User talk:Bravada/Archive2

list of cars AFD invite

thank you. dposse 16:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Automobiles

Hi, please see WikiProject Automobiles talk page; it's important! (I also need help with some articles too!) --TheM62Manchester 17:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The vandalism notice

I only used it so I could subst: it, to inform you of WikiProject Automobiles. Sorry --TheM62Manchester 17:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your TV question

That's The Pretender (TV series). You're welcome! Karen | Talk | contribs 17:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Automotive lighting

Greetings, please see talk:Automotive lighting. Thanks! --Scheinwerfermann 22:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I am writing to inform you, and many others, that an AfD in which you voted delete, List of automobiles that were commercial failures, was already unsucessfully nominated a short time ago, but under a different title. This was not noted in the nomination. Please read the opposing arguments here, and reconsider your vote. Thanks! AdamBiswanger1 23:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being up front about the omission of the previous AfD. I appreciate it-- AdamBiswanger1 00:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FA question

Hi Bravada. Since you seem to be quite knowledgable about the different statuses which are awarded to articles on WP, I am asking you this question. If I nominate one of my articles that just got GA for FA status but it does not succeed as an FA nominee, does it retain its GA status? (I'm not talking about Passenger vehicles in US). I couldn't find a clear answer for this, so I though you could help me with this question. Thanks. Signature ^brendel 00:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I asked the question on the FA talk page, it does-so never mind. Signature ^brendel 05:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autobianchi Stellina

Hi, about your question about DYK and suggestions about similar things. When I update the template I don't mind if similar topics (eurovision entries, english and french houses seem to be popular at the moment) pop up every day or two as long as the article is good quality and the hook for the DYK template is interesting, if the blurb is boring and we're not short on suggestions I'll pass over something that there has been a lot of recently. Hope that helps. Keep up the good work. --Peta 09:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Love Me Tonight (song)

I've added some links (lyrics and performance video) for Angelica's song, which might help it get over the line in a DYK sense. Not totally sure that it's not a stub, though, which is what's going to kill it when push comes to shove. BigHaz 09:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for the apple pie award, I apreciate it. Also, an idependent review is a good idea as we just need to agree to disagree on Passenger vehicles US meeting of GA criteria. Regards, Signature ^brendel 16:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates

For what it's worth, please don't remove {{AutomobileWatch}} from any categories... you're free to change the contents of the template to use your new one, but don't replace that specific template from categories, as I have an upcoming feature that relies on them.

Also, I don't think I'm against your ideas. In the latest case, I'm just personally interested in a single list of essential articles, rather than four separate lists.

Anyway, with a small bit of fiddling, it should be possible to have lists of articles display both on separate "task force" train-style pages, as well on one single "essential articles" CVG-style page. Would it be okay if I went ahead and made that happen once the task force pages get underway? --Interiot 12:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really have any experience with bots, and don't have the time at the moment... sorry. Maybe another wikiproject has one that they can make work here. Even CVG seems to update theirs by hand though. [1] The ratings don't often change, do they? --Interiot 14:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, hopefully they would - the thing is that compiling and keeping the list up-to-date would be quite cumbersome and one small mistake could have disastrous consequences. Perhaps you know somebody who has experience with bots that we could approach for help? Bravada, talk - 14:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YooHoo

Hi there, did you see my message which I left a few days ago under "Seeking your input" (above)? Maybe you missed it, buried in the middle of the others. I hope you are well. EuroSong ^talk 14:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noooo... I have no reason to hate you! It's quite alright that you've been busy: I understand. I was just checking that you had actually seen the message, that's all - since it was rather hidden in the middle of everything else. Just reply whenever you are able :) EuroSong ^talk 17:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know: Eurovision Song Contest is up for FAC again. You get a mention :) I hope that the article is up to your lofty standards this time, hehe. Really, I'm serious: your input has been wonderful. Even though 99% of the work for the article in its present form has been done by me, much of that work would not have been done at all if it had not been for you and your useful advice, pointing me in the right direction. Thank you. I now truly believe that the article is great. I hope you are able to support it. Have a good night! EuroSong ^talk 01:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, thank you for the "12 points" :)

Okay, so three things:

1) Thanks for pointing out the fact that IE won't display the hair-spaces either side of mdashes: that's what happens when I use Firefox! I have replaced these with regular spaces.

2) I do agree that the FA criteria should be high: that is why I have waited until now, as I believe this article is great after all the improvements made, and I do not believe there are any more addressable points. Your own reservations seem to come from your own preferences, and not addressable concerns which are rooted in WP policy and guidelines. Surely everyone has their own way in which they would write any particular article, and if every person objected on the grounds that "they would write it differently", even though there is nothing wrong with the article as far as WP guidelines are concerned, then no article would ever become featured.

