User talk:DeLarge/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Matador

Since WP isn't a US institution, isn't it a good idea to preface with country of origin, or major market? --matador300 23:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Not if the company which makes it is called the American Motors Corporation and you end up with a linguistic redundancy. If the first sentence read "...built by AMC" you might have gotten away with it, but it doesn't, so you didn't. See also AMC Ambassador.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DeLarge (talk • contribs) 00:05, 7 July 2006.

Linking through redirects

Just noticed you "fixing" articles which link through redirects to Mitsubishi Motors. For future reference, you might want to read WP:R#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. Cheers. -Dawson 18:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, another well-hidden guideline that's new to me. Sigh... Still, a lot of the links I've fixed are of the [[Mitsubishi Motors Corporation|Mitsubishi]] style, and I think it's OK to change them. Also, there's a few links I left alone, at MMC, Mitsubishi Kinyokai, and Mitsubishi Motors Australia so far. Regards, -- DeLarge 20:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Champagne!

Yahoo! Raul decided today the Talbot Tagora is worthy of the coveted little star! So, you are among the very elite group of Wikipedians who can use this Userbox (even though I see you probably won't! Thanks so much!
Now we can lobby for the Tagora to become Wikipedia:Today's featured article and to be featured in Template:Did you know! Bravada, talk - 11:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, well done! To be honest, I didn't think you'd be successful, but that was as much because of the subject matter itself, i.e. an obscure '70s Eurosedan. At the end of the day, such cars have less to be said about them than more glamorous models with illustrious histories like (for example) the Porsche 911 or Ford Mustang, and I thought that this (and the consequent limiting effect on the size of the article) would count against you. But you've written something comprehensive, NPOV and well-cited, and the FA reviewers have acknowledged that.

I can't really claim much credit ~ I pointed aout a few possible improvements, but aside from tweaking the references to adhere to WP:FN guidelines in an earlier draft, I haven't actively contributed. Still, I'll move the userbox to my userpage anyway. Cheers! DeLarge 11:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's 80s Eurosedan actually :D I chose the Tagora to prove that even the most obscure and seemingly uninteresting car can have a well-referenced, comprehensive article. I wanted to pursue the FA status for it to serve as a model for other articles on cars less glamourous than the Mustang or Corvette. Besides, there isn't that much to be said about the Tagora, so this was fairly easy (yet still much tougher than it seemed to me at the beginning :D ). Now I am actually starting to discover there might be a thing or two more to be said about it but shhhhh... ;)

As concerns your input, you have been the only user who provided a comprehensive review (or perhaps only other than Outriggr, but I have settled that with him separately, and he also became a major contributor in the process :D ) of the article and without the tweaks you have helped implement I am sure this article would have perished in the FAC. I believe that a good review is at least as important as typing in a huge chunk of text. Or, in some, cases, much more important. Thanks again! Bravada, talk - 12:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. Now let's advance some Mitsubishi to FA status :D

Tagora strikes back!

First and foremost, I have noticed you removed the Tagora FA infobox from your user page. Please note that you are fully eligible to bear it (if you want, that is), as it says "This user helped promote the article Talbot Tagora to featured status" - you surely HAVE helped a lot!

Browsing through the "what links here" special page, I have found this interesting link from an user page: User:MotorSportMCMXC#WRC - seems like this user claims that our venerable lady actually won the WRC in 1981! On the other hand, a WP article claims it was actually a totally unrelated Talbot Sunbeam that did so. I am a complete layman regarding the WRC and its history in particular, so perhaps you could find a reference that would sort out that controversy? Is it possible that two cars somehow "won the WRC" the same year in their own right (different classes or sumfink)?

Secondly, Interiot has placed a request for a better picture of the Tagora. I am afraid the one which is there now and the previous one are the best I could get from Mr. Stan Orand, so perhaps you could be more lucky - e.g. get hold of Mr. Keith Adams, the editor of Classic Car Weekly who apparently started the rootes-chrysler.co.uk (and also runs the great austin-rover.co.uk site). He seems to have been editing WP as User:Kadams1970, contributing some really nice car photos of his. He also apparently actually even owns/owned a Tagora - perhaps he could be so kind to contribute some photos of his and other Tagoras or help us establish a good contact with other owners/enthusiasts?

