, so the matter should be resolved by simply modifying the original. I don't think what I have here seems too difficult or frustrating to navigate, probably based simply on the fact that the list of cars does not excede 50 different models. But I don't really want to force that idea, because it would make me sound biased toward my work! I of course would much rather make something everybody could say "well, I like the way that looks" rather than something I alone could be proud of! If you have no objections to copying what I have now and making your own adjustments on your user page, I would definitely encourage it! We might reach completion much faster if we have more than one person collaborating on it.

My goal with this template is that once it is perfected, to simply take it, fill in a different picture, title, and colors, and use the same layout for all the companies under Volkswagen AG. So think of this as not only working to complete a template for VW, but also for Audi, Bugatti, Bentley, Lamborghini, Seat, Škoda, and VW Commercial Vehicles. And when people see all that work done, I'm hoping it will motivate more people to collaborate and revamp more templates and articles within the automotive project. Maybe that's a kind of out-there goal, but at the very least we'll have some cool new templates huh? Haha, and so far it's not like I've spent too much time or effort on this, so I don't feel like I'm wasting my energy. Thanks for your continued correspondence!

--CBecker 23:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting my spelling

Dear sir or madam, thank you for correcting my spelling mistake in the article about Ms. Carola Häggkvist. I was taught to type the letter i before e. I keep typing recieve. My English and spelling is not good.

I have a hard time learning and writing English.

Cheers, Starion Wolf

Hi, did you see my answer to your questioin? I typed it on my user page. I can copy it and paste it on this page too. Bye --Starionwolf 03:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lancia

I would work on the name section if it can be enlarged. I would also give info on body parts. And inform yourself of other articles on cars to see what they have that your article doesn't. Lincher 16:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks...

Hi Bravada, Many many thanks for correcting things on the Jane Comerford page and also for all your hints and tips. Indeed, you are right in all you've said and I really appreciate that you sent me that message since I am fairly new and actually have no clue about the laws and copyrights here...- I'm stil learning and I promise I'll try to improve things :) I have never edited on Wiki before and just did it the same way I learnt it in school ages ago...that's why I put a few inappropriate comments in it. I'll take them off as soon as possible! I know Jane a little, I have met her once, went to a couple of concerts before and I'm a great admirerer of her music. She's a great musician, has a wonderful voice and composes lovely songs. She deserved the success she has right now in Germany! I was so pleased to see you started this article! Thank you for all your contributions and your kindness!!! Kind regards Jenny

JennyHelmer has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Fiat Brava/Bravo/Marea/Stilo article etc...

Hi Bravada, tomprice here. My old login details got lost in the virus on my previous computer,so I'll try and find them. The Marea article in particular seems scanty

Cheers

Abarthaddict 15:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiat Marea article

Bravada - I've updated/improved the Marea article; I'm afraid it's still a bit short, so maybe you could add something to it?!

Leave a message if you manage to whack up something. Cheers.

Abarthaddict 06:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Alright. I too had a brief look at the Stilo/Brava/Bravo articles and decided to improve a Renault Modus one - all it said was there might be a 'Grand' version. (?)

Oh, and by the way, feel free to edit the engines part (I don't mind at all). I found that the powerplants listed were terribly out-of date, so I updated them and restructured it a bit.

I'll try and find a link. In the meantime, I've got myself and interesting project. Dunno if you're interested in it, but this kinda caught my eye Perucac

You have my permission (alright, you could do, if you don't like that phrase.) to replace that dreadful picture with something much more flattering.

Right, Bravada, let me set things straight. I appreciate you are under considerable stress, but that was rather uncalled for. I was merely suggesting that the picture used in the original article wasn't the best, and could be replaced. I suggested the Marea on the Brazil homepage, but it seems you took me too seriously - maybe I can get a contact in South America to get me a few pics of a black one, and then that'll be that; we'll have our pictures. BTW - I've deleted the Rumours section on the Renault Modus (can't be fecked to scan and article in from an Auto Express mag - and it doesn't appear to be online anyway). I've found no such article for the Grand Modus either, so that's that stuffed.

Abarthaddict 20:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC) Abarthaddict 18:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bravada/T200 proposition

Bravada, all I did was correct a spelling mistake, i.e. Columbia (a old and somewhat Colonial-era poetic version of America, named after you-know-who) vs. Colombia (which is what I think you were trying to say, also named after you-know-who), but yes I agree with what you say. -Daniel Blanchette 13:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and do that, but if DmitryKo is still around, have him check the article as well. -Daniel Blanchette 17:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How's this for an image for the article?