2) I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the "Expansion of the Contest" section.. although I would like to know exactly why you think it is POV. You said that there are undertones which imply that "Eastern Europe destroyed Eurovision". Well, I can't see a single sentence which says, either directly or by implication, that the Contest's expansion is a bad thing. In fact, the result of all the expansion is that we now have two shows: the semi and the final! That could be taken as a good thing; certainly it provides more entertainment for fans, such as myself. Personally I am not against the expansion, and welcome the new countries: they have provided us with many wonderful songs, which I love. Therefore it is hard for me to imagine how I could have had any subconscious undertones of negativity when writing that section. The only one problem I have with the new countries is that in some cases, they make it even more obvious that there is neighbourly/block voting. However, the expansion section does not touch upon voting at all: that is dealt with in the "criticisms" section, which itself does not even mention Eastern Europe, and even steers clear of it by giving Greece and Cyprus — old-timer Eurovision countries — as examples. Really, my bottom line on this point is that the expansion is a major theme of the Contest, as the past ten years of its history have produced more changes to the Contest's format than any other period. Most of these changes are a direct result of the fact that there are more countries wishing to enter than it is possible to host in a single show. Therefore this theme needs its own section, which explains in context exactly how and why the changes happened. To incorporate the information elsewhere in the article would be to down-play it, and to make it a lot less clear exactly what happened. If you still feel that the section is POV, please give examples of specific sentences which you believe imply that the expansion was a bad thing, and I will take a look at them. If there are no such examples you can find, then surely you must then admit that it is not POV. Oui?

3) The Criticisms section. In the Peer Review, you said that a discussion about musical styles and performances should have its own section. I have thought about this. I would like to be able to give it its own section, but I don't really see how such a section would be encyclopædic and comprehensive. I mean, there are so many styles which have been included in the Contest.. it's almost like proposing that we discuss every single song. If I were to create such a section, then it's hard to see what justification I would have to highlight particular, individual songs above others. When I wrote the article originally, I really tried to stay clear of talking about the actual songs, because: a) it would be difficult, if not impossible, to make the discussion encyclopædic; b) as songs, by their very nature, are artforms to be judged (especially in such a competition!), it would also be next to impossible to write about them in an NPOV way; and c) such discussions about the music of the Contest would be an open invitation to editors to edit that section and include their own POV. I therefore decided to only mention something which is directly referenced, which is an example of the criticism which the Contest faces.

Thanks again, EuroSong ^talk 09:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WatchlistBot

I don't think it would be too hard. Right now, I'm working on a couple of other things, and trying not to get sucked back in to spending too much time on Wikipedia (it's not working). I want to say that I'll consider it and get back to you much later, when I find time. Knowing me though, I'll probably get to it relatively soon. No promises. I don't think it will even take much change from what I already have, but that's easier to figure out once I can actually try to do stuff. So, let me know when your template is done, and where you want me to put the article lists, etc.

Also, my bot can be used to tag articles in the project once you get your template done. It won't be able to categorize them, but might make it easier to find them. It's only good at tagging all articles in a category though, not picking out which ones apply. Ingrid 16:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I wonder if you're aware of Mathbot which does some list related work for 1.0 assessment. Ingrid 16:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the problem, but the list is too long to fit on one page. All articles are on the main page, but if you're interested in other types of pages (talk, templates, project pages, etc.), you'll have to look at subpages. Ingrid 15:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TF

Okay, I add the design task force as many article completely lack info on design. See Mercedes-Benz E-Class or Toyota Corolla. They are mere listing of engines and options. I will think over this task force as I see your point-you want to assign specific article's to a certain task force. Also, as w/ luxo cars, yes the boundaries would be somewhat vague as they include some companies such as Volvo and Saab which are soetimes seen as lux, but it is these gray areas where a lot of POV sometimes hides as people try to make their semi-luxo car out to be luxo cars. Again, for now I have put my name under the NA TF. Guessing from your comment on my talk page a POV removal TF would also be against the original idea wouldn't it? Signature ^brendel 19:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Triumph 1800 Roadster + British Cars Task Force

I have changed the image as requested and also touched out the balloons in the background that were tied to the car.

I am thinking about the taskforce. Did you realise that you have the definitions of the tasks under UK and France switched over?

Malcolma 08:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Barbara Dex

You don't happen to have any pictures or footage of Barbara and her dress for the article, by any chance? I've been trying to find some, but I'm coming up blank which is unusual given the fame she enjoys in ESC circles. BigHaz 08:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Japanese Cars Task Force

I didn't notice that task force (actually I never actually read the list properly :( ), so thanks for informing me of it!

With regards to the notice on the Category:Keicars, I wasn't sure how appropriate it would be (I couldn't find anything at all about writing text like that in any cat guidelines), and probably didn't word it as well as I should have. AFAIK all those cars are kei cars in Japan, it's just the export versions can differ greatly and some articles currently only refer to the European models. Some may be the same car, or the same car with a larger engine exceeding the 660cc kei car limit. Then there's some which are all over the place - the Suzuki Alto sold in Europe has been since at least the early-mid '90s made in India, is rarely (if ever) based on the JDM Alto (IIRC the model in the picture is based on the Suzuki Fronte, and the one after that is based on the Suzuki Cervo Mode), and depending on when/where/what spec they may or may not conform to the kei restrictions - usually they're just older JDM Suzuki kei car models with larger engines stuck in them. And then there's stuff like the Wagon R, in which the Euro models where never really kei cars, though are based on the original Wagon R which is one.