I guess this will alleviate all your doubts about being an important contributor to this FA :D :D :D In return, I would like to return to the idea of FA'ing one of the Mitsubishi articles. My obvious favorite is the Debonair, but probably most of the sources would be in Japanese, so this might be a slight problem. Do you have any favorites with regard to that? Bravada, talk - 10:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Tagora FA userbox ~ once I archived my talk page I lost the discussions about the article, and I didn't like having the userbox without any context. Still, it's nice to have in reserve.

User:MotorSportMCMXC ~ that's easy, I don't even have to look that up. It's definitely the Talbot Sunbeam, driven by the late, great Henri Toivonen. Reference can be cited at Rallybase.nl to confirm. Eventually I'll get the 1981 WRC results page on WP completed, along with all the other years on my 'To Do' list. But it takes about two hours to create an page from scratch, so don't hold your breath.

Contacting Stan Orand ~ I'm busy tonight and at the weekend, but I'll see what I can find out for next week.

FA'ing a Mitsubishi article ~ the Mitsubishi Debonair would be good, but I know little about it. There's an error in its article too - the engine in the 1964 model was a KE64 straight-6, not a straight-4. There's a few other esoteric models on the {{Mitsubishi}} template; Mitsubishi Galant GTO? Mitsubishi Galant VR-4? Mitsubishi Lancer 1600 GSR? Or how about Mitsubishi Motors itself? That'd be the only automobile company to have FA status. Their various woes over the last decade make for a good read too, if only I could get my finger out an rewrite in per your talk page recommendations. --DeLarge 13:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me start with a minor correction - I have already established the contact with Mr. Stan Orand, he actually provided the currently used pics of the Tagora, as you can see in their description. I meant establishing contact with Mr. Keith Adams, which may be valuable for many future collaborations, but now writing that I realized I should rather talk to Kieran about that, as he is British (you are American, aren't you?) and has good contacts within the UK historic automobile enthusiasts' community :D

Thanks for checking the WRC thing! Is it possible that the Tagora took part in some other racing/rally event in 1981, e.g. those family sedan races (WRCC or sumfink...)? Perhaps you could see about that the next time you would be browsing the archives.

Now, the Mitsubishi thing. I must say I am not a big fan of some of the articles you mentioned, as I believe all versions of a given model should be discussed in the main article - but then it would mean we would have to undertake the sisyphean task of refurbishing the entire Galant or Lancer articles! Moreover, I believe the articles on mainstay Mitsubishi nameplates, such as Colt, Lancer and Galant, are quite problematic, as the names have been wandering accross models and markets, but perhaps they could serve as good examples for many other models suffering from the same problems. In the end, perhaps the articles would become so big that carving out the sections on VR-4 or 1600 GSR would start making sense, but then I am not that into rallyes and motorsports in general, so I guess I wouldn't be of much use improving those :D

I think I like the idea with improving the Mitsubishi Motors article - it is certainly a much more challenging and labour-consuming ;) task than FAing the Tagora, but I agree that we need at least one brand/company with FA status. I guess it might take a few good months to upgrade it to the FA status, and it would involve editing related articles too, but I will gladly help. I guess we need more editors than just two, so I believe repeating the call for help or perhaps instituting a permament "current brand/company collaboration" within the Project might make sense. I also think we should seek the help of editors whose native language is Japanese, or who are proficient in it, and are possibly at least a bit interested in cars or Mitsubishi itself. Perhaps you have encountered folks like that while editing Mitsubishi articles? talk - 17:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

<moved Autobianchi talk to its own section (below)>

About Mr Adams, if KieranT can deal with it, that'd be grand. I am in fact British as well, although I'm pleased you didn't think so, since it indicates a lack of nationalistic bias in my edits.

