User talk:Milkmandan/archive0
This page is an archive of User talk:Milkmandan, and all current discussion should be directed there. --Milkmandan 07:15, 2005 Feb 16 (UTC)
Toyota Camry
[edit]Thanks for the reorganization of the Camry page, Milkmandan. Looks much better—it clearly needed it. Stombs 05:42, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
Toyota 4Runner
[edit]Hi Milkmandan, I would like to ask about the GFDL Licence for the "Image:1985 toyota 4runner sr5.jpg". Someone translated the according article for the german Wikipedia and also copied the image (Same for some other Toyota articles/images). Now we have a discussion about the licence and usability of the image within the german Wikipedia branch, as some doubt that it has been put under the right licence (Germany, famous for it's beer, bavarians and bureaucracy ;). Is it a photo you took yourself, do you have permission from the originator of the image or is there a licence legislation that puts the photo under the GNU-FDL? Sincerely Azhai 62.112.80.130 01:50, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Hello! I'm going to duplicate this discussion here and on the image, since I can't find a talk page for you. I took the photo myself and have released it under the GFDL—I'm happy to see that it's made its way onto the German wikipedia. Und koennen Sie bitte mich zum Artikel fuehren? Ich kann ein bisschen Deutsch sprechen. --Milkmandan 02:16, 2005 Jan 5 (UTC)
- Hi, thank you for your fast answer. You can find the article using that image under http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota . I appologise for getting confused, it is not a translation of your article, but a general article about Toyota that uses the image in discussion, linking on a still to write article about the Toyota 4-Runner. You can find the discussion on http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:L%C3%B6schkandidaten/Bilder#3._Januar (you will have to find it under the headline "3. Januar"), that is a page for image licence discussions. My personal "user talk" area is under http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Azhai . If you want to, you may use the "Du" instead of the more formal "Sie" when addressing me in german (thats the normal habit on the most internet platforms i know, when members of the same project are talking to each other). But feel free to use english, despite the typos when writing i'm able to understand and read it quite well. Greetings, Azhai 62.112.80.130 04:57, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
BMW Z1
[edit]Hope you don't mind my section-breaking—I want to convey how brilliant I think your BMW Z1 page is. Stombs 08:23, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks very much! The real credit needs to go to Fred Brossaud (and the authors of the other links on the Z1 page...but very specifically Brossaud), who coalesced a ton of good information in his PDF.
- I absolutely don't mind section breaks, either. --Milkmandan 08:43, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
They show up now; I added the bullets for the references, because I just changed Template:Book reference not to do it itself (for consistency with other templates)
My understanding is that edits get made to the master database server, but most information placed on viewed pages is from replicated slave databases. Sometimes, it seems, the slaves lag behind the master. I think that explains the problem. —Morven 09:51, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
Changing Litres to cubic centimeters
[edit]I disagree with that change. Litres are a standard; ccs are not. —Morven 20:45, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Fair enough. In cases like these, I'm just looking to drop the more precise information so it doesn't get lost. Moving the data into the body of the article is probably much more appropriate. --Milkmandan 22:28, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)
moving De Lorean to De Lorean Motor Company
[edit]You should call for a vote on this, preferably at Talk:De Lorean, and perhaps later at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Others may have a different opinion about whether this move is desirable. In the meantime, you shouldn't break the page at De Lorean Motor Company by overwriting the redirect with a deletion notice. -- Curps 07:34, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- No problemo. In the event that the move is approved, how would I get the redirection page deleted without killing the redirect text? --Milkmandan 07:36, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
- Admins can handle that. If you do the vote at the talk page and it's in favor, let me know and I could arrange for it to get done (or if I'm away from Wikipedia for a few days at that time, you could try contacting an admin like User:Violetriga). If you do the vote at Wikipedia:Requested moves, one of the admins monitoring that page will do it automatically at the end of a vote in favor. -- Curps 07:41, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Studebaker Starlight
[edit]Could you take a look at the Starlight Coupe article and give me your opinion. User:Hotspur wrote it up and I really, really overhauled it. Hotspur is, as I would be, not too pleased with my swift action. But I think I did basically a good job at pointing the article in the right direction. Also, shouldn't the article be Studebaker Starlight? Just need a reality check; feedback is appreciated. Thanks user: stude62 user talk:stude62 21:44, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Will do, in a few hours. I'd respond on your talk page ... but I figured I'd just avoid inflaming things further. --Milkmandan 22:07, 2005 Feb 3 (UTC)
- Much appreciated and understood.user: stude62 user talk:stude62 00:37, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Wow Dan- Just saw the edits on the Starlight coupe! Thanks user: stude62 user talk:stude62 02:41, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Good work
[edit]Hello. Good work with all your copyediting etc. on car articles. Keep it up. SamH|Talk 11:13, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nash Motors
[edit]Dan- Someone on with just an ISP edited the Nash Motors entry and it looks like they were indents and returns without understanding what Wiki-code does with such things. I tried working with - I did add in a section on the Nash Healy - could you go over it? user: stude62 user talk:stude62 02:32, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Received your message
[edit]Dan -- Got your message. My apologies for not including summaries with my recent edits. I'm still quite new here, and hadn't yet figured out proper posting etiquette. I assure you I will figure out how to add summaries and include them with major edits from now on. Thanks for the support, and I look forward to adding more of my research. user: Jagvar user talk:Jagvar 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the invite
[edit]Dan,
Thanks for the invite. I went ahead and signed up for the automotive group. I'm actually trying to update as many car pages as possible, with my own information and stuff I compile from different public domain websites. I'm also updating the pages with pictures, since many of them don't have. I noticed you wanted to update some with every car you've ever owned and you list a few. So have I, so I'll be putting a lot of information up soon. Any pointers/flames/suggestions?