[1] -Daniel Blanchette 16:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Anyway, the article looks good. Why not move the image that you mentioned in the first box, not the "1st Gen" box? Anyway, the reason why I mentioned that image was because I haven't seen any photo of the Aveo's rear! It's all the front! -Daniel Blanchette 17:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict

Hi, sorry about the edit conflict, I didn't get the "Edit Conflict" message that usually appears so I didn't know what was going on, please feel free to add to the article. Thanks. Regards, Signature ^brendel 23:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daimler-Chrysler

Hi, I noticed you added the {{fact}} to the statement that recent court decisions have made it apparent that the Chrysler was bought by Daimler-Benz. The source is actually another wiki article. Wouldn't that suffice as a source? Also, why did you remove the Jag pic, the LS and Jag share the same angine and manufacturer, yet their VIN makes the LS domestic and the S-Type import, So...? Signature ^brendel 19:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Car portal news

Great job with the Stratus and TVR writeups! --SFoskett 15:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Household

You, see I can spell it correctly! ;-) Thank you for correcting my spelling mistake. The problem is that I just copied "Houshold" and pasted it wherever I placed my wiki links. I really appreciate it! Signature ^brendel 21:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you and I actually found your editing summaries very amousing and do agree that household and human being can live together peacefully. Also, the professional and managerial class articles actually are written in regards to the US upper middle class, so there probably is some POV as they cover phenomenon (sp?) as defined in the US. Thanks for the spell check and those funny comments! Signature ^brendel 21:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see but I really do think they're good articles. I do however see the point of the policy- I guess I am not as good in following policy as a German should be, that's probably the American in me, eh ;-) So, why don't you be the judge when they reach GA status, as the articles are on your watchlist. Oh, and feel wlecome to contribute! Signature ^brendel 03:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel like being a reviewer, as I became involved with the articles. Not only I did some (minor) reviews, but also I don't feel impartial after getting involved with this whole debate. I will think it over though and will try to give suggestions how I think they could be improved. Until then, why not place them on the GA nominations list and wait for some really impartial reviewer to take a look at them. I actually find it much more rewarding (which is the real guilty pleasure we are yearning for editing WP, don't we) to have an article promoted by somebody I don't even know, than by solicitating praise from colleagues. There quite many involved GA reviewers who will surely take a thorough look at the article and give you some insightful suggestions there, promoting it or not - that's my experience at least. Bravada, talk - 03:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, good idea. I wasn't really soliciting and am sorry if that's how my posts read, it was just a friendly suggestion that your advice is more than welcome. Regards, Signature ^brendel 04:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. Just so you know, I didn't actually write most of the class articles. I have taken your suggestions into consideration and have come up with improvements that need to be made. However, as you know I am involoved in discussions and editing pretty much all over wiki so that might take a while, but others user might see our discussion and act upon it. BTW: The article is based on the works of Max Weber and Paul Fussel, both American so I probably won't be able to globalize it. Nevertheless thanks for going through the trouble of giving a peer review. FYI: You misspelled household ;-) Regards, Signature ^brendel 23:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Okay I just read over this discussion and have come to the conclusion that I really didn't express myself very well as to why I didn't follow the GA policy. First, I saw that one article I was working on suddenly got a GA tag in the disucssion page after two years in existance. I though, well this user just added the tag, coming to the conclusion that user just come by a good article and add the GA tag if they think its appropriate. I didn't know about the nominations process until you told me, and by then I was used to just tagging my own articlea unwilling to wait for another user to do so. In other words, your the first one to tell me of the nominations process. Just so you know the whole story. Best Regards, Signature ^brendel 00:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, is this discussion spreading everywhere. Now, thanks for telling me that, this explains a lot. I of course assumed you knew the procedure, and hence I said what I said the way I said :D I am happy we're finally there. Now I am beginning to have a huge backlog here, now you put the passenger vehicles under PR, this is going to be a massive task... Bravada, talk - 00:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln MKS

