This is an archive of past discussions about User:Eddaido. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Devaynes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pall Mall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you.
I noticed some personal attacks against User:SamBlob in your previous edit summaries, like this that you repeated a half dozen times. Later, it appeared you two were making good progress in resolving your disputes. But now you are mocking his suggestion at the Automobiles project talk page with this. Please stop. Keep your comments on topic and civil. Thank you.Dennis Bratland (talk) 06:22, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Many of us have been able to collaborate just fine with SamBlob for a couple years now and there has never been a problem. Please solve your content disupte with no more sarcasm, insults and harassment. You seem quite confident but I'm convinced if you don't stop you will be blocked from editing. Focus on content, not personality. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 07:25, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Sorry for the cryptic edit summary. Usually we stick to using succession boxes for offices that are occupied by multiple people over time, rather than ranks held by one person. So things like the colonelcies of regiments, governorships, commanderships-in-chief of certain theatres, and so forth get them, while promotion through the ranks (brigadier on this date, major-general on that) are left to the prose, since the person doesn't really have a predecessor and successor in those ranks. It looked like you'd covered the dates of commissions in the prose above. Also, you don't need to end and begin a new box with each new heading; they can all go in one structure. Usually we just put years in the boxes, else they tend to get large and sprawling; dates can also go in the prose. There is a wikiproject for this, but it hasn't been very active of late. Best, Choess (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, thanks for everything. An elder brother had a TF1500, red like the one in the Italian photos and he would, very generously, let me borrow it! I think it is wonderful that you were able to keep your car and long may it please you! Have been wearing blinkers for days to concentrate on something else, apologies for my slow response. Best regards, Eddaido (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Andy Dingley. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Bentley_Speed_Six. Please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you.
Please do not play your usual part of the bully. True you are very experienced at it, I know. The epithet applied to the dogging editor is fully earned - "acres" of sorry "hectares" of WP are covered with the evidence. Eddaido (talk) 11:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Edit summaries used for personal attacks
Greetings. There's an ongoing pattern of sarcastic personal attacks, harassment, and belittlement in your edit comments directed at User:SamBlob:
It is my understanding that you've received several requests to desist. In future please use edit summaries to explain and support your edits and not to attack other users. Thank you! Writegeist (talk) 21:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Fat chance. He's been doing it for years, aimed at the same couple of editors. As always, no-one gives a damn and admins (ha!) certainly don't act to prevent this. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Historically, true. But now there are three people in this thread who give a damn, one of us an administrator who has added a clear warning of a block if there's a repetition. Writegeist (talk) 23:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
If that diff had been current I would have blocked the user on the spot; I am not convinced I can justify it on a two-month-old edit. The editor is, hopefully, now clear that they cannot continue to belittle other editors in edit-summaries. I will keep an eye out but feel free to ping me with any further issues. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Black Kite. Today (12/23 my time) yields these three charming edit summaries targeting the same editor: [25], [26], the third without content revision and posted purely to insult the other editor ("What's that smell?"). [27]. Writegeist (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
I had not noticed that. Given that, and the posting below from the editor which suggests that further attacks are likely, a block is now in order. Black Kite (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Let us be very clear about this. You were previously blocked for a week for harassing another editor with unpleasant edit summaries and now you come back from your block with this. This is a final warning - one more of these and the next block will be indefinite. Please don't let it come to that. Black Kite (talk) 18:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Parlboxes
Re this edit with the edit summary "repositioned parliament box but is it a duplicate?", every New Zealand MP article has a parlbox, and the convention is that they go into the section that discusses the political career. As such, it is not a duplicate to a succession box. Good on you for using proper edit summaries! Schwede6623:45, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Then I am afraid I have to tell you its a bad idea and at least in that particular article's layout looks weird! I don't usually take any interest in Kiwi-style MPs. I hope you provide good edit summaries too! Eddaido (talk) 00:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lanchester Ten, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page S.U. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Weymann Fabric Bodies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Arnold (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Coventry Ordnance Works, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fuzes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Felix Schuster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Willans & Robinson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Hooker, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BSA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I have replaced your inclusion of the Tiger Moth, but I have changed "innovative" to "notable", as the notability of the Tiger Moth is more readily apparent than its supposed innovation.
I have also edited the sentence so that the reader will be clear that the first jetliner was the Comet, as your version introduces confusion as to whether the first jetliner was the Comet or the Tiger Moth.
Following this good-faith collaborative edit by User:SamBlob, which corrected inaccurate content and made a perfectly reasonable addition to the lead of the de Havilland article, you removed the addition and attacked Samblob with this edit summary.
Next, when he reworded specifically to try to appease you, you undid his revision, reverted to your "own" version, and again wrote an attacking edsum [28].
You were blocked after a string of attacking edit summaries directed at this editor. When you came off the block you attacked him again. And now, yet again. This pattern of bullying, intimidatory behaviour is unacceptable. You can either stop repeating the behaviour or continue and be blocked indefinitely. Writegeist (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
As ever, the war comes from your (apparent) pal Samblob so here's some of your own words for you:
"Get back under your bridge and stop posting to my talk. If you want your crap on a talk page use yours, not mine. Writegeist (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)"
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ferries in Wellington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gravesend (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Congratulations on re-opening this and related cans of worms. I applaud your "rewrite the darned thing! We will ALWYS trip over ourselves if we keep up the Yankification of Wikipedia - same words have different terms in different parts of the world". Though startled by the quite remarkable lapse of the succeeding editor. Mind you I'm not sure your re-write was correct but then neither is what you were re-writing. I look forward to a "re-development" of the little article this time using reliable references. Best wishes to you, Eddaido (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your message - I hope that I find you well! I think certain cans of worms are worth reopening - have a look at the definition of Biscuit, which had become in the seemingly continual process of Yankification as something which was definitively (and not to be argued with) soft doughy objects in gravy. We now have Biscuits (European) and Biscuit has become a big-link/virtual disambiguation page. If you read the German and French Wiki articles on the same Coupe de Ville subject (translations available via Google), then they follow the same form as I did in the rewrite - hence why I did as I did to improve the article. These accept that the words can have different interpretations in different countries - why should we as an encyclopaedia be afraid of this? As a Brit (much as though I spent 20 years working in North America), I haven't got a clue what a Town Car is above a Lincoln model. If you ask me to define an open front topped/enclosed rear car then I'd call it a Sedanca de Ville, as (a) I own one, and (b) the UK dealer chap who I bought it from described it as such, as that's what the Rolls Royce/HJ Mulliner build sheet described it as such. I also accept that if I went to France and Germany, they would define it as a Coupe de Ville, which would have a very different interpretation in North America (hence why I added a North America section in the rewrite - plus it keeps them happy). I personally don't think that if there are major reference sources that clash we should be worried as an encyclopaedia to provide reader guidance around the wording - the article before I started my rewrite didn't even define the term as French language in origin! I think that there is a lot more to go on the article, but the opportunity here is in (1) the definition of what the word means and then (2) how then each area of the world interprets it. Best Regards, --Trident13 (talk) 10:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree. I don’t want to get involved myself for a couple of reasons. The most important is that for the moment I’m minimising my WP involvement, the other is that I found what seemed to be a suitable reference maybe three years back. It may have been this Illustrated dictionary of automobile body styles / Lennart W. Haajanen ; illustrations by Bertil Nyden ; foreword by Karl Ludvigsen.
This book (if its the right one and it probably is) was downright upsetting because the author gives the right definitions then kinda takes a deep breath, and provides a few more alongside that seem to contradict what he has just said. I don’t know your level of experience with publishers but I suggest an agent or publisher sent it to USA for an opinion on its saleability and the simple response could have been along the lines of "Few buyers unless you try to fit with all USA’s most casual uninformed usages, them’s the kind what (you hope) will be buying your book". So I stopped worrying and tried to ignore WP's (to my mind) often moderately out of wack versions.
Here is the (USA) library association’s Booklist description of that book: “As the preface states, "Few things have been subject to so many confusing type names and designations as automobile models and body styles." Where did the terms station wagon, sedan, or spider originate, and how have they come to be used? This dictionary is intended for students of automotive history and other car buffs to help them sort out this confusion. Both modern terms (All wheel drive, Flattop, Hatchback) and those inherited from the horse-and-buggy era (Brougham, Cabriolet, Landau) are included. More coverage is given to innovations and developments in auto body styles in the early twentieth century. Entries include one- or two-paragraph descriptions of the term, including the period of usage, origins and history, variations, and language varieties. American, British, French, German, and Italian varieties are given, but there is no mention of Japanese, Korean, or other designs. Trucks are excluded, but SUVs and minivans are included. Cross-references include backward and forward pointing arrows for earlier and later usages. Terms in all capital letters have their own entries. Some entries illustrate body styles with generic-looking line drawings. There are many car books, but no other source provides definitions of body styles. Recommended for libraries with specialized automobile collections.” -- RBB Copyright 2003 Booklist
Our local library’s copy is out until the end of this month (well, 1 July). Should I put my name down for when it comes available?
I think WP should try to set some standards (while holding to its own rules) in the naming of old models and styles. Maybe like you suggest by lining up usages into regions. WP should lend its weight to clarification and codifying rather than adding to the confusion. I envy you your car which is bound to be very nice indeed. A sedanca de ville must have been the most distinguished formal motor transport a man could have. Fully enclosed — stuffy (twice over).
An article that you have been involved in editing, Town car, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 02:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Coupe de Ville, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 02:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Morris Cowley may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
| successor =[[Morris Cowley#Morris Cowley (1926-1931))|Morris Cowley (1926-1931)]]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Morris Oxford may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
[[File:Morris Oxford Traveller 1953 4659310521).jpg|thumb|Traveller registered November 1953]]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Triumph Dolomite (1934–40), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triumph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wolseley Hornet six, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page S.U.. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to MG Magnette may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
by the '''Magnette ZB''' announced 12 October 1956.<ref>Higher Speed Of Nuffield Cars. ''The Times (London'', Friday, Oct 12, 1956; pg. 7; Issue 53660</ref> Power was increased to 64 hp (48&
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Wolseley automobiles, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wolseley Hornet and Wolseley 18/85. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rover P4 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
was designed and built by Rover and at the time was the only British-built automatic transmission (others had bought in units from American manufacturers such as Borg-Warner. This unit was actually
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rover P4, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rover 2000. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Standard Motor Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
With regards to your question I'm afraid I cannot agree with this. The facts are that Lyons and Harriman agreed to merge the two companies and stated this at the press conference and in subsequent written comments. What a journalist may have interpreted from the announcement - or if some other companies have used the term 'merge' for other reasons - is not relevant to what was actually agreed and took place.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Humber, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beeston. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thanks, after four or more years of this behaviour by this editor it seems my only defence is to make a fuss - which I am trying to do. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you positively identify...
Looking over your excellent Morris articles, it seems this is either a Morris Cowley or a Morris Oxford. Can you ID it for me? It was identified as a "KX 50 Flatnose Morris with Eccles Caravan body". Thanks! Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Morris-Commercial T-type 1 ton 1925
Thanks for your kind words. It looks to me just like one of these but I'm not all that good on the commercial versions. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 04:54, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh yes, I think that is precisely what it is. The "KX-50" is a bit of a red herring, I later noticed this was the license plate :-) Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:07, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Austin 30 hp. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Your wholesale reverting of edits that brought articles into line with standard practice is extremely unproductive, particularly given how much of a mess most of them were. Do not do so again.Lukeno94(tell Luke off here)13:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Humber Limited, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages BMC and Pressed Steel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
My eye was caught by this line in the Humber entry:
"At Speke, Liverpool, another shadow factory opened in April 1939 assembled bombers."
