User talk:Charles01/Archive 50

Continuation of the Hilux photo debate

Hello Charles01. Though you left a comment at WP:AN3 about the photo issue, there is a risk that the post you left there will just disappear into the archives, now that the report is closed. Consider adding your two cents worth at Talk:Toyota Hilux#Photos where I think they are trying to agree on a plan, and they should ideally be getting input from more than just the two original protagonists. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Noted. I might. And thank you. Regards Charles01 (talk) 06:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Though courtesy of the "tactic" of instantly rambling off-topic at inordinate length I am not suprised that people hesitate to jump in. The thing became impressively incoherent within less (MUCH less) than 24 hours. I did get involved in an equivalent discussion on that same talk-page a few months ago, but it ended up with Vauxford doing what he did (and does) regardless of the discussions. That, as it happens, was my point in my intervention this time. Strangely consistent. Possibly because the conduct only gets more "Vauxfordy". Or am I missing something obvious?

As for your belief that archives are places where things go to disappear .... Well, there are those of us who think that archives are places where things go to be kept. Otherwise, why archives? But yes, those apparently contasting appreciations of the nature and purpose of a decent archive long pre-date wikipedia. And if we're smart, I suppose the technology now gives us hitherto unprecented opportunities to reconcile the irreconcilable through intelligent srategies for accessing the archives and retrieving stuff as and when necessary. Happy days Charles01 (talk) 06:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Vauxford

Extended content

I just read your respond, honestly I don't think it bad to be persistent of doing the things you love, except if it becomes disruptive and breaking Wikipedia policies. You still seem to not understand what I mean that I have no association with EurovisionNim whatsoever. "If we just retained 10% of Vauxford's pictures linked to car entries, wikipedia quality would be enhanced and wikipedia readers would have every reasons to be grateful to the fellow." Seriously, I don't see how my pictures is degrading Wikipedia they are obviously being used without my intervention and this is not a vanity project I'm doing. It just so happen pictures I insert were taken from me, which I know is hard to believe but I can tell you that the honest truth. I'm simply fed up with you looking down on me, constantly making sarcastic remarks and treated me like I'm a sub-human. Is this how you treat people below you when you were in education? university? jobs? life?. I once looked up to you as a inspiration to what I do when I first started, a highly respected individual but I guess I was wrong. There no other better word I could find that fits what I really think of you; a bully. Instead of talking negative and indirectly about how my pictures should all get removed and how I'm a thorn to everyone side on Wikipedia when I have sincerely no intention of doing that, I always want to maintain good faith and not be disruptive although I failed to proven that with the recent edit warring which I deeply apologise of causing. I still have some faith that deep down your a decent gentleman and you can approach what you disagree more positively or realistically, constructively. Most genuine users are in this together, not all of them are boomers who got degrees and graduated from prestige universities. Rather then continue talking down a editor who did wrong until they break, try and help them, sometimes it difficult to get both parties to agree over something but I don't think of myself as the type of person who will just go back to their old selves afterwards. --Vauxford (talk) 10:00, 3 April 2019 (UTC) I'm not asking much but I find replying to my statement with only a Thank on my edit shows that you know very well of how you treat other editors but reluctant to admit so. --Vauxford (talk) 11:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC) I didn't rush to reply because I couldn't think of anything to write. But you choose to intrerpret my failure to jump in as somehow disrespectful to you. And it's the second time you've done that to me. I'm afraid I do not have the expertise or experience to be able to diagnose with any confidence what is going on here. Clearly there are issues, and right now you have issues with me. I think of them as your issues, but you may find it easier to think of them as mine. Either way, one of my concerns was that anything I wrote might make said issues worse rather than better. My overall reaction, of pushed, is that by dumping this little rant on my talk page you leave me wondering what on earth you must be on when you write it. (Me? Boring old coffee. Well, not that boring, actually ...) I don't think I've changed my mind significantly about the way you carry on. But if, by expressing myself as I do, I trigger in you distress, well I regret the distress. I try to treat everyone equally; and on wikipedia my default assumption is that everyone "here" is an adult. But it's not really about you. It's not even about me. This is a wikipedia talk page. There's a clue in there somewhere. I do think you have produced some good picures for wikipedia - and a few that are better than good. I think you have produced, linked to erticles, and then stubbornly defended rather more that are not very good. I think that because of the number of simply ok and bad you have uploaded, to put it as gently as I can manage, you have on balance not made wikipedia better. I may be wrong but that is what I think. And I think the way you behave when someone dares to disagree with your "judgment" concerning "your" pictures is appalling and dangerous because it discourages other people from contributing at all. Wikipedia is a collaboration. That's the only way it can work. If you treat it as a personal vanity project, then you miss the point, and the damage you do to the constructive collaborative approach extends far beyond the damage you do simply by linking a large number of mixed quality images. On the simple matter of linking pictures to wikipeida entries, I have already indicated several times that most conributors are content to upload their pictures to commons and leave it to someone else to determine which pictures fit best with any given article. Many car articles are compiled over ten or more years by ten or twenty thoughtful and careful constributors. Each one of them is just as entitled as you are to have an opinion about what is an imnprovement and what is not, whether regarding text, tables or pictures. There can be exeptions, but my starting point is that once you start inserting "your" pictures without regard for their appropriateness or quality, you are being unnecessarily arrogant. Where your pictures of cars are brilliant, of course, no one will care or in most cases even notice. But otherwise, you should expect people to notice. And, in rare and extreme cases, care enough to do something about it. As I wrote already, it's about wikipedia. Both you and EurovisionNim, when you get excited (which seems to come easily), insist on treating wikipedia as a personal fiefdom. But none of my insights on your behaviour - whether or not you share them - should normally belong on my talk page or on anyone else's. Nor yours on mine. Wikipedia is not about you. Well, I try to tell it like it is, or at least like it looks from here. I hope I do not upset you when I do that, but if I do, then of course I am a nasty old bully and you hate me and we're back to the Kindergarten. Which is all more than a little bit sad. And not stuff that should normally be included on a wikipedia talk page. Getting reptitive. Time to stop. Regards Charles01 (talk) 10:08, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Sadads. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Christian Didier, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Sadads (talk) 15:28, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Please

