User talk:Mr.choppers/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

DYK for Styling Garage

On 23 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Styling Garage, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Styling Garage charged luxury car customers almost the cost of the vehicle to convert it to gull-wing doors? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Styling Garage. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Styling Garage), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Honda Civic Si

Hello

I'm the user that edited the 2001-2005 section of the Honda Civic Si page, and I was wondering why you deleted it and moved parts of it to the main civic page.

I spent a large amount of time adding information relevant to only the Civic Si of that generation, so I'm unsure why it was removed.

Thank you

Millermacs (talk) 08:09, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Millermacs

Since the Si is just a spec level of the Civic, there is no need for a standalone article. It will become a redirect (there was a discussion on WP:AUTO some time ago) and the relevant Civic pages will contain the information. After all, a 1985 Civic Si has much much more in common with a 1985 Civic DX than with a fifth gen Si, for instance. As for the long lists of equipment, see WP:NOT. That kind of information would be considered a shopping guide of sorts. Also, adding lists is not what Wikipedia is trying to do. Most articles consist of prose, with the occasional table or list added when suitable. I suggest looking at a featured article for pointers on how articles should look.

Personally, I love information, but some levels of specificity is not really of interest to WP. Things like color codes and number of cupholders are generally considered beyond the scope of WP, some would consider it merely WP:CRUFT. I restored much of the info on the Civic page, but much of it was already duplicated. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  12:09, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

The Si isn't just a trim level, otherwise, the same could be said of the type R. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.48.189.66 (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1986_Audi_80_GT_(white),_front_right.jpg

Guten Tag, durch Zufall hat ein Freund von mir die beiden Fotos von meinem Audi 80 (siehe Link im Betreff) im Internet entdeckt. Nicht nur, dass diese Fotos ohne mein Zustimmen aufgenommen und veröffentlicht wurden, zusätzlich ist auch noch das Nummernschild meines Autos und auch ich (drinnen sitzend) zu sehen! Ich finde das ehrlich gesagt ziemlich unverschämt. Datenschutz und das Recht am eigenen Bild werden hier wohl kaum beachtet. Zumindest hätte das Kennzeichen geschwärzt werden müssen! Und natürlich vorher um Erlaubnis gefragt werden, bevor man ein Foto im Internet hochlädt! Bevor ich jetzt weitere rechtliche Schritte tätigen werde, kann ich anbieten, dass wir uns gütlich einigen: Angesichts der Tatsache, dass hier Datenschutz und das Recht am eigenen Bild maßgeblich verletzt wurden und die Fotos ohne meine Einwilligung gemacht und hochgeladen wurden, sehe ich eine finanzielle Entschädigung von 200 € als angemessen an. Nicht zu erwähnen brauche ich wohl, dass die Fotos umgehend entfernt werden müssen.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.12.151.124 (talk) 12:56, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

I deleted your name, as this is obviously much more intrusive than a license plate or your blurred face. I did blur your face, in case you hadn't noticed. As for the license plates, as far as I can tell German plates are not tracable and you drive around all day with them on your car where anyone may look at them (or photograph them). For the rest, I turn you to § 59 of the Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte (UrhG):

Werke an öffentlichen Plätzen

(1) Zulässig ist, Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden, mit Mitteln der Malerei oder Grafik, durch Lichtbild oder durch Film zu vervielfältigen, zu verbreiten und öffentlich wiederzugeben. Bei Bauwerken erstrecken sich diese Befugnisse nur auf die äußere Ansicht.

(2) Die Vervielfältigungen dürfen nicht an einem Bauwerk vorgenommen werden.

KOmmentar: Wie es richtig in dem Paragrafen heißt "Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden" - ein Auto bewegt sich fort und befimdet sich nicht "bleibend" an öffentlichen Wegen - dies gilt also nicht. Ich bitte noch einmmal darum, dass die Fotos umgehend gelöscht werden, ansonsten muss ich meinen Anwalt befragen und weitere Mittel vornehmen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.12.151.124 (talk) 20:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

And:

Recht am eigenen Bild. Die Panoramafreiheit an sich bezieht sich nur auf das Urheberrecht. Sind beispielsweise auch Personen in einem Film zu erkennen, dessen Urheber sich bei seiner Wiedergabe des Aufnahmegegenstandes ansonsten auf die Panoramafreiheit stützen kann, so bedarf es zur Verwertung nichtsdestoweniger der Einwilligung der Abgebildeten (§ 22 Kunsturhebergesetz [KUG]). Das zugrunde liegende Recht am eigenen Bild kennt eine „Panorama“-Ausnahme nur in den Grenzen der Beiwerksregelung des § 23 Abs. 1 Fall 2 KUG, wonach die Nutzung von Bildern, auf denen die Personen lediglich als Beiwerk neben einer Landschaft oder sonstigen Örtlichkeit erscheinen, nicht einwilligungspflichtig ist. Siehe hierzu den Artikel „Beiwerk“.

This is why I blurred your face. Anyhow, I made it even more blurred for you. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

ATS 2500GT

Hi, excuse me for my disturbance. I recently have been working on the stuff of the 2500GT, and I've noticed that you changed the engine cylinder-distribution from "flat" to "inline". Tbh at first I thought that the cylinders were in the form of "inline" as well, but after a nice guy added that the engine was from Subaru, I corrected it into "flat". So here I want to know if the cylinders do be in the form of "inline", or just still under controversy? Thanks for your answer. :) ArcTempesta (talk) 15:23, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi ArcTempesta, that must have been a mistake on my part - you are definitely correct in that it is a flat engine. However, the "car" was never more than an imaginary rendering, so I don't think we ought to give it too much space. Vaporware, methinks, I'll wait and see if their redecorated MacLaren happens.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:11, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ford Escort (Europe), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page I4 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

usage of access-date

In regards to the 1587 vs 1588 cc thing - fair enough. The printed mechanics books list either one, it changes seemingly at random for the different print years.