There was one editor who added some Japanese language stuff to the Mitsubishi Motors article, but I'll need to check the history to find out who. I can maybe place a request at the Japanese wikiproject if I need to. --DeLarge 23:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, now you reminded me that I actually forgot to see Kieran about Mr. Adams :D I guess I stretched myself too thin too and promised both myself and other users too much, like the Mitsubishi thing... The Japanese WikiProject/Notice board seems like a good idea to me. I will also try to get hold of an American auto buff I know who lived in Japan for many years and speaks the language, though he hasn't been editing WP too much and is rather interested in GM cars - we'll see.

Oh, and I thought of you as American chiefly because of the times you edit WP at :D If I paid more attention, I could deduce it from your English that you are British, but then I don't even read what I write... (it's pretty evident, isn't it?) Bravada, talk - 00:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Mitsubishi Motors vehicles

hello delarge

you have twice linked mitsubishi engines in the mitsu template like 4G5x and Astron family. They are the same.--194.165.122.1 21:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I know ~ that's why 4G5x and Astron (and the others) link to the same pages. If you check the history of the article, you'll see I inserted the extra links on 14:39, 6 July 2006 so that people who only know the alphanumeric codes can still navigate using the template, as explained in my edit summary. -- DeLarge 22:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Mitsubishi's new engines

delarge there are new engine family's that mitsubishi recently developed 4B1-type (4b12 is the new 2.4 DOHC MIVEC for the new outlander, upcoming 4B11 DOHC MIVEC (which replaces 4g63) is for the new lancer ralliart and evo-x 4B11T and 4A9-type DOHC MIVEC which powers euro spec colt 1.3 and 1.5 liter

"Mitsubishi Motors began revamping its car engine lineup in 2004 to a common theme of high performance, low fuel consumption, low weight, and compact size. The new 3-liter V6 MIVEC engine powering the North American Outlander is the fourth new engine in this theme, following the 4A9-type 4-cylinder 1.3 and 1.5-liter units that power the European Colt launched in May 2004 (and the Japanese Colt from October 2004), the 4B1-type 4-cylinder 2.4-liter unit that powers the Japanese Outlander launched in October 2005 and the 3B2-type 3-cylinder 660cc engine that powers the i minicar launched in Japan in January this year."[1]

when you get around to it..... --193.95.238.82 22:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, that ties in with other info I have (The Mitsubishi i has a 3B20 three cylinder). I wonder what the 'B' stands for, now that they're no longer denoting the fuel type with that letter...? -- DeLarge 22:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

B stands for next generaration i guess but the A in 4A9 could also stand next gen, maybe mitsu is naming new engine familys in alphabetical order 4A9,4B1, who knows--193.95.218.254 20:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I know that they'd already used the 'A' code in a couple of engines, and it referred to an alloy cylinder head, but only as long as the entire range had such a design. 4A9x is a new one for me as well. That's more engine pages I'll have to create. -- DeLarge 11:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Done - created pages for Mitsubishi 4B engine and Mitsubishi 4B1x engine (both redirect to Mitsubishi GEMA engines). --DeLarge 17:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

User:SndrAndrss

Hi. Just wondering what you make of User:SndrAndrss. Their recent edits to 1994 FIFA World Cup aren't helping. Any ideas as to how I should handle this? --StuartBrady (Talk) 12:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot you can do, since strictly speaking he isn't vandalising the pages. Looking at his edits, he does seem to obsess about applying "his" standards to pages of tables. Also, from what I can see with yourself and me, he doesn't seem very communicative with other editors, which is probably the root of the problem.

For myself, I'm simply doing regular reverts of his changes in the hope he gets bored, although in my case (World Rally Championship results) I have the advantage that he's making factual errors, so I'm absolutely right to revert them.

For you, the best thing I can recommend is to stick rigidly to Wikipedia policies. Right now it's just a very minor series of reverts, but if it gets uglier later, you can point to a history of your good behaviour, good faith edits and attempts at communication to which he failed to respond. If you want to revert, do so, and detail why you're reverting on the article's talk page as well as the user's talk page. Then, it's up to him to also communicate when he makes changes.