And then you have to couple all this with the fact that most of these articles are sporadic at best in content right now. My idea with putting these articles in this cat are that (i) though some articles may currently have nothing about the JDM kei car sold under that name, they should, and hopefully will in the future (and I'll try my best to fix this), and (ii) if there is significant content about both the JDM kei car and the loosely-related export/foreign-built model that goes by the same name, the article should be separated into two, with only the standard-compliant cars staying in the keicar cat.

(I've copied most of what I said here into the cat's talk page) --Zilog Jones 11:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology?

None needed whatsoever, my friend! In retrospect, I once read a story by Roald Dahl named The Hitchhiker, which was made into short French film called "l'Auto-stoppeur". I knew of this and still didn't make the connection! We shall share the cookies. Have a good rest -- Samir धर्म 00:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam

Yes I've reverted it-also he knows Wiki (and me-sigh) so I will put him on the 3RR noticeboard after the fourth. Signature ^brendel 01:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Infobox

I think I've got the hang of it now. I'd been avoiding it for so long because it looked complicated, which it is in a coding sense but not at all in a using sense. BigHaz 12:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of automobiles that were commercial failures

Hi, I just want to say that I am not trying to obstruct you on this AfD for any other reason than I simply don't agree. This is probably the stance of most other people advocating to keep the article. Your comment that you are "still waiting" for me to explain how to get profitability from company figures is a little impudent, to use your words. You also say that you find the scope of the arguments annoying. Perhaps you may find it easier to discuss individual's points of view on their own talk pages. By no means would I presume to tell you what to do but my advice is to try not to make this so personal, accept that not everyone agrees, and just let the AfD run its course. I hope there are no hard feelings. Mallanox 00:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how the educational system in Poland works but I hold a qualification in business practice at advanced level in the UK. This covers understanding of profit/loss accounting amongst many other subjects. In the UK account keeping must be meticulous and as I said on the AfD the results are available for every company operating in the UK at any time (provided the fee necessary to obtain it from the registry is paid). A precised version is provided to all shareholders. The problem for me is that I have no idea whether the rest of the world has such transparent accounting practices, and the UK has precious few car manufacturers left! I suppose a short version of all I have said above is that I would be confident to try researching it if the company were based in the UK, if not I would not know where to start! Mallanox 00:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Your qualification is superior to mine though that's largely I guess because I have taken a different path through life. I have been a company director of a road haulage firm, though related, it's a far cry from manufacture. I have abandoned this kind of work and am now working in banking services in the field of the prevention of money laundering. Again, obliquely but not directly related to accounting. I doubt either of us are going to try, and given the international nature of the article, as individuals we would find it an impossible task to verify everything in the article. I doubt we would be able to get enough willing co-operation to do it especially as a cost would almost certainly be incurred. I guess the bottom line is that the AfD will be decided on issues other than this. We've gone a little bit off on a tangent here but there's no harm in that! Mallanox 01:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The rich get richer...

Living in Poland perhaps you don't appreciate how extensively the slogan is used in US politics and media, but that is your privilege. Gazpacho 01:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simca Vedette

Hi Bravada. I don't know very much about old cars, but since I can read portuguese fluently I will be of great help when things come to cars produced or imported in Brazil. I've already found a work by the brazilians José Rogério Lopes de Simone e Paulo César Sandler entitled "Simca - A história desde as origens” (Simca - The history since the beginnings). A quick search was already productive: [2] and [3] seems to have good information. Today it's Dad's Day here in Brazil, so I will come to my dad's house to enjoy a Sunday lunch and a great afternoon together with my family, perhaps tonight or by the week I'll be able to come up with something new. Regards. Loudenvier 11:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK images

Hi Bravada, yes it would be fabulous to have more images. It takes quite a bit of time to update DYK and having to find images prolongs things even more. Would be really great if you could help find free images. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 00:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simca Vedette

Hi - Glad to be of help but please don't expect 'too much' expertise. Main French interest is in Traction Avant & DS Citroens. - Ballista 04:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On DYK now! Thanks for the article and your help at DYK. -- Samir धर्म 06:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, the unicorn fish had its air time. The Vedette's on now. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 12:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop selling your English short - it's excellent and beats many natives! - Ballista 03:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I've done a 'make-over' - how do you like it - can obviously do more, if you wish. - Ballista 05:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you can ask me to do a summary - I hope I am up to the task - let me know when this is needed. By the way, I shall be away for 3 weeks, from about 12th September. - Ballista 16:40, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to have messed up your system! I just feel that it reads better without all that bold stuff and I cannot see what the bolding does for the article, but, as you say - personal tastes vary. I shall be very happy to leave all the bolding in place, in future. - Ballista 05:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note - no thanks, I shan't vote for a change - I just hadn't seen that the system was already laid down, so had never observed it - perhaps I'll take a look at some of my previous edits and created articles ...... - Ballista 05:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Automobile Barnstar?