I strongly disagree with access-date serving no function. Following the guidelines for how to cite, citation style and everything else I can not find something that says that archive-date on it's own is a suitable substitute. Looking at other articles, featured ones and non featured ones, there are plenty that have both an archive-date (as is required) and an access-date. One reason why I think that access-date is sensible to have is to account for website changes. The archive is, hopefully, such that it accurately matches what was cited. But a website can change in that information changes slightly, or gets lost completely while the linked page itself remains. It also allows an interested reader to know when the citation was either created or seriously worked on. That's important as for example a several year old access-date on a citation indicates the need for a possible update or at least a look at the link. The archive-url and -date only show what once was, for when a website has gone down or a page gone missing.

Please do not hastily remove them from the article in the fashion that you have done. If there is previous discussion about the usage of access-date I haven't come across it. As I understand there is also a degree of flexibility on how these citations can be formatted, usually the first editor chooses a style to their liking.

As a random IP using 'my' talk page isn't likely to get a response in a timely manner. Will watch yours, that will work better.

regards, 2A04:4540:903:7E00:D406:A1D9:C1C6:30E2 (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

No point switching the conversation here, clearly we need more editors involved. Moving your response there.  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mr.choppers. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Photo comparison for Kia Sportage

Vauxford's

Mine

Hello Mr.choppers, How have you been? I'm currently in a bit of a dispute between a user (Vauxford) in relation to his images and I thought, you being the expert in car photography are able to compare and see which of the two is better. Vauxford keeps reverting my edits for unnecessary reasons and he usually ignores some of the guidelines on OSX's WP:CARPIX and also he believes that junk orange picture he took on his iPhone is better quality, where I have been following the rules that have been established since I have arrived here. I only came to message you because I would like you to take a look at both images and come to a conclusion to see whos is better.

I will get Vauxford to get his own version of the story and post his version of the edit here, and to tell us why he belives his is better. Again, this is not me relying on my own ways. This is what has been established on Wikiproject Automobiles and therefore I follow this guideline. Vauxford on the other hand doesn't really follow this guideline, instead he relies on his own judgement. I'm not sure whether I'm getting much further with him. Although my image has maybe a slight sunshade ting, it doesn't mean that its a bad image, compared to Vauxford's Sportage. If you believe his is better, I will not make any further reverts and the dispute has been solved.

Please respond, I would like to see which is better so the dispute has been settled. Cheers EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 03:51, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't much care who took each picture, and I also feel that there is somewhat of a preponderance of Australian-plated cars in Wikipedia - presumably due to there being more interest from editors down under. But this is very clear, the photo of the silver car is much much better. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:40, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Vauxford, had complaints of me reverting his edit and to prevent edit warring, he believes that his orange car is the better one, I've discussed this with him, so would it be okay if you like tell us about the discussion we had please? I don't want Vauxford to think I'm a hypocrite. I've done edit reverts enough and not going to be wasting my time, so would it be possible if we let him discuss it here please? He thinks that his orange car is a "...bit sharpen but does show details nicely..." which I do not fully agree with, so we are going to let him have his say. Lets get him to talk about it here. UK would probably be a bit in the middle of the day for him, so we will wait for the response from him to discuss what action is needed. We will have a voting system to see out of the three of us, which is better. EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Do you have any other car pics you want me to focus in Australia that you know we haven't got on Wikipedia? I'm more than happy. If you want me to the Holden Acadia, i can, theres a Holden dealership not far from Fremantle Train Station, next time I go with friends, I'll visit that and grab a pic. I can do any old Aussie car as User:OSX is no longer there. Cheers EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:03, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I just want the best photos and I am trying to be as honest as possible. No thanks needed! WTH is a Holden Acadia, a rebadged GMC? Sounds horrible but should definitely be photographed.  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

It was recently released this year, replacing the ageing Holden Captiva. I agree, Holden should seriously stop importing cars that are from the US. I looked at it, not the best I've seen. I guess Holden workers are lazy hey. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on Vauxford's talkpage

Hi Mr.choppers

Please compare (angle wise)

Vauxford made a recent edit (as I said on his talkpage which we discussed) and I was wondering why he thinks that his image is at a better angle to mine. I was going to follow up with you, but I don't see a need to revert as I agree with Vauxford, his is higher quality. I don't mind his contributions, I have no problems with him, but he seems to be fussy over some of my edits. I have a firm editing style but I am generally not biased with my photos (except maybe in the last 2 months or so). I am not being lazy, in fact, I was the one who begun before Vauxford in relation to his images, he keeps trailing me with uploads i.e. when I upload, he'd upload before me and often accuses me of being "lazy" and thinks I should take my own path. Well I'm sorry for him, but I was the one who first uploaded pics of international worldwide vehicles from Australia. Seriously, he should focus mostly on cars that are in the UK, such as Vauxhall, Rover, Jaguar, Land Rover etc. and leave the Asian cars to a person who is from another country, say Singapore, India, Malaysia or Australia. I generally have now not bothered picturing Suzukis because I know Vauxford would be focusing on the newer ones, so I've now just left out the European models out. You, OSX, M 93 & Charles01 are my favourite car photographers. Sadly IFCAR left, but I really liked some of his American images, but Vauxford keeps insisting his is better. Not only I'm upset, but I seem a little downtrodden and feel like my images have no value on Wikipedia, rather its being kept as an archive on Wikipedia. I think for this and to prevent further conflict we should have a team role and divide up the sections as see fit:

• You & Kevauto – Focus on the American cars, such as Jeep
• Vauxford (more new cars @ dealers) & M 93 (other European car photographers) – All European manufactured cars
• Myself – Australian and Asian cars [mostly slightly older] (These sell in good numbers in Australia, and may suggest that other editors chip in.