We are sorry you did not like the article on the Lincoln MKS because of "excessive speculation" and that it seems to "argue a point rather than inform the user". I beg to differ - all the material was extracted from the Ford Press Releases on the subject, and is properly cited with references to authoritative sites. Readers are warned that the article represents a "future automobile" that is subject to change as production nears. Your additional warning banner smacks of a "drive-by" vandalism edit with a hidden agenda, and even if well intended, has the effect of shooting down an actually informative article about an upcoming car. Where are the constructive critical examples of violations? Did you read the Ford Press Releases, or check the references? Or did you assume we all just made it all up out of thin air? We find your tone insulting and demeaning. If you are going to be consistent, and true to your own "wikipedia does not cover future" thesis, then you must add the same self-made banner to all the articles about all upcoming and future vehicles, including the unreleased 2007 models, and all upcoming events: movie releases, political events, etc. Your work is cut out for you. Thanks for your suggestions though, and we will look for the flaws you claimed and try to fix them. --T-dot 12:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Hi, While I don't agree 100% with the tagging of the MkS article I think its useful to have a template to warn users of specultaion, so here it is: {{Speculation}}. Also I have taken this debate to the Wikiproject since I would like to hear more on the issue from other users, espcially as I am able to see your point and T-dot's. Best Regards, Signature ^brendel 22:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nissan Y30/Cedric/300C

Managed to rework the intro but there's no way I can do the whole article. Please pop in and revise it a little - I can't think of nowt else that can go in.

Abarthaddict 17:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talbot Tagora

Hi Bravada, I decided to copy-edit the above article in its entirety. I hope this well help with the FA nomination. I think if you can find one or more pictures of a Tagora with better licensing rights, you just might get your FA! I will change my vote to 'support' soon. Outriggr 06:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If you can't find such a photo, then all the more reason to use the current one and add the "Fair use" rationale, eg. "Public domain photos of this vehicle are not commonly available". Outriggr

I can't express how much I want to thank you! I am a bit under the water now, but I'll get back to that ASAP. It was the best surprise I could ever dream of - somebody actually taking care of the Tagora article when I couldn't :D Thanks an unspeakable lot! Bravada, talk - 00:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lancia template

Hi, I've been trying to build up the Mitsubishi template for a while now, and while I think the content is OK, I'm not nuts on the very bland, Wikipedian style of it. I was very impressed with the Lancia template when you "unveiled" it, as it was exactly the style I'd been aiming for. However, after User:Ed g2s had his logo purge in April, I was wondering - has this template "sneaked under his radar", or have you had any official confirmation that a photo of a logo (especially one where the logo isn't presented at the "correct angle") is OK? Regards, -- DeLarge 21:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I came accross this photo at the Italian Wikipedia and this was my inspiration to create a whole template around it. If you'd click on it, you'd see it's actually a free (GNU-licensed) photo of a Lancia, or more specifically it's grille fragment featuring the logo. Which is why I believe there is no reason why it can't be used and it hasn't attracted any hostile actions (yet :D ). The photo is of absolutely superb artistic quality, and it also includes the tones which are what Lancia uses currently in its marketing, and I used as background colors. I also tried to replicate the Lancia logotype with a serifed font.

So, what you need is basically a super photo of the Diamond Star and a great idea for a layout inspired by Mitsu's marketing :D One fellow WikiProject member already tried this with VW, and this is not that easy, unfortunately... But do try, it's certainly worth it, I believe creating the Lancia template was one of the most satisfying things I ever did on WP! Regards, Bravada, talk - 00:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talbot Tagora photograph

Have a look at my talk page User talk:Ericd. Ericd 20:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have send a mail to the French 604 & Tagora club asking for photographs. As of today I'm waiting for a response. Sorry for anouncing it so late but as it wasn't enough to be a bit overbooked a stupid mistake destroyed a phone cable cutting phone and internet for 900 France Télécom customers incuding me ;-). Ericd 14:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tagora article

The Tagora article is improved, but still needs work on copyediting. The reason I don't go through and fix everything myself is simply that I don't have time to do that for every article I review. The majority of articles brought to FAC need copyediting; if FAC reviewers had to copyedit each of them, it would be impossible to keep up with the nominations. Ask around; there might be a good copyeditor at a related wikiproject who has time to work on the article. Oh, and what I meant about the citations was not that the changes you made weren't good, but rather that you should make sure that the footnotes I didn't check are also good--which you may have already done, and if so, great. --Robth^Talk 03:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mfo

We need to keep an eye on this guy... it seems that now, not only is he bent on inserting his link SPAM into the top of some pages, he's also posing as an admin, and claiming that people will be blocked if they remove it! I checked out his site the first time he did it.. (it's pretty poor) - and sent him an e-mail asking him politely to stop inserting his link on WP like this. He just replied to me today with the following:

Hello Chris

In regards to your e-mail - I will hereby inform you that I have re-added my site to wikipedia.