I didn't hang around long enough to figure out if it came from you or someone else, but right now I think you probably have better (at least better practiced) access to relevant sources than I do. The only car plant I know about in Speke was the Triumph plant where they made the Triumph TR7 and other assorted .... um .... cars, but (1) I don't think it was set up till many years after the Second World War and (2) Triumph is nothing to do with Humber. Whoever entered that line may well know something I don't know - almost certainly does - but do you mind checking that line, please? More generally thanks for giving the Humber entry a clearer structure. Regards Charles01 (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Wha?!
No need to thank me, I only do it because it feels good (if not always - see the fresh amendments to Rootes).
The reference appears at the end of the paragraph. That is to say at the end of the next line. (!) Check with the website of your local library. Eddaido (talk) 03:24, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
If you don't have a source to hand that answers this, I think I'll paste my heckles to the Rootes page. I do have a reader's ticket for the University Library in Cambridge but haven't used it for years, and I imagine the bureaucratic slownesses haven't got any better in the interim. Your insights on our local library are pleasingly droll.... Best Charles01 (talk) 08:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
PLEASE read what I just wrote to you above. Why are you running on about finding something else? I meant you can check online Now with the ODNB, the source. OK?Eddaido (talk) 08:16, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Identification request
I wonder if you'd mind finding a moment to tell me what this is, please? Sorry to be idle, but I figured you might be able to do it more easily and more reliably than I.
I was in two minds about uploading it. It's not a good colour for seeing the door lines, panel gaps and other stuff. On the other hand, it's more or less in focus, and I guess it MIGHT be unusual...
I can't find a picture of it. It is a little strange insofar as the body would date it to 1935-1942, the headlights are late 1920s. I am defeated. Curses. Eddaido (talk) 12:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for thinking on it. There is (faint) reassurance for me in that if it was too difficult for you, then no wonder I couldn't figure it out. It looked and sounded almost truck like, a bit like the Bentleys of those days, but I never heard of a Rolls Royce badged Bentley that far back in time. Hmmm Best Charles01 (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I wonder if it's a phoney aka replica...or at least a reconstruction by a dedicated engineer with a well stocked workshop
Hi Eddaido, Thanks for your work on the Karrier page. With regard to the newspaper reference, the original edit just said 'the newspaper' and the only mention I could see was to The Times so it looked like a block quote. (Even though I thought it probably wasn't — & I used the phrase as a 'generic' description). If it is not, I was wondering why it was put into a field/parameter of its own, also including the Cob picture, which ends up rather unconventionally placed in my view. Is there any reason why the text should not be written 'normally' and the image placed say to the left &/or at the end of the text. Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message. It was fair enough to put the Times in there, I was just spurred to further investigation by the "block quote" comment and needed to make an amendment to have an edit summary to put it in! Then I found that in Yorkshire / Huddersfield they said the name mechanical horse was given by Karrier. If you look at Scammell they seem to think a mechanical horse is their product. I don;t know the correct answer but I thought I'd wave a flag for Karrrier in case its Cob gets forgotten.
The paragraph, field as you put it, is about the Cob and I arranged the picture within it. You could enlarge the recovery vehicle pic to fit with the inbox above and then it would look better, well I think so. There is a shortage of nice pictures of dustcarts etc ; )) While of course I prefer what I've done there please feel free to try alternatives. By the way I hate being thanked for my contributions to WP. I only do it for pleasure! But thanks for the thought anyway. Best, Eddaido (talk) 12:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Well it's polite!! (Too often interactions on WP lack civility IMO!). Anyways... my suggestion, for what it's worth, is taking the 3 sentences/paras outside of the Cob section and moving them to the top of the section and creating a subsection === Cob === and aligning the image to the left (at the bottom of the section). I've tried it on preview, but didn't save it, and I think it would be OK. The other image...I would like to move it away from the end of the i/bx where it also 'bridges' a heading... that's a pet hate dislike of mine but I haven't much idea where else it could go. Don't want to 'hide' it away too much... Eagleash (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
PS Any thoughts on including one of these pictures in the article (possibly the second one, in the Rootes section)? The Mr. Whippy brand was big news in UK in the 1960s... :P I'd forgotten they used Karrier vans. Eagleash (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Please do re-arrange to suit, I can tell you if I think it might be improved. The recovery vehicle was jammed in because it was pre-Rootes and pushed beside that section. Everyone likes ice cream. Its Sunday here and in summer which comes soon someone drives a surely retired ice cream van playing tunes through its loudspeakers past this house. Never stops, must have sold out 40 years ago - probably early regression to infantilism (is there such a thing?) Maybe can't otherwise cope with all Sunday's grandchildren. Next time I will rush to the window and see if its in regulation pink, I think it is. Eddaido (talk) 22:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi again, Well I've split up the section as I suggested above. I did try giving the Cob its own section and swapping things back and forth, but ended up doing what I first thought after all. Please feel free to critique at your leisure...I left the recovery vehicle image where it was and apart from it being right after the i/bx it seems OK there. There's an ice-cream van passes by here in the Summer too. I've never seen anyone buy one though. I did try once...he was too quick for me! Regards, Eagleash (talk) 23:34, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
More good work on the Karrier page I see! I couldn't find the right DVLA page to get the van reg. year...did this morning, but you got to it before me! The page is missing something more about the trolleybuses. I drafted out a very small section just a couple of lines really. (I've saved it in my sandbox). And the only ref I could find was this one which I feel isn't very good and has a hint of "circular" about it too. Also the images of the trolleybuses at Commons all seem to have "geograph.org.uk" in the file name so wondering if we can actually use them. The "Grace's Guide" site does have some dustcart images at the bottom but we probably can't use those either. Best. Eagleash (talk) 17:54, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Am I wrong? I thought Geograph photos had the right licence for WP. I tracked down in Flickr a good enough Karrier Cob photo to replace the alleged Cob but I have not heard back from the photographer though I know he is friendly to the idea of letting his pics go to WP - its currently All rights reserved. Should the bad pic currently displayed in the article be taken down? I thought I'd wait to recategorise until I have a replacement and so there's no loose category floating about if you see what I mean. Graces Guide can be absolutely excellent and it can be wrong so I ignore it, find my own sources and then who needs Graces Guide. They have a relaxed attitude to copyright, or more relaxed than Wikimedia or they know a lot of things that I don't! Had a look in the sandbox, found a really nice photo of same subject and it says it was made by Sunbeam. In our article it says the trolley buses were sold off in 1946 so the Sunbeams are only Karriers by descent and not true Karriers or do I have that wrong too. No sign on the front of the buses. So all the trolley bus images should be recategorised? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 23:09, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) That's what I read on the Commons file. Licensing is a horrible mystery to me still, so I generally only use images I've taken and uploaded, to Commons, myself. So if you say it's OK to use that pic. if so decided, that's fine by me... I've just had another look at the Sunbeam (car company) article. It doesn't mention trolleybuses until Sunbeam-Talbot-Darracq go bust in the 1930s, when it says car production at the original Wolverhampton factory stopped but trolleybus production continued and Karrier trolleybus prod. was moved there by 1939. It goes on to say that there was some badge engineering of trolleybuses also, (particularly during WWII). I found I couldn't enlarge the pics to check on the badge or branding on the front. As I read it, Sunbeam made trolleybuses before the takeover by Rootes — and Karrier also; both then separate companies. After the mergers the trolleybus production was rationalised over a period of time and could be branded as either Karrier or Sunbeam...or is it me that's got it wrong (usually is!).
I would think the 'Cob' image can stay as it is for a day or 2, till the replacement is agreed.
Oh! I wanted to ask you also about the car class (large car, exec., etc.) field in automobile infoboxes. I've seen a couple of articles I watch where it's been removed after an IP inserted it. The field still exists in the infobox template so was wondering if it had been recently deprecated or something...agreed it's not a great deal of use and a bit POV... Regards, Eagleash (talk) 23:57, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
I do remember seeing something about images from Geograph but I can't find it now. I think the image you like is excellent, its in a pleasing setting too. It'd be nice to get that image from Sandtoft but I am discouraged by the photographer having planted her name in the foreground. Better that we show a complete Karrier of the 1930s than an invisible Karrier chassis. Infoboxes. I reverted a number of edits by an IP that put, I thought, silly terms in that slot. Is there one in particular that you are thinking of? Eddaido (talk) 04:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I think it was the Lancia Aurelia article that I first noticed the infobox thingy. I then noticed other reversions by other editors. I don't complete that field if I find it empty but have no objection to (say) full size car, executive car etc. appearing there (as noted in the infobox doc 'instructions') It is however the sort of thing that provokes squabbles in motorcycling articles (sport bike, tourer etc.) and some terms don't sit well with older vehicles. & then there's things like C-segment.....Anyways I see what you mean about the t/bus pic. It would be better if a genuine Karrier from pre-merger could be found. Might be quite difficult. I won't start the trolleybus section as yet. Need to try to find some more info and better sources too. Best, Eagleash (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I have found a small number of newspaper times, one is about the supply of 4 new wartime Karrier buses with steel not aluminium bodies and about 8 fewer passengers than usual. ---an hour or two--- Too many emails so I do not know what was in my mind other than replying. re Hutchinson. Yes, nothing in his article. I get maddened by NZ articles written simply because a person was an MP for 6 months and he is described as a politician and a shepherd (just as unlikely here as anywhere else) Hutchinson suffers because he is notable for golf and not yet for being a rich man so I have reverted. I am also well into an article about the Direct United States Cable Co because it fits with other stuff about transAtlantic cables written earlier. Have just been tackling website owners about infringement of copyrights with Wikimedia photos and they are surprised! Grrr, off to bed. Eddaido (talk) 13:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Well I was going to try to get to the library in the next couple of days. I'm sure I saw something useful there last time I was looking for motorbike info... Re: Hutchison if he is the same guy and you have a source which links the 2 parts together, I.e. his address, perhaps something could be put into his article (sourced) to the effect that he was also a businessman &/or entrepreneur, and referring to the Commer Co., otherwise somebody in the future, might well remove the link again. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
29 Lennox Gardens? Royal Exchange Assurance 213th annual general meeting of the General Court reported in the times page 21 27 April 1933. " . . . Before I proceed to a review of the past year I must first express our deepest regret at the loss we have sustained by the death of Mr Horace Hutchinson and more recently that of Sir Edward Manville. Mr Hutchinson had been chairman . . . ." Eddaido (talk) 13:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you have put a question mark after the address?..that is the address in Hutchison's article and your edit summary at Commer indicates that the 2 Hutchison incarnations lived at the same address. So I'm assuming you have sourced that from somewhere? If I have it right, there is a ref that a Mr. Hutchison registered the Commer name but it doesn't tie him to Horace Hutchison the golfer. May well have been the same person, not impossible that it was someone of the same name. What's needed in my view is an entry, with a source, in Hutchison's article that can show he was a director of Royal Exchange and then there's no problem with the link. Eagleash (talk) 14:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I've spent a fair part of the afternoon trying to find something that would confirm his business interests but everything just says he was a golfer and a writer...quite a number of books too... Eagleash (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
The question mark is because I am asking you. I have just come home (from the gym) and found your message. If you have a library card you can access (as I do) The Times online. If you go to the Hathi Trust site you can look up the reference (in the Commer article) to The Commercial Motor which will give you the 29 Lennox gardens address. If someone (not you) disconnects the link again I will leave it unlinked. I have too many things on the go to do everything at once. When I sort out the Direct USA cable Co I will do that too. How about looking around yourself if at Hathi Trust and The Times if only to prove me wrong! Why the fixation? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 23:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi again. I seem to have struck a problem. I have tried to email you and I've not received a copy myself. I'm not sure what that means, WP email not working? I've done something wrong? Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I had a bit of a Wiki- (semi) break yesterday, partly voluntary, partly brought about by RL. There are some good pics there, but I think (if & when) I will probably use the one from Commons, not least because I do not know the correct or best way to go about obtaining permissions, nor am I inclined to find out! :P
I cannot get access to The Times; every page I find, requires log-in and/or subscription and none of them have a field to use a library card number. I did find one website which showed the libraries that subscribe but mine wasn't one of them and according to that site there's only about a dozen or so in UK that do. (Won't pay the Murdoch shilling?) I did find a couple of pages about Hutchinson on the Hathi site but was unable to find anything about Commer. I've no desire to prove you wrong, as you suggest, but merely to confirm accuracy as Wiki requires.