Please note this is only a suggestion, but i think this should be easier to prevent future conflicts. Its not mandatory, and I am open to discussion. I also believe that if we keep to these guidelines, everyone is in a happy place :))EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 07:57, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@EurovisionNim: There is absolutely no justification for "dividing sections." Every one tries to take the best photos they can, of what they see wherever they are. Sorry. I assure you that I at least will always support the highest quality, most illustrative images, no matter the license plates or who took it.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Advice for your photos

Hi Mr.choppers I really like your photos you upload, however I would like to advice you to refrain from using auto mode. The reason being is that sometimes it doesn't really work out. I suggest begin with Aperture Priority and use f/4.5 - f/5.6 because it has a large aperture. Do you want me to email you the attachment of the cheat I got from a Facebook group chat about aperture and stuff. Thereby you can produce high quality shots. Best --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Why change the current gen pic?

Do you know that i said in the summary is to avoid confusion of the readers thinking that model in the picture is current. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 01:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I said it on the Mitsubishi Mirage page. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 01:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@VictorTorres2002: I just commented on your talk page, okay to keep it there?  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Oops, i've deleted it by mistake. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll just revert the accidentaly deleted message on my talkpage. VictorTorres2002 (talk) 01:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Audi Q7 images

Hello, please see Talk:Audi_Q7#Audi_Q7_great_example and please provide your input into which would be the better example. Thanks --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 00:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Grey Baskerville has left the building

After surviving AfDs, Doug Thorley and Magoo are still up, but both could use better sourcing. I'm wondering if you've got back issues of Hot Rod, Car Craft, National Dragster, & the like that would help. Ditto on Jake, Showboat, The Mantaray, Ed Donovan, Donovan hemi, Silhouette, and a few others I've created lately. (Have a look at my userpage under the "Open Vanity" 3&4.) Any help you can be would be very much appreciated. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 09:35, 1 January 2019 (UTC) (Post scriptum No actual reply needed. If you can help, jump right in; if not, no worries.)

@Trekphiler: - alas, drag racing/hot rodding is as alien to me as is Star Trek. Sometimes old Swedish magazines carry references to these sorts of things, I will make sure to make use of them should I come across anything. Congrats on keeping the articles and Happy New Year!  Mr.choppers | ✎  12:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

No problem. I've been going through back contribs, & your name came up in connection to a (somewhat) related page, so I thought I'd give you a shout. (Along with all the others who fit that profile. ;p ) Thx for the good wishes, & the eyes on the subject. Same applies if you turn up anything on custom car or hot rod; Swedish (or European) coverage is way outside my experience, but it deserves mention! Best in the new year! TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 01:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

TD2000 edit

Mr.choppers, I removed the external link www.mgtdclassic.com because it isn't TD Cars. TD Cars Pte. Ltd. was officially dissolved 10 years ago. Pls do not reinstate the external link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FBI J. Edgar Hoover (talk • contribs) 19:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Automobile Dacia

Hi, regarding this edit: I still don't see the reference that says the Dacia 1310 P was built in Poland. That's an information held exclusively by you. I'm not being offensive towards you, but you shouldn't revert the edit just like that, with no additional proof. I'd like to know in which Polish factory it was built, but also see a reliable source. Thanks. Regards, BaboneCar (talk) 08:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@BaboneCar: - You're absolutely right, I spent hours trying to verify what I thought I knew. And couldn't find a thing, of course. From what I can see, the "P" only signifies being a Polish-market car. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:58, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

1950 Ferrari 195S Inter Vignale Competizione Coupé

I am writing an article on this car for FORZA MAGAZINE and would like to consider using one or more of your pictures from the Greenwich Concours, specifically one that shows both this car and Jay Leno's Cunningham C3, next to it. Both cars had the exact same color and are quite similar. I would be glad to get you credited for the photos, but alas, there is no money in it. Please contact me at george@avekta.com.

Thank you for your consideration, George Avgerakis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:3D92:3000:4E4:1878:9223:F4C2 (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Blue Checker A12 photo

Hi. You have a photo here - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Post-1974_Checker_Marathon_A12.jpg - and it looks to be the exact Checker I am searching for. It was last seen in Tijuana, MX/San Diego, USA, and was owned by Mother Antonia, a nun at the prison in Tijuana. She passed away in 2013 and the only photo I have of her with the car is from the mid-80s. More on her here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonia_Brenner though it doesn't mention her car. I am particularly interested in her Checker cab because I, too, am a gringa in Tijuana and I drive a Checker Cab!

Can you tell me any information about where you saw this car, when you saw it (I noticed the pic was dated in 2012), and any other info at all that you might have about it?

Thanks! Lily N. Lilyjdragonfly (talk) 06:04, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Lilyjdragonfly: - Hi, it is very easy - the picture has GPS information embedded. I'll spare you the trouble though, it was at a classic car dealer/repair place called Aventura Motors, in Southampton, Long Island (NY). I don't know anything at all about the car beyond where it was. Now, I shall read about Ms. Brenner. Enjoy your Checker, seeing one is rare around here but always makes me happy.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:36, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much; I was so excited about seeing the pic that I forgot to check the GPS stuff! Lilyjdragonfly (talk) 18:20, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Accreditation

Hello!

I'm interested in using one of your photos in a project of mine and just want to double check on how you would like to be credited. Is Mr Choppers fine?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.205.109.97 (talk) 19:52, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, although it is Mr.choppers. Just out of curiosity, which picture? Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Okay I'll credit you as Mr. Choppers.