For the last time it isn't a vanity project! I'm not the only one that does that though, other users has done it and they didn't get frowned upon. The logic I have with using images on other Wikiepdia is that if the foreign users on there doesn't like it, they can happily revert it and I leave them be but rare that anyone does. I swear you guys are just trying to push me over the edge to borderline retirement or worst, I got U1Quattro on my backside and talking to him is like talking to a brick wall and have you constantly making snarky remarks and stuff that isn't true, I'm sick of it! I'm still going to fight my corner regardless and defend my edits are in good faith, I might of slipped up in the past such as with the 1 day block but even so the accusation I got from U1Quattro, telling me that he going get me a "permanent banned" for "misconduct" and trying to use every single word I say against me! I feel like this project is simply a echo chamber haven and you guys simply want me to disappeared just because you don't like the way I edit. --Vauxford (talk) 17:53, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

It's interesting - reassuring even - that you state that where "foreign users on there doesn't like it, they can happily revert it". It is a pity that you fail to extend the same respect on English wikipedia. It's revealing that you see nothing wrong in scattering images that you yourself have taken all over what you identify as "other Wikipedia". What looks to me like "vanity project arrogance" is defined not by what you choose to write about yourself, but by the way in which you choose to behave. That, at least, is how it looks from here. If you and EurovisionNim behave badly and degrade wikipedia in pursuit of your private "not a vanity project" you cannot expect people not to notice or not to care about the results of way you both carry on. No one wants you to disappear. But if you could use the temporary exclusion of your former partner in crime as an opportunity to stop treating wikipedia as your own private property, that would represent valuable progress.

I do not know who you have in mind when you write "other users has done it and they didn't get frowned upon." If you mean EurovisionNim he really did get "frowned upon". Especially, in the end, by you. Is memory really so short?

Meantime, you do indeed sometimes appear to be close to the edge of something - "borderline retirement or worst" or ... um ... whatever it is - but neither the cause nor the remedy are likely to be found within wikipedia. It is not fair to wikipdia to inflict whatever it is on the rest of us. Most of us simply don't have the expertise to deal with your unusual approach, especially when, as you like to do, you start writing about yourself. Which is one of several things that make me wonder if it is ever wise to reply to you when you start writing about yourself. But when I do not reply - reply more or less immediately - you choose to take it as an indication of disrespect. But, well ... it does damage wikipedia that you still have not bothered to learn to collaborate, and that matters. And yes, I wish you could bring yourself to recognise it. Is that such a terrible thing? Charles01 (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Because I don't speak anything but English so communicating with foreign users when under a dispute is really difficult. Seriously, I am not like Nim, if my images really degrade Wikipedia, why aren't I gone? My image do have values I think and people do indeed appreciate it. I can collaborate and it works before, but when it comes to certain tricky users, it goes a different direction. --Vauxford (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

