User talk:BMan1113VR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TALK PAGE

Contents

[edit] Drag Racing link

The reason I gave for removing your link from the drag racing article was that it was a poor overview of the subject as it is just a database of 1/4 mile times and does nothing to explain drag racing to the casual reader. And surely it doesn't need to be linked to from three different articles. Cdh1984 19:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Drag racing link.

Maybe for the casual reader, but most people looking at that page are looking for more information and/or resources. Also, I am NOT the webmaster of that site, just a daily reader. The 3 pages that it was listed on are: Drag strip, Drag racing and 1/4 mile. I think it is just as relevant as any other outside link on this site for those topics. "Drag strip" because it has a list of drag strips as well as there locations and times ran there. Same thing in regards to "1/4 mile", which on wikipedia seems to deal exclusively with drag racing. Most of the external links on this site that I see our for further information which is how I view the provided link. Is there anything that I am missing from your point of view? I want to make sure things are done right. I do not think that the link will confuse anyone nor will it degrade the topic (it can only help). Please let me know. . . BMan1113VR 01:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I never suggested that you were the webmaster. Anyway, I decided not to revert your edits because my objections were too much down to personal preference (I'm generally against external linking unless it is absolutely necessary because I don't like seeing wikipedia becoming just a directory of links) and you're right that it will not confuse anyone or degrade the topic. No harm done :) Cdh1984 06:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay, just making sure I wasn't missing anything obvious ;) BMan1113VR 16:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Sepulveda

Heck, as a noob I wrote an article that was utterly devoid of formatting. (Thermofax) One month later I went to clean it up, but the Gnomes of Wiki had already done so. Kinda like the Brownies in Ringworld Engineers. LorenzoB 01:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] United States metropolitan area

The Oxnard MSA is a separate area from the Los Angeles MSA as defined by the Office of Management and Budget. I'm not going to revert you but I'm just saying that this definition is not consistent with the current MSA definitions. --Polaron | Talk 05:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: United States metropolitan area

The OMB might have some executive reason for doing so. To most Los Angeles residents the LA metro area/ Greater Los Angeles Area (an article that you have worked on) is considered to definitely include Thousand Oaks (which isn't completely in Ventura County), the Inland Empire, and Oxnard, Simi Valley (which has LAPD jurisdiction), Oak Park, Point Mugu (which most consider part of Malibu), as they are so geographically close to East and West Los Angeles (the cities themselves). Heck, Thousand Oaks is a 15 minute drive with light traffic from my house in the middle of West LA (Thousand Oaks is closer than Marina del Ray, LAX, and about the same distance to downtown LA). Please look at the locations of the city on their county maps in the links provided. Obviously it is your call, you have been working on the article/project longer than me. If you are looking to determine the legal metropolitan area, I cannot argue that point, the presidents’ budget office (OMB) in Washington has said that Thousand Oaks is not part of the Los Angeles Metropolitan area (even though the LA metro buses serve that area). If you want a local view of the LA metro area, then the above area's are included. If you spoke to someone from these area's they would identify themselves as being from the LA metro area. The call is yours. BMan1113VR 21:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Motorcycling Wikiproject

Welcome to the Motorcycling WikiProject. Hopefully you have a good time, start many new articles and can contribute lots to the existing ones as we need that. Cheers ww2censor 14:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the Welcome

I am currently working on a couple motorcycle wiki pages, that are not already listed by your project (I have a lot of work this week, but they should be finished by next week). -- BMan1113VR 18:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Sports Car Racing

This is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports Car Racing has finally been launched. Due to your expressed interest in the project, it'd be greatly appreciated if you'd check in on it and help in any way possible. The359 02:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Automobiles Notification

Hi BMan1113VR, 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|BMan1113VR]] 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 04:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Los Angeles County Raceway/gallery

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Los Angeles County Raceway/gallery, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Los Angeles County Raceway/gallery. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. BlankVerse 23:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Separate narrow-purpose gallery pages are generally discouraged on the Wikipedia. For a good discussion on Wikipedia policy on the issue, see Wikipedia:Galleries. The odds are that if you continue with the page that someone will nominate the page for deletion at Articles for deletion, and based upon past discussions that I've seen, it is highly likely that the consensus of Wikipedia editors will be to delete the page. In my opinion, it would be much better to include a small number of photos (no more than 6-8) divided between pictures of the current raceway and historic photos in the main Los Angeles County Raceway article.
As for the photos that you are soliciting, make sure that the people providing the images are well aware of the Wikipedia's Image use and Copyright policies. Basically, the Wikipedia requires that a photographer give a perpetual license to the image so that it can be used and copied by anyone that follows the terms of the license (usually GFDL or Creative Commons licenses). BlankVerse 05:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Locust (car)

Hi! I saw that you tried to merge Locust (car) with Locost. They are however two very different designs. The Locust article is now updated and have some pictures so that should prove without a dubt that they are two different, but simmilar sounding designs. Especially notice the very different type of chassis used. // Liftarn

[edit] Image:Shelby_Superperformance_427-435hp_Driveable_Chassis.JPG

Sure, feel free to use it. I didn't name it so don't blame the spelling on me ;-) Nrbelex (talk) 23:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your personal experience