The photo I'd like to use is the GM 400ci engine in 1975 Avanti II — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.205.109.97 (talk) 20:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Cool, enjoy it. And no, not "Mr. Choppers", Mr.choppers. A ridiculous name but I can't change it after ten years here.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Ford F-series (medium duty truck)

You added a photo and I have my doubts about the year. There was a book I looked at some years ago which showed the same design for all Ford trucks from 1948 to 1950 and then a different design in 1951 and 1952.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: - you are probably right; I thought the same thing when comparing to other photos, but then the image was labelled a 1951 by the uploader. I changed the description.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

About that AWD and 4WD problem

About my edit on the Toyota Noah article, there is clearly a difference between the AWD and 4WD systems. The Noah that sold in Japan does not provide a transfer case to switch between all-wheel or front-wheel driving modes like the traditional 4WD system does. This can also be applied to the other non-SUV JDM cars such as the Toyota Mark X. The definitions here also explain that.180.244.54.144 (talk) 12:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, those distinctions are mostly inchoate and often confusing. From the AWD article:

The most common forms of all-wheel drive are:

4×4 (also, four-wheel drive and 4WD)
Reflecting two axles with both wheels on each capable of being powered.

The supposed distinction is not universally accepted, and not recognized at all outside of the US and Canada. Read this article for instance. Since these are JDM cars, I feel that AWD v 4WD is inapplicable. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:36, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Here is what the SAE has to say about it, also from the Four-wheel drive article:

SAE Recommended Practices

Per the SAE International standard J1952, AWD is the preferred term for all the systems described above. The standard subdivides AWD systems into three categories.

Part-Time AWD systems require driver intervention to couple and decouple the secondary axle from the primarily driven axle and these systems do not have a center differential (or similar device). The definition notes that part-time systems may have a low range.

Full-Time AWD systems drive both front and rear axles at all times via a center (inter-axle) differential. The torque split of that differential may be fixed or variable depending on the type of center differential. This system can be used on any surface at any speed. The definition does not address inclusion or exclusion of a low range gear.

On-Demand AWD systems drive the secondary axle via an active or passive coupling device or "by an independently powered drive system". The standard notes that in some cases the secondary drive system may also provide the primary vehicle propulsion. An example is a hybrid AWD vehicle where the primary axle is driven by an internal combustion engine and secondary axle is driven by an electric motor. When the internal combustion engine is shut off the secondary, electrically driven axle is the only driven axle. On-demand systems function primarily with only one powered axle until torque is required by the second axle. At that point either a passive or active coupling sends torque to the secondary axle.

In addition to the above primary classifications the J1952 standard notes secondary classifications resulting in a total of eight system designations:

Part-Time Non Synchro System Part-Time Synchro System Full-Time Fixed Torque System Full-Time Variable Torque Passive System Full-Time Variable Torque Active System On-Demand Synchro Variable Torque Passive System On-Demand Synchro Variable Torque Active System

On-Demand Independently Powered Variable Torque Active System

Mitsubishi GTO / 3000GT

Fanboying would be saying that it does 12.5s stock. I have Best Motoring videos that show the MKII GTO MR beating the R32 GT-R and R33 GT-R in acceleration tests. I didn't link them. I also have a video of a bone stock 1999 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 doing a 13.2@102.2. Didn't link that either.

I'm an older mechanic. I've worked on all four and driven all 4. The Z32 TT and the FD3 TT were slower in a straight line the VR-4. It's proven.

What's wrong with legitimate sources from major magazines? They never got the Z32/FD3 under 13.7 ET or trapped over 105mph. Edmunds tested a 1999 VR-4 and did a 14.0@105 - id link that as well but it's gone.

Let me guess - you think the VR-4 is the slowest and a fat pig. VR-4 Enthusiast (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

No, I like the VR-4 alright. One of my dream autos when I was fourteen (although I'd much much rather have an FTO). It is simply an argument that is of little interest, plus anyone could find sources supporting whatever they want to have on there. Road tests are notoriously unreliable, due to the vagaries of testing and also because the habit of car makers (all of them) of giving special fettling to test cars. Wikipedia is not a d**k measuring contest for the fans of various cars. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

How to take better pictures

Hello, I recently started photographing interesting cars I see around. Although, I am always afraid that someone will confront me when I take pictures, which usually leads to me taking them from a distance and cropping them to just show the car I want to photograph. This means that the pictures turn out much lower quality than I would like. Could you give some tips on how to take better images and not being so obvious about photographing cars on the street? SsmIntrigue (talk) 02:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Great, I am looking forward to seeing your shots. I notice that looking through the viewfinder always makes me braver than otherwise...

I usually just take the photos - but I worked as a Maître d' and as a Sommelier for many years, so I usually expect to be able to talk my way out of situations. If I have encounters with crazies I usually try to sidetrack them with a) enthusiasm and b) dorkiness. Being super excited about their 1996 Hyundai Sonata is somehow disarming. Next step is that I explain that I always blank license plates (outside of car shows) and if they remain crazy I tell them I am deleting the photos while swiftly removing myself. But that has happened maybe twice in ten years, so it shouldn't be a major concern. Most of the people that don't want their cars to be photographed seem to be right-wing nutjobs, so they just have to be convinced that you're not with Acorn or the IRS. But being in Ontario I imagine you won't have these sorts of problems.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Subaru WRX VA Platform

Ok, I get the no speculation part, but I thought encyclopedia was to catalog information on items and how they changed over time. I guess you are saying Wiki is not interested in detailed changes, but just general, high level looks. I kind of did not think I was being super detailed, but just taking the 10000 foot view and not the 10 inch view.

Is there an article I can be pointed to as an example to follow on how detailed or not detailed I should get. I am glad I did not spend the time doing the same year to year changes for the STI.

I know you deleted a lot of content, but for that material you deleted, was I including enough references or do I need to be more or less detailed in the reference section.

Thanks

Um, I can recommend Toyota Camry articles - lots of active editors and very few fanboys seems to make for well curated articles. Just try to strike a neutral tone, don't speculate about 2021, and always aim to write readable prose rather than bullet point lists. Prices are not to be included unless they are particularly notable. In general, listing equipment differences is not particularly interesting to the general reader. This is not a Buyers' Guide. As for references, the amount seems ok to me (there are lots of opinions, with many editors spending their entire time peppering pages with "Citation Needed" tags) but try to format them properly. The system is a bit weird, I learned by copying other references and by reading Template:Citation. I will follow up, and I will try to spend more time looking at your work next time. Also good to look at is WP:CAR and WP:STYLE.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your recommendations. I will spend some time studying these, and not go enthusiastically charging ahead.