Hello, Bravada. First off, thanks for your kind note. :) I've looked over some of the discussion at WP:BAP and WT:WP Automobiles, and this design really stands out. It's probably more creative, elegant, and fitting than any design I could come up with for an Automotive/Automobile Barnstar. If you'd like to contact other graphic designers who might be able to help out, some users named at WP:BS include Deathphoenix, David Levy, ClockworkSoul, Brian0918, and Smurrayinchester. Hope this helps. Regards, Sango 123 18:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Automotive Lighting

Hi, Bravada. If you'll duck over to Automotive Lighting, you'll see I've been hard at work whipping existing references into shape and adding new ones. It is slow work and I expect it will take some time before the article is as exhaustively sourced as it ought to be. I have still not yet settled on the best formats for several types of cites, which is why you will notice inconsistency. One thing I have not figured out how to do is to re-use cites. That is, if there is a particular source that will be cited more than once in the article, I would like to be able to have all instances of that cite refer to the same reference number, if possible. I'm also not yet pleased with how to reference the ECE Regulations. Not only is each of them an individual PDF, but there are also revisions and amendments to many of the regulations, and each of those is its own PDF. I will keep thinking about how to rework this for maximum ease of use. Wiki contains excellent cite templates for books, journals, encyclopædias, websites, even Usenet posts, but none for technical standards, which would help out considerably in this case. I have not yet looked into what it takes to create a new template, but perhaps I will do so this evening or tomorrow. In any event, interested to read your thoughts! --Scheinwerfermann 21:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know this van?

Hi Bravada, I took this picture the other day in Brigg. I have to say this is the first time I have ever seen one of these. I guess it is not British made as it is LHD and has beam deflectors. The badge reads Taurus TRANSIT. So far my googling has proved unsuccessul. I would appreciate any suggestions. By the way I got consent to use any of the Argentinian Fiat 125 Club images as we talked about. I simply have not got around it yet. Regards, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 23:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Taurus Transit.jpg

Absolutely amazing! I am so glad I asked you. Not to worry about it if you are busy right now. I will be on holiday next weekend for just over a week and do not reckon I will have time before Friday either. In any case, I will take up your offer for later on. Thanks a lot. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 00:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More photos

I took this one today. I drove past the car and felt the need to turn around. Too pretty to let it go without a pic. I guess it is a Fiat Dino but it was just badged as Dino (i.e. no Fiat badge anywhere to be seen). Any idea? E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 01:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

its a 1966-1970 2 liter ferrari V6-engined Fiat built Fiat Dino Bertone 2.0 coupe. you're welcome.

Nominator DYK

I don't know when that template got added to the routine, but I don't tend to use it. To be honest I think that the writer of the article deserves the credit and encouragement that the talk page template provides, not the nominator. --Peta 11:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: GDFL-something issues

I'm not... really all that seasoned of an admin. But I am a self-professed anal copyright something or other, so I'll do my best. :)

Yeah, GFDL work can be modified and redistributed anywhere, as long as it's still tagged with the GFDL license. Since it sounds like it's useful across several wikipedia projects, it might be a good idea to post it to the commons (which accepts PD, GFDL, and a few types of creative commons images). Otherwise, it'll definitely work on en.wikipedia.org as well. --Interiot 11:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are distinct benefits to allowing the content to be used for commercial purposes... Answers.com can generate advertisement revenue off our content, and use some of that money to fund our bandwidth [4]. Wikipedia can generate printed books of the articles, sell them on Amazon, and use that to fund Wikipedia bandwidth/servers/development (can't find the link, but it was mentioned somewhere in Wikimania). The $100 laptop can distribute our content to poor countries. [5] And while it's not directly using our content, it's a closely related corporate project... Wikia is advertising-supported, and on top of that, they got venture capital for the project, some of which will go to fund Wikipedia as well. [6]

There are some protections in the GFDL as well though... Corporations can't use our content and pass it off as their own... in fact, they're supposed to credit you and me whenever they post our work.

Also, the GFDL is based on open-source software. Some open source software (eg. Apache) has become so popular and well-known and respected partially because it's used by so many businesses. Free culture is important, and by exposing more people to it (even if it's while they're at work), that gives free culture more of a chance to grow. --Interiot 15:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions

Hello Bravada/Archive2! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Portal:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with us.

--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

I passed over the astra article, the tag line still wasn't working for me and there are heaps more car articles coming up.--Peta 23:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

=Sam

I have reported Sam here: [7] Have a good one! Signature ^brendel 01:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Another BigHaz-Bravada collaboration added to the collection (Iemand Als Jij). Many thanks -- Samir

'Allo Bravada!

Hey, what's up dude! Some of us GMI'ers are wondering what you're up to, including me - you are such a great fountain of knowledge, we don't want it running dry. If it's anything of a serious nature, email me. My address is dcbjms1988@hotmail.com .