Re: e-mail: I haven't received anything and I have checked in preferences and it is enabled. I also disabled it and re-enabled just in case but no, nothing seen. Eagleash (talk) 12:40, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
RL. Ralph Lauren? Real Life? You need to contact the holder of a copyright to ask them to publish the picture with a licence acceptable to Wikimedia. Someone calls themselves Mr Sandtoft. Maybe if we contacted the office there Mr Sandtoft might be prepared to take a few pics just for WP? I assume it is staffed by volunteers. Might be a serious Karrier fan and love the idea.
Its my understanding that every ordinary public library in UK like in Australia NZ probably Canada provides free access to The Times from their own website, maybe even the IRA . . . Simplest and quickest solution is to phone your library and ask (this is the point when I can find it hard to get someone who does know the answer but we must try!) or have a glance at their website or tell me which library site to look at(!) I do not properly understand Hathi Trust's workings but get started with a more general request like Autocar magazine and then search there? I don't know. Similar with Internet Archive. During 12 hours intensive searching yesterday and the day before for refs to placate Eagleash I found the The Commercial Motor has set up its own archive right back to the beginning of the magazine. I also found after an hour or so that it locks you out from free access unless you are in the truck trade. Aargh. I guess you will be starting with a clean slate so give it a try. Email required by me so I can send attachments to make you comfortable about the golfing couple. Underdown was a serious golfer too. I'll give the WP system another go at emailing. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 22:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Yeah that Lauren bloke is a real pain... I might explore the licensing 'system' sometime, but I don't feel inclined to at the moment...
My library is Croydon Libraries (South London) and this is the closest I can find to any info. about online subscription services...
Update, when I saved the above there suddenly appeared a new talk page message which said I had mail. So I checked my google mail inbox and yes there was something there → 'view message' took me back to my talk page but there was nothing new there, just the mail template and your talk page message of yesterday (changed pic), so I'm not sure if I should be seeing something else or not...or even if I'm looking in the right place. Eagleash (talk) 23:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
"Enquire is a free, live-chat question and answer service available 24 hours a day with trained library staff. Libraries throughout England take it in turns to deliver the service Monday to Saturday, 9am-5pm, with libraries in the United States answering your questions at other times. Ask a question via Enquire and get a response straight away from the real-time 24 hour service." from here I can't but you can look at something they call "UK Newsstand" because I think that takes you to the right kind of place. Back soon, Eddaido (talk) 00:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Croydon Libraries has decided I must be up to no good and now will show me almost nothing so Ask a Librarian (we have the same here) is the best bet, maybe in the morning so you don't need to explain what the Atlantic is to a US operator. I only wanted email to show you "the evidence" but the most compelling is from The Times so if you get into the Times no need for email which is going to be awkward anyway because when we make contact that way next we need to exchange proper addresses. What a (nuisance) Eddaido (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Well I got into the newsstand site without a problem, and initially just searched for 'Commer'. The first result yielded the info that Ecurie Ecosse used a Commer transporter when winning Le Mans in 1956 with the D-Type Jaaaaag. It didn't say what model Commer otherwise I'd probably already have it in the (Commer) article! :) I shall look at the Times in a moment. Croydon probably think you're a terrorist or something. Eagleash (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
But its the 3-cylinder 2-stroke version and its good-looking as well as racy. Its gotta be there. Legacy of growing up when even radio was in black and white as well as car magazines. I always assumed Ecurie Ecosse cars were grey like everyone else's. The head writer for Spooks used to live in the next suburb. I think because his wife needed to be here. He would commute to London each week for meetings with his team. Otherwise aside from the occasional incursion we don't do terrorists. Long may it continue. Eddaido (talk) 02:15, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I've got back to it at last after Mr. Lauren's influence and a series of crises at WP:F1. Corgi did lots of Bantam models. I'll list em out sometime. I've added in the trolleybus pic. ..feel free to re-position if desired. Eagleash (talk) 21:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Droving, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Smithfield. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Change of scene! I just added an image to AC Cars, (The 1959 single seater). I note you have been involved with the page before. I'm not sure about the image and there's a load in the article already. Perhaps you could take a look and see what you think. Ta. Eagleash (talk) 22:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Nice picture but the car is all news to me. Where did it (the car) come from? There doesn't seem to be anything in the text to explain it. Does that matter? You live much nearer to Thames Ditton than I do. AC_Bristol rings a bell though, a rebodied Aceca?. Best, Eddaido (talk) 23:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
I suspect it is a Bristol-engined device. The cowl thingy is reminiscent of a Cooper-Bristol. It might even be a re-bodied early (pre-Jack Brabham rear-engine etc.) Cooper; they didn't seem to care what people did with their chassis or even if they copied them exactly (yes you Aston Butterworth!). The programme is no help; as a late entry running as an invitational, it didn't feature. Yes Thames Ditton is not very far and I'm even nearer to West Norwood, where AC was founded, which also borders Crystal Palace... small world. Eagleash (talk) 23:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, well my g-grandfather supervised the making of much of the cast-iron then each morning before opening time would take Queen Vic and kids and spouse on their daily inspect of the Crystal Palace but he moved here before the move to Norwood. I have a large pic of the Hyde Park opening ceremony on the wall in front of me. Does all this get me in somehow? I suspect until the advent of young Bernie and differently sourced money the competition was centred on the track and it would need to be a major transgression to call in lawyers. Have I digressed enough?
But that's User:Redsimon and it does read as a shorter version of the story you found earlier. Why not leave the image in its place and wait to see if there are objections. Let purists find it for themselves. Eddaido (talk) 03:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Tom M. Scotney
It seems car bodies were very much a sideline or maybe even a misunderstanding by Bonhams. Anyhow, I've thrown various factoids (and maybe the odd quasi-factoid) at the page and now it's a complete mess. Were you minded to apply a fresh set of eyes, step back, take a deep breath, and apply a more coherent structure..... that would be a friendly act. Though maybe now we know he was a specialist manufacturer of prefabricated timber buildings during the war including housings for searchlights scanning the East Anglian skies for enemy aircraft, and his range included chicken housing during the 1950s when "we" were all encouraged to keep a few hens in the garden because of egg (and other proteinous stuff) rationing .... hell, I don't know. He CERTAINLY did trailers, so he's not completely divorced from the world of things on wheels. I think there are tales to tell there, but I'm not quite sure what or where or in which order. Hence the request for a fresh pair of eyes. I need to organise myself some lunch. Best Charles01 (talk) 10:30, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Hope it was a good lunch. I've had a try which you may see here: Motor Industry Minnow. Would you like me to try to explain my thinking behind each alteration? Sorry I got you into this. My apologies, Eddaido (talk) 08:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Looks like good progress. Thanks. I don't feel strong enough to quiz you on each alteration, and I'm not sure how useful it would be if I did: but in any case, the overall effect is an improvement. It flows better. As far as I'm concerned your syntax changes should go live without undue delay: I'm always slightly hopeful others will come along next week, next month, next year - but maybe even in the next 24 hours - and contribute more so it's not helpful to have parallel versions lurking separately in sandboxes. Though I know different people may see some of those issues differently.Charles01 (talk) 08:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maurice Wilks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spencer King. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rover 10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pressed Steel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello TWL users! We hope JSTOR has been a useful resource for your work. We're organizing a cleanup drive to correct dead links to JSTOR articles – these require JSTOR access and cannot easily be corrected by bot. We'd love for you to jump in and help out!
After all our good work on the Karrier etc. stuff, (sorry!) I thought that Clough, Smith might deserve a page. If Tilling-Stevens have one, and Straker-Squire; feel they do. Anyways, I have created a draft here. It's not that good really, but I was wondering if you could have a quick look at it before I move it into mainspace, see if you have any observations... I know I'll have to correct the title when it's moved. Thanks. (If you're too busy, or whatever....no problem). Regards, Eagleash (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Really good to hear from you Eagleash. That article looks all good to me. How would i go to find "Draft article space" I've never seen it before and maybe I should use it. I was left wondering about one thing, where was Clough, Smith's factory / works? I guess Yorks or Teesside. Keep up the Good Work! regards, Eddaido (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thanks, I've moved it into mainspace & it's already been reviewed. I added Yorkshire as a location; there's no info. in the book I used, apart from a reference to temporary premises at Leeds. Charles H. Roe also mentions Leeds but not ref'd. In the absence of more; that'll have to do I think. Draft...I've never written an article without going via draft and also adding the review tag when moving to mainspace. Shortcut is at WP:WIZARD and then there's a lot of damn fool questions about notability etc. before it asks for a title which then automatically creates in draft. Or, I think if you create something in article space you can move it to draft via "more" at the top of the page. Anyways, thanks for having a look at Clough. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 02:08, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I saw you are a major contributor for Hooper coachbuilders. I was wondering, did the company create any cars after 1959? This Silver Spirit coupe is credited as being a Hooper car. Maybe that's a typo? Any ideas?
This is very puzzling. I see its a 2-door coupé so it will have been specially modified, possibly quite recently. Why not take up that site's invitation "Ask me anything" and Ask why that note is there. It is always possible that Hooper as (it says in the article) R-R retailer may have found someone to make the modifications and then added their name to the car's coachwork. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 04:05, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I've found a news item in The Times of Friday 14 December 1990 saying "Hooper & Co one of only two coach building companies authorised by Rolls-Royce has started restoration of classic cars . . ." May be its all true? Eddaido (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I've made some further amendments to the article though it leaves me a little uncomfortable, any thing further you may find out would be gratefully received. Eddaido (talk) 06:08, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rover 6, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bosch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Riley RM, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roadster. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited British Motor Syndicate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lawson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Well, umm, yes? but the road usage comes from a road junction forming a triangle as with triangular pieces of cloth (gores) in making a skirt or umbrella. Road in this case has nothing to do with this matter, your kind is the gore in Kensington Gore but it is the triangle that counts, not roads. Eddaido (talk) 20:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
What I suspect is that the word originally meant triangular something - perhaps a piece of cloth particular related to gussets, and then by analogy used for triangular pieces of land which are often created at three way junctions. I think this needs more research which could lead to improving the Gore (road) page. Leutha (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Ummm - suspect?? Please read your very own Collins reference!