I know your time is volunteered so this is extra appreciated. Thanks again.

Disambiguation link notification for August 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Honda Today, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scooter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Isotta Fraschini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mors (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:58, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for content edit

Good day!

I have been in touch with Victor Torres and we decided we could re-add the content i added for mitsubishi canter about reading the model codes after some edits. could i kindly request some edits from you so we could re-add the content soon?

Best Regards, Ken — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken.Aoki0329 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Apologies!

I was in the middle of leaving you a semi humorous response to your revision and it appears that I have altered your main page and messed it up - so apologies there and it was in no way an attempt of vandalism.

Can you reset it rather than me making it worse?

Regards

Juanpumpchump (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Juanpumpchump: Ah, no worries at all. Best regards,  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:07, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Challenger X

Can you please explain what a Challenger X is? I can't seem to find this variant of the Challenger anywhere. Here is where you called the car a Challenger X. Now this has caused quite a stir on the Dodge Challenger page.

U¹ _quattro TALK 18:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hm, I may have just depended on the "X" on the trunk.  Mr.choppers | ✎  23:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Peugeot 204/Wei-Wei Te Mousse

Peugeot 204 Berline

Cik-cik-cik te muka nanah, te OK car, Ah Pak-Pak cha.

Te kelawar car, te Sanjay gunting, hok ci thoi. 60.53.125.193 (talk) 06:19, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

That's just what I was thinking.  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Still stubborn.

The IP 90.195.49.226 did those things again. Is that considered as a block evasion? 182.30.87.226 (talk) 14:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but as I am sure you know, IPs are untouchable. Range blocking is very drastic, so unless WP looks over its policies we will just have to keep policing for this foolishness. Thanks!

What's funny is that their edits are flushing out some of the existing incorrect categorizations, so Wikipedia actually benefits from their idiocy. Hah!  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

RfC Closure

Hello Mr.choppers,

There has been an RfC here which needs close-by an uninvolved user. As you're uninvolved, I am requesting you for it's closure. Its non closure is resulting in an edit war at the BMW M3 page.

Regards. U¹ _quattro TALK 15:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Mr.choppers correction done. I apologise for any inconvenience.U¹ _quattro TALK 19:01, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Re: Polonez

Hi! Yes - the name Atu is associated with the card game (similar to the name of the Caro model). The dispute with the insurance company was probably in France - that's why the car on the French market was offered under the name FSO Atou. I am collecting sources to develop an article about Polonez on Polish Wikipedia, I will also try to add sources to English Wikipedia. Greetings :) LechitaPL (talk) 18:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Meteor (automobile), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford Fairlane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:49, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Toyota Diesel Truck

Thought you might get a kick out of this. https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/352896184841?ul_noapp=true  Stepho  talk  14:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

@Stepho-wrs: - nice! Luckily for my wallet I only collect 87th scale cars.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Pak-Age-Car

On 20 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pak-Age-Car, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Pak-Age-Car (example pictured) was Stutz's last gasp? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pak-Age-Car. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pak-Age-Car), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rayton-Fissore Magnum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ZF (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Doing the same thing again.

This IP is still doing that thing in this new year. :| 182.30.139.37 (talk) 04:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Update 05:13 (UTC) has been reported — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.30.139.37 (talk)

Update 05:18 (UTC) has been blocked 182.30.139.37 (talk) 05:17, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Nicely done.  Mr.choppers | ✎  11:53, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited BMW M88, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Procar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion.

This IP has evaded the block. 182.30.12.254 (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Quick catch, nice.  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:11, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Automotive industry in India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maruti (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Opel misunderstanding

Hello, Mr. Choppers. Hope you are doing well. If you remember, at the time there was a screwy edit with the Opel page that, quote "ruins the page leaving only the Opel insignia and an error message." (that is what I said on the edit at 20:17, 11 April 2012) You responded on my talk page with "Sorry, didn't realize how screwy that edit was. Also hadn't noticed all of the German English on the page... Apologies." Now today at 5:59 UTC you posted on my talk page "Not sure where you copy-pasted all of this text from, but it is a copy-paste of several chapters of Karl Ludvigsen's book Opel: Wheels to the World. I know this happened a hundred (8) years ago and I do not hope for any repercussions, but if you have committed any other similar copyvios I strongly recommend going back and deleting them." I did NOT add that text, nor have I ever heard of the book "Opel:Wheels to the World" till I read your post today. On April 11, 2012, I was playing with the text to see what was causing the error message, as seen here:

   20:17, 11 April 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-58,836) . . Opel 
   20:09, 11 April 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+43,596) . . Opel
   20:08, 11 April 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-102,382) . . Opel
   19:56, 11 April 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-25,650) . . Opel
   19:48, 11 April 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+12) . . Opel (Undid revision 486809644 by EnzaiBot (talk))

The edit where I added 43,596 bytes of data was me adding text back that was already on the page, and I did it to see if I could fix the error message. The stuff from the book by Karl Ludvigsen (which I assume is all that WW2 stuff from what I saw you deleted) was, from what I could find, added on 13:35, 26 January 2010‎ by a user named Ds1863.