I'd also look at the possibility of involving other users. Aside from myself, have a look through his talk page to see if anyone in a senior or administrative position has dealt with him before. Also, go to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Football discussion page to see if others there can assist. You might even get lucky and find someone who knows him, or has communicated with him in the past.

Further possible reading: Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, and Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes - swot up on this last page extensively, and follw it's step-by-step approach. It'll take a long while to reach a resolution, but is the safest method.

Finally, try to find anything in the WP:Help pages about making "unnecessary" edits. If all he's doing is swapping teams and changing the match report external link, there might be a better case against him. Unfortunately, I can't find anything yet, but I'm sure there'll be something in there about it. Again, the more users you can involve in this, the bigger the pool of WP knowledge you're tapping into.

Finally, there's a slightly sly way of getting his attention. Track ALL his contributions. Double-check everything he does against external sources. If you can confirm he's making errors (as he was with the WRC), revert his changes elsewhere too. That might at least serve to get his attention, although obviously if he's adding correct info that's not much use as a piece of advice.

Best of luck. In the meantime, I'll keep watching him as well. -- DeLarge 13:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Further comment: I've noticed he's still reverting your changes. be careful not to fall into the WP:3RR trap (3 reverts per 24 hours). If he makes three reverts himself, that's a definite WP policy violation and you can definitely pursue action against him for that. -- DeLarge 13:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Right. I'd argue that replacing links to authoritative sources with links to non-authoritative sources is vandalism, but I suppose others might not see it that way. I suppose that for it to count as vandalism, it has to be intentional, though... and we've got no response so far.

Fortunately, I knew about 3RR, but thanks for the warning. I'll try to help you out, but I need your help too. I will try to involve more users — I've already posted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, so hopefully I'll get some more help. In the mean time, I think I'll have to wait and see what happens. Cheers! --StuartBrady (Talk) 13:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Reverting Kit Cars

Conversation originally posted at User talk:Deenoe, 15:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Why did you just revert the Kit car article back to a vandalised version of the page? From a look at the history of the article, or from the article's talk page, you can see that three users (myself, User:Malcolma and User:Liftarn) have been reverting the additions made by an anonymous user IP in Germany, who has repeatedly been adding in a huge block of text. This text, copy/pasted straight from the German Wikipedia article, already exists in the article. However, it has been properly translated by User:Malcolma, and the links now conform to Wikipedia guidelines.

Please either offer comment on the article's talk page, or restore the previous version. -- DeLarge 15:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Take it easssyyyy. What probably happended is that when I got on the page, someone has already reverted and I did not see that. Sheesh. --Deenoe 15:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

After checkup, you removed a big chunk of text, that's why I thought that you had vandalized the page, which is why I reverted. --Deenoe 15:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Following the above comments the user reverted her erroneous changes, adding "What-f**king-ever, I don't like being bitched at for trying to help" in her edit summary. Apparently, asking why someone has done something, explaining why it should not have been done, providing helpful Wikilinks in that explanation, and requesting the error be undone using the word 'Please' is an example of being bitched at. So, there you go.

The user also decided to "not participate in Wikipedia anymore" as a result of this, but had revised this to "considering quitting Wikipedia for various reasons" seven minutes later. Her decisive stand seems to be the end of the matter, although the vandalism by the anonymous German user continues. -- DeLarge 10:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

You may/or may not have noticed that an anonymous user deleted the external links to the Mitsubishi Delica Owners Club from both the main article page and your Userpage with the infoboxes on. I have now reverted those edits. On a side note the image of the Delica in the infobox is/was mine. Regrettably it was 'taken out' by a Boy Racer on a Scottish Highland Road. it now looks like this:- [2] I have a number of differing images of various body configurations. Do you have any suggestions for creating a gallery of them, either on the main Delica Article page or as a Subpage?. Richard Harvey 08:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd noticed that ~ I was in the middle of reverting myself, but you seemed to get there first. I've been neglecting that page recently until it was bumped up my watchlist by the edits. The userIP resolves to Woking in Surrey, if you happen to know of any anti-MDOCUK folks down that way.