Listen, do not block me as a user, or interfere with the content added, or I will block you. Try me

Hopefully sorted

M

A guy with issues :) Thanks for helping revert his edits. EuroSong ^talk 16:39, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eurosong, I'll reply here as I don't want this discussion to sprawl over too many pages as it often is the case. What I think should be done is Mfo should be reported to some admins for his repeated breaching of WP rules, and it is quite apparent he knows he does wrong. I guess there is some formal procedure for it, I just couldn't find time to research more thrughly into it. Besides, my brain's simply boiling - I envy you, as probably it's not even close as hot in England like it is here... Bravada, talk - 17:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.. yes, I know the procedure. I have given him one final warning - and if he does it again, I shall report him to an admin. Actually it has been extremely hot in England recently: it's only in the last few days that the temperature has dropped a little bit to more reasonable levels. How is it in Poland now? :) EuroSong ^talk 13:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's see whether he's being persistent... Somebody else started to repeatedly vandalise Carola, so seems like we're in for some "fun"... Anyway, today is actually the first day in like a week to feature any actual clouds, and there are even suspiscions of rain, so it's not that boiling hot anymore - we've been having far over 30^oC Seems like a bit of relief, but still I could hardly have any sound sleep over the last few nights and feel totally unconscious... I bet you were dying to learn that. What-EVER. Bravada, talk - 13:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dziekuje

Thanks very much for the ~~barnstar~~ "Pentastar" Bravada! I already knew you appreciated my edits, but that was kind of you. It is my tendency, if I comment on an FAC (second one now), to try to help the article along. One can expound at length on what's wrong with an article, or just go in and fix some of it. I might be a pragmatist in that regard. Thanks, Outriggr 22:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking your input

Dear Bravada, I am seeking your advice and input regarding the article Eurovision Song Contest. I nominated it as a Featured Article, but it failed - see the page here. Many of the objections arose because there were not enough sources, or they were not properly cited.

I have now gone through the article thoroughly, and along with a few tweaks here and there, I have added many more references. I even bought a hard-copy book in order to ensure that some facts had been published, before citing it as a source.

Now I would like to ask you a favour, as one of the people who objected to the original nomination. Could you please take another look at the article, and let me know if, in your opinion, it looks better - and now up to Featured standard with regards to source citations? I do realise that most of the sources are online ones: unfortunately there has been surprisingly little published in hard-copy about the history of the Eurovision Song Contest, and most of the information that I know myself comes from having simply lived and breathed Eurovision for the past 14 years - attending the Contests, and experiencing the events, stories and rule changes as they have happened. If I could get more "hard copy" to verify this then I would, but it doesn't seem to be out there. It is, however, online. Therefore I have formatted all my web citation templates as best I can.

With regards to many of the criticisms which you mentioned and changes you proposed in the FA discussion, as you can see I have taken much of your advice on board: thank you for that.. I do value other people's input. However there are some things I have not changed, because I disagree with them - and these things are not formal WP guidance as to how articles should be; they're just matters of prererence (for example your suggestion of moving "criticism" into the "voting" section). Anyway...

I am seeking to re-nominate this as a FA. However, before I do so I would value your input, as a former objector. Thank you :) EuroSong ^talk 04:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I went right ahead and submitted it for Peer Review. Please feel free to comment. Thanks. EuroSong ^talk 15:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bravada, thank you very much for your input so far. I greatly appreciate it: due to the things you have pointed out, the Eurovision article is much better than it was before. Even though in its current incarnation I am 99% the writer, your input has enabled me to implement many improvements; the need for which I would not have seen without you :) I don't know how much longer the Peer Review will stay active for - but if you have time, I'd like you to review the points I have addressed, and possibly take on board my responses to those things which will not be changed. I see you're "travelling" at the moment, so I understand if you don't have so much internet time! Where are you: anywhere nice? EuroSong ^talk 01:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris, thanks for all the nice words! I am happy that you found my review of some assistance. Keeping the article and the PR on my watchlist I am seeing all the improvements you are constantly making. However, the whole PR has now grown to considerable size and I just need to be able to put away a bit more time to be able to go through it thoroughly once again - which obviously isn't that easy, especially given all the backlog I have both concerning WP and other stuff (sometimes referred to as real life). I certainly want to get back to that, so it is high on my list.

