Garage Talk/1

Return-Garage Talk

Streamlining the Infobox

There is a specific topic i'd like to discuss with everyone. it might seem a trifle insignificant but i noticed that there are several forms of infobox automobiles on this site. i was thinking what if we standardized it to streamline the pages and add professionalism. This infobox is what i've seen used most commonly:

ABANDONED - DO NOT USE
Manufacturer
Production
Class
Body style
Lengh
Weight
Transmission
Engine
Similar

Unfortunately this infobox is chockful of errors like spelling mistakes (see "Length") and missing several parts (width, height, wheelbase, etc.)

I have since created and have been using a more expanded and IMO complete infobox. Check out my Maserati A6 page to copy and paste. I have deliberately left it unfilled to act as a control. If anyone has any suggestions as to things they want to add or modify please notify me so we can maintain a uniform look to wikicars. Or if you don't feel like digging around here are the codes:

---

UPDATED-----

Red_marquis 10:08 am, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

New infobox. streamlined and, now, stylised. what more could you want?

{{{Image}}}
{{{Name of Vehicle}}}
{{{Manufacturer}}}
aka	{{{aka (Type here, not up there)}}}
Production	{{{produced from when to when+total units made (optional)}}}
Class	{{{Class}}}
Body Style	{{{Body-Style}}}
Length	{{{length - type here}}}
Width	{{{Width - type here}}}
Height	{{{Height - type here}}}
Wheelbase	{{{wheelbase - type here}}}
Weight	{{{Weight - you get the point}}}
Transmission	{{{transmission + drive}}}
Engine	{{{engine}}}
Power	{{{Horsepower and Torque rating}}}
Similar	{{{similar (competition)}}}
Designer	{{{Designer (lead designer if it was a team effort)}}}

Red_marquis 3:45 pm, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Everyone: The boxes look great on the site! LuvWikis 15:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Love the boxes RM - got one on the Porsche 930 page and it looks rather classy. delays

Alfa Romeo Template Image Voting

Your votes are required.

What if you put the lady in red on the left and the the grille in black on the right side of the box? Might be too busy?? LuvWikis 13:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Grille in black, definately. I'd rather have a quadrifoglio badge or something, but that'll do just fine. User:Argen 1:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Red marquis 02:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

So It's resolved, "Grille in Black" wins. Red marquis 04:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Porsche Template Image Voting

Red marquis 03:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a thought - is the Porsche 64 included in the template? delays 13:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC) (This was me, this morning, on the other machine.)

Not sure what you mean - RM

The template doesn't seem to include a link to the Porsche 64 - or is it just my eyes?! delays

You're right. fixed it. - RM

Voting has ended. 997 Headlights win. Red marquis 04:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Categorical redundancy

I'm trying to sort out and fill up categories and I am noticing some redundancies and mixed terms. For example, there are both Car designers and Automobile designers categories. Instead of just going on my personal whim, I decided it would be best for everyone to decide on some regulations for these things. We need to decide what terms to use (auto or car?) and how the categories should be capitalized (difference in caps can create multiple categories).

Argen 15:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That is a good point. Most of the categories are leftover from our initial Wikipedia transfer, as evidenced by the lack of wiki-pages for those categories. Once we started fleshing out our pages with a bit more original content, we began to incorporate our own categories, like Current Models and Discontinued Models. As for the regulations you mentioned, I'd go with "Automobile" over "Car" as a general rule; and I'd also capitalize the categories the same way book or song titles are capitalized. In other words, I'd use "Current Models" as opposed to "Current models" and I'd use "Fords of the 60's" as opposed to "Fords Of The 60's." Just my two cents...

- Pastrami on Ry 18:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking. I generally prefer automobile (self moving) over car, because it can mean any vehicle on here while cars are just cars. Maybe it should be called Wikiauto instead.=P

Argen 16:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I like Automobile designers in this case, although generally "cars" will get 20X he traffic from Google searches, so I'd use that in most cases. LuvWikis 12:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's the sort of thing I'm talking about. Cars, Automobiles, and Vehicles are frequently used interchangeably, and right now there are categories under each. I've been changing them, but I want to stop and get some rules straight so I don't have to re-do pages several times. Given that this is Wikicars, using "car" in categories would be more appropriate. Aside from that, many pages have been directly translated from Wikipedia to Wikicars and contain links and categories that are inappropriate. For instance, do we really need a category for the "Economy of Serbia" on an auto site? Argen 8:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, Argen. We're trying to consolidate as many cataegories as we can, but with over 800 categories, it's a bit tougher to decide which ones to keep and which can be removed. =)

1. I suggest that for now, we keep one category for each make, to be denoted as [[Category:Make Vehicles]].
2. Also, several vehicles, especially the classics and vintages, spanned over several decades so we should have another category for the decade associated to it.
3. Other categories we should consider are: [[Category:Current Models]], [[Category:Discontinued Models]], and [[Category:Model Reviews]].
4. We should also have categories for the types of cars and body styles out there: [[Category:Sedans]], [[Category:Coupes]], [[Category:Trucks]], [[Category:SUVs]].
5. As we keep expanding in the exotic cars and classic cars portals (as well as the predominent automotive personalities, we should think about distinguishing these types with their own category: [[Category:Classic cars]], [[Category:Exotic cars]], [[Category:Sports cars]], [[Category:Automotive engineers]] and [[Category:Automotive designers]].