Just for the record, it wasn't me who edited the Nash page... I'm still on the A
Not to worry, I was just clarifying, since I saw the previous post and I actually did some minor fixes to some Acura pages before registering: In a couple of places it said something like "Better then the previous model"... I just exchanged "then" for "than".
On the webpage imagery, I'm updating the ones I know where I got from, but there are many I think I just typed in the image search of Yahoo or something of the sort, so I'm having a hard time with them.
Alright, I think I'm managing to actually have some success. Anyway, being that you're part of the automotive group, whenever I want to discuss something included in a car page, should I write you or someone else, or is there like a "central page" in the group?
Either way, I'm down to the Cadillac Eldorado, and in that page the onyl image is of a '73 model. However, the copy is divided by decades, starting in the 50s. What I've done is eliminated the first '73 model image and placed it in the 70s subdivision, and included one of each model for the rest of the decades. In the future, should I consult before doing so, and again, to you or someone else, or the whole group? Or just follow my initiative and say what I did in the end?
One last thing. I'm sure it's part of the goal of the group in fixing the whole automobile pages. But when I look for a car company (i.e. Cadillac) I get the definition of the name and their respective models etc. However, if I look for just "automobiles" and then go to the respective marques, I won't get the same models I saw before. Sorry, probably this has been talked about before and since I'm new here I'm just being paranoid on everything. Still, I'll keep on trying to make it all better.
Alright, I think I'm managing to actually have some success. Anyway, being that you're part of the automotive group, whenever I want to discuss something included in a car page, should I write you or someone else, or is there like a "central page" in the group?
Either way, I'm down to the Cadillac Eldorado, and in that page the onyl image is of a '73 model. However, the copy is divided by decades, starting in the 50s. What I've done is eliminated the first '73 model image and placed it in the 70s subdivision, and included one of each model for the rest of the decades. In the future, should I consult before doing so, and again, to you or someone else, or the whole group? Or just follow my initiative and say what I did in the end?
One last thing. I'm sure it's part of the goal of the group in fixing the whole automobile pages. But when I look for a car company (i.e. Cadillac) I get the definition of the name and their respective models etc. However, if I look for just "automobiles" and then go to the respective marques, I won't get the same models I saw before. Sorry, probably this has been talked about before and since I'm new here I'm just being paranoid on everything. Still, I'll keep on trying to make it all better.
er... where is the tilde?
where's the tilde?
[edit]New Message
[edit]Alright, I think I'm managing to actually have some success. Anyway, being that you're part of the automotive group, whenever I want to discuss something included in a car page, should I write you or someone else, or is there like a "central page" in the group?
Either way, I'm down to the Cadillac Eldorado, and in that page the onyl image is of a '73 model. However, the copy is divided by decades, starting in the 50s. What I've done is eliminated the first '73 model image and placed it in the 70s subdivision, and included one of each model for the rest of the decades. In the future, should I consult before doing so, and again, to you or someone else, or the whole group? Or just follow my initiative and say what I did in the end?
One last thing. I'm sure it's part of the goal of the group in fixing the whole automobile pages. But when I look for a car company (i.e. Cadillac) I get the definition of the name and their respective models etc. However, if I look for just "automobiles" and then go to the respective marques, I won't get the same models I saw before. Sorry, probably this has been talked about before and since I'm new here I'm just being paranoid on everything. Still, I'll keep on trying to make it all better.
er... where is the tilde?
No new WK
[edit]Just borrowed one from a friend for some weekend fun! Not a bad vehicle, really. Sure beats the nasty-handling WJ! this is my car! *grin* --SFoskett 04:38, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