For the time being, I am in Cologne, where it is being absolutely tropically hot nd humid, which greatly hampers any intellectual activity - but the city is very nice. Bravada, talk - 10:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.. I see you left a message on the talk page of the Eurovision article. Are you back from Köln? Hope you had a nice time :) So... yes, I made a lot of changes, after your useful suggestions in the Peer Review. I addressed all the points which were addressable: the issues you raised which I did not address were things which I considered to be just the way you would have laid out the article if you had been the major writer - for example the issue about the Contest's expansion, when you suggested that the information should be moved elsewhere. I responded by saying that I disagreed, as the expansion is a major theme of the Contest, and needs its own section to highlight the changes. But anyway... I believe I have addressed everything possible, which might serve as a barrier to a successful FA nomination. Before I re-submit it, I shall myself go over every word of the article with a fine-tooth comb just to make sure that everything reads as it should. Lewis R recently improved a few sentences here and there, which is good. But also before I re-submit it... could you tell me now, whether you would give a FAC your support? :) All the best.. EuroSong ^talk 22:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I agree with your comment on the talk page about perceptions of the Contest in different countries. It would be extremely difficult to find well-written, objective, NPOV references which describe the different attitudes towards the Contest. Practically everything I have ever seen on the matter is polarised, either in fan magazines which blindly love the competition, or in the British media where it is trashed with no factual basis. EuroSong ^talk 22:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eurovision Songs

I tend to reply on my own page, but I'll reply here since it's more useful to do so:

There's no reason to assume that all the entries will remain as "permastubs". Just because I don't happen to know that this song was later covered by a particularly legendary Japanese singer or that melody would turn up in another country selling aftershave two years later doesn't mean that nobody knows it. For example, you're a Poland-based editor, so I daresay you'd know more about the Polish entries than I ever will for the simple fact that I don't speak much in the way of Polish. As I see it, what I'm doing is doing the groundwork for others to jump on after me - I'm not one of those people who claims "ownership" of an article beyond a general feeling that I don't like seeing my work vandalised - so I fully expect that over time there'll be a great many stubs converted into fully-fledged articles. Obviously not all of them will be, but that's the mechanics of the thing.
Where lyrics are concerned, you're right that I'm trusting to the Thrush (or my own German, where applicable). Again, as with the general information, someone who speaks Estonian is welcome to explain what "Nagu Merelaine" really is all about, but until they do, it serves as a useful summary. That said, I think we can both agree that one of the great joys of the ESC is that most lyrics call a spade a spade - there aren't any Dylanesque metaphors to deconstruct.
The idea of combining the less notable ones as you've suggested could well be viable, but there are two main caveats I can see:

Some of those pages themselves are looking suspiciously like duplicates of the pages of the artists who won the national finals in question. That's obviously something which can be worked on over time, but at the moment they look like that.
As I said earlier in relation to the permastubs, it's not going to be too easy to decide offhand what is and isn't notable. Even getting a Belgian to adjudicate notability on the Belgian entries and so on would be a bit of an issue, as the notability may well come from the song's life outside the relevant country ("Volare", for example).

That said, I do take your comments and to a greater or lesser extent I see your points. What I'd suggest, though, is that we don't do anything too hastily just at the moment. There'll be time enough to merge articles together once they're all there. BigHaz 13:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of automotive flops AfD

You obviously do not understand the use of AfD. I strongly oppose to such efforts, and I hope this initiative of yours fail. --Arbiteroftruth 17:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My dear Bravada

My dear Bravada, I'm honored that you hold me in such high regard... tho I feel it's quite undeserved! :) Anyway, hun, I want you to know that I'll be glad to help in any way I can. I was about to leave for an hour or so - don't be alarmed, I've taken note of your request, and I'll get to it as soon as I return home. Catch you later, and big hugs! Phædriel ♥ tell me - 21:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, dear, I've examined the discussion in question, and I think I get the picture now. I'll give you my humble opinion, tho keep in mind that it's just that: my own personal impression and my modest advice. I don't think I have an extensive experience in Wiki policies (tho I sincerely thank you for your kind words! ;) and that all I can offer you is my grasp as someone who likes to read the discussions and try and reach an acceptable and NPOV agreement.

