User talk:Stepho-wrs/Archive/2009


Category Honda, Toyota and Nissan dealerships (Japan) nominated for deletion

[1] your comments would be appreciated (Regushee (talk) 17:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC))

Japan naming template suggestion

Would using the Japanese word for "Japan", or "Nippon" be objectionable, since other uses of the word Japan are already used?(Regushee (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC))

The template displays a message asking that Japanese script be added to the tagged article. Is this what is supposed to be displayed?(Regushee (talk) 18:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC))
Are you looking at {{template:Japanese}} or {{template:Nippon}}? Japanese already existed as a request about Japanese script. My template is Nippon to link to the Japanese wiki article. Although I've just realised my examples say 'Japanese' when they should have shown 'Nippon'. I've just corrected that. Stepho-wrs (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
That's what it needed. Thanks{Regushee (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC))

Photo Request

Hello; we've talked a few times and I thought I'd ask a question. Do you have a digital camera? If so, could you add a few very difficult to find Japanese vehicles, such as the Mitsubishi Debonair, the Mitsubishi Proudia and the Mitsubishi Dignity? I understand many JDM cars are exported to Australia and finding information on these JDM cars is very hard to come by, especially photos.

If you're unable to add these images, do you know of anyone who might be able to assist?

Thanks for your time (Regushee (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC))

Oops, I forgot to reply to this. Sorry but none of those Mitsubishi cars are in Australia - at least, not under those names or in numbers that will make them easy to spot. The government opened up the import market in the 80's and 90's but tighten them right up again for the new millennium after manufacturer lobbying. I think only 10 year old cars have a hope of getting in and not many people want a 10 year old car. Stepho-wrs (talk) 01:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Thanx for your message, I will write a comment in the future. I just wanna say that iam addicted to Toyota Cars just like you and iam creating the articles of Toyota Vehicles in arabic. Have a great New Year. Magic zico (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Removal of "Toyota" from model names.

Hi Stepho-wrs, just a quick message about your removal of "Toyota" from model names ([2], [3], etc). As per WP:CARS conventions, and Wikipedia standards in general, the complete name should be used and bolded in the lead. Also the same goes for predecessor, successor and aka fields in the infobox. For someone with little knowledge of cars, the use of "Reiz" instead of "Totota Reiz" in the case of the Toyota Mark X article is probably going to arouse confusion. Thanks. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:51, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Corolla and Sprinter

The Toyota Corolla coupes in the U.S. market had the pop-up headlights, similar to what Honda was doing in the same era with the Accord. If you think photos illustrating the US-spec Corolla don't belong in the Toyota Corolla articles, I'd have to ask you to rework both the Corolla and Sprinter articles to make that more clear. However, as those "Sprinters" are just standard Corollas with pop-up headlights and sold as Corollas, I would think it would make more sense just to put them in the Corolla articles.

Your thoughts? IFCAR (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I know the Australian 'Sprinter' was really a Corolla (ie called a Sprinter but with fixed head lights), so I will double check the US microfiche and then get back to you. Stepho-wrs (talk) 03:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I went to restore 'Image:Toyota Corolla coupe.jpg‎|Toyota Corolla coupe (US)' for Toyota Corolla E90 but the picture is no longer available. Not sure why. If you can see how to get it back I'd appreciate it. Stepho-wrs (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what the problem would have been, but it's restored.
And if you're not finding a source for the E80 with pop-ups, you can see the Corolla badging on the rearview image. IFCAR (talk) 13:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I've been researching old Toyotas in detail for 10 years and Toyota still throws a spanner in the works :) 221.124.237.76 (talk) 02:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Euro NCAP small family cars

The reason I included specific generations of the Corolla in this category is because they are the only versions of the car actually tested by Euro NCAP, which didn't come into being until 1997 (see here for the complete source list).

For most cars, e.g. Ford Escort, Opel/Vauxhall Astra, Renault Mégane, Mitsubishi Lancer, there is no sub-article for each individual generation, so I had to categorize the parent article. Nevertheless, the category tag is still on the same page as the information about the specific model(s). In the case of the Corolla, as well as the VW Golf and Honda Civic, sub-articles existed which allowed me to be more specific. Someone navigating from the category will be taken to exactly the right article in one click, whereas using the parent article for categorization will force the reader to make two clicks.

The same basic principle—populating the category as accurately as possible—is why I categorized several redirects instead of target pages, e.g. it was specifically the Suzuki Baleno which was tested by Euro NCAP, not the Suzuki Esteem. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 10:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I try to keep the categories clean and simple, which usually means a single entry for a vehicle rather than listing each and every generation. But you have made a good point about it being relevant for particular generations of the vehicle and not the early generations, so I will reverse my edits. Stepho-wrs (talk) 20:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

History of Toyota

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of History of Toyota, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://playcarracing.net/2008/history-of-toyota. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The playcarracing website copied their text from Wikipedia, without credit and including many of my own words from previous edits. So there is no issue of copyright infringement. Stepho-wrs (talk) 07:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of History of Toyota

A tag has been placed on History of Toyota requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ERK talk 18:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I explained this on the discussion page. The playracing website scraped Wikipedia (without credit). I know this because I can see my own words that I typed into Wikipedia being reflected on the playracing site. I have seen this many times for Wikipedia content on other sites and also of my own website appearing on other sites. Considering that the text for History of Toyota was merely shifted from a section in Toyota (ie it already existed on Wikipedia) and that the playracing article was created on 12 July 2008 (it says so on the page), it is obvious the playracing is copying Wikipedia.
Also, look at http://playcarracing.net/category/toyota/ for a list of more blatant copying by them. Notice the list of Corolla articles with the exact same names and structure that appeared after I split the Corolla article up into separate generation articles. Even for such obscure topics like http://playcarracing.net/2008/toyota-eb/ and http://playcarracing.net/2008/toyota-ac/, both of which I co-wrote on Wikipedia in Sept/Oct 2007 and only appeared on playracing in July 2008. Stepho-wrs (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikitable

Thank you for the wikitable at American and British English differences, I wasn't quite sure how to do it. --Bejnar (talk) 05:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome. I have a particular fondness for tables. Stepho-wrs (talk) 08:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion re ENGVAR

I hope you don't mind my saying so, but your edit comment at International Organization for Standardization, "Revert - it's very rude to change UK vs US date formats based on your own personal preference", is a bit on the rude side itself. Unlike you, only a tiny fraction of editors have any idea that ENGVAR even exists. To almost everyone, correct is what they learned in school, on either side of the Pond or even Down Under, and anything else is just a mistake, which they are helpfully (they think) correcting. You could get the same message across, while ruffling fewer feathers, with an edit summary like, "This article uses UK [or US] English and date formats; please see National varieties of English and Strong national ties to a topic". Thanks. Finell (Talk) 05:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC) (To preserve the continuity of the conversation, I will watch for your reply, if any, here on your Talk page)

Point taken. But in my defence, non US editors tend to know that other date formats exist, while US editors tend to believe that what they were taught in school is the only way to do things. There are exceptions on both sides but this gets very aggravating on the 1000th time around. Nonetheless, I'll take care next time. Cheers.  Stepho  (talk) 05:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Model years

Please see the WikiProject Autos discussion page to weigh in on the use of model years wrt US-spec vehicles. IFCAR (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)