Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:42, 29 May 2007

Archives

Archive 1, 3-18-06 thru 3-18-07

South Dakota Highway 127

Right now you started up with this page. You mentioned the source but please cite the section or any statement for which mentioned the source. Sushant gupta 03:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

68.224.84.185

Is there a reason this is vandalism? The rest of this user's edits seem to be legitimate. --Wafulz 03:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, but next time I think it'd be better if you started off with {{test1}} or {{verror1}} rather than {{test3}}. I think that's why the IP exploded on you. --Wafulz 03:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Userbox

I thought you may be interested in this userbox. Template:Bull is back
{{Bull is back}} Karrmann 22:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Old MN shields

Do you have specs on the two old MN Sheilds so SVGs can be made in the Commons? Also per my reply - revert whatever shield change I made - sorry for the mishap.-- master_son 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The plain white square shield was adapted from one of the others here (maybe Maryland's, I think?). I used the Type D font. The "MINNESOTA" was 66 point, I can't recall the size for the number I haven't seen an actual sign from this period, I'm just basing it on Riner's interpretation.

The 1954-prior star shield I made from scratch. An example of the actual sign (in yellow) is here. As you can see, my representation isn't quite that good anyway. I'm not quite sure how Inkscape works, so I'm sorry I can't be of much more help. I do know that the last time some of my PNGs were converted to SVGs, it took a few tries to get them to look right at 20px. --Sable232 23:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I was afraid this would happen. The new SVGs you made don't show up correctly at 20px. --Sable232 19:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Which ones in particular? -- master_son 19:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with them? I had to fix MN 93 though since I forgot to convert text to path, so if you purge the image, it will be better. -- master_son 20:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, they look fine now. --Sable232 20:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

MN 93

May I propose splitting this article into two?

one for the current route and one for the former route - with disambiguation links between them? The fact that two infoboxes exist on an article makes it look awful. Thanks. -- master_son 19:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I really don't like the idea of having two stubs instead of one. Automotive articles have multiple infoboxes, one for each generation. We don't split those articles up, I don't see a problem with having both routes in one article. --Sable232 20:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Not a prob - considering the size - lets leave it. but leave the possibility out there for future expansion possibilities. 8) -- master_son 20:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoaxer

His initial username was User:Teddy.Coughlin. he isn't blocked though, so I don't know why he keeps making accounts. Karrmann 20:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I say you report him to the admins. Mainly because he keeps adding hoaxes, and is doing it under who knows how many sockpuppets. Karrmann 20:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I have Twinkle, so I'll report the sockpuppet. Karrmann 20:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he would add false info to articles and create hoax articles. It seems that he uses the socks purely to create hoax articles. Karrmann 20:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Ford Taurs

This car is no longer in production and I do not appreciate being threatened

Your recent edits

Hi! Please don't leave vandalism warnings for edits that are not vandalism. See here. If you had attempted to engage the user in a friendly manner, while assuming good faith, you would have realised that the user is well-intentioned, if not a bit mistaken gaillimh 01:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I can definitely see your point, and the user was clearly mistaken, but it was a genuine attempt to help out Misplaced Pages, and it's never good to "scare off" new users with undeserved vandalism warnings gaillimh 01:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

He's baaaaaaack

The hoaxer is back, under ANOTHER suckpuppet. He just recreated the Saturn Avaze article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karrmann (talk • contribs) 12:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

USRD Newsletter - Issue 5

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 5	5-8 April 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news Good and Featured Articles are promoted Deletion debates Interstate 238 revert war Featured subproject IRC discussion comes to light Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — V60(Bot?)  02:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok

You were undoing an edit made a while back. I thought you were undoing that one revision made by BD. Karrmann 21:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a shop manual

I've read through the information you linked (thank you), but it still doesn't explain why some individuals have such a problem with including paint codes. And what do you mean exactly by "shop manual"? The G20 is no longer produced, and as such, that information is no longer available through a dealer. I happen to think that the colors available for a given year/trim/model are just as important as the engine options. Just a quick browse through some other car articles revealed some "shop manual" information you might be interested in deleting...such as the VIN letter designation for each engine offered in Chevy S-10s or the handy "abridged option" table on the Bonneville site that indicates ABS, traction control, and passenger/driver airbag status. Your "shop manual" argument is spurious at best. So again, I'd say that we should quit holding a particular article up to the "standards" of very non-standardized articles. --MackOSU 21:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly, the two 'model' articles you linked are two obscure cars of little or no consequence on the American car market. Fittingly, no "breach of standards" has cropped up within these two examples - the Tagora was manufactured for 3 years in France, after all - not exactly a 'popular' car today. By the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with including the various trim options for the Bonneville article...that was my point - that if someone wants to take the time to include such detailed (and accurate) information, then why remove it? Is it taking up too much space? I mean, who's to deem that information "unneeded"? And, could someone please address the irony that car articles in and of themselves are mostly unencyclopedic? I'm afraid that some folks are too busy trying to enforce "standards" without really giving the information in question full consideration.--MackOSU 02:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Taurus wagon

You can see the reply on Karrmann's talk page. I'm nearly sure it's a second-generation. IFCAR 00:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Template Generation Gaps

I know you feel that generation gaps make templates look cluttered, but in the case of the Chevrolet timeline, generation gaps can be very useful. For example, the 2008 Malibu is a completely different car from the 2007 Malibu, sharing only the name and size classification. Leaving out the generation gaps makes it appear as if vehicles ran relatively unchanged over the life of the nameplate, while putting them in shows each individual vehicle while still allowing the reader to see the lifetime of the nameplate.