I have not looked more than a second at the Gore road page, seems fine to me if quite completely un-referenced. There must be plenty more undoubted authorities around. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 22:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
In answer to your question...they're great pics but probably don't belong in the Karrier article as the the relevance is a bit tenuous (IMO). Perhaps one could be kept just to demonstrate the point, and others go in the Chrysler UK article (if such a thing exists). I would think there's a fair chance of someone bobbing up and just deleting them as not pertinent, but given the way of Wiki that may take some time...:) Regards, Eagleash (talk) 08:41, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks EA, good to hear from you and, yes, the message was meant for you! It is because a certain other editor finds it hard to credit that Chrysler was actually making things (I understand a lot more than just assembling Canadian bits and pieces) in Britain in the 1930s and had quite a substantial presence. Many readers think of the short-lived Chrysler Europe as just a renamed Rootes Group. And yet it might be hard to write any kind of article about it. If you find a source of inspiraition please let me know. Please adjust Karrier to suit or I suppose simply revert. Best regards, Eddaido (talk) 08:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anthony Grey, 9th Earl of Kent, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burbage. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello; I don't suppose you know of a way to find an eMail address or at a pinch, 'phone No. for a NZ company? Old family friends and as exec. of an estate in UK I have some things that belong to them. No worries if you can't help. Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 15:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
All my pleasure, though I'm afraid I don't know them personally. (It is said that all this country is within 3 degrees of separation or whatever) probably because they may be new arrivals(!) Try [redact-thispages.co.nz/w/100887848/ this] for a home address phone +64 3 942 6396 in case it doesn't work. And it seems he's on this list at Ilam which does not include an email address, d n it. Here is a possible connection. You might have to post a letter. If someone changes address it usually shows immediately in the online phone directory. Have a nice Sunday, Eddaido (talk) 20:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. It does help....moves the process along even if just by eliminating possibilities. Thanks again. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 17:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
It's good of you to offer but it might be best if you didn't! The situation is slightly more complicated than it appears at first sight and might involve a lot of long-winded explanations if they asked why you wanted it. I'm also not sure that the dentist chap is the same one. I don't really know him; 'her' I knew from birth. As it happens I've got a letter done to Deirdre but not posted as yet; will do as soon as some more RL probs are out of the way! Thanks again. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 11:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Sorry to tread on your toes Eddaido, I didn't intend to steal your thunder. Sincere apologies, but I just thought the article deserved a DYK and evidently didn't go about it the right way! I'm more than happy for you to take full credit for it. RedSunset18:38, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cornwall Park, Auckland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page One Tree Hill. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Northland, Wellington, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Fraser. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Some 'local' knowledge needed here on the FC page please if you would be so kind... An editor has added some info. about NZ production of this van. I think it must be an editor from your side of the planet. It is unsourced and I have yet to find anything that would bear it out. (Rather than just delete it). Do you know of anything that might help. (I've moved it to a seaparate section and tagged it for refs). Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 14:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
This IP's edits are all correct I think. (I realise we need refs) Sounds like someone of my generation. Those vans certainly were a familiar sight. They would not have been imported assembled. They were considered the perfect subject for training unskilled new immigrant labour (when that was all the workforce available).
Perhaps this IP contributor is the same person who supplies the address: howard@eclass.co.nz at the foot of this page Doesn't seem to be interested in vans but there is quite a lot there on his website. I suppose we need confirmation in print. I've sent you a few emails through the WP system and you have never responded. I should have told you I was sending them but it didn't seem vitally important. Do you know if there is a way we can unplug / plug-in this communication channel?
Sorry, delay, F1 project woes, RL and trolls at the help-desk. OK, there might be something out there somewhere about the NZ prod. I might even ask the editor where they got their info. Emails; my eMail is enabled but I haven't seen anything from you I'm afraid. 'Enabling' is under the preferences tab, on the first page below the edit count bit. I've looked at the shadow factory page, it's a bit out of my usual area of expertise really. Some of it could do with a bit of a re-write though. Eagleash (talk) 11:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
No problem about delay. Don't you worry I will order the book on local Commers to be delivered again to local branch library though it is impossibly boring. Sorry about F1. Please rewrite the shadow stuff. Please also send me an email, have not had a problem before though it is a while now since I have needed to use it. Eddaido (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
OK Sent a very brief test eMail. I might have a bit of a look at the shadow page in due course; when circs allow, that is. Eagleash (talk) 13:32, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I get lots of email from WP all day about changes to articles etc. But what is odd is i have just sent you a message and confirmed that "Send me copies of emails I send to other users" is ticked and it is but I have never received a copy of my emails sent to you. And of course your latest test didn't come through. I must go look for help. Eddaido (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
I received a copy of what I sent to you. I have not received your reply. Looks as if there's something up with the email system at your end. Eagleash (talk) 21:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited British shadow factories, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CRT and Lucas. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I can not do what you asked me to do, but I can help you fix your email. Did you receive an email from me? -- PBS (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes I have received your email! Thank you very much!! I wonder what has been going wrong. Have a very nice Sunday. Many many thanks, Eddaido (talk) 23:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
I tried sending myself an email via the Wiki link and it worked fine. Are you still having any problems? -- PBS (talk) 13:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes it worked again, once. Haven't tried again since then so I've just sent you an email ensuring the send me a copy box was ticked and so far I've received no copy. If you don't receive my message what do you recommend I do? Many thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Eddaido. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ford Motor Company of New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Model A. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I like your rewrite of the intro - it may need some referencing for the claims in a few spots though. Other than that good work. NealeFamily (talk) 11:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Good morning, would you mind detailing the claims that need referencing please. Where did the idea of three 3-wheelers come from so I can see if I can track down its sources. It may be quite correct just the owners are not correct. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 19:41, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks but I've a long way to go and enthusiasm is currently low. I'm surrounded by dead boring source material. Eddaido (talk) 01:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seventy Mile Bush, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Scandinavian and Woodville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Automotive industry in New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Zealand Railways. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi and thanks for your message. I don't know much about this topic, and I understand the edit may have included more up to date information, but it didn't appear to me to meet the standard of verifiability as it was unsourced content replacing sourced content and in addition was added by a COI editor. (Or, for example in the infobox, the membership number was changed but the same source given, which means the source did not say what the article was then claiming it did). I hope that makes sense, let me know if not. If you have sources that confirm the new content, please do update the page, thanks. Melcous (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Yep, now I'm confused - I didn't revert your editing, I reverted the editing of a user called "cvvogb" (who now has a new name), and back to the edit made by QueenCake, which was exactly the same as your last edit but with added categories. But yes, if there has been a misunderstanding feel free to fix what you think the problem is. Melcous (talk) 00:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not trying to fight. I have helped by fixing some formatting errors, and the maintenance tags are there to indicate that the current content is unsourced. They can be removed once you have added sources, but you really shouldn't be adding content without sources. Melcous (talk) 09:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Seriously, I have no idea what you are so upset about. I have not reverted any of your editing! (Unless you are operating multiple accounts??!) You don't need to "sort out" my copyedits, all I have done is fix incorrect formatting you introduced into the article and add tags requesting citations, nothing more. You do not own the article and if you are going to add content without sources then you should expect other editors to revert or add tags requesting citations. Plus, if you have a personal relationship with the club outside of wikipedia then it sounds like you might have a conflict of interest and if so shouldn't be editing the article anyway. Melcous (talk) 09:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Speed reading? Mistakes? You are really not making any sense to me. The edit you are talking about (diff you included on my talk page) is where I reverted the edits of another editor, not you. Or are you saying that you are that editor are one and the same? And that edit took the article back to almost exactly what it was the last time you edited it (which, by the way, before I edited the article, was in October 2014). Melcous (talk) 10:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
"Removed all trace"? No, it's still right there in the edit history. "Presumably did not like"? No again, my edit summary made clear it was because the content was unsourced and added by a conflict of interest editor. Melcous (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely M a g i c ! ! here it is again — User talk:Melcous. otherwise - the breathtaking logic is dumbfounding. reader please see Veteran Car Club of Great Britain: Revision history. Eddaido (talk) 23:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Tiger pics
there is already a front shot in the above paragraph, and a slightly cropped rear shot in the paragraph below. Your two of the same car, certainly welcome. Could there be some movement, like your two of the II be in the II paragraph ? and the I etc ... I just got home, so I don't want to half arse it quite this early ... Dave Rave (talk) 08:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laycock Engineering, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Northern Railway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thos W Ward, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cordoba. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Removing the term "Standard/standard" from the Bentley S3 article
There isn't any confusion. "Standard" is a descriptor, an adjective. It is capitalized when it is the 1st word in a sentence, caption, or Infobox entry. Nowhere is it implied that "Standard" is the name of an Bentley S model, like the modifier "Continental". Your approach, while well done, is very extreme to a non-issue.71.233.84.208 (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it is an adjective I put in to clarify for those unfamiliar with the subject, it was my mistake but capitalising it turns it into a model name which it is not. If you think it is a non-issue you do not know enough about the subject! Regards, Eddaido (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
There was an edit conflict, your amendment does not change anything so far as I can see. Please quote chapter and verse on MOS i always just get lost and forget about it and I'd like to know why you believe your claim is correct. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Darracq and Company London, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clément-Talbot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page State. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Adolphe Clément-Bayard. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:
Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:
|image=SomeImage.jpg.
There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:39, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, just picking your brains... on the above, the infamous F1 IP editor has added a table of GP results to the page. He's very fond of tables (more on that via eMail if you're interested) but do you think it's something that should be included? It's not a defining aspect of the type of engine in fact it was a failure at that 'level'. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 16:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, good to hear from you. I just don't develop strong opinions about things outside my immediate focus. The table does seem to throw the article out of balance. If there were "performance" details for the other manifestations it'd be OK wouldn't it. Another editor once said to me that an encyclopedia should contain useful information and for that reason alone any useful info should be considered carefully before rejection (I must admit this opinion suited me at the time yet I do think it is sound judgement).
Is the BRM engine sufficiently notable to have its own article? I am quite sure it is. But, there's a challenge that I wouldn't take up myself! If that were done I think the table certainly should be removed from H Engine and appear in its BRM article.