T-type

I'm going to maintain my stance that this is not a personal vanity project and I'm kindly telling you to stop the accusation that it is. I replaced it during discussion because at the last min the picture on the article was a replica and I believe it shouldn't be used in the article. I admit I could of waited until the discussion was over but Eddadio seem to have intentionally avoiding my confrontation. He then suggested a picture which nobody said anything about except me which I said it wasn't a good choice due to it being overly blurry, but replaced it anyway. It seem to me that almost every comments you made on discussion over stuff like this is mostly a personal grief rather then actually contributing to the problem. --Vauxford (talk) 15:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Your eye-watering arrogance is not in itself the defining issue. But where it leads to appalling behaviour which discourages collaborative and constructive ccontributions to wikipedia from other people, your behaviour does indeed become "the problem". I am mightily bored with repeating myself ad nauseam simply because your behaviour has not improved and, indeed, since EurovisionNim quit, had become more EurovisionNIm-like / Vauxfordy than ever. Your pictures are not universally terrible, but mostly they are mediocre and you damage wikipedia by refusing to differentiate between the ones that are competent, the ones that are mediocre and the ones that are terrible. You damage wikipedia by replacing inages that are perfectly ok with your own pictures even where these are frequently significantly worse. Before you and EurovisionNim came along people only rarely attached pictures that they themselves had taken to wiki-entries, and only when they were, by most mainstream criteria, unambiguously better than the alternatives. That way, little by little, quality improved and variety was sustained. You guys changed the rules and conventions. Not in a good way. Monotonous messy backgrounds in Leamington Spa have their place, and if all your pictures were brilliant no one would mind - or maybe even much notice - a certain uniformity of approach. But they're not. So yes, that is why I object to the Vauxford Vanity Project. Is your suggestion that your behaviour is just fine and your behaviour is constructive and collaborative? Otherwise why do you insist on dumping your little outbursts of self pity when I do something with which you disagree? I freely admit, I don't understand you at all. And your behaviour just seems to get worse. Please make a special effort and improve it! Charles01 (talk) 16:12, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The way how people edit and conventions on automobile articles has changed, I don't think I have become worst, before I used to be a lot worst and reverted people edit that objected me constantly, without discussing it with them but it obviously not right and I got a 1 day block for edit warring. Now when someone disagree with my edit, I do take it to the talk page and discuss it, the problem is other users aren't playing fair, they go and do their own action before anything could be agreed on. What else could I do, I tried to improve my behaviour by discussing rather then rejecting and I still feel like I been duped.

"people came along people only rarely attached pictures that they themselves had taken to wiki-entries" -- That because their was barely any users who was dedicated to that subject, I presume you are talking what the environment on Wikipedia was like back in 2007-2008 and back then any pictures that weren't your scans were either taken by ancient PowerShot cameras or are super tiny for fair-use because there wasn't any pictures in the Commons that they could use. --Vauxford (talk) 16:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Now I don't see why this should be taken to my talkpage when you brought this one up yourself and the fact that even when gave my defence in this and telling you I have been improving behavioural wise, you blatantly ignore it and try and move the entire thing somewhere like it not yours to deal with when it clearly is because nobody except you has been making these condescending comments towards what I do. I'm doing my half to try and eventually solve this discord between us, please do your part on it. --Vauxford (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit

Please do not attack other editors, as you did in your edit at Audi Q3. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Vauxford (talk) 07:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

You are right in at least one sense. It should not be necessary to name an individual "contributor" in an edit summary. Unfortunately you have repeatedly made it clear that special rules apply for Vauxford and EurovisionNim. Since - triggered by your complaint on one of the relevant noticeboards - EurovisionNim has been excluded, your own behaviour has become worse. Even worse. If you treat wikipedia as your personal vanity project you damage wikipedia because other contributors with less time and less arrogance than you will simply wander off and do something else. I do not like to see you damage wikipedia and I am frustrated that you think, for your own reasons, that the price is one wikipedia should be happy to pay. I am also mightily fed up with having to repeat myself ad nauseam because you resolutely ignore all polite requests, frustrated urgings, pleadings even, to mend your ways. We should not be wasting our wikipedia time trying to attend to your unique bundle of personal needs. It is not what wikipedia is for. Please - even now - make a special effort. Contribute collaboratively. Success Charles01 (talk) 07:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Location of Deidesheim.jpg

The file File:Location of Deidesheim.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

It was useful when I set it up, but for the purposes originally intended it has subsequently been superseded by a more wiki-standardised approach. I don't think it does any harm, but if it is getting in your way feel free to delete it. (Do wiki-bots read messages? Hell no .... so why do I bother to write this?) Happy days Charles01 (talk) 12:40, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Incident

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incident regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Vauxford (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Volvo 300

Thank you for helping to make the Volvo 300 Series article a little better. It still needs a lot of rework, but at least I was able to give John de Vries the credits he deserves, as the original version stated Michelotti. Michelotti was actually quite miffed about DAF turning his design down! I have met John de Vries a couple of times, he is a very friendly man, and can talk for hours about his designs. Brinkie (talk) 15:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Thank you.