With regards to your photos, if they're of earlier generations they'll probably be useful in the infoboxes. When/if I get my sandbox page up to scratch it'll replace/upgrade the current article, so if you want to put them there you're welcome, but if they're just multiple images of later Delicas, you might as well put them in the current article. I tend not to be a big fan of multiple images myself, so I've little experience in formatting an image gallery that I could offer. -- DeLarge 09:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Lady Godiva / Clint Eastwood

I don't care that you edited my entry re Lady Godiva Film - but the reference to Clint Eastwood was not an "error" Lady Godiva was his first film appearance he was "Saxon number 1". vono 86.12.253.32 21:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Cited sources say otherwise: (i) Clint Eastwood bio at imdb.com ; (ii) Revenge of the Creature (1955) at imdb.com ("Look for a young, uncredited Clint Eastwood in his first screen appearance ..."), etc etc. A Google search shows no sites making a claim for Godiva, including Wikipedia itself. If you're going to make claims, you have to verify them (see WP:V).

As an aside, it makes no difference ~ the Lady Godiva page is not the place for such trivia. If you find a source, add it to the Clint Eastwood article. -- DeLarge 07:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - however an uncredited appearance is hearsay but as you say it is not the place for such trivia 86.12.253.32 21:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

According to IMDB.com, his appearance in Lady Godiva was also uncredited, so would similarly qualify as hearsay if that were the rule... He's listed as "First Saxon (uncredited)", compared with "Lab Technician (uncredited)" in Revenge of the Creature. -- DeLarge 07:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Scottish flag vs British flag

re: User:SndrAndrss, I would suggest you just revert on sight. I have never ever seen this user communicate on talk pages. The only way to educate this user is to keep reverting. In my experience they can often learn from such reversion and start editing in a more preferable way. For a while at least. This is a very strange user who insists on putting flags everywhere. I have to suspect some form of autism although that may be unfair. But the complete lack of communication suggests this might be the case. David D. (Talk) 22:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Deceptive copy/paste

I posted comments regarding the use of images on the AMC Machine article at Talk:AMC Machine; the edit can be seen here, 08:07, August 4, 2006 (and here, 11:49, August 4, 2006, when I added my omitted signature). Those comments were copy/pasted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles by User:Wiarthurhu on 16:55, August 4, 2006. No quotations were used. No link to the original page was used. My appended signature was included, but Wiarthurhu did not sign his own name.

I believe that Wiarthurhu copy/pasted my work with the intention of convincing other readers that I had posted these words myself. I believe his motivations for doing so were twofold:

1. Wiarthurhu has an ongoing conflict with User:Karrmann, and he was attempting to attack the Karrmann's credibility by highlighting how his edits were being disputed by others.
2. By moving my comments from the article talk page to the more public general Wikiproject forum, Wiarthurhu was attempting to prolong or escalate the conflict.

If you read the comments on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles and believed them to have been posted by me, please insert your name below. I intend to take further action regarding this deception, but I would like the evidence of others before I present my case. --DeLarge 21:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments/discussion relating to this issue

• I support the notion that User:Wiarthurhu tries to generate as much fuss about his actions as himself as possible, and by devoting WikiSpace to those one users only fuel his insatiable desire for being in the centre of attention. Please consider what would happen if he was collectively ignored.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bravada (talk • contribs) 21:42, August 5, 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me for not properly signing my edit - this was purely unintentional, especially given the nature of the issue raised. Bravada, talk - 22:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I wasn't really confused - but because the same thing has been done to me by the same user on at least half a dozen occasions - I'm now very wary of the problem and have been checking back to see who did the edit rather than trusting the signature. Since I've been following this shambles over about six different talk pages, I've usually managed to read the original post in the original location before it magically popped up elsewhere with altered content and/or mangled signatures. Truly we do not need more evidence in this case - we just need to find the right admin with the appropriate privilages and mandate to cancel Wiarthurhu's account. It's gone beyond the 'who is right and who is wrong stage'. I think it's only a matter of time until we get this guy out of our hair. SteveBaker 00:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for your kind request. Unfortunately, it's late in UTC -400 and I have to be up early for church. I'll respond to your request tomorrow morning or afternoon. Regards, CQJ 04:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Bravada talk page/Autobianchi