Failing that new article it does throw this article off balance, but if it were balanced by items about the other like engines, motorbike, aero it should stay. It is indeed a record of failure but that is exactly the point being made and it was so nearly successful. I notice no one has troubled with the concept since or am I guessing wrong. At least it gives a thoughtful reader some idea of the time trouble effort and Money poured into trying to make it work well enough for what must be the world's most demanding motoring. Best, Eddaido (talk) 22:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I won't delete it as things stand, but I can see one or two others not being keen on it...so in the fullness of time it may well disappear. I'm not sure the engine is worth its own article... our chum may well have split it off already if he'd thought about it... he did the same with some 4WD F1 cars from the 4WD in F1 article. I might discuss it with some F1 project members see if an article might fly. F1 rules since (IIRC) have been to a max of 12 cylinders (often less) over the intervening years..currently 1.6-litre hybrid turbo'd V6s...so the possibility hasn't really arisen. I doubt very much whether any other category would even think about it. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 11:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sunbeam-Talbot Ten, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Ye-es. When this kind of things happens I have the theory its because all the final year high school students in a particular city in China have been given the assignment of translating this WP article into Cantonese or doing the same for any Charles Dickens novel. Eddaido (talk) 11:48, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Revert
Hello there! Thanks for reaching out. Just to be clear, it was not your edit that was the problem - it was the preceding edit where a user had vandalized the page. I have no problem with you reinserting it. DaltonCastle (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Biography opening sentences
No, subject's proper name and common name should be in the lead sentence, and both should be bolded. See WP:OPENPARA. Thanks for catching the spelling typo! Pyrope22:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
You mean in the first sentence of the body text? No, that shouldn't be bold. See MOS:BOLD; only the first mention in the lead section, thereafter avoid bold emphasis. Pyrope22:59, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The MoS is such a sprawling, arcane thing I'm constantly surprised by finding new things, and I've been editing here for over a decade! Pyrope23:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Has a specific meaning on Wikipedia. Please read WP:VANDAL and perhaps consider not making personal attacks in your edit summaries, (which I will of course ignore) I haven't decided what to do yet, but if I decide to re-instate my edits, I shall be asking you to provide a source, as the current text is not supported in the source. -Roxy the dogbark14:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes it has a specific meaning. I suppose it is a personal attack on the vandal. If you wish to change long-settled text (particularly by inserting nonsense) you must provide a good citation, which of course you will be unable to find for nonsense. Eddaido (talk) 21:39, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Eddaido. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello Eddaido, thanks for the note. I don't own the book, so I may have found snippets of it online or (more likely) it was cited by one of my trusted sources so I included it as a pointer for future use. Sorry I can't be of further help. P.S. I regularly see the improvements that you are making everywhere, so please, please keep up the diligence. Congratulations and many many thanks.. Chienlit (talk) 09:35, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@NealeFamily: just to let you know, consent requirements or prohibitions on photography in museums etc are generally not considered a reason for deletion Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Museum and interior photography (this is commons, but we basically treat it the same and in any case the photo could be uploaded to commons). It's left up to photographers to decide whether they want to contribute photos taken in violation of such museum etc policies. I'm not certain what happens if the photos are uploaded to Flickr or other such places but I strongly suspect if they've been publicly uploaded with a suitable licence they are uploadable to common (but you should check first). Note that consent requirements for living people are considered important Commons:Commons:Photographs of identifiable people and doesn't mean we're encouraging people to take photographs in violation of museum etc policies Commons:Commons:WikiProject Arts/Museum photography. Nil Einne (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Please don't reintroduce errors in our articles for no good reason
As I said here [29] please don't reintroduce errors in our articles for no good reason. If you continue to do so, don't be surprised if you're blocked. Nil Einne (talk) 06:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dalgety plc, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Australasian and Gold digger. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited British Titan Products, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stockton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi, Eddaido. I have started a little spring cleaning at Aston Martin. I am a little stumped when it comes to ownership. The list of owners was outdated. I have seen you did a little research into the company. Could you help a little with the article? Thanks, BsBsBs (talk) 10:51, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
I am flattered but I don't think I can. I entirely approve of what you've been doing. I was not impressed by the citation provided for the complicated ownership stuff. (An hour later.) I've got interested in the topic but I know I will be unlikely to bring it right up-to-date. Anyhow, watch that space! Thanks , Eddaido (talk) 12:34, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I am familiar with the industry, not so with UK ownership structures.If you feel like contributing, please do.BsBsBs (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your great edits at Aston Martin, please keep it up, the article needs it. I have and will focus on fixing the most glaring errors first, and I bet there are a many more. Allow me to suggest to postpone the finer nuances of style and terminology until we have filled the biggest potholes. Your “bankruptcy” point is well taken. That’s where the American and English languages differ. I do not cringe when the word is used in the general sense. Very few automakers completely avoided it in their history. 10 years ago, most of the U.S. auto industry was near-, or totally bankrupt. When specific cases are discussed, the article definitely must use the proper legal word, be it administration, or receivership. Used in a general sense, “bankruptcy” doesn’t hurt me. If Andy Palmer calls is bankruptcy, then we should not correct him, it’s his quote. I don’t doubt that he said it. I met him a few times – I cover the auto industry from Tokyo - during his Nissan days, and he always was a no bullshit straight shooter.
Also, please allow me to suggest to discuss the article on its talk page, and as little as possible in comments to the article itself. Comment mark-up are great when two work on an article, when there are more, comments quickly get out of hand, and I would hate to see the same comments in the code years later. A discussion on the talk page hopefully will involve other editors, this article needs all the hands we can get. Let's take it there! BsBsBs (talk) 07:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
We are of course enjoined to use the talk page, it is clearly better to do so if one has the time to spread oneself. The difference between bankruptcy and receivership is in law and not language. I expect Palmer was advised to use for his particular audience a US term for the similar thing but it is not the same thing and rather more than a nuance. It may be necessary to explain what he meant but we can wait till later for that. Just at the moment I can't take the time to go into any lengthy discussions should they be called for. My thought was to mark obvious mistakes which may need to be discussed and I've done that. Where I am quite sure of my ground i have simply fixed the text. I do try to be terse, on talk pages too as well as in the text. In my opinion some sections should be expanded and some contracted but perhaps that is the kind of topic for a talk page.
"I do not cringe" . . . "Bankruptcy doesn't hurt me". I take it you mean you don't mind that that word is used. Am I right or is there more to your thoughts behind the comment? Somehow I doubt we'll be swamped by other contributors. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 08:32, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
You are probably right that there won't be an overload of editors, especially when it comes to hard work. I have done cleanup of a few car articles (Volkswagen, Toyota, Nissan et al) and it sometimes was lonely work. Good to have you as company! Re bankruptcy: I am an Americanized German. In German, it's a very bad word, in American, everybody is doing it. So I can relate with both. I am looking at it more from an industry perspective. Car companies either are among the thousands of dead ones, or they had at least a brush with bankruptcy. Luxury makers are especially endangered. In this business, simply being alive is an achievement. BsBsBs (talk) 10:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
That's right. In USA you get full marks for trying even if you do screw up. I think it is part of what made that country great. Almost all luxury car manufacturers are vanity projects. I own BMW therefore I am important to the world — oops, bad example, that's true!
Hi there. There is a bit of a confusion after the last edit. In Sprague and Curtis: "Six months later in September the factory — shut-down the previous December — re-opened under its new owner Aston Martin Lagonda..." In Gauntlett: "Six months later partners Alan Curtis and Peter Sprague announced they had never intended to maintain a long term financial stake in Aston Martin Lagonda.." Six months after when? BsBsBs (talk) 12:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Rootes etc.
Hey! Do you remember the discussion at 'Automobiles' regarding manufacturers. I.e. do we say Rootes (or British Leyland or whatever the parent Co. is/was) or the marque name. As I recall the parent Co. was decided upon, I.e. 'Rootes' rather than Hillman, Singer, Sunbeam etc. It seems there is an IP making multiple changes to the mfr names here and I'm reasonably sure that this is not what was decided (after much discussion). Thoughts? Best regards, Eagleash (talk) 12:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
First thoughts, panic, as it is just coming to 2 am and I need to sleep, pronto. Tomorrow is another day. Thanks for the heads-up, will try to forget it for 8 hours. Eddaido (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
It looks as if you (with others) have fixed the glaring examples. Otherwise the amendments seem to be arguable (Don't know enough about the US manufacturers). Are you content with the current situation? Regards, Eddaido (talk) 00:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Up to a point, yes. As you say, a number have already been fixed. However, there are at least two other recent IPs making similar edits, often factually wrong and without ES. This is similar to the IP-hopping F1 editor I've mentioned before, who ended up with over 250 IP addresses before an Admin. properly cottoned on to him. (Now blocked indef). All the IPs geolocate to Mountain View, California. Dynamic IPs make it difficult to spot bad edits &/or communicate. Time to 'keep-em-peeled' and play 'whack-a-mole'. Eagleash (talk) 05:45, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Borough of Onslow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Johnsonville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Enfield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BSA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand Refrigerating Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Cooke. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Good morning, (assuming you see this on Monday 15th). I was convinced that a page for Bantam existed as a redirect...thought I'd seen it back when we were looking at Karrier and trolleybuses etc. Searched for it recently and couldn't find it so created a redirect...(with 'possibilities'). I couldn't find anything via deletion logs either. Do you recall seeing anything in the past? Don't want to trip myself up creating unnecessary pages! Regards, Eagleash (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, I've given the day over to recalling the matter from the back of the mind every time there's an idle moment. I just can't remember. I remember thinking the Bantam was notable enough for its own article but one of the odd things was/is there are so few photos of them. Do you think the truck enthusiasts find them a bit too small? Good to hear from you. Best, Eddaido (talk) 11:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Both
Hi 842U, thinking about MG T-types is there such a thing as an other than two door sports car, coupé, two seater (roadster?)? I'd like to know because all those Midgets seem to need to have 2-door in their infoboxes. Roadster is a US term only recently accepted in UK. Yes there were sort of sporting cars called Roadster for export to USA sorry US. One fun thing was the discovery that some poor person thought OTS for a 2-seater Jaguar was a US term and inscribed it as such in the XK articles. Should the MG articles be marked British English and British nomenclature be adopted throughout? What do you think? Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 13:10, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Roadster
Not all roadsters are two passenger: the Austin Healey is a "2+2" roadster and the 1919 Pierce-Arrow Model 48 Dual-Valve was a four passenger roadster. 842U (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Um its the number of doors as in 2-door not the number of seats. An (American) 1919 Pierce-Arrow Model 48 Dual-Valve is most welcome to stay a four passenger roadster and I would never suggest otherwise. So you agree about the 2-door superfluity? How about my other questions?
Talkback
Hello, Eddaido. You have new messages at WP:MCQ. Message added 13:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Here's the thing. The lead isn't supposed to be intimately detailed, just a quick pass over the essentials. Yes, the page should contain the exact info as far as possible, but the lead need not, & that's my objection. If you'd put it in the body of the page, I'd have left it. TREKphilerany time you're ready, Uhura 21:18 & 21:29, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
There were three blacksmiths on the electoral roll in 1858. The mentions of foundry until Bill Light all refer to Langlands foundry in Australia. Having said this I don't see why the business that became Howkes Bay Foundry might not have begun in 1866 as a blacksmith but I have found no mention of Hodgson or Bowler before William Light of 1871 (pr Hodgson & Bowler until 1865) and I believe I should have. What reason can I give any Napier archives for my interest in the matter? Eddaido (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, that should have been "no mention of Hodgson or Bowler before William Light of 1871 (or of Hodgson & Bowler's Hawkes Bay Foundry until 1885). Eddaido (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Obscure Healey pictures
I hope you are well.
My attention has been drawn to a plea from the Warwickshire County Records office. They have some Healey pictures that they would like help identifying. I thought this MIGHT be the sort of thing you would enjoy taking a look at. Might even add to our wiki knowledge in some sort of indirect way I didn't think of yet.
Edaido, I am frankly offended by your attitude. I am happy that I was finally able to convince you that the Silver Dawn came first with a small boot as well. Why exactly you deleted the second reference, which is not "redundant" but has a lot of additional information on the body styles? And is there are particular reason why a Rippon Estate Car or a MK VI Mulliner Sport Sedan, a body that was mentioned in Nutlands book as "never suprpassed", should not be in the gallery? And any reason did you delete my well referenced section on the Mk VI as it is available today? I think you are transgressing here. Since we have obviously a shared interest I hope that we can collaborate in making this section better rather than deleting each others posts. After all, none of us "owns" this page.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinntal (talk • contribs) 17:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi Sinntal, I'm sorry you feel offended. How do you account for the extra length of the first Silver Dawn? I'll add this to the talk page as suggested above. Eddaido (talk) 21:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
I have no particular objection to changing the name of this article. It did start out as an article about the actual Office Building, but the content seems to be primarily about the company. You might consider splitting the article into two articles: one about the company (most of the current article) and one about the building (containing the last two sections, plus a brief contextual history), but that's hardly necessary. Andrew Jameson (talk) 14:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Eddaido. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thank you very much G G-J. That's nice. And te rangimarie me te pai to you as we might say here if we had a mind to it. I phoned Crickhowell for a more suitable response but they must be out. Always nice to hear from you, my very best wishes for the New Year to you and yours. Eddaido (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Reading back I see I have caused a mess in your worlds. I am sorry. I have been playing with infoboxes and made a list. I sort of have to write these truck blurbs to make it work, though. I plan to add numbers and refs. I do not care about the layout, text or images. Talking is hard just now. If any of this is fun please just do anything at all. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Re our discussion on Bert Cooksley I asked at the National Library and they will send microfilms of newspapers to local libraries with microfilm readers (eg Masterton? provided they also have a master copy, as with the main centre papers) Hugo999 (talk) 04:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Eddaido. Could you please me more specific about what the problem is with: A landaulet — also known as landaulette — is a horse-drawn carriage or car where a fixed roof covers the driver, but the rear passengers sit under a retractable roof. Since World War II, landaulets have mainly been used by public figures in formal processions.? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 06:57, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi 1292 Simon. Please be me more careful with your edits. If you cannot see a difference you should not be making the changes you are. Look at my edit summary. Eddaido (talk) 07:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
"a horse-drawn carriage or car where a fixed roof covers the driver." Just have a look at any photo of any carriage on that page and you will see how daft your statement is. Eddaido (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Sorry Dai. I don't get what you are saying either.