The way I see it, there's merit in your appreciation that the mere term "flop" has an inherent personal judgement and its limits cannot be clearly precised in an encyclopedic fashion. On the other hand, the list itself is useful, and although calling a commercial failure "flop" may be questionable, there doubtlessly is a big number of models which have not met its sales expectations. This is one of those cases where a solution can be reached without much consequence and trauma, as long as everyone involved is willing to discuss and reach an agreement, imho. The longer this discussion goes, the worse the personal arguments will get, and trust me, that's useless. I believe Rogerd and Vegaswikian have provided the best solution: since the commercial failure of many automobiles deserve an article; and, since the term "flop" can be considered inherently POV (as you correctly point out, again imho), the best solution is simply to rephrase the name of this list into truly neutral wording; something like, i.e., List of automobiles that were commercial failures. I also understand your concern regarding the contents of the list itself; and yes, tho some models may be doubtless failures, there will always be gray areas when it comes to such issues - it is inevitable. I'd recommend to keep an eye on the list and request for proper sourcing using the {{fact}} template where needed; it is very common, hun. But trust me, the worst you can do is entangle in personal appreciations, so it's best to try to enforce NPOV in the most open way - we all tend to be more receptive if we add a little kindness to the discussion... again, my own 2 cents!

Words to the wise, my dear Bravada, I praise your courage in being bold and posting this for AfD; but if you ask me, I would have tried to discuss it previously with the regular editors of this article at its talk page. I have seen one too many bitter arguments over articles that have been proposed for deletion, disputes that could have been easily and quickly solved through better communication. Still, I believe this case will reach an acceptable conclusion easily, so please, don't worry nor blame yourself over this - I repeat, there "is" merit in your reasoning, and if this episodes helps you to guide yourself in similar situations in the future, then its purpose will be accomplished. Hope this helps you, hun, and if you ever need my help, you know where to find me, right? ;) Take good care, and big hugs! Phædriel ♥ tell me - 23:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talbot Tagora featured

Hi Bravada, Remember to add the {{featured article}} template to the new featured article! (I am going to assume that this is some spoken or unspoken tradition—that the nominator/major contributor gets to add this template.) Outriggr 23:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me of that :D Bravada, talk - 00:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about never responding to your note on my talk page--I've been too busy to edit lately--but I just wanted to congratulate you on the Tagora article getting featured, and to note that the copyedit by Kierant got it to right where it needs to be in terms of prose quality (I wish I'd noticed in time to withdraw my objection). Thanks for stepping up and sheperding the article through the process; it isn't an easy job, but you handled it well. --Robth^Talk 15:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you on behalf of all editors! :D Bravada, talk - 16:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitalk comment

First congratulations on getting your FA! My second question is regarding your comment:
"Oh well, first it was about crappy photos, now that they've improved (though I'd try to clean this camera lens), we went into the "dump all kinds of everything into WikiProject talk" phase. Let's see what comes next..."
-Where you talking about the Wiki project being used as a blog? Signature ^brendel 04:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I have apparently forgotten to answer that - the answer is obviously yes :D Bravada, talk - 08:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DaimlerChrysler

Hi. You wrote, "I guess the EU thing would add confusion, but it's important to note that DCX is headquartered in BOTH Germany and USA - if you REALLY need to have those designations anyway..."

Thanks for the feedback. Question with DCX. I was under the impression that DCX, even though having a "dual-headquarters" was actually for all intents and purposes incorporated and legally based in Germany. Actually, I think a lot of the Germany/USA stuff goes back to the publicity blitz that DCX tried to use to make it look more of a merger than as an acquisition. That is why I just listed it from Germany, because it is actually the real truth behind the matter.

Anyway, yeah, I saw similar designations used before, so I used them here to quickly give the user an idea of where the Top 15 companies are from. Maybe it would be better to go ahead and spell out the countries. Do you have a strong opinion either way on having or not having those labels? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.105.111 (talk • contribs)

First and foremost, I would like to encourage you to log in - that way, you make sure everybody recognizes your edits as done by a single, registered user, and you will not be accused of possible vandalisms and such done by other users from the same IP. Moreover, you will be able to sign your comments in talkpages and in general it's much easier to work within the Wiki community with a fixed login. It takes about 15 seconds to establish a login and then you do not even have to log in everytime, provided you are using the same computer.