On an unrelated note, I must say I have also found myself a really interesting topic to develop - the Autobianchi A111. I started with the thought of completing all Autobianchi articles, as the company only produced a handful of models, and the A111 page was missing. I discovered there is unbelievably little on this car online, one could even doubt it existed, and many sources contradict each other! Bravada, talk - 17:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for detagging my talk page - I somehow did not notice it amidst the rapidly developing discussion. It never occured to me that my talk page has (or perhaps I have) "limited geographic scope" :D BTW, I have also been informed that the tiny Autobianchi Stellina made it to the front page - another good reason to look into those Autobianchi articles ;) Regards, Bravada, talk - 23:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my knowledge of Autobianchi is limited to winning one of their cars while playing Gran Turismo 4. I suppose I could start doing some research, but to be honest, right now I feel stretched a bit thin. Sorting the List of bestselling vehicle nameplates took 3-4 days (although I reckon it was worth it), and I've plenty of outstanding tasks on my 'To Do' list. But I have faith you'll continue the good work you've done with Talbot and Lancia. --DeLarge 23:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

No research is required actually, there are sources linked to already, more work of editorial nature is needed. I understand you have your priorities and everybody's pushing their way - I am just impudent enough to molest fellow users :D Please bear with me :D Also, thank you for your kind words concerning my work, even if you're just brushing me off :D Bravada, talk - 00:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Japanese Cars Task Force?

Hi DeLarge, I was wondering whether you would be interested in joining the proposed Japanese Cars Task Force, and perhaps some other Task Forces as active member or reviewer. Please see top of the WikiProject talk page for a list and sign in in case you are interested! Thanks! Bravada, talk - 13:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Mitsubishi i

On 11 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mitsubishi i, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

A very nice expansion. It's on the main page for DYK now. Thanks for the contribution! --Samir धर्म 06:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Ferrari linkspamming

so whats the deal you cant offer content related to the topic on wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Riddle9 (talk • contribs) 22:45, August 14, 2006.

I do offer content, although not to the Ferrari article. I also ensure that other editors add content, and do not merely add linkspam, in violation of Wikipedia's policies on spam and external links to be avoided. Feel free to add content yourself. However, if it's as riddled with punctuation errors as your above question, I would recommend that a third party copyedit your work to ensure it too does not get reverted.

Your anonymous IP has already been blocked for two weeks for exactly the same attempt to insert your link. I assume you realise that continuing to do spam with the Riddle9 account will lead to the same fate. --DeLarge 23:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

70.134.*.* serial POV vandal

Hey, I noticed you have RVed several edits from the serial POV vandal coming from 70.134.*.*. I have been doing that, too, and I am tracking this to some extent on my talk page. It seems that he is using dial up because he has so many IPs. Nova SS 03:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

New GEMA V6 family of engines

http://www.autospies.com/images/users/Agent001/IMG_8974.jpg the new 3.0l SOHC MIVEC that will power the new outlander has a 6B31 engine code. a new engine family for you to create lol

more info here http://media.mitsubishicars.com/detail?mid=MIT2006041224953&mime=ASC

more mitsubishi info http://www.autospies.com/news/EXCLUSIVE-Spies-scoop-confidential-marketing-pitch-for-the-2007-Mitsubishi-Outlander-7865/

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.210.231.250 (talk • contribs) 20:39, August 23, 2006.