Queen ElizabethII.
Take the photo' of Elizabeth II... Roof over front (driver), her & someone (not Phil) standing at the back (an open section)... or the Maybach one, fixed roof front, folding bit at the back. Hope all is well? Eagleash (talk) 11:55, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
1900 Landaulet, Dresden
Hi Eagleash, nice to hear from you. (Things are OK and may be improving. You are flourishing I trust) Take the photo at the top right hand corner of the landaulet page reproduced here on the left as a fr'instance - I didn't put it up there! Cheers,
PS That is of course unless there is something I don't understand and that is Always possible
Yes I agree that there are a couple of pictures which do not fit the 'typical' desription and where there's an open part at the front where the driver would be (like in a stage coach or similar). However, even in that pic. there's a small fixed roof above the door, before you reach the folding part at the back. That's the nub of it I think. The front can be either closed (or open in rare cases) but the rear has a folding or retractable roof, even if the rest of the vehicle is open. That's what makes it a Landau (or Landaulet(te) (small Landau)). One example from an online dictionary. I could do with a bit more enflourishment really! Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 12:40, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Austin taxi
Then back to square one, "a horse-drawn carriage or car where a fixed roof covers the driver." The driver is never covered in a landaulet carriage otherwise of course I concur. Here's a picture of a once-popular style of landaulet, that body style was required in London by regulation. Very soon after that photo was taken I was given a Dinky toy version beautifully modelled. I like enflourishment, please may I keep it? Eddaido (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
It can't be said that the driver is never covered: The dictionary link supplied says it can be open or closed. And nearly every picture on the page has a roof over the driver. So the definition perhaps should be (something like) 'A vehicle where the rear seats can be covered by a folding or retractable roof, but the remainder of the vehicle may be either open or closed' ...edit at will. Eagleash (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
On a landaulet Carriage the driver is never covered. The mistake being made is to lump carriages and cars together. Eddaido (talk) 20:55, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes I did, I'm still thinking about it. My primary interest is (older) cars but sometimes I see a truck that I think should be in Wikimedia and I upload it. That's how I got involved here. My thoughts with trucks is that they could be given more detailed categories as the number of images held by Commons grows. A while ago I tried to put this into practice and found a couple of things. Uploaders were inclined to feel they were being generous with the info by saying (eg Ford) truck or even 1941 Ford truck. Next when I tried to fit the image into a category I found it very very difficult to decide exactly what model of truck it was because there are so many minor variations of engines and wheelbases and truck bodies and I couldn't decide what was important and what was not and so in despair I would categorise the image as (eg Ford) truck and hope someone with more knowledge would be along soon. I was thinking of you for that job ;-)
Is it possible a D (for defence?) 15 is the same as a W (for War) 30 but 1500 lbs capacity (a pickup) against 3000 lbs capacity? Eddaido (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, that would be an honour. I'm hopelessly tied up in coaches and carriages right now where I would be very pleased to have company. Could you be tempted with that? I know you have been seriously involved already. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 09:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
I have not really done that much with Mail coach and certainly not seriouslyt involved in the article. It certainly needs improving to include some more countries or at least continents for a worldview. I'll see if I can find anything non-British in my philatelic library but most literature I have are British related. ww2censor (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
I now notice you changed the lede image, which is a very fake looking version even though it is at a higher resolution. Several years ago I saw an original print at the Post Office Archives in London and the older image is very close to that original print. Personally I would revert it and see if a better quality could be found. I had looked at that image and thought it looked really nasty being overly enhanced, so I didn't change it. ww2censor (talk) 16:44, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
The current image is the result of an hour or two's searching just before I uploaded and displayed it. If you look on the image's file you will see the source. You will also be able to see how Yale University believes the colours should appear. You are welcome to choose that version (however see below). I downloaded it and put it into Photoshop and thought I'd made an improvement - maybe not. I favour the new image (my colours or Yale's) because you can now actually see what is being talked about. The old one is much prettier but Fuzzy. My thoughts about the picture/s showing the thunderstorm, not ideal.
I've now been as recommended to the Post Office Archive here and there may be something better but all they will let me see is small low resolution images which would not be any good. You may know how to improve on that. We want to illustrate a mail coach in its natural habitat (i.e. on the road with horses and people, not in a museum) and the current picture and alternate do that and a lot else besides that's superfluous. I suppose to make the coach visible it is presented in a size format that pushes the text out of the way. So, while I've little doubt I'll approve anything new you come up with, as I see it the only reason to revert to the old alternate image/s is to minimise distress of previous editors.
There is a difference of opinion. Paul Ailey on this page says the Post Office owned its own mail coaches. The Post office here skips the matter. Is it true contractors were dropped and the Post Office operated its own coaches? If its true can you provide any dates?
I thought to leave the 'world view' alone (not saying it is not a valid criticism) - I know nothing even to write home about on e.g. continental postal services and that is just 'Europe'. Have picked up a little by osmosis about US.
Did you get an answer to the question about pictures that you asked Nimbus227 about?
If I have the right pictures the answer is
'Rolls-Royce Aerospace engine part at Abbey Panels. Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust advises this is an intercooler diffuser casing for a Rolls-Royce WR-21 marine gas turbine, in production from 1999.'
Yes, thank you. I'm the one that got the info from RR Heritage and added it to the images! If there are more copies without the note of the correct i.d. please add it to them. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
You have rewritten large sections of this article and left an orphaned part sentence:
Success of Talbot-Darracq cars 1.5 litre,...
Keomike (talk) 01:37, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. I don't now know what I had in mind so please finish it if you can or delete it. But it does tell you he had some involvement with their 1.5. litre cars doesn't it. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 01:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Durant Dort
You wrote: @GMTEgirl: Hi GMTEgirl, can you explain in more detail your new note that the business was dissolved in 1924? I am working through the many discrepancies between the various WP versions of the early history of Buick and its involvement with Flint Wagon Works and Durant-Dort which will result in a number of changes to all three articles. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 11:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
At the State Archives in Lansing, there is a copy of the Notice of Dissolution of the Durant-Dort Carriage company. It is dated 25 August 1924.
The document is found in the Articles of Association book 1841-1935 for Genesee Count Record group 81-50 Container V1-10. Thank you.
The blind leading the blind
If you honestly think I could give a damn about your edits except insofar as I think they're misguided, you've got a bigger ego than I gave you credit for. And if you think it's more than that, feel free to take it to AN( & claim stalking or whatever the hell you want. TREKphilerany time you're ready, Uhura16:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
August 2018
Your recent editing history at Emily Langton Massingberd shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Softlavender (talk) 08:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Honestly, I'm not sure what you're getting at with your edit summary at Daimler Straight-Eight engines. How does this particular use of an honorific not qualify as a general usage? It's not an article about Jam Sahib discussing his titles, it's just a tangential mention in a caption that appears to be in Wikipedia's own voice, meaning inclusion of the honorific is a violation of neutral point of view and it should be removed per the Manual of Style. If the title is in a quote, that's one thing, but it does not appear to be the case here. What's your reasoning, if you don't mind? PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm not "picking on" this article. Some people fix punctuation, I fix honorifics in accordance with the Manual of Style, in whatever article I happen to notice them in. I was just attempting to start a discussion rather than simply reverting back and forth. As a compromise, might I suggest adding a link to the owner's wikipage, with the wording "Lanchester grilled drophead coupé for Digvijaysinhji Ranjitsinhji, the Maharajah Jam Sahib of Nawanagar"? (I assume that is the individual referred to in the caption.) PohranicniStraze (talk) 05:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
I see. But the manual of style, as I pointed out to you, as quoted by you, says "GENERALLY". This is not generally. Eddaido (talk) 05:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it says "generally" because there are some exceptions listed in the policy. The four exceptions given pertain to where the honorific is virtually synonymous with the person's name (like Mother Teresa), for historical women when their husband's name isn't known so they are referred to as "Mrs. (husband's name)", special rules for some of the minor English titles like Sir and Dame, and Burmese names with an honorific preserved within them. I don't think any of them apply here. Would the compromise change I listed above be acceptable? PohranicniStraze (talk) 05:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
No authority more than any other editor. And I could ask the same for you? I'm attempting to reach an acceptable compromise, if you'd rather not discuss I can just leave it at the article talk page. PohranicniStraze (talk) 05:26, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
An acceptable compromise would be for you to leave this article alone and go off to edit somewhere else. So much fuss about such a small thing! Leave it alone, go on, dare you. Eddaido (talk) 05:27, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Good to hear from you. I've held off answering because so many other things are happening here away from Wikipedia. Yes please, I certainly will watch what happens but right now I cannot commit myself to any more. I'm honoured to have been invited. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 21:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Eddaido. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
@Eddaido:Thanks for your edits and I am happy you found that photo of the carriage. By drumming I mean a construction method for the roof rather than the sound it makes. The closest I could find for a reference you can see is when I google
"james young" car roof patent drum
The first book that comes up is the 1951 issue of the "The Flying Lady"
There is a good description on page 722 that reads "at the London Motor Show, a James Young car had introduced a new roof construction which, in order to eliminate drumming, employed light wire in place of wood or metal. ... The patent was eventually sold to the Volkswagen organisation."
It looked as if you had begun to add more information and then dropped your project. I'm pretty confident I found and brought to Wikimedia every image on that page.
I've added the citation you mention, does that solve your concerns? I do have more to add to the article. I'll do that later today, its been getting in my way on my computer's desktop too long. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Gwin poeth sbeislyd i chi ...
... gan yr hen Gymro; rwy'n gobeithio eich bod wedi cael gwyliau Nadolig gwych ac rwy'n dymuno 2019 heddychlon i chi! That is Welsh and translates to: Spicy hot wine for you from the old Welshman; I hope you have had a great Christmas holiday and I wish you a peaceful 2019! Thank you for your excellent work on the 'pedia.