Anyway, since I'm also on a media crusade, I wonder if you can help me. Even though I'm working on Televisa and a "Media in Cuba" article, I wonder if you can help me with the media in Eastern Europe. Thanks. -Daniel Blanchette 15:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Ford, I know someone who can possibly help. He owns the North American English & European Ford Registry, and I think he can help. I'll just give him a holler on FordEurope.net, since some of the Euro Ford articles are also on FordEurope.net. In addition, there was also a series of book exclusively on Ford in Europe. I'll see if I can find the link for it. Anyway, thanks for responding to my message. I'm working on Televisa's history thanks to a fellow GMI'er who translated the Spanish Televisa article for me. -Daniel Blanchette 16:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bravada, do you have an email address? If so, I will probably need some help (constructive criticism and the like) for something that I intend on posting at GMI. Oh, and my first "Media in Eastern Europe"-esques task is to expand Polish Radio and Television, the public broadcaster.-Daniel Blanchette 14:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minn Hinsti Dans

Good grief, what would I do without you around? The sources I had said absolutely nothing about the "former drag queen" business, so I'm glad there's more of a back story to the song. BigHaz 21:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good to Hear from You

People have been asking for you lately in "the other world."

I promise to look over your posts and see if there's anything I can add. Please do the same for my posts. Hudsonthedog 00:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

simca.com.br

Bravada, I'll summarize and translate the simca.com.br. Stay tuned!!! Loudenvier 12:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ford Vedette Coupé 1950.jpg

Greetings! I noticed you uploaded Image:Ford Vedette Coupé 1950.jpg yesterday. I appreciate your diligence in attaining permission to use the image on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, we can not accept media that is "used with permission". Our two basic image categories are those licensed under a free license and those used under terms of fair use. This is covered under Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Images.2FMedia item #3. I regret to inform you that we will have to delete the image. The image is very good and it's a beautiful car, but we must have a free license for it (and a claim of fair use can't be made in this case). If you have any questions about this, I'd be happy to answer. All the best, --Durin 13:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this also applies to Image:Citroen CX 2400 GTI 1978.jpg, Image:Citroen LN 1977.jpg, Image:Peugeot 505 2.2 Turbo Aut. Familiale 1991.JPG, Image:Peugeot 604 SL Automatique 1977.JPG, and Image:1973 Simca 1000 GL.JPG. These will be deleted as well. I'm very sorry. --Durin 13:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you feel this is user-unfriendly. The directive comes from Jimbo Wales himself. I'm following that principle, as it is the underpinning for WP:CSD I3 and is a criteria for immediate, speedy deletion. If Jimbo felt there was negotiation room on this, he would have indicated an acceptable wait period, such as the 7 day wait period for unused images hosted here under a claim of fair use.
I've removed the Ford image from "Did you know?" because of the policy violation, and did so prior to it's deletion.
As I noted, I appreciate the effort to gain permission and sending such permission to Wikipedia is a good step. However, the lack of a response from Wikimedia is not an affirmative proclamation that the use of the images is acceptable.
Please understand; I'm not trying to be in any way hostile towards you. I didn't see the images and think "Hey, I'll be a jerk to this guy". I'm simply following the explicit policy decreed by Jimbo Wales, the founder of this project. --Durin 13:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I did inform you of why it was so and took pains to be as polite about it as possible. I am sorry you feel this was offensive; it most certainly was not my intent.
You do have an opportunity to gain permission from the copyright holder to freely license the image and re-upload the images, presuming you still have copies of the images, which I think is a reasonable conclusion. Deleting the images does not in any way prevent you from re-uploading the images again, under a free license. In fact, I heartily encourage you to do so! They are great images, and I'd love to see them here. We just need to have them under a free license.
I'd just like to juxtapose the images you uploaded under a limited license with Image:Simca Ariane - cropped.jpg. This image was released under GFDL.
As to why it needs to move quickly and what harm can be caused: I'd like to have you take a look at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. There are literally hundreds of sites that are using our content. The images that you uploaded are for use of Wikipedia alone. However, the images would rapidly propagate to a number of sites having no affiliation with Wikipedia. The use of the images on those sites is in direct contravention of the permissions granted by the copyright holder of the images you uploaded. We are trying to be respectful of copyright holders who grant "used with permission" licenses who are frequently unaware of how widely their work is distributed. A copyright holder would be rightfully angered if a used with permission image showed up on hundreds of non-Wikipedia sites, with us saying "Hey, it's not our fault. We're not responsible for their actions!" While it is true we are not responsible for those sites, we do have some responsibility to be respectful of copyright holder's wishes, else gaining access to copyrighted work through a free license could be considerably more problematic.
Again, I'm sorry you feel offended. I had no intention of trying to upset you in any respect. Deleting the images was not a knee-jerk response to a used with permission problem, but a process built on sound reasoning as you can see from above. I heartily encourage your contributions, but we must have material available to us under a free license or under terms of fair use (which is narrowly defined on Wikipedia, for reasons of self protection among others). --Durin 13:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to answer any questions as well. When emailing people about images, it's important to ask whether the image can be used under a free license such as the {{GFDL}}, {{cc-by-2.5}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}, ... The images can be re-uploaded only if you contact the copyright owners again, and confirm that the image can be released under a GFDL-compatible license. There's more info at commons:Commons:Email templates as well. My apologies as well... --Interiot 13:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm Interiot on Skype, unsurprisingly. Some of the copyright issues can be stressful, but, for what it's worth, this is a clear part of policy, and Durin is just doing what policy says, so try not to get upset with him specifically.