Dang, this GEMA business is generating a lot of new info. I'll create a Mitsubishi GEMA engines page that covers all the different versions, and a page for each individual family as per the current WP standard. New redlinks now added to the MMC template for now... --DeLarge 21:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Done - created page for Mitsubishi 6B engine (redirects to Mitsubishi GEMA engines). --DeLarge 17:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm struggling to find further references to support the original post, i.e. that the V6 is directly related to the GEMA family. Should the info not just be moved to the Mitsubishi 6B engine page and the redirect removed? --DeLarge 21:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

i think you're right. gema only makes 4cylinders, i agree, move the 6b31 to 6b page.... --195.210.217.225 10:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:1978sapporo.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:1978sapporo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 13:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Old image deleted, so put new one on Commons. Hopefully sorted. --DeLarge 17:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

rv on olympics

Thanks for the help. I have reported him for an investigation at Wikipedia:Requests_for_investigation. His long term behaviour is suggestive of a user that we need to be able to block on sight (including his IP addresses). The problem is that many of his edits are quite good but it really gets tiring trying to sort the wheat from the chaff. And the edit warring is a pain. We'll see what an outside reviewer thinks of his actions. David D. (Talk) 18:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

As long as User:SndrAndrss is changing articles from a current, consistent standard across all FIFA or Olympic articles (he is), and as long as he's not adding new information (I can't see that he is), I'd just keep reverting him. Also, if he violates WP:3RR, get him for that - use every WP process to your advantage and don't give him an inch of leeway.

Also, I think one of the most significant things counting against him are his bad edits, where (for example) he deletes info or changes names of US stadia for the '94 World Cup. The history page demonstrates that multiple editors are reverting him for that,

You might also want to contact user:Stifle directly - he's the admin who blocked him before, and he may have suggestions for the best way to tackle him in the long term.

In the meantime, I'll post on the Rfi to support you.

Strangely, he keeps away from the World Rally Championship results pages now, since I posted on his talk pages a few times with my reasons for reverting him. I must be scarier than you... --DeLarge 19:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Well you do have a large name! Larger is scarier, right? I have found that i can train him to make the correct type of edits with respect to style. So he is not 100% unflexible. I really wonder if he is a simple. I even tried to get a Norwegian to talk to him about a year ago, same mute response. David D. (Talk) 19:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Airtrek should be merged with Outlander

outlander is the global name, airtrek is only used in japan the airtrek article is also redundant because outlander article has much more information--195.210.244.182 13:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this for a while. However, WP's proposed convention on naming car articles prefers redirecting to the name used in the home market. Currently, it's a bit complicated for MMC vehicles; the Mitsubishi GTO now follows this convention, but the Mitsubishi Galant Lambda does not (it redirects to Mitsubishi Sapporo).

In favour of Airtrek redirecting, I think Outlander is the name almost everywhere. However, the fact that Airtrek existed for a couple of years before Outlander arrived makes me want to give priority to the Japan market name. Decisions, decisions... I'll probably redirect to Outlander, simply because all the info's already there and it would therefore involve fewer changes. --DeLarge 17:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why I have your talk page on my watchlist, but since I've seen you discussing that, I'd like to say that it would be better to stick to the standards - i.e. home market name. I would ask an admin to help with the merger so that the resulting article would bear the Aitrek name. Regards, Bravada, talk - 17:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

This is getting complicated. I'd agree with what you're saying about the Airtrek in principle. However, according to this link to a Japan-based personal import company, the Airtrek may have been superseded in its home market, as only the Outlander is offered new (the same company offers only the Airtrek in their used models section). Also, there's no Airtrek listed on Mitsubishi's model lineup page. Recent edits by User:24.13.203.76 to both pages suggest the two exist in parallel in Japan, but I can't find evidence to corroborate that, unless all he's referring to are dealer stocks (as opposed to actual current factory production). --DeLarge 10:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, according to the Japanese Mitsu site [3] (which, I believe, is more trustworthy), the new-gen car is indeed called Outlander in Japan too. The Airtrek does not seem to be sold in paralel (unless I missed something). If so, it might make sense to call the article Outlander. Cheers, Bravada, talk - 11:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

yes, even the new generation is called outlander in japan, airtrek should be merged, you should only add "1st generation outlander was marketed in japan as Airtrek", as the airtrek article has no important info,--195.210.227.21 12:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

is this guy serious?

Evolution 0? [4] --195.210.227.21 13:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Haha, that was actually quite amusing, but now deleted by this self-appointed Mitsupedia Nazi. Let's see if it reappears... --DeLarge 13:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)