As concerns the country issue, I have seen that in auto catalogues and such, whose roots go back to times when the auto industry looked so much different than today. In the days when major automakers are much more of global companies than national ones, it is a bit irrelevant, if you'd ask me. IIRC, e.g. Honda manufactures more vehicles and probably does more turnover in the USA (or America in general) than in Japan.

The "EU" thing - I think it's fairly obvious that given countries are members of the EU to the general readers, and for those who don't know, it's not that relevant anyway. It also creates confusion as to what that means - now it more or less indicates where the company is headquartered, but if you add the EU comment, does that mean that the company is also headquartered in another EU countries, onlyoperates within the EU or what? Just as well one might describe GM as USA (NAFTA).

DCX - whatever the propaganda Kirk Kerkorian fuelled to make some cash in his "palimony suit" said, DCX is actually headquartered in both Stuttgart in Auburn Hills. They always indicate so in official documents. I believe they are incorporated in Germany, as you can't probably have a company incorporated in two countries at a time, but I think that Chrysler Group is actually still incorporated in the US in that form or another. Whatever one might want to believe concerning the "merger" thing, the company actually DOES operate like it had two separate headquarters, much like Renault/Nissan, despite the fact that the latter two are still separate entities by law. Bravada, talk - 08:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome home!

Hi & welcome back - I hope it was a good trip. One question and one piece of information:

I can't find anything on air-conditioning or climate control, on English WP. Am I missing something?
Not a question: I've uploaded some more images (mostly Saab!) onto a sub-page: User:Ballista/Images/Vehicle components, in case you're interested. Please feel free to upload to Commons, if you wish but please don't remove them from English WP!
Greetings and best wishes from the UK and from me - Ballista 12:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that you have a problem - hope all blows over soon. No, I didn't want you to upload, it's just that some people have in the past, so I permitted it - but added that I didn't want to lose them from english WP (last time someone did it, they removed them from english WP!). Not dimwitted at all - I was not giving the full picture. Thanks for the tip on how to upload quickly to Commons - that's very helpful and makes it worthwhile that I approached you. Ref. air conditioning, I did put a request out, for someone to write it (not my area of interest or expertise). Thanks & good fortune be with you. - Ballista 13:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brazillian cars

Hello again Bravada. The Opel Tigra was sold in Brazil simply as Tigra. The front emblem was changed from the Opel to the Chevrolet's which is the GM brand for Brazil (or Latin America, I don´t know). They are the same car. The Opel Tigra article should clarify that (I'll check it). In Brazil the fuel injection was remapped to drop the 110 cv engine to 99 cv due to taxing law (cars under 100cv paid less taxes, so it could be sold with a greater profit margin or lower price or both). The 15' wheels were also exchanged for 14' wheels to lower maintenence price since Brazilian roads tend to destroy tires faster and 15' replacement tires are more expensive than 14's. Here we use the brand names GM and Chevrolet interchangeably, there are no clear distinction among them. Opel is less known because it is from Europe, but I think it would also be used interchangeably if it was more common around here. The Opel/Chevrolet Tigra was imported from mid 1998's until early 1999's. The Dolar was almost paralallel with the Real and U$ 1,00 was worth aproximately R$ 1,29. This valorization of Real was maintained with government intervention and since it wasn´t an actual valorization the government had to drop it's messing witht the financial market so by 1999 the Dolar suddenly (but not unexpecting) reached the value of R$ 3,50 or so. So suddenly the Tigra, which was imported from GM/Chevrolet and not manufactured here suddenly cost more than 2,5 times it´s intented price, so Chevrolet ceased importing it. I was one of the lucky to get my hands on a Tigra and only recently parted ways with it. I now own a Fiat Marea but I will be buying a Chevrolet Opel Astra, which here in Brazil isn´t yet the last Astra model. In fact I don´t know it the Astra sold here is exclusive for Brazilian market. The front is clearly different from the 1998's Astra B, the rear is also slightly changed as also are the tailights. The interior is also a litle changed. So I don´t know how to categorize the current Brazilian Astra in European classification (the brazilian Vectra is also not the actual Vectra. It was a brazilian designf over the Astra platform, with a front very similar to the current European Astra and a unique rear, very, very beutiful.) See pictures from the current Brazilian Astra here. And see more from the beautiful brazilian Vectra here. Regards. Loudenvier 13:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answers to your questions on my talk page:

I understand all Opel and Opel-based cars, both imported and locally made, are branded as Chevrolet in Brazil, and the Opel brand is never used in official marketing, right?