I hope this clears things up! Let's continue to make Wikipedia a great recourse! Best regards, --Rockclaw1030 (talk) 20:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Whitespace Stripping

Hey again, I saw you reverted my edit on the Maserati Quattroporte article, mentioning the removal of spaces in the infobox. Firstly, I wanted to clarify that it is not me doing that, it has something to do with my system or my browser and the way they handle Wikipedia. Of course, I know that doesn't make it any less irritating for future editors, so I was wondering if you knew what could be causing the issue? Because I honestly don't know what is causing it. My knowledge of the tech aspect of Wikipedia is very limited. Second, I wanted to ask, about the edit you reverted, did you simply revert due to the whitespace stripping or did you also not agree with the change of image? TKOIII (talk) 20:43, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi @TKOIII:, I didn't agree with the image change (I feel the angle is a bit too wide, distorting the shape of the car) but it wasn't a very strong disagreement and if it wasn't for the whitespace business I would have left it. Do you use a phone or something to edit with? I have never known a browser to execute unasked-for edits, but I am also not a techie. Do you have any custom tools installed? Perhaps you are a bot? Some of them are so good nowadays that they think they're humans (joke). Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:05, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah ok, gotcha. And no, I only use my laptop to edit. It's a pretty standard setup; Windows 10 and Google Chrome. As far as custom tools, I don't believe I have any Wikipedia specific tools aside from Twinkle, which I didn't use to make that edit nor do I use very often anymore. And, although I can not rule out the possibility that I am a bot, I think with the current state of bot technology the odds would be low haha. TKOIII (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for going to International Loadstar. I felt as soon as I saw it that your 6 Feb 2020 post, then the rest, gave the move credibility. Thank you. No reply is needed. Sammy D III (talk) 20:00, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Mistake?

Did you mean to cut Loadstar up like this? I just went there with a new project and now I'm out of business. Sammy D III (talk) 05:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I moved the content to the International Loadstar article. What's the new project?  Mr.choppers | ✎  05:25, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

I was just working on infoboxes and wanted to update these. They probably wouldn't reconcile very well though, single vs. multiple with more info, so I'm probably better off just leaving these alone and moving on anyway. Just a note, without numbers in the text the infoboxes don't ref. Have a good day/night. Sammy D III (talk) 06:38, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Not quite sure what

"without numbers in the text the infoboxes don't ref"

means, did I break something? I updated the references at International Loadstar, they seem alright to me. If you have any additional Loadstar content I think it would be useful!  Mr.choppers | ✎  06:51, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

I understand your Loadstar in a list. I was using it as a source and context for the numbers in the infobox and, frankly, to take up space. My main interest is the form of the infobox and I've got what I want. Please do anything, it was just bad timing.

Loadstar needs form, correct? There is info there but it is a mess? Maybe we should move to talk there, but I'm sure not going to start anything. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

The Loadstar article is just a bit empty and somewhat undersourced, once I added the things from the International page it looked a lot better. I should just get out Crismon but there are so many things that interest me right now that I don't know where to turn. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:15, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

I think you have improved Loadstar, but you could have just copied that stuff, you didn't need to delete it, did you? I really don't want to revert anyone. I suppose I should try to do something at Loadstar. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sammy D III: If there is a main article then that is where information belongs. You could always propose deleting International Loadstar. From Template:Main: "When a Wikipedia article is large, it is often written in summary style. This template is used after the heading of the summary, to link to the subtopic article that has been summarized." If List of International (brand) trucks is indeed a list it doesn't need infoboxes nor so much content for each model. Compare with List of German institutions for instance, or List of Mack Trucks products. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Or I guess you should restore whatever content is consistent with being a summary. I still think that the infoboxes are making that page a giant mess; maybe just keep the infoboxes for those vehicles that don't have standalone articles?  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Venting. I had a bunch of International sources and was interested in infoboxes. I made a "list". I have posted, e-mailed, and even asked a librarian for their help. The first person who ever cared showed up and just started dismantling it unilaterally. Since you cut up Loadstar were you going to cut up the rest? I threw away what I thought was good information for you because I like editing, but I'm not going to put it anywhere else. It's just gone.

Loadstar refs didn't fit because I hadn't done them. I stopped and reverted because I have ownership problems. I thought "this is not the place" for me. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 20:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I guess I am not quite sure what you are/were trying to do. It could just be that I cannot understand what you are trying to say. Earlier, you wrote "That list is effectively a personal blog", and that is not what Wikipedia is for. When adding content to Wikipedia you are essentially giving away the right to control it, it becomes public property the second you hit "publish changes." But instead of "throwing away" the "good information," why not add it to the relevant articles?

Was this list about IH or were you just trying to create a new kind of infobox?  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I am poor at talking sometimes (often). I was the only one there, I designed everything without input, and I did anything I wanted. Nobody was excluded, nobody ever came. I slashed it for you and left instead of continuing what I was doing.

I have too many problems to edit anything, especially International.

Infoboxes. Those are Gen 1 and obsolete now, both in design and use. The blurb was secondary but evolved. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 01:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Tractor Merge on Mitsubishi GTO page

I STRONGLY OPPOSE the tractor format. A TON of work has been done on that page to add sources with real links, bringing the tractor thing in would be a disaster. Just voicing my opinion. Also, when will the top banner talking about the merge go away? VR-4 Enthusiast (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry, the tag has no impact on the article, nothing is merging there and there will be no change based on the discussion. You can always click the tage and state your opposition to it at the relevant discussion, but be aware that the merger concerns an infobox and not Mitsubishi GTO itself.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Reason why I removed displacement on the Hyundai Grandeur page

Hello,

Regarding Hyundai Grandeur

I removed it for two reasons.

First is simply because the displacement is self evident from the model name, for example "3.0" LPi is 29xx to 30xx cc ....etc.

Second, I added top speed to that table, to avoid putting too much info on that table and make it wide and large.

Your revert reinstated the displacement but removed the top speed as well.

Alawadhi3000 (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

2992cc (or whatever) is not the same as 3.0. Also, there are lots of cars that have misleading names, such as the 2143cc mercedes C180 diesel. It is not my responsibility to salvage the good parts of your edits, but feel free to do so yourself. Best regards,  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

You and me both know that Asian manufacturers always advertise the true displacement unlike Germans. And yes, 2992cc is the same as 3.0L, no need to be very specific about the exact displacement when there is a page dedicated to the engine, contain all the small details and is already linked to the page (inside the infobox). Alawadhi3000 (talk) 22:35, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes there is, compare with nearly all other car articles. And there is plenty of space for both speed and displacement.  Mr.choppers | ✎  23:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nissan QD engine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Direct injection (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

"GM S platform" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect GM S platform. Since you had some involvement with the GM S platform redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Tsla1337 (talk) 16:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

A Boxster Spyder for you!

