User talk:VectorD
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] HSV Senator Signature
I need some tips or help from you an expert for my article HSV Senator Signature. Senators 10:28, 04 November 2006 (UTC) (australia)
I am adding notes. Senators 3:49pm, 06 November 2006 (UTC) (Australia)
[edit] Template:Holden
sorry about adding "holden senator" to the holden template please review my article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Voritecorp (talk • contribs) 07:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. As for the HSV Senator Signature article, I'm probably not in the best position to review it as I've been contributing to it. It's a good start but I think more needs to be added to model history as currently most of the info relates to the E series. VectorD 03:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Holden VE Commodore
Hi, I hope that my request is not too much of an ask, but could you please review the article on the Holden VE Commodore. I understand that you have personally contributed to the article, but considering though the article has had a recent overhaul, it has changed substantially, and I think it needs to be properly proof read. Regards OSX 07:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have nominated this article as a good article and to be a featured article in Portal:Cars. I was wondering whether you could quickly go over the article and make sure that it is of the highest standard. Regards OSX 00:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Getting better
My article is getting better HSV Senator Signature please help me by telling me if there is any things i need to fix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Senators (talk • contribs) 16:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ford BA Falcon
Hi again VectorD I have created a new article Ford BA Falcon can you please check the article and if it is good enough can you please nominate it for Good Article it would be greatly appreciated by my behalf. Senators 02:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thank you for the review I will get straight on to the mistakes and try to fix them many thanks again from senators.Senators 22:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject Automobiles Notification
Hi VectorD, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.
To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting {{Wiki Auto Project}} where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add [[Category:WikiProject Automobiles members|VectorD]] to your userpage.
If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086Talk | Contribs 04:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congratulations!!!
I would like to thank you for helping me get the article on the Holden VE Commodore up to good article status. This would not have been possible with out you. My next task is the Holden VZ Commodore. Regards OSX 07:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Do you need help?
If you need me (Senators) to help you with anything I am glad to, such as reviews, article checks and general assistance. Contact me on my talk page for help. SenatorsTalk | Contribs 23:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- For the moment, I am fine. Although, thank you for your offers of assistance. VectorD 07:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hello
Hello OSX, I need your assistance on an article Ford BA Falcon please of you can could you complete one of the following points:
- Copy/edit
- Add information
- Review article
- Nominate article for Good Article status
If you have any questions just go to my talk page. SenatorsTalk | Contribs 23:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Specification levels of the Holden VE Commodore
I have created a new article Specification levels of the Holden VE Commodore merging the information about the specification levels of the VE Commodore, as the main article was becoming to long. I thought that we could incorporate some of the bullet points from the new article into sentences stating what each variant came standard with, similar to what Senators has done with the specification levels for the BA Falcon, just included the most important features.
Could you also please elaborate upon the opening paragraph of the new article on the specification levels? If you have any issues or concerns with the new way please do not feel hesitated to ask. OSX 01:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- I will try to do my best in converting the bullet points into sentences, but I feel that doing so may result in a lot of info being lost. I also have concerns that rebuilding into sentences may read like a itinerary of features rather than flowing prose. Perhaps some sort of table would be a better fit?
Anyway, I'll see how it works out. VectorD 09:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Personally I wouldn't worry about information being lost, as it has just been merged into a separate article. All that is really needed is a brief summary, about one or two paragraphs, no more than three outlining the main features given on each variant. On the other hand I have started a table that is situated in the specification level section. So maybe the information about each variant could focus more on the market it is aimed at, etc rather than what features it came with. The exact features could be outlined in the table below. OSX 00:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Ok, I have tried to keep the features listing brief (and maybe I could make it briefer still), leaving the rest to the table or separate article. But info about what market each variant is aimed at, is already pretty well summarised in the first sentence of each section. I'm not sure I can improve on that much. On the other hand, I could include info about what variants of competitors it matches up against (a bit like what was in the "Market" section) – might get a bit murky as some models don't line up exactly. Or, I could add a bit of history to it and compare VZ and VE specs for each variant. In any case, I think I'd better play around with it a bit and see what works. VectorD 03:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] JavaScript peer review
Since extensive editing and formating has been done to the VE Commodore since last time this message was generated, I decided to re-run the script. Some of the suggestions do not really apply to the article but others do. I will try to fix up as many as I can, but I would appreciate it if you would fix any that you see that I don't pick up. OSX 07:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.
Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.- Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 22 additive terms, a bit too much.
Avoid using contractions like: couldn't, wouldn't.- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.
- I've managed to implement many of the changes mentioned above, but much more needs to be done. What struck me the most was the removal of the the redundancy words. I don't really know whether I should do so or not, because often at times it can ruin the structure and flow of a sentence. The dates and numbers section probably can be ignored so I crossed it out. If you disagree feel free to revert my move. The words: couldn't and wouldn't, were only used twice and were easily changed. The programme also suggested the implementation of more links. I've managed to incorporate several more links into the article, but I feel that linking obvious terms that may be unknown to a small percentage of the population is probably unnecessary. OSX 08:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Good work on the changes. As for the additive words, they're basically being used in place of the word "and" which would have made the article even more repetitive. Considering the article is pretty long, 22 instances is probably borderline acceptable. However, as you say, removing them would mean a major rewrite of the article, so I think this issue could possibly be put on hold for a while.
- All the other changes appear to be taken care of. Although a word of warning for the 90% font in the infobox, I'm not sure how article reviewers will like it or not. I've seen one article fail GA status because the Table of Contents was non-standard size. I don't know whether the same rules apply to infoboxes.
- Overall, I think the article is at a pretty good level. I'll fiddle with the specifications section a little more and a few more photos are needed. VectorD 02:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What else
Is the article Ford BA Falcon close to be nominated for good article status? also if you want me to edit or fixSenatorsTalk | Contribs 05:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC) any car articles please tell me.
- There are still some concerns raised on the article talk page which have not yet been addressed. These need to be completed before the article can be nominated. The article is much better than it was in terms of grammar and spelling mistakes, but there are still some areas which need work. I suggest a proof-read of the whole article to see if it flows properly. Chopping and changing the article in a piecemeal fashion as has occurred to Ford BA Falcon can cause repetitions and relevant info scattered around. The engine table needs some more work; at least listing what configuration it is (I6, V6, V8 etc) rather than just the capacity. It's also a good idea to go through the GA criteria as SteveBaker has suggested on the talk page, seeing if any issues need to be addressed. VectorD 08:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FA-Status
Just to let you know I have nominated the article on the VE Commodore for FA-Status. So you may want to add Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Holden VE Commodore to your watchlist. If you feel that any editing could be done to improve the article now is the time to do so. Regards OSX 00:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. The article is pretty good now, but I feel it could do with a picture of a SV6 or SS V and maybe a few shots of the different interior styles or engines. The current fair-use image/free image ratio is a little high for my liking. VectorD 02:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ford BA Falcon
Some improvements are now featured in the Ford BA Falcon article, you can check it.SenatorsTalk | Contribs 07:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please see the article talk page for comments. VectorD 09:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Great
It is great that in some time the Holden VE Commodore article may be a featured article, finally everyone will be able to see what Australian cars are made of!!!!SenatorsTalk | Contribs 22:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gone
Those issues that you have left on my page have been fixed the solution was to delete the information about the rear suspension in the "Issues" section due to no references. More references have also been added to the article in general.SenatorsTalk | Contribs 06:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Following up
Are you planning to pursue any other car articles, if you are I can help you with it. Please leave your comment on my talk page.SenatorsTalk | Contribs 02:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't have a fixed plan at the moment. I will contribute to any article that catches my interest, but thanks for your offer. VectorD 01:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Follow-up review
I have revamped parts of the article on the VE significantly over the past few weeks, but I need a second opinion as too what needs further improvement. Do you feel that any improvements need to be made to the article on the VE that are not yet present? Do certain parts of the article require clarifying, to be understood by someone unfamiliar with the topic? I have started to spend the time to re-write entire sections of the article, but this process takes time. OSX 03:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi OSX. There's nothing really specific that needs to be added. However, aiming for FA status probably means providing a little more background info on the Holden Commodore (and its situation in Australia) for the benefit of people outside of Australia.
- Additionally, some sales info would be good, as well as some info on the public reaction to the VE (i.e: whether the model is a success and meets the hopes of Holden). However, since it's a new model, sales info may be a bit hard to find.
- Also, the article probably could do with closer ties to the previous generation Commodores, particularly pointing out its deficiencies and how the Holden designers tried to address these with the VE. I will try to help in this regard. VectorD 11:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)