Even though the spacing can be affected (especially in the case of the Monte Carlo that is shown for only one year), I really believe it is informative to show the generation gaps when available, especially after seeing them on many other timelines. —Denimmonkey (talk • contribs) 17:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned up the template greatly (located at User:Denimmonkey/Template:Chevrolet, removing false generation gaps that were probably placed by over-zealous editors. The template now maintains spacing when the screen resolution is lowered. I also rejoined the chevy/geo counterparts since geo was always ran (and eventually absorbed) as a part of chevy. Further, I removed duplicate names (such as the Aveo/Aveo5 name that I added) and seperated the Beretta and Corsica since there was room for separation. I believe the end product is much more simplistic than before while still containing all the information it had before. With your approval, I'd like to replace the current template with this one. —Denimmonkey 19:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Tagging {{db-bio}}

I've removed the tag from Bob Innes, as it certainly isn't an A7, nor a non-notability, candidate if he played for the national team. Just letting you know so that you can AfD it, if you want. Daniel Bryant 00:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot

Why does SmackBot add "date=" to a maintenance tag when it's not needed? For example, {{orphan|June 2006}} has the same function as {{orphan|date=June 2006}}, as far as I can tell. It seems a waste to have SmackBot making these changes. --Sable232 14:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sable. Most cleanup templates that take a date use "date=" but a significant few use (used) the default parameter, it is very hard for editors to remember which are which (I find it hard, and I work with these templates a lot). For that reason "date=" support is being added to the templates which didn't support it, such as Orphan, and over the course of time these should migrate to only using "date=". SB has traditionally added or taken away the "date=" as required, this will become simply adding "date=". The default argument then becomes unused, unless the template is re-written. I have to day fixed up several hundred articles where the default argument (which stood for the date) had been used as a "reason" field or contained "article" as other templates default arguments can do, as well as the normal crop of wikilinked dates, quoted dates, misspelled dates etc., some of these problems should go, when the transition is complete, and the syntax will be easier to remember. Hope that explains what's happening. Rich Farmbrough, 15:35 19 April 2007 (GMT).

USRD Newsletter - Issue 6

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 6	21 April 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news Canada highway WikiProjects deleted Deletion debates Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use promotional images

Thank you for adding the tags to correct the "Fair use promotional images" to the images that I have uploaded -- CZmarlin 04:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 7

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 7	5 May 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: State updates Project news April 27 IRC meeting California Deletion debates MacArthur Maze Fire Illinois Featured member Circular route shields Pennsylvania From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Image ID

I am very keen at identifying cars, and i can often see little details that give away the model year. Though I admit, sometimes i guess. But I do think it is better to give a year instead of a range of years, it makes it look a bit more professional. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karrmann (talk • contribs) 13:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Orphaned fair use image (Image:77Marquis4dr.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:77Marquis4dr.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 8

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 8	19 May 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: State updates Project news USRD members assist Canada project California Deletion debates Two debates at USRD Illinois Featured member A new GA Oklahoma From the editors Pennsylvania From the editors Washington
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —VshBot (t • c) 19:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Captions for logos

I concur with your summary that the edits by User:In1984 are counter productive. It seems that Misplaced Pages guidelines are very clear about this topic. I have tried to explain it with every inclusion of "this logo is a logo" that this editor has made. They do not even seem to care or want to read their own talk pages. Now they are expanding this editing to other brands of automobiles. It is a waste of time for everyone. Yes, someone should do something to stop this. Thanks --CZmarlin 02:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Mercury Monterey

Earier today I created a page for the Mercury Monterey minivan. I changed the link on the Mercury Monterey car 2 times so far so rather than being directed to the Ford Freestar, people will be directed to the new page I created. 2 times it says you changed the link back to the Ford Freestar. Please do not do that. The Ford Freestar is not the Mercury Monterey and shouldnt be on the Freestar page. The link to the Mercury Monterey minivan is Mercury monterey(minivan). Thank You.

Mercury Monterey

Well Sable had you told me this BEFORE you started threatening me with blocking my account than maybe we wouldnt have had this disagreement. Rather than starting in on the threats maybe next time you could be a little more polite and just say we do not want a separate page for the Monterey rather than threatening to block my account from editing. As far as Im concerned what you did was threatening and uncalled for and if you EVER threaten me again over something this I will request Misplaced Pages block or delete your account.

Response to Sable

First off, you NEVER put anything in the first edit summary saying that there was a prior agreement. Dont lie just to cover yourself. Second, what you did send to me WAS a threat. In your response to me you clearly say "What YOU posted can also be considered a threat as well." The last 2 words in that sentence were AS WELL, meaning you acknowledge that what you sent me was a threat. And lastly, what I sent you was not a threat, but a promise. If you do threaten me again I WILL request your account be blocked or deleted.