Copyright is complicated, and nearly everyone (including me, an anal copyright whatchyamacallit) gets upset when their photos are contested.

The short version is that it's important that our work here not be controlled by any one organization. The work here is "open source", so if Jimbo goes insane tommorow, you can just take a copy of the encyclopedia and set up bravadas_noninsane_encyclopedia.org and all the sane people here can go work over there instead, because the encyclopedia is not owned by anyone, not even Wikimedia. When people give you permission to only use the image on Wikipedia, that means the work isn't free for anyone to distribute anymore. I don't know if you've heard of CDDB, but that's a very good example of why you don't want community-generated content to be controlled by any single organization. --Interiot 14:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

de-indent Respectfully, I did explain why the images needed to be deleted. Please note that most of the images were tagged for speedy deletion before I ever got to them. Most items that fall into Category:Candidates for speedy deletion are rapidly deleted without any commentary left to the creator/uploader at all. In most cases, this is entirely proper; considerable content that is deleted through that category is of a nature that does not deserve deletion explanation (for example, an article on John Smith being created saying "He's a terrible teacher! The worst at North Sebastian Junior High!"). I took time to explain why the images were deleted because it was apparent you had put forth considerable effort with regards to the images, and it deserved an explanation. I recognize there are limitations to textual communication and that the explanation was not sufficient for you. From my chair, I thought it would be as I explained the policy under which it was deleted. Since then, it's become apparent that explanation was insufficient. But, I chalk that up to communications limitations rather than willful intent on my part. If we'd been talking in person about this, this would have gone considerably more smoothly, I am sure. It's not you and I that are really at odds here; I think we can get along fine. It's the limitations of our communication medium here in this case causing disruption to the explanation.
We don't disable forking/mirroring of content because the only copyrighted content that we allow here is used under terms of fair use. Thus, any other use of the copyrighted content is also (hopefully) legitimately under terms of fair use. With that in mind, we are not violating the rights or permissions of any copyright holders. The principle behind this is that we are striving to build an encyclopedia that is free to anyone, for any purpose, anywhere in the world. For example, one of the projects that is using Wikipedia content (in this case under the auspices of the Wikimedia foundation) is a printed encyclopedia intended to be distributed to third world countries for the education of children. It is entirely possible that some for-profit actions will need to be involved in that in order to pay for the significant costs of that project, though of course to the children it would be free. If we had content here that we could only use on Wikipedia, we'd be significantly restricted in our ability to conduct such projects. This devolves into a messy situation; if we permit images to be here under a "used with permission" license, we should also permit textual content under such a license. The two types of material are not subtantially different. It would create a very messy situation that would be immensely difficult to untangle to create derivative works from Wikipedia. We're trying to keep it simple; It's either free use or fair use.
As to requesting your content be removed; it is my understanding you can't. All textual content that you have contributed has been licensed under terms of GFDL.
We can't use an image of the Ford Vedette here under a fair use license because there are multiple such vehicles in existence (maybe hundreds, or even thousands). The car was produced for 7 model years. This particular image is not of unique historical value (one of the ways in which fair use can be claimed) nor is access to such a vehicle to take a photo of it impossible, such as no surviving vehicles being in existence (another way in which fair use can be claimed). Fair use taggings are regularly disputed. See Category:Disputed fair use images, which contains several hundred images. So while the images in question might have slipped in under the radar on fair use, it is likely they would have eventually been picked up. The only reason I found these images is because I was doing recent changes patrolling against templates and pulled up {{Did you know}} looking for fair use violations, which is something I frequently do. See User:Durin#Fair_use_work. Other people may have found them in other ways, such as reviewing recent changes for images.
I apologize that I did not remove the images from the articles in question. As you noted, I have now done this. It is indeed standard policy to remove them. I'm human too. :)
I don't mind you pouring it on me. I don't mind being a bumper. I probably type more in explanation of various things than the vast majority of Wikipedians (for example, see this; most admins just close/delete without explanation). I'm not bragging on this; just noting that I'm happy to be the person you butted up against in this, as I'd much rather have me explain than have someone else barely explain or not explain at all and have you leave the project over a misunderstanding.
I don't intend to complain to Jimbo about this policy because it's well founded in my opinion. Please understand; Wikipedia is under a *constant* onslaught of image uploads that are wildly inaccurate in their licensing and in their use on Wikipedia. A recent estimation of mine showed that we have more then 34,000 fair use violations, and that's just one area of copyright problems that we have with images. Used with permission images created a very significant problem for us, and it is an area that became intolerable because it was being badly abused. The CSD I3 criterion was in response to that, to give up some weapons to fight the very serious problems we have with copyright abuse. This goes to the core of the very survival of Wikipedia; if we come under an onslaught of copyright lawsuits, it would drain our (very limited) coffers. We just don't have the resources to fight such problems in court. I am not saying your images in particular are so egregious; just that the category they found themselves in is one of the battlegrounds of copyright problems on Wikipedia.
As for being subjected to impolite treatment; Hey, that's your fault not mine :) Seriously, I don't take offense at people getting upset when policies are applied properly. We try very hard to educate users, and offer plenty of opportunity for them to be exposed to and understand our policies and guidelines. Still, it's a heavy task and one that only a small subset of users undertake prior to conducting a given contribution. I don't think there's much more we could do to educate our users prior to making contributions in contravention of our policies without locking down the encyclopedia for editing by all but trusted users. Of course the problem then is how do we get new trusted users, and the answer is we don't. So, some negative outcome of the application of policy is to be expected. It hurts, and we have users who get upset, but I'm not sure we can do much more short of a mandatory bootcamp or some such for new contributors. But, that again undermines the very basis of what we are as a project.
I am at a loss as to understand the disconnect we are experiencing regarding the intent of this project and your viewpoint on what the intent of this project is. I wish we could amicably resolve this. I was rather startled to read this when my explanation was no less illuminating or less polite. --Durin 15:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology, though not needed, accepted. I have no grudge with you nor am I upset with you. I just wanted to try to amicably resolve this so that a person such as yourself who is making such fantastic contributions isn't pushed off the project. There are some people here who are quite happy to rip apart other users. I'm not one of them; everybody is important, from Jimbo down to the person making the first edit.