	For uploading a good picture of the Jaguar XJR-15 to commons.

U¹ _quattro TALK 16:15, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@U1Quattro: Thanks!  Mr.choppers | ✎  22:57, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Mr.choppers keep up the good work! Cheers.U¹ _quattro TALK 00:45, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

M3 99 conversion to hardtop, guidance please?

Dear Mr. Choppers, I've brought my dear M3/99, E36 silver convertible, from the USA to the UK about 10 years ago. With the pass of time the top became soggy and green of algae so i had it changed last year. Unfortunately it seems the seals around the doors are not longer holding the water when it rains so it's flooding the interior really badly as it deposits and stays on the floor. (a car cover around here is not an option as the wind has damaged and blown away all the covers I've bought). So my next and possibly best and cheapest option would be to convert the top to a hard one. Only thing is that I'm having a hard time finding a hard top for my car here. Or if you had any advise on the change of the seals, or parts from others than BMW as they are SO expensive! ANY help or referrals or information that you could share i would appreciate it very much, just let me know please.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.188.71 (talk) 16:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I am a Wikipedia editor who often photographs cars. Not sure what help I can be. Have you tried the internet? Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, I guess i misunderstood your posts as i saw the picture of a converted hardtop M3. ;-) I'll keep searching, Cheers!

FYI

Hey Mr Choppers, FYI there's another AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isuzu Giga (2nd nomination), Letting you know as you left an editor a message on the deletion of the article, Many thanks, Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 17:13, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

TVR Cerbera

Is everything fine with you? How come you not ascertain the fact that the Cerbera is a 2+2 and is a grand tourer? Did you even read the cited sources? Do some research next time so that your errors are not misinformed at this level. U¹ _quattro TALK 17:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Clarification

Sorry to bother, I just want something you said on the ANI clarified. "I have observed U1Quattro pushing several other editors over the edge in the past. I could be wrong, but I remember at least User:Typ932, User:Vauxford, User:Ybsone, and User:1292simon all getting in hot water over altercations with U1Q. There are probably more. I don't know if their statuses warrant any sort of reconsideration? Obviously they should have all been better at dealing with situations, but it has been frustrating to watch mostly good editors leaving and getting blocked." I should held accountable as well? Even my dilemma happened over a year ago and I moved on from that.--Vauxford (talk) 13:23, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Vauxford: - I meant that whatever troubles you (and others) had gotten into as a result of U1Quattro should be seen in a new light, i.e. minimizing the blame placed on you. But as it seems that you have moved on I guess there is nothing to worry about. Relatedly, are you still under community restriction? I would say that you are an entirely different editor nowadays and would support lifting the restrictions, FWIW. I have no clue how to go about it or any suggestions, just a feeling on my part. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:23, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

The only trouble I got into with U1Quattro was the edit warring part which got me a 24 hour block. Then he clashed with YBSone resulting in another ANI, the people on there initially proposed a 3-way IBAN between me, U1Quattro and YBSone. However, I distanced myself from all that immediately since I didn't want to be involved in their spat. Thus, it resulted to just a regular IBAN between them. Yes I am still under community restriction, I'm still semi-active on Wikipedia and still uploading images despite the pandemic, but there only so many I can do on there and if I really want to propose a change with something regarding to images on a article, I would take it to the talk page, but I usually only getting one person involved in it, so it never becomes a full discussion, which makes reaching a consensus difficult.

Also you should really get the message below suppressed by a overseer. --Vauxford (talk) 00:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Vauxford: - Haha, yeah, stuff like that doesn't really worry me. They usually get deleted by some sort of wiki-gnome before long. I guess my question was whether your community restriction is for eternity or if there was an avenue to have it lifted, like one would request the undoing of a block?  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

No clue how to get it lifted, but it would be great to have that bit of freedom back, there quite a few photos I uploaded that I strongly feel they make great addition to the articles, especially the newer vehicles. I will still discuss stuff on the talkpage if I need to to minimised COI. --Vauxford (talk) 02:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

PRnewswire.com

Hello! You asked for an explanation here. Have you heard that PRNEWSWIRE is a press release service? It's a terrible source, signed at the bottom with "Dukas Linden Public Relations" and their contact info. Why on earth would you revert that?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: Press releases can be used as sources, unless there is any doubt of their veracity. Has the source been blacklisted? If not, I would not recommend deleting instances thereof unless you can provide a better source first, or if the reference regards something controversial. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:50, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

It's poor quality self-published material, and we should not be advocating for including it as a source. See the perennial sources list at WP:RSNP, where it is a source to avoid.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

It's self-published, yes - and it's used as a reference for the organization changing its own name. Thus it is totally fine in this case. Again, I wouldn't use it if Kearney had used it to state that one of their clients had a great product, but that's not the case here.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

See WP:ABOUTSELF. It fits these guidelines, as it also does at BMW 5-series.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

It's low quality stuff that should be avoided if possible, per the advice at WP:RSNP. When you use Prnewswire.com you are just publishing the article subject's own writing. If possible that should be avoided, seeing as we are building an encyclopedia and not doing advertising for companies. I've replaced the Kearney source with something slightly better. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Better is always better. But it's totally okay to use a source themselves when the conditions at WP:ABOUTSELF are met. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I encourage you to aspire to better sources. As it says at WP:RSNP, there is a general consensus that it (Prenewswire) is to be avoided. What a company says about itself and its products is not always to be believed. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