Yes, you´re right. Opel brand is never used. The emblems, car manuals, all are changed to reflect the chevrolet brand and emblems.

I understand that Chevrolet models are also referred to as "GM" in Brazil, e.g. "GM Astra" and the like - this would explain the propensity of some editors to generate articles such as General Motors Astra, which looks absolutely atrocious to users from Europe or North America. Is the "GM" naming only used only in common parlance, or officially too (marketing, press release, technical literature)?

GM is only used in common parlance. Officially and "marketly" all cars are from the Chevrolet brand. But there is another catch: It´s not the Chevrolet Astra. Here we know it only as Astra. You never say, "I´m going to buy a Chevrolet Astra", instead you said "I´m goind to buy an Astra, or a Marea". I´ve also took the liberty of correcting the General Motors Astra issue. It now redirects to Opel Astra and I did moved the contents and the discussion. The history tough are only on the old General Motors Astra article.

I am quite interested in Latin American cars, so I know about the Brazilian Astra and Vectra - I would say the Brazilian Astra can be classified, despite modifications, as Astra B/G, while the Vectra is a sedan version of the Astra C/H. Anyway, I believe the differences between the Brazilian and European models should be explained in respective articles.

I will see what I could do to help.

In general, I think the division of GM models between articles should be sorted out - I will raise the issue on the WikiProject talk page. Stay tuned ;)

All right. I´m waiting :-) Loudenvier 17:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Autobianchi Y10

Done, I'm glad to help in any way possible. --Interiot 14:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maxima

The Maxima is a mid-sized vehicle, always has been, always will be. Never was an executive vehicle. So stop trying to add it as such. Also, the '{{world}}' tag is unnecessary because the problem HAS been addressed and solved. Prosze nie wiecje. Rarelibra 19:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and just so we're clear, I will reiterate for you - the term "executive car" is used "generally to describe a passenger car larger than a large family car" as defined. It also mentions "Equivalently sized cars in North America are usually called mid-size cars", and gives the example of a luxury (or executive) sedan as the 2002 Lincoln Town Car... a full-size, luxury car. It also mentions "there are certain guidelines by which the luxury cars are defined. Currently, that means its Mean Selling Price (MSP) is in excess of roughly US$36,000 or higher" (which the Maxima is not, nor never was). And also, it mentions "Mainstrean Japanese manufacturers (like Honda, Nissan and Toyota) sell slightly more expensive cars than European manufactueres (Opel, Peugeot, Renault) but are considered in the same category as them." Thus, the Maxima is a MID-SIZED car, NOT an 'executive' car. Rarelibra 19:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maxima part II

No, it does not answer my concerns. The Infiniti line was released to be executive class. One statement I found says "In the past, Nissan did not have any strong products to compete in the executive sedan segment, which is dominated by Mercedes E-class and BMW 5-Series." The Maxima is not in the same category as those two. "In Japan, Nissan used to have Gloria and Cedric to please conservative businessmen. That's why Ghosn decided to build a new executive car for the global market." (The Infiniti M, which IS an executive car). "Compared with Audi A6, BMW 5-Series, Mercedes E-class and Lexus GS, the Nissan executive car looks relatively conservative." But since the definition goes as being in the UK, then I see it's validity... especially in light of not having it be biased. If any of the articles need tweaking or rewriting, we can do so to expand on more world-wide models. However, it mentions the histories in Japan, the UK, Australia, etc. - thus, the tag is unnecessary. Rarelibra 19:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The English equivalent of "Ober Mittelklasse" is "upper middle class", not "executive". I think this is getting twisted around due to semantics. You mentioned that the definition states "Cars in Europe's equivalent category to North America's mid-size are generally known as large family cars or executive cars" but that is contradictary in itself, since the executive car definition states that it is "a passenger car larger than a large family car". Rarelibra 20:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]