What does everyone think? -Nidhi 15:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

So, for the major cats we caps both words and for the smaller cats we just caps the first. That's fine with me. That aside, do we have a consensus on the car/auto/vehicle thing? I think vehicles should only be used for the [[Category:Make Vehicles]] categories. Broad categories, like "Classic cars", should retain the car part, and "automobile" should be used for more technical things such as in the "Automotive _____" categories. Argen 14:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Our 2000th Article

It's getting close. Coming on pretty fast now. Don't kid yourselves everyone, that's a milestone for us. I'll post a link here as soon as it comes into existence. =) Red_marquis 18:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Awwww, our little baby's all grownz up! Oh, and GREAT job everyone! There's no way we could have gotten this far without our superb contributors. You guys rock my WikiWorld.- Pastrami on Ry 19:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Here it is:

Isotta-Fraschini

Red_marquis 10:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Everyone, this is fantastic! Red_marquis, congrat's on grabbing the honors! Here's to a fast 3,000! LuvWikis 03:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. At this rate, I wouldn't be surprised if we reached the 2,500 page mark by mid-February! Congrats and thanks to all! -Nidhi 19:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, quality counts...and I think our quality has been great too! LuvWikis 12:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, were at 2,508 articles now. Not exactly "mid-February" (that was 4/5 days ago) but pretty close.

Red_marquis 11:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Automotive Navigational Boxes

0-172 brought up a good point about the images we should use for these boxes. He commented that on the alfa romeo nav box, the picture doesn't contain a logo of the marque. However, I've been thinking we could try a different approach. What if maybe, instead of the obvious, we used iconic images like paintings, posters, B&W photos, design details of a car, manufacturer-sanctioned PR images, etc. Why not try appealing to their artistic senses instead and use visuals that make them think of a marque ~ I'm talking about the use of images iconically associated with a brand. The alfa romeo nav box is a good example of this experiment. What I have in mind is, like for example, with the Ford box, we could use a cropped image, Camillo Pardo painting or racing poster of a GT or GT40 in Gulf Oil livery or a B&W photo of a Model T or a shot of Steve McQueen's Mustang jumping through the streets of San Francisco or a Model A hot rod, etc., etc. The idea is to create a more visually tactile environment. I get the sense that most people who'll be visiting here are car enthusiasts rather than car shoppers looking strictly for information to guide them on their next purchase. While I'm not suggesting we should completely abandon wikicar's original philosophy, I thought it'd be nice to give people more than just cold hard informative facts by lending our pages a warm and inviting atmosphere through the use of a bit of "artistic flair". I don't know, am I making myself understandable? Red_marquis 10:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Red_marquis, this is a very interesting policy question. I think you argue for your case very eloquently and intelligently. I think you've framed the issue broader than 0-172 was intending with his comment; so, I suspect he may concur with your comments above. I, for one, am very supportive of the creative direction you outline. It's different, passionate, and fun. As always, we're open to hearing all points of view. I appreciate the creativity and energy and would be excited where a direction like this might take us. LuvWikis 16:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Well...it doesn't really matter to me either way. I understand what your saying and go ahead with it, but personally I prefer the grill images. Enzo Worshipper (Talk) 4:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I like the concept of diversifying the images, especially since our “Wikicar’s Philosophy” is still under development. I agree with you Red marquis, that we need to spice up the content with some artistry rather than just bookish knowledge. There’s the risk of diverging too far from the automotive front and delving into some risqué content, but thankfully we haven’t encountered any images thus far that require such scrutiny. While I think the Alfa Romeo nav box is “borderline sexually suggestive,” I don’t think it’s at all offensive and I think as long as we can steer clear of the latter, we’ll be okay.-Nidhi 23:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nidhi about the image for the Alfa Romeo template. Seeing that type of thing here kind of makes me uncomfortable, and I believe that images like that don't really have a place at his site. Enzo Worshipper (Talk) 4:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm also all for a bit more creative license with the nav boxes, and I also agree with Nidhi's sentiments about making sure we don't veer into the potentially offensive. I think it would be beneficial to the site as a whole and I think it would generate a bit more interest for people just browsing through here. One concern I have is this: While I'm sure those who are in the know will appreciate a touch like the picture in the Alfa Romeo box, I myself an not that familiar with the marque, and so I'm personally not aware of the relevance of the picture. As such, it would seem rather random, and I would imagine that those who are not enthusiasts may find the picture slightly odd or out of place. Black and white photos of the