Hi. Trying to put this article into context here, and WP:REFERS discourages framing an article as being about a "name", unless it really is about the name. If the article is primarily about the name Vanden Plas rather than the coachbuilding company, can we clarify the statement about the coachbuilders? As currently written the lead (and the article in fact) is ambiguous as to whether the coachbuilders itself still exists or not. --Lord Belbury (talk) 11:57, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Your Worship, greetings. I don't see how your reference to WP:REFERS applies. Whether or not you exist in 2119 your name (for these purposes) remains the same. The present tense is correct. Latterly would not have been my choice of word but it conveys the meaning doesn't it? Eddaido (talk) 12:04, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
From what is said in the article I should think that if the company still exists it is probably only protecting the Vanden Plas name. Don't know what happened to the business in Belgium. Eddaido (talk) 12:10, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
The question addressed by WP:REFERS is whether we're saying "this is an article about the name of a company" or "this is an article about a company". It read more like the second to me, but I'll leave it up to you. --Lord Belbury (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
OK, I think I see what you are on about. First, please would you tell me precisely what you mean when you say "a company" and I can go on from there. Otherwise in trying to explain I might write a lot of stuff that's not relevant. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
It's okay, I'll leave it to you. All I wanted to do was point out that WP:REFERS discourages writing articles as "Vanden Plas is the name of a coachbuilder" unless the article really is more about the name than the coachbuilder. --Lord Belbury (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Its not OK. I like it the way it is, you don't. I Guess there is likely to be a company of that name to protect the ownership of the name but I don't Know that. If I remember rightly a man of that name started a business in Belgium which opened a branch in the London suburbs. The fashion for special coachwork died out and Vanden Plas got used as a name (signifying what?) on fancy versions of ordinary cars. I am still hopelessly lost as to why you see there is a problem. You are becoming a little repetitive. Tell me more, please Eddaido (talk) 11:40, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Alright. The question is just what the main subject of the article is. Is this an article about the coachbuilder Vanden Plas, or is it an article about the name "Vanden Plas"? --Lord Belbury (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Please see the disambiguation style guide for more information. If you have any questions not answered there,
drop me a note
or try the help desk.
By the way, I have already brought Daimler into line with the guidelines.
Hi Eddaido. Regarding your message on the talk page for Executive car, I haven't got the Wikipedia message/email system setup. What would you like to discuss? Perhaps we can do it here? Cheer, 1292simon (talk) 09:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Regarding your message about the Thames page I don’t remember ever editing that page. Regarding Dunedin it was at one stage the largest population area in New Zealand. See: https://teara.govt.nz/en/otago-places/page-6
It is easy to find multiple other references on the net. Regarding Thames being the second largest I have know idea whether that is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.84.242 (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, didn't know that, the cite is just what I wanted. And thanks for coming out of retirement, hadn't noticed that until after I left my message. Eddaido (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Image Removal
Hi,
Why was the image removed from the Austin 10 page? If I put it in the wrong section, I could have just moved it. It was done for something on Commons.
Wikipedia is not a picture gallery. There are too many pictures on that page already
The pictures that are there have been selected very carefully and each appears there for a specific reason
The picture you were inserting is not special in any way at all. Maybe I have that wrong and you can explain that to me.
"It was done for something on Commons" I am sorry I don't understand what that means.
I'll copy all this to the Austin 10 talk page where it belongs. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 07:53, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I have commented at the article talk page, so I won't do this myself, but if you do not revert yourself at Stagecoach I will seek to have you blocked for edit warring. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
But you'll self-revert first, right? Or do I need to ask for you to be blocked? "Keep it the way I want it until I read up on it" is not an acceptable approach. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
I see you have reverted for me and on the same message: "Undid revision 899567407 by Eddaido (talk) More explicit: A direct quote from the inline reference already in the article (currently [6]) says "The..." you say you have found a direct quote. Why has your friend never pointed this up? In a few days I will go and take a look at what you refer to. I presume you consider the cite adequate? Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 23:22, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
I got a noise from the computer and clicked on email which (maybe accidentally) brought up the option to email you. I just did it then realised it was a bit odd. Sorry. Yes, I do want it to be named Goldie's Brae because that is the building's and its now built-on surrounds' real name. Someone (an admin) blocked me last time I tried to move a NZ article and I assumed I had transgressed again. Or did I stupidly try to move the talk page all by itself! No matter now. Yes please would you move it. Apologies for being a nuisance, Eddaido (talk) 07:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I see the connection now. I had deleted the talk page because, yes, you moved it without moving the article. No worries, all sorted now. — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:11, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
No, I keep myself wanting to link to such an article but I don't feel up for starting it. I was hoping to plant the seed in your brain so that you'd do the dirty work. And then, Carrozzeria Savio needs writing, too. Best, Mr.choppers | ✎ 02:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Crystal Palace School
Hi, I have been looking at categories for University of the Arts London and see you created Crystal Palace School in 2012(!), so you may not remember much about it. I can't find any connection between "Crystal Palace School" and "University of the Arts London", so would it make sense to remove the "University of the Arts London" category? TSventon (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
2012, 2012, was that a year or is it the number of electrons in a microscope. If its a year would there be any written historical records? Such a long time ago. Have you read the article, Crystal Palace School, and tried guessing? I imagine it was a constituent of the organisation you mention (back before 2013?). Would component fit better? I don't think I would have been responsible for that edit but I expect it will be correct, wouldn't you? Now? Don't see why It shouldn't be. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 21:16, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I wrote a long essay then when I went to save it there was an edit clash because Andy had replied so I threw it all away. Poor weather protection does define the car, its what open in the description open two seater means. Today most readers would assume without thinking that the car is what they would call a convertible and would be dumb-struck if they were caught in a Midget in a Melbourne rainstorm I mean after they'd got the roof up and the sidescreens on - if the (4) sidescreens had been brought along with them. Eddaido (talk) 22:52, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I'm sorry for the delayed response I'm not on WP very much now and again I'm sorry you will need to talk to somebody who knows the subject (like a solicitor old enough to remember the changes) in a way that I don't. There was a time when every incorporation with limited liability had to show its full legal name on any piece of paper issued even a tram ticket. That was so anyone dealing with that business knew they might not get their money back (they were trading with a business whose liability was limited). I don't know when it changed it was not of interest to me at the time. Eddaido (talk) 07:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm sorry to have to say it but while you do have my support what I want is success, not a lot of disagreeable people just being disagreeable — which we got last time. Can you see anything that's changed in attitudes? Can you see anyone else ready to support us? Maybe when a fierce opponent to the clearly demonstrated truth, (Why are they like this???? One of them has never even lived in a market where the trucks were sold) better still three or more, retires or disappears altogether then it might be worth the attempt.
Mind you, its true the longer the silly idea that the trucks are named International Harvester is supported on WP the harder it will be to make the change. I just don't want us to start a fight we may not win, again. We gotta be Generals not angry ineffective infantrymen! Best, Eddaido (talk) 11:21, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Yea, and being a "co-nom" would just get you in deeper. Sure can't blame you. I'm hoping I can get a couple of outsiders, new eyes. Really toned down, too. Cross your fingers. Anyway, come back in a week and take a peek. Later. Sammy D III (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Do you know anything about the Stromboli airship engine mentioned in the article? Also mentioned in the article on Rod Banks? Theres a bit about it on Graces Guide, but I'm not sure that is a reliable source.TheLongTone (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Grace's Guide is reliable. Also they're just quoting this letter, from Rod Banks, [30], who also mentions it in his autobiog, I Kept No Dairy. Grace's is always reliable, because they have no editorial at all, they just recycle straight from the sources, and they're pretty good at sourcing. Often hard to read though.
No-one knows why the Stromboli engine failed. The production engineers all blamed each other: Alpax was no good, Alpax was good, but they'd cast it in something inferior, Alpax is eutectic, Alpax isn't eutectic, Alpax is ductile and doesn't fracture, Alpax is too ductile, it bent the bearings out of alignment and then started vibrating. Or else it was just a six and torsional vibration did for it. Whatever happened, it must be one of the few engines where Hookers switched from aluminium to fabricated steel! Ricardo also had a look at it and was unimpressed: something about having the right number of valves, spread across too few cylinders. It was a horrible engine, in the tradition of pre-war Italian behemoth cylinders. But if it was obsolete to begin with, it became ridiculously so as petrol chemistry improved (and there's Banks' involvement). The design looked quite nice of paper, until you appreciate the size of the damned thing. There was no way that a flame front could propagate halfway across those Pantheon combustion chambers with any sensible rpm, and that's a right nuisance for an aero-engine. There was some interest in using it as a diesel, which with prechamber injection was probably the best thing that could be done for it. But really, it was just a bad idea in all ways and best got rid of ASAP. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
66 litres? It's about the same as the Tornado, per cylinder. Although of course the Tornado was designed from the outset as a diesel. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
6x12 v 8x12, & the Tornado's capacity was over eighty litres....my horrible lump of metal is bigger than you horrible lump of metal!TheLongTone (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
That's OK, it was about the article for deletion and it was very cheeky of me to volunteer my idea of improvement. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello there. This is an invitation to join the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week. £250 (c. $310) is being given away in May, June and July with £20 worth of prizes to give away every week for most articles destubbed. Each week there is a different region of focus, including the last week dedicated to NZ and Oceania, though half the prize will still be rewarded for articles on any subject. There's a potential £120 to be won in total for destubbing on any subject or region of your choice. Sign up if you want to contribute at least one of the weeks or support the idea! † Encyclopædius12:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Sorry!
Sorry about the "grammar" edit. I was "Random Article"-ing and I accidentally clicked the wrong suggestion. Respectfully, Thanoscar21 (talk) 01:00, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Thrupp & Maberly. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please do not accuse me of starting an edit war. And I made edits. You reverted them. I restored them. You’re the one doing the warring, and if you would like to take it to talk do so. But stop the reverting. I don’t know what’s gotten into you, because we’ve coexisted well and even collaborated before. This is not a very good display.Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Go ahead. I’m not the one who’s doing the reverting. I’m just restoring legitimate edits, with legitimate edit summaries. I have never taken an issue with any of your edits as a Wikipedia editor. And thus, by definition, never peremptorily reverted any.
Eddaido, thanks for working to keep the article accurate at this edit. I found a few relevant sources and changed it to what they support, more or less. Please do help make it more precise, with more and better sources, if you can. Dicklyon (talk) 03:26, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Don't know. Is your thought that we should have an article on steel wheels, or are you happy with it as a redirect? Dicklyon (talk) 04:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
1936 Chevrolet delivery truck
I think we must have an article on steel wheels. There's one on alloy wheels. I think the artillery wheels article should be more clear about what currently makes an artillery wheel an artillery wheel for the purposes of the article and I thought the clarity provided by the US government's International Trade Commission might inspire new thoughts. And if it didn't there was nothing lost. Eddaido (talk) 04:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I think you might have misinterpreted this advertisement. (This one "Sankey belatedly, circa 1935, publicly recognized the connection of their steel wheels to artillery wheels.")[1]
1938 Vauxhall 25 introduced September 1936compare & contrast 1935 Chevrolet
I recognise the wheel in the ad as the new Vauxhall wheel made by Sankey for the local GM subsidiary, Vauxhall. This is the year of the new wheel that Americans called an artillery wheel. Here is an (American) encyclopaedia noting its advent. Go to the centre of page 322 and down a paragraph. It begins "Practically 100 per cent of the 1936 motor car production . . . "
I had to add mention of Sankey to the artillery wheel page in 2015 because someone else had put that picture there, of the small Humber. That's how Sankey got onto that page. You deleted my own text I'd copied from the Sankey article on the grounds it was public relations trash. Remember? <grin>
In European terms Sankey was big. It made all sorts of wheels and many other vehicle components. The ad is saying see this American wheel we make on our stand (of motor vehicle components) at the 1936 Motor Show, we've always made this kind of thing. Maybe you don't see the sense of that, can we discuss it? Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't know that history at all. I'm taking at face value the statement in their ad that "Sankey Artillery Wheels were famous in motoring's pioneer days". Maybe that's a revisionist marketing ploy in reaction to the Chevy wheels, your saying? Perhaps so. Or perhaps not. Here is a 1912 magazine with "steel artillery wheels (Sankey patent)". So someone called them that already. Dicklyon (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
So someone said "steel artillery wheels (Sankey patent)" in a New York publication. I'd suggest possibly sub-edited to provide a translation for the American English speaking reader? You must be aware that e.g. a novel published simultaneously in London and New York will have many small differences in their texts to fit local customs and understandings. Its why we have little admonitions like Use Australian English within WP.