As I have said several times already: of course a better source is better. I am not suggesting that we reinstate these PRnewswire sources if and when better sources are found. And I have never suggested using company sources for any controversial facts, which is patently not the case here. By all means replace these citations, but unless there is any reason to disbelieve the statements then don't just delete them.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Panel truck

The panel truck page should not (at least in my opinion) be merged in the panel van page, since a panel van is based on a car chassis (sedan, hatchback, and station wagon), while a panel truck is based on a truck chassis (pickup truck, SUV, or in some rare times of a crossover). Also the HHR was inspired by old panel trucks, so it should be listed here and the T2 had a fully enclosed body and was taller than some other European panel vans of it's time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aertgan (talk • contribs) 04:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The T2 is a van from the beginning, whereas you yourself state that panel trucks are based on a truck chassis. Is there a source for panel truck being distinct from panel van? And lastly, what about the names of things in other countries? And who decided SUVs and crossovers were included? Anyhow, this belongs at the merger discussion and I suggest you make yourself heard there instead. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:18, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Why panel trucks are also built on the chassis of SUVs

As you see the Chevrolet panel truck is based on the chassis of the Suburban which is an SUV, also as the HHR is stated in some sites as a crossover . And panel trucks are mainly built on a pickup truck chassis, I mean it's quite obvious, just look at a ford pickup from the 50s and a ford panel truck from the 50s. So yeah?

The Suburban itself is built on the chassis of a truck; SUV was not even a term in usage until the late 1980s. The HHR is not a panel truck, most sources that mention it call it a sedan delivery or panel van or even panel wagon. Here's one. So no.  Mr.choppers | ✎  18:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Pontiac G6

Hi Mr.choppers. I'm getting confused why the Pontiac G6 had two different stylings. I knew that they did a facelift for the mid-2009 model year, but I can't tell which of these images is the 2009.5 model. Was there a further facelift that sold very little before Pontiac's demise? Thanks. --Vauxford (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

The more radical facelift

The more subtle one

The manic looking one seems to be the GXP version, which received its own look beginning with MY2008.  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

About the panel truck article

Okay, I decided to give up on the panel truck article. Are you happy now? Also, why did you called me "an editor who is trying to expand the definition and is marking everything he can as a panel truck"? Anyway, do what you want with that article. Wish you the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aertgan (talk • contribs) 16:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't want you to "give up" on anything. Just hoping you would help find out what the actual answers are instead of trying to make panel truck into something it's not. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Bedford TA

I added a sentence that the Bedford TA is the European equivalent of the GMC New Design. Just look at the New Design and the TA. They're identical if not the same cab (with some minor changes) being used in both vehicles.

I suggest you read WP:OR.  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Law Enforcemnt in Brazil

You changed the article. So, I have some questions: 1st: are you a law enforcement agent? 2nd: are you a neutral part? 3rd: are you a brazilian federal and/or state law enforcement agent?

I'm just asking.

Bryard (talk) 15:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

PS:

I would like to know about your training in public security. Because I see that you have none. For me, it is a case of a Swedish citizen editing in an article about Brazil, a country you have never visited.

Bryard (talk) 15:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Your grammar and spelling are all over the place. I do not edit articles about the Swedish or American police in Portuguese, because I cannot write it well enough to do so. Perhaps you can find someone who can assist you in writing content.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia: WikiProject Law Enforcemnt

I am part of a "task force" created on Wikipedia whose mission is to monitor articles on law enforcement forces. If someone vandalizes the article or does not dominate the subject, I inform the senior editors. From the moment you are working on an article that is not your business, you are entering an editing war. And I don't think you're fluent in English enough to say whether my grammar is good or not. If I need English lessons I look for a teacher. And, they always approved of my pronunciation and grammar.

Next time, be more ethical and polite.

Bryard (talk) 18:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

That's nice. But while your English is pretty good, there were tons of spelling and grammar mistakes. Maybe just take more time with your edits? For instance, you named this section "Law Enforcemnt in Brazil". Also, please format your references instead of using bare urls. Also, WP is an open encyclopedia and there are no monopolies on who can write about which topics - see WP:OWN.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Friendly Warning

There are only 6 Swedish citizens that interest me: The Queen, Joel Kinnaman, and the members of ABBA. And, contrary to what you think you know, there is an internal hierarchy in wikipedia. Not in relation to subordination, but an ethical brake. And since I have a subordinate relationship like you, I call this issue over. If you vandalize the article, I will have to report it to the right. Please do not insist on your modifications, or moral lesson. I have the impression that I am much older than you. So, your opinions: keep it for yourself. The Law Enforcement in Brazil article is under monitoring. Don't try to contact me again. Or I'll consider you a stalker. Consider that.

Here is the link to the project where I am a collaborator.

Bryard (talk) 01:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Wow. Most of that doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but rest assured I will keep an eye at whichever articles interest me.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Just wanted to drop by and say thanks again for your help on the Ford Fiesta MK5 article, Admittedly I wasn't sure what to put for the lead so I greatly appreciate you adding it as well as for your edits to the article, Thanks again Mr.choppers I greatly appreciate it, Take care and stay safe, Thanks, Kind Regards, Dave // –Davey2010Talk 18:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Davey2010: - Thanks! This may be my first barnstar ever! Be good.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Pickup trucks with bedcaps

Should be pickup trucks with bed caps be seen as a category loosely succeeding that of the panel truck? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aertgan (talk • contribs) 19:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for intruding. To my mind they are very different. Some major differences between panel trucks and bed caps are:

1. Panel trucks allow access between the cab and the cargo area while bed caps do not.
2. Panel trucks are built as a permanent feature of the vehicle. But bed caps are removable items that can be added or removed to pickup trucks at any time.

The term "bed caps" is new to me. In Australia we call them canopies. Is bed caps an America only term?  Stepho  talk  00:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Stepho. This person is acting very strange and is a sockpuppet anyhow, so I don't really worry about what they're saying any longer.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nissan Trade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Direct injection.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 1 November 2020 (UTC)