I'm happy to hear that :D I don't know of a person like me who makes fantastic contributions, but if you do, do give him or her my regards ;) Bravada, talk - 16:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Studying business does not mean you're an intellectual weakling :)

The other way around - being an intellectual weakling means you are limited to studying stuff like business :D Believe me - I know something about that :D Bravada, talk - 16:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your English is fine! Prior to my looking at your user page a few minutes ago, I had no idea you were from Warsaw or indeed a non-native speaker of English.

It's nice of you to say so, and I guess that's the problem - we more or less assume we understand each other, when we might not :D Bravada, talk - 16:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a big interest in cars, so I don't know how often our paths will cross in our work here. But, I hope we will cross paths again. Apart from some misunderstandings, it has been a pleasure to work with you. I think we've ironed out the misunderstandings. All the best, --Durin 16:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, if that was a pleasure for you, I wonder what isn't! Very nice of you to say that though, I hope you will join the discussion I am intending to start on this and possible similar cases! Bravada, talk - 16:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks for re-mailing the people. I'm not an expert on it, but for instance, at commoans, it seems like people do something like this... eg. put their requests in a subpage. Yeah, I think "okay" is fine. I'm not all that knowledgable about the details though. --Interiot 23:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply! I did not email anybody, BabyNuke was kind enough to do so (although I did not intend him to, I was just trying to get his opinion on that). I have asked the same question I asked you to Durin, and he stated that he would rather be more dilligent. As licensing under CC is a quite major issue, considering the possible results, I think it would be better to make sure Mr. Stedehouder understands all the aspects of the issue. Seems like I have to pester BabyNuke again... Bravada, talk - 23:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he gave permission for them to be licensed in a particular CC license, then you should definitely only tag the image with that specific license. It's not really even good to change the version of a license that someone agreed to (eg. cc-by-sa-2.0 to cc-by-sa-2.5). It really is a specific legal agreement that can only be changed by the copyright holder.

Also, for what it's worth, if you're worried in the "who owns the copyright" bit, even if someone licenses an image as GFDL, they still own the copyright to it (eg. if the creative commons is not valid in a country, then the image falls back to being simply copyrighted... or if someone doesn't accept the terms of the license (eg. they don't want to let people know who the original author was), then the image falls back to being simply copyrighted, and the person can be legally liable for copyright infringement because they don't have a valid license to use it)).

Regarding the main page... I have the technical ability to change it I suppose, but I don't really know much about the ins and outs of DYK, so I'm hesitent to override the decisions of the normal DYK'ers without knowing everything about it. Perhaps you could contact them directly? --Interiot 02:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can look over the correspondence if you want. Yeah, {{copyrighted free use}} does seem to be appropriate.

Okay, so what specifically do you want done with DYK? I... haven't really done DYK at all before. You want Image:Ford Vedette Coupé 1950.jpg to replace the current picture, and Ford SAF to replace Matra Bagheera? --Interiot 03:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactement! If you could just move the Bagheera back to the talk page under August 19th, perhaps adding in edit summaries and the talk page that the DYK was removed back to the pool by user request, and then do the opposite with the Ford SAF DYK? As concerns replacing the picture, the edit summary should state that you are replacing it because it was featured on the 16th. This should be all lege artis. Thanks a lot in advance! Bravada, talk - 03:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the edits are made. Hopefully I didn't muck anything up with archiving or anything. I don't even read DYK usually, so if there's anything not quite right, let me know. "(pictured)" seems to be lacking, but I didn't know whether it was right to go into the explanatio of how the image is related to the factory.... --Interiot 04:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am unspeakably thankful! Everything is as it should be bar two small things, I forgot to tell you about them but you've got them on your talk page already. Funny how I now know the DYK updating procedure better than some admins :D :D :D As concerns "pictured", I think it is used rather liberally, so nothing will happen if you don't put it anywhere. As concerns what is pictured, well, the automobile(s) are :D