I lived in England in the 1980s and never entirely understood the appeal of the Volvo 343 which was included in the top ten sellers for month after month during the late 19780s / early 1980s. I guess the Volvo brand had a reputation for reliability and safety, and the British auto industry was in a terrible mess. Anyway, folks (in England) who owned them seemed to be appreciative of their merits. I don't remember seeing so many in West Germany or France, the other major European car markets, though I seem to have found one to photograph in Switzerland. The Swiss market was always considered especially competitive because all the automakers competed on more or less equal terms. Though away from the cities of the central belt I seem to remember Subaru rather scooped the pond with their affordable four-wheel drive cars.

With wikipedia - especially in the english language version - it's important always to source anything that might become contentioous. I wonder if there is any basic biographical information "out there" about Mr de Vries. Why is he called John rather than Jan? Does he have English ancestors? Or was he just born at a time when English-language names were fashionable? Where was he born? Obviously more on his career would also be interesting. That Volvo 480ES was an influential design. I wonder if he ever gave an interview to Autovisie that could be mined for information.

Just thinking on paper. Feel free to ignore. But thank you for what you have already done. Success. Charles01 (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I have really no independent source of his bio, maybe I should interview him (I have his e-mail and phone number) and publish that somewhere. But he is really called John, not very uncommon for people who were born shortly after the liberation by Americans and Canadians in 1945.

The Dutch-built Volvos are generally unliked by the fans of Swedish-built Volvo, because the build quality wasn't quite stellar. I know the 300 series has been very popular in the UK, as was the 400 series (especially the 480). In The Netherlands, the 300 series was popular, because it offered like its DAF predecessors a small car with automatic transmission; many people had a driver's license restricted to automatic gearboxes. They kept the 340 with automatic transmission in production until 1991, because there was no 400 series with an auto box available. It also ran great on LPG, which made it suitable for fleet sales. Nevertheless they had a very dull image, generally bought by elderly people, it was a standing joke that a Volvo 340 was always driving in front of the queue. ;)

Also a big thanks to you for uploading all those old slides from old cars when they were new! --Brinkie (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. If you have the gentleman's e-mail and 'phone number (and the time and willingness to go ahead). It might indeed be worthwhile to contact him.

Wikipedia is full of biographical entries that people write about their chums or colleagues. Nevertheless, where it is obvious and where it takes place on entries that significant numbers of people read, it tends to attract criticism for rather obvious reasons. Entries should be objective. Where there are two versions of truth that the available sources promote with approximately equal weight, then the starting point is that you should normally include them both. (Though bear in mind that some sources are seen as more reliable than others: there seems to be a much debated consensus that several of the less reliable English mass-market newspapers should not normally be used as sources at all. You don't believe it? Did you ever read an English mass-market newspaper?) There is also a presumption against what gets called "original research". Wikipedia should be based on existing sources.

In this case, therefore, since you say Mr de V loves to talk about his work, and is fascinating when he does it, then he must surely have given interviews to enthusiasts with pens, type writers or word processors. Some of them must have been journalists writing for the specialist (or indeed general) press. Some of them must have been people writing books about DAFs. People are interested in DAFs. Ditto Volvos. So an important thing to try and note down, if you do get to speak to him, is the details of the pubished sources to which things about him might be sourced: title, date of publication, author, publisher, page numbers (sometimes helpful), isbn (if book). You won't (normally) get every detail for every source, and you may well get other details that I forget to mention. url is an important one where stuff is online, of course. Of course what he tells you about himself and about his work will most likely be more than worth the visit - if you get to visit him - and will provide important context for anything you are able to contribute to the wikipedia on him. But from the wikipedia perspective, taking the opportunity to write down details of a few sources is important.

Success Charles01 (talk) 08:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

That lovely line you mention about "a Volvo 340 ... always driving in front of the queue" (so it must be the fastest car on the road, to spell out the logic), I originally heard in connection with much earlier DAF designs. We have a Dutch born uncle who became a priest and emigrated to Canada. Whenever he returned to NL on a visit he always insisted on renting an old (ever older) DAF: that nice old joke always got rolled out each time he came back to Europe for a visit! Ach, nostalgia isn't what it used be! Charles01 (talk) 10:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Vauxford's report on ANI reopened

I see that they have failed to inform you that they have re-opened the report about you. At any rate, please tone down the innuendo regarding vanity, and so on. I'm sure you can get your point across without resorting to that rhetoric. El_C 21:18, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Referring to a user's contributions as toxic and delusional is not appropriate. Please do try to be, if not sensitive, careful with your language. Thanks again. El_C 02:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Perfecly fair. Of course. And, yet ..... Charles01 (talk) 10:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Incident

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Vauxford (talk) 21:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:57, 20 June 2019 (UTC)