Talk:Suzuki TL1000R
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Suzuki TL1000R is within the scope of the Motorcycling WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of motorcycles and motorcycling. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
Contents |
[edit] Complete Overhaul
I just completely rewrote the entire article, expanded it, added a bunch of info, and wiki-fied it. Spent about 2.5 hours of work. Please feel free to keep expanding, AND PLEASE EDIT my poor phrasing/grammar. Any TL1000R OWNERS, PLEASE FEEL FREE to UPLOAD PICTURES of your bikes. BMan1113VR 00:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ersatz Peer review
Never done this before, so if I blunder, please excuse.
- The second and fourth references give me a 403 page: "You don't have permission to access /photos/TL/TL1000R-articles/Australia/1998_AustralianMotorCycleNews/1998_TL1000R_AMCN48-5_800.jpg on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Apache/1.3.37 Server at www.suzukicycles.org Port 80" response, so I cannot check these references, tho' others might be able.(Maybe check in case address flawed?)
- As ref 1 and 3 were same, changed to inline reference. (Could be useful to u 2 know?)
- The image looks like it might have "fair use" issues, or similar. I don't know enough about that stuff.
- Probably should have "stub" status (Rough guide:less than 300 words?)
- With ref to "widow-maker", "pulled the plug": I do the same thing, it could be seen as "magazine article" style rather than "Encyclopedia" style? Certainly better than "just because a few plonkers dropped their bikes" tho.
- I try not to rely on one site for info, better to show a few different references/sources.
A pic of the Ducati Apollo went up, only to be challenged...and I hope the justification...prototype motorcycle, only one exists, not available for photography, in private collection....is good enough for "fair use". Added an infobox too, but only have a few fields filled. Seasalt 01:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Peer Review
Thanks for writing the peer review. I will check out the broken links tomorrow. As for the image it does follow the fair use guidelines as a promotional/press kit photo for Suzuki of Canada (see photo page for more info). I wish I could add another non-Suzuki Brochure photo, but I do not own a TL-R (or even a Suzuki for that matter). As for length, the text bits are hovering around 290 words, with total word cound (not including code) at over 560, so it is nearly a stub. It really would be nice if someone could expand it, but there is not a whole lot else to add to it (as far as I know, I am not an owner). As for articles cited, those are just references for facts that I felt needed citation, a "works consulted" section would include ~ 20 different articles, and 3 paper magazines. Thanks for the constructive advice. -BMan1113VR 10:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unreferenced
I have placed the {{unreferenced}} tag at the top due to poor references. Are those web references? Are those magazines? If so, where are the authors and, more importantly, article names with the volume and issue in which it appeared? Find those first and then we can remove the tag. Roguegeek (talk) 12:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- Quite obviously magazines scans. As a fellow biker, I take it you HAVE heard of Australian MC News, quite possibly the biggest motorcycle magazine outside of the US and Britian. . . http://www.mcnews.com.au/ . As referenced: "MotorCycleNews" Magazine September 1998 TL1000R article" . . . More specifically:
- Title: On the Record: TL1000R Road Test
- Volume:48; No. 6
- Author: Martin Port
- Anything else you need: http://www.suzukicycles.org/TL-series/TL1000R_articles.shtml
Could you please remove your tags? Thanks. - BMan1113VR 04:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] External links
I have removed the following links in violation of WP:EL
- TLzone.net - Site with forums, articles, images etc. (Worldwide)
- Please do not link to forums. Their content cannot pass WP:RS or WP:V and linking to them generally only serves to promote the website and not improve the content of the article. Also, the above website requires registration to access most of the content (another WP:EL problem.)
- I removed this link because it contains information that is available elsewhere, including some of the references. It's content is redundant, the website has excessive advertising, and is already linked to too many articles. Actually, I have left links to this website in some articles where the content of the link really supports and amplifies the article. In this case, it doesn't. I also have concerns that this website is in violation of some copyrights. The images and content are not properly sourced and there is no evidence that these materials are being used with permission.
I think the other external link to MCN could also be removed since it is already linked several times in the references section. Linking the same site multiple times doesn't improve the content of the article. Nposs 18:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