Hmm, now that I think about it, the picture is usually placed by the image that it illustrates, and in the last few dates the DYK that was illustrated was put as first by default so that it would look nice. Now it looks a bit like Tsar Alexander is illustrated by the Vedette pic :D Bravada, talk - 04:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk over my Talk page, will you? :P

If you're desperate, I could subpage the discussion you, Blnguyen and I are having. Chances are it'll have its own page when I next archive, since it's an important issue, so this would just be speeding up a natural process. BigHaz 03:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that, I am just having a sleeping disorder, which is why I edit Wikipedia in the middle of the night and am usually quite unconscious when doing that - this is why my judgement is close to non-existent and I am usually quite ashamed after what I did between 0 and 4 AM here :D That said, I still believe than Wenn Du Da Bist makes a great DYK! Bravada, talk - 03:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, please check your email. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 08:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

DYK

Wasn't talking about you, was talking about an e-mail I got entitled "SAVE EUROVISION ON DYK!!!!!". That was clearly histrionic -- Samir धर्म 12:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last thing wiktionary:histrionics does not necessarily mean histrionic personality disorder -- Samir धर्म 12:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

random stuff

Thanks for the barnstar, though Durin probably deserves his more because he's extremely accomodating compared to most admins.

So this is the sort of silly sub-stub I write when I start out articles. I don't know how you DYK people crank out great writing.

Anyway, I'll join the talk page you mentioned. --Interiot 14:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone's block expires in ~2 hours. :| Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles was starting to seem more normal too... --Interiot 14:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ford SAF

Malcolma, thanks a lot for taking care of the Ford SAF article. I will be grateful if you could state what sources you were using when expanding this article. If you speak German, you might also want to take a look at this page - it provides some more information on the commercial vehicle side of the business. Regards, Bravada, talk - 14:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used mainly the Beaulieu Encyclopedia of the Automobile, a massive 3 volume work I treated myself to. Sorry, should have added the source to the article. I'll do it now.Malcolma 15:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked and ammended the refs as you requested. We seem to be lacking a Ford Germany article unless I just can't find it. Any ideas? I can start one from the same source if you wish but it is something about which I know virtually nothing.Malcolma 17:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks a lot! I will try to find references for the other parts then... Seems like our level of knowledge about Ford Cologne is quite comparable :D I will let you know if I find something, but please do start the article with whatever you have - I will join in if there will be anything I will be able to add. BTW, does the book mention when Automobiles Ford became Ford SAF? Regards, Bravada, talk - 17:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian Astra (Chevrolet)

Bravada, I´m now a owner of a Chevrolet Astra CD (my 1998 Marea engine blown-up!). I made a litle research about the Astra here in Brazil and it seems that it saw a different history here. The Astra was facelifted in early 2003 (before the Astra H introduction) only in Brazil. The interior panel was facelifted again in 2005 (it's a pitty because I've bought a 2004 Astra and the new panel is pretty beutiful!!!). The new Opel Astra (H) will probably never saw the light in Brazil because it's design was borowed for the Chevrolet Vectra, which is based on the Chevrolet Astra platform!!! The engine of the Astra 2.0 (116cv) is the same of the Chevrolet Monza (a rather old car even by brazilian standards! And very few information exists on wikipedia about the brazilian Monza - based on the Ascona). The current brazilian Astra received a Flexpower engine which can use petrol or alcohol or any mix of those (121cv with petrol and 127cv with alcohol). The Astra SS model was also introduced in 2006. See the photos on [8] (click on any image of the Astra to see more). The interior is very unique. I'll try to summarize more information about the Chevrolet Astra an will put it into the Opel Astra article. If it gets too long then we create an article for the Chevrolet Astra and link to it from the Opel Astra article. Regards. Loudenvier 06:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lancia Kappa

Just to let you know Lancia Kappa (which you nominated) has failed Good Article criteria. The reasons can be found on the article talk page. Thanks Alexj2002 09:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiat acquisitions

In response to the comments by you and another editor I've nominated image:Fiat Acquisitions over Time.GIF for deletion. That discussion is here: Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion#August 20. Cheers, -Will Beback 09:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

No probs Bravada. Missed the picture on the 16th for some reason. Happy to see the Vedette back in its glory. Take care -- Samir धर्म 06:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd leave it on the page; we'll handle it when the time comes... Cheers -- Samir धर्म 06:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ford Germany

I have put together the bare bones of an article on Ford Germany from what info I have. There is loads of stuff on the web about the relationship between the company and the Nazi party but I will leave that to someone else. I know nothing of the truck manufacture which is why it is omitted. Malcolma 10:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GM do Brasil engines

I was looking at the GM engines (family 0, 1, 2...) on wikipedia and found very litle information about the brazilian flex-fuel engined (FlexPower). GM do Brasil seems even to have made a Multipower engine (ethanol, petrol or LPG based engine). The problem is that I don't know nothing about engines! And I don't know either where to find the engine designation numbers. Did you know someone who kwnows something :-) about engines that could work with me on this? By the way I did nothing yet about the SIMCA... :-( Regards Loudenvier 16:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]