I look forward to reading in WP a clear description / definition of whatever Americans call an artillery wheel. I still say the Artillery wheel article should lead with "In the US" or some such similar caveat. Eddaido (talk) 22:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Do you think it means something different in British English? Are you saying some of the editors such as Qwirkle seem to be American? Dicklyon (talk) 06:38, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes I think the words artillery wheels have been used as names for some particular 20th century objects solely in American English. That's the only solution I can find. I'm waiting for some confirmation but it might take a month or more. I'm sure Qwirkle is American, am I wrong? The WP Artillery Wheel article still needs American as its second word. Eddaido (talk) 08:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Qwirkle seems like he might be American, but I have no particular reason to think so. I am American, but don't have any special knowledge of this history; not a car buff. And you? Dicklyon (talk) 04:14, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes its true, I'm not American. I was a bit of a car buff in my youth and more recently got sucked into WP when I saw things that were wrong that really had to be fixed. How did you get into this? Testing your book? It looks as if it might be very interesting. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
I have in mind talking my artillery wheel thoughts through with a particular party. I want his thoughts off the top of his head, not a magisterial opinion because I only want a minute or two of his time not half a day. I have emailed asking for a time I can phone / call. No response. I have called twice, his guardianess (as in lioness) almost burst into tears the second time saying "We've been closed here for three months, we have three months work to catch up on, leave us alone." Hmmm. I do actually have his personal domestic email address from some years back but I'm reluctant to use it. Of course I think he will agree with me and he will confirm my opposition to the way the article covers certain details now. If someone would just send all that infection back to Wuhan and put a stopper on the bottle we could get on with life. P.S. never been there tp look around but I've always liked Texas since I read it tried to join the British Empire and after it was turned down it joined a union of other states in the locality. Eddaido (talk) 03:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I was editing this article and didn't notice that you had just made some edits too, so I apologize for editing over what you just did. I'm sorry and didn't intend to make changes to the edits you just made, so please feel free to change the wording as you think best. With regard to the Dutch car, you are right that sometimes cars are named after the figure they were bought for. I was just trying to introduce a link to the car's article at Royal Dutch State Limousine, but feel free to change that to a piped link captioned as "Queen Juliana's State landaulette" if you prefer. I'm finished editing for now. -- Blairall (talk) 04:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
You changed some pictures (quite rightly) before me and that attracted my attention. Way back (almost exactly 5 years ago) when I set up the little gallery they were the best I could find. I managed to find a newspaper article about how Tito bought the Rolls for the visit of Haile Selassie so that got me 1959 for that car but though I think the Dutch car was quite soon after the war I was unable to settle on a date. I see you have and that's the sole reason why I mentioned it. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 04:58, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
You know that Chinese quote that goes "if you wait by the river long enough, the body of your enemy will float by"? Well, I can wait and wish you a long and happy life with all the best things in the world. You are a tremendous editor and an invaluable resource to Wikipedia; yes you are; yeah. --Deeday-UK (talk) 20:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree about superfluous "Talbot".
105 - I zoomed in and read the owners display board. They must know.
Congratulations on a grrat suite of articles.
Regards. Chienlit (talk)
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
(I wouldn't necessarily accept the caption or date at the linked sourcestern view?
Hi there - i do a lot of work on Sydney ferry articles - historic boats, rarely the contemporary ones. I've come across a few photos of Kirribilli (1900 to 1934) in Sydney and put them on Commons. In two photos, there is another boat...the same boat i think. It might be the Cobar which I am just learning was built in Sydney in 1903 but went to Wellington. Do you think this is Cobar in either or both of these photos? My source for the first photo labels it "Cobar", but there is no name for the second. If it is Cobar, then they must be very early photos, and looking at newer photo she has been modified. Would be good to hear your thoughts. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 10:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
The COBAR was built at Laurieton, New South Wales in 1903 for the Cobar Copper Mining Company, but they very quickly found her more of an expense than anticipated and she was sold to a harbour ferry company in Sydney, where she plied her trade until purchased by the Wellington Steam Ferry Company.
Built of timber, the COBAR, of 96 tons, was 113 feet long, beam 25 feet and could carry up to 738 passengers on a busy day. Designed to operate in the warmer climes of New South Wales, COBAR had a vast amount of open deck space and seating aft. Although it was a very pleasant arrangement for the guests of the Wellington Steam Ferry Company on the fine fourth of April day in 1906, it was very quickly discovered that in less favorable Wellington weather, more shelter had to be provided for passengers.
This led to changes in her appearance and in fact, to the form that is remembered by those who today, recall the grand old lady on Wellington Harbor. The mainmast was removed and a bridge deck was extended well aft from the rather 'boxy' saloon, with canvas sides to give shelter to the previously exposed aft deck seating. This seating was replicated on the topsides of the new bridge deck , which was a popular and crowded position on fine summer days.
The enclosed wheelhouse at the for'ard end of the saloon had severe visibility problems for the helmsman if guests crowded the for'ard bridge deck. The upper, open steering position was very unpopular with the Captain for obvious climatic and down-wind smoke reasons! Therefore, a new enclosed wheelhouse was built, standing on pipe supports, replacing the open upper bridge. This in turn enlarged the area of the for'ard bridge deck. The foremast was removed and a short spar was fixed to the new wheelhouse and in the interest of reducing maintenance, the decorative carvings with name on each side of the bow were removed.
Yes, although my background story implies she spent some time (skip the quickly found) as "the extravagant private yacht" of the mine manager or CEO of the mining company. I have only the very haziest memories of the Cobar, I think she burnt when I was about age 8. But the photo you provide certainly has a very familiar look and the decoration by the bow is right. There are many photos available. I'm no expert on ships and things, how may I help further, links to photos? In the 1980s I would go from Circular Quay to Hunters Hill and back each day and have very happy memories of my floating commute. Best wishes, Eddaido (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Cobar and its mine is a long way up the NSW coast and it was my understanding from my Sydney born aunt that Cobar was a coastal vessel (going up and down from Sydney to the mine's port) not for harbour work. Will be back. Eddaido (talk) 11:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Did Cobar's copper get out to sea at Port Macquarie? I don't have any idea of the lines of communication / transport around 1900.
Ah - excellent indeed. Nice to see those sources...almost enough for an article! ha ha. I'd like to know which ferry company in Sydney had her, even if only for a year or two apparently.
Interestingly, there is no mention of her in my printed sources on Sydney ferries. It was only a brief time that she was here. Perhaps she did not run as a regular ferry in Sydney - she was certainly not like any ferry there at the time. I'll try to look into it when time permits. --Merbabu (talk) 09:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
I only went from the info I pasted above - and the photos of her. Indeed, i had never heard of her until the last few days. --Merbabu (talk) 10:44, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Eddaido, can you explain to me how including SI units is unhelpful when it is required by the Wikipedia Manual of Style? The Manual of Style states the following:
Unit choice and order
Quantities are typically expressed using an appropriate "primary unit", displayed first, followed, when appropriate, by a conversion in parentheses e.g. 200 kilometres (120 mi). For details on when and how to provide a conversion, see the section § Unit conversions. The choice of primary units depends on the circumstances, and should respect the principle of "strong national ties", where applicable:
Avi8tor (talk) 09:58, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Read the manual of style and your misapprehension will become clear.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rover company and Rover 8. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please do not accuse me of starting an edit war. I made edits. You reverted them. I restored them. You’re the one doing the warring, and if you would like to take it to talk do so. But stop the reverting. Avi8tor (talk) 10:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!14:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
I could really use a pic or two and I don't know copyright. Sometime if you have a chance? There are a ton of them on Google images. The trucks are not English, old, or tiny, but they do have wheels.
Mack Anthem to infobox, I have nothing. It's a new truck. LF or? Grill is spotting feature, maybe that crass chromium thing? They also have real ones, maybe typical? Please no "roo-bars", pink, or cammo. Commons:Mack
Mack LR to infobox. This isn't bad, it's optional. LR is name-change after 2015, before that it was TerraPro LE. No spotting feature to tell them apart. RF with the door open? Standing RHD is important. Clear cab? Any body type, it just could use a sure LR. Commons:Mack COE and/or Commons:Garbage.
You uploaded a picture of a 'Roseneath Gardens' sign to the pae for Roseneath but somebody took it down for copyright reasons. Do you know who took the photo, or where the sign might be so somebody could take another photo? I thought it was a great addition to the page, and it would be good to get it back with copyright sorted out. Wainuiomartian (talk) 05:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Roi-des-Belges. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Both you and Qwirkle have been warring over this page for some time. Please do not edit the article any further without discussing at the talk page. — HTGS (talk) 04:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Do not remove "citation needed" tags without either providing a citation or providing a good reason why a citation isn't needed. Your first edit summary of "no" meant nothing, and it's out of line to expect someone to explain on the article talk page why a "citation needed" tag should be placed on uncited material. --Sable232 (talk) 21:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
The reason is that the correct answer would be very complicated. There is every indication that this is a casual comment because a serious enquirer would know the answer and not ask the question. Thank you so much for correcting me, I must follow your example. Eddaido (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You are obviously not aware that you cannot accuse another editor of being a sockpuppet. It's regarded as a violation of WP:CIVIL, one of WP's policies. There is only one accepted way of dealing with suspected socks and that is outlined at WP:HSOCK; the only route open to you is to file a sockpuppet investigation. Making these allegations on talk pages is viewed as a personal attack and that's a serious issue. I have removed the attack from the relevant talk page and deleted the revisions that showed it. The correct action for you at this point is to issue an apology to the user you have accused, and that user's talk page, or right here, or where the attack occurred, would all be appropriate. Of course, a subsequent step open to you is to open a sockpuppet investigation and if you think that you have the required evidence, you should most definitely do that. But it's a subsequent step; the apology needs to come first as you were out of step with WP policy. Schwede6604:10, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
I've just reviewed your block log. You've been blocked four times thus far, and each block had "personal attack" as the reason or it was part of the block rationale. You might want to more careful on that front; I cannot help but think that if you were dragged to WP:ANI over another personal attack, a permanent block may well be one of the options considered. Schwede6604:18, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
On Trade Me at the moment is a prototype NZ electric car - [31] and there was an unidentified photo of a kit car, now identified, the Goodwin GT which is featured in the latest NZ Classic Drive on page 82. NealeWellington (talk) 04:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks very much for these special news items. I have this dreadful need to add a question to the electric car ad. "Would you buy a used car off this man?" but he might take offence :-)) Great that the Goodwin GT has been identified. Good to hear from you, cheers, Eddaido (talk) 09:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I'm honoured. It is hard to know how to stop this. A block (like I see has been imposed though for only hours) just makes them move to another IP address. Anyway it looks as if you've done exactly the right thing. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 05:59, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. 
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Croall & Sons Edinburgh may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 10:27, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Obviously you cannot reply there, if you wish to make a statement make it here and it can be copied across. Black Kite (talk) 08:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Austin 30 hp. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Your wholesale reverting of edits that brought articles into line with standard practice is extremely unproductive, particularly given how much of a mess most of them were. Do not do so again. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
_arriving_Schaffen-Diest_(2015).jpg)
Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Adolphe Clément-Bayard. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:
,_cropped.jpg)
— Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard | 11:08, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Coachbuilder. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Tornado chaser (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. stop calling another editor a child Tornado chaser (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
_-_15783647125.jpg)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Qwirkle (talk) 05:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
_and_COBAR_at_racing_sculls_Parramatta_River_c_1910.jpg)
.jpg)