Your personal experience has no bearing here on Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:No original research. If you feel the top speed of the vehicle is 171 mph, fine a reliable secondary source (which you are very much not), cite it on the page, and then you may change it. Until then, my source says 160 mph. Roguegeek (talk) 10:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not doubting it could do better than what R&T says. If you find something that says better... great. Just make sure you cite your sources, which you are not doing in that article right now. Roguegeek (talk) 19:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Cited numerous magazine sources for Cayman S top speed (including other articles by R&T!) as well as several videos. . . My guess is that R&T mixed up the top speed of the base Cayman with the Cayman S (the 160/161 number is what Porsche show as the top speed). The car has a drag coefficent of 0.29 and makes between ~270rwhp and 283rwhp bone stock (or the higher number if the air intake restrictor is removed). . .it runs out of gear at the top of 6th (which is ~171) from my expiriance. Again, I know wikipedias rules, therefore I cite the other magazine articles, the manufacture's claims (Porsche is also know to underrate their cars), and video evidence. My personal expirience is used as a way to for one automotive enthusiast to communicate with another, and is not ment (and was not used) as evidence in the article. Long story short, Porsche is accurate with their top speed analysis, R&T had a typo. BMan1113VR 04:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Whatever the case it, cite your sources. Roguegeek (talk) 10:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:1998 TL1000R canada brochure.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1998 TL1000R canada brochure.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Roguegeek (talk) 10:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I hate to sound argumentative, but you are joking, right? I am trying to assume good faith, but it is challenging. I get the distinct feeling that you read very little associated with the picture or the article, it almost seems as if you just troll articles looking for places to give people the same cookie cutter "free use image warning templates" found all over your talk page. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE take the time to actually READ the article and the licensing info. You will see that this is a pretty rare bike, and free liscence pictures are not the easiest thing to come by. I have been on wikipedia (although part time without a username) for several years now; I know the rules of wikipedia (without having to have a link to them on my userpage), so you don't need to lecture, just discuss any concers you might have. It would be easy to get a TL1000S picture, but the R's are a lot harder as there were a lot less made. Do you have an image to replace it with? There were no images in the commons and I don't know of any wikipedian who owns one of these bikes (and trust me I looked around). The image is not "easily or reasonably available" so it IS acceptable(in addition to the already listed reasons on the image page). I did discuss the usage of said picture BEFORE uploading the image and BEFORE updating the article with an admin. He said that the picture would be fine till a better one came along. At such time a decent (or any) freely licenced image is available, I will be the first to say that it should be switched. Also, if you wouldn't mind using the talk page (or write a personal note instead of a template) when you are going to change (although not add anything) from articles without any explanation, it would be most helpful. Person talking to person is a lot more reasonable than sending precanned forms. - BMan1113VR 11:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Do you have any idea how quickly images of vehicles and motorcycles get removed from here? Follow the directions on the template to dispute it and take it up with the admins if you have a problem with it. Don't forget that you need to supply a fair use rationale that explains why it passes each and every single one of the WP:FUC. Roguegeek (talk) 11:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I did.BMan1113VR 01:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to open this discussion further, I know the Image was already removed, and frankly I don't care about the image being on wikipedia, because I'm positive someone would remove it (probably someone with no understanding of how useful it could be to someone years later trying to restore the bike to original etc etc), I am currently building a motorcycle wiki at http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/ . My dad is actually a Suzuki dealer here in the U.S. and eventually I do plan on getting permission from Suzuki (and Kawasaki as well) to use their brochures on the site. I'm planning on building up traffic first, and also finding ways to receive the press kits(as a motorcycling magazine would). Also, I think a brochure would be fair use to begin with, since it was made for advertising purposes and all you are doing by putting it on a website is furthering that cause at no additional cost to the manufacturer. Also I would like your thoughts on the best format to display bike specifications if you have any. I tried to simply email you this message but it says you have no email address on file please feel free to email me back!--Budlight 19:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Los Angeles County Raceway/gallery delete

I put this page up for deletion due to so many violations of gallery guidelines. Discussions have already started here in case you want to chime in, but it looks like other editors are already agreeing with the delete. You should really check out the policies on gallery usages. Roguegeek (talk) 12:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daytona Coupe and Daytona Sportscar

Hi, Thanks for being bold and moving those pages and you did in December. I agree with the outcome. I have however redone the moves as it appeared you cut and pasted the Daytona Coupe text which had the effect of losing the edit history on that page. Its always better to use the 'move' function rather than cut-n-paste. Cheers. —Moondyne 01:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping make sure everything is done properly :) . -BMan1113VR 19:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TL1000R

I'm a total noob so i hope i don't screw anything up (well bad enough that it can't be fixed anyway) I have several pix of my TLR (over 100) that you could choose from, no copy right issues, I own them 100% and would be willing to let you have what you need/want for free. I would also like to help with the discription and content of the entry. I understand that it isn't supposed to be a motorcycle mag artical but the "Tiller" is so much more then 424lbm dry and 92 ft-lbm of torque @ 5200 RPM. she has style, lines, charater, and a sound that will snap most people's heads around trying to find out what that growling, snarling thing is. My Email is Rifleman@hotmail.com (put something in the subj: line that will catch my eye cuz i get a significant quantity of junk mail at that address... bottom line is, I want to help, not complain or hinder. Let me know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ricejocky (talk • contribs) 17:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] News

Just to let you know, there is now a Wikipedia:WikiProject Motörhead.--Alf melmac 18:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Motorcycle Wiki

Hey BMan1113VR, Here's an opportunity to put your expertise to work in the area of motorcycles. Cycle Chaos is a Wiki-styled web site that needs a lot of help from people who love bikes and can contribute more information and even more manufacturers. There's virtually no problems with administrators and it seems free to edit without any trouble. You seem to be someone who can offer some content and images that may be lacking. My user page is: Cycle Chaos, Noles1984 Thanks. Noles1984 (talk) 15:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Photographs by User:BMan1113VR

Category:Photographs by User:BMan1113VR, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.