Talk:Métisse Motorcycles

Unsourced categories - "removed unsourced class"

Editor 72bikers; "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it is a duck." The Métisse has clip-ons, rear sets, solo seat with a racing seat hump, and no air filter. The Mk V is a lightweight parallel twin that produces up to 120bhp. It is called (depending upon the version) a "Road Racer", "Café Racer" or "Street Scrambler". It is obviously not an adventure bike, nor a commuter, not a motocross bike, nor an enduro machine. It is obviously a sport bike (or "sports bike", as we say in England, where the Métisse is designed and made).

Of course, Wikipedia relies on sources, but there is no need for sources for the bleeding' obvious. The point of categories is to allow readers to see other things (in this case, motorbikes) in the same category. If you truly wish to check the veracity of entries, why not visit the "Category:Sport bikes" page and check the other bikes that are struggling to be true sport bikes (such as the Ducati Pantah or the Honda CB500 twin)? Arrivisto (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Editor Arrivisto; I am sorry to inform you that content based solely on your own opinions have no merit here. This is called original research WP:OR and therefor not allowed. I am sure you can understand that if this behavior was allowed what the consequence of this kind of editing would look like. Also your spec given is wrong as well and I fail to see the reason how it has any relevance. Also your reasoning that these bikes are not adventure bike, nor a commuter, not a motocross bike, nor an enduro machine would dictate that they then therefor are sportbikes, does not hold water. Their class is as clear as there name Café Racer and Street Scrambler these retro-inspired classic bikes are just retro versions of todays standard motorcycle. At best this could easily be compared to such bikes as the KZ1000 and many others in their day that were race bikes but todays versions are considered just a standard motorcycle.

The pics[23] you had added are also clearly not your own work[24] and have been removed. -72bikers (talk) 18:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I cannot infer any meaning from the above comment "Also your spec given is wrong as well and I fail to see the reason how it has any relevance." Please clarify.

Nor can I fathom the continuing objection to putting Métisse Motorcycles into the Sport Bike category when it is so obviously correct. If there is a better category, which not suggest it? I note, by the way, that the other categories "Dirt biking" and "Motorcycle Racing" are inappropriate and unsourced, yet neither category has been challenged.

I had full authority in person from Gerry Lisi (the boss of Métisse) to upload the Mk5 photos. I therefore did not breach copyright, but I acknowledge that I breached a Wikimedia protocol; so I am seeking guidance as to the acceptable way to re-upload the images. Arrivisto (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Image

Thought you might like to see this Metisse Arrivisto. This is Dave Gittins, ex Rickman employee who wrote the definitive Rickman History book that was unobtanium, reputed to go for £80 a few years back, less now. The uploader is an internet-acquaintance so when I saw this article on my Watchlist it reminded me I have to contact him. --Rocknrollmancer (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Very nice! Are you able to upload that photo? I am still trying to get formal approval to upload the Mk.V photos. Arrivisto (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't ask as he's big on the classic dirt scene and I imagine protective of his many albums. It's a bit complicated with makers images hosted at their own sites, which are presumed to be copyrighted even if there is no footer with 'C' symbol and annotation/date. The problem is that when images are on the interweb, they get copied all over unofficially, and it's often a chicken and egg situation and the Wikimedia release for former-copyrighted images, a pro-forma letter, is very complicated and cluttered (or it was last time I looked 3/4 years ago) especially for an outsider with no WP experience trying to give permission. They theoretically still 'own' the rights to the image but give a release for it to be (re)used under conditions. All of Craig's images that he uploaded in Good Faith 2008 have been deleted, decimating the article that Brianhe and I put a lot of work into (as in this revision, although I see there is another one image added recently), by two Commons Admins who have intimated a bogus individual stole the copyrighted images from his website, assumed a mild, Wikipedia form of identity theft, and spuriously uploaded to a repository on Wikipemedia - for what gain? Duhhh. This is one edit summary Similar to: http://www.caferacer.net/forum/attachments/p someone stole an image from caffay racerrrr dot net, (that probably didn't even exist) and uploaded it to WP in 2008, purporting to be Craig Vetter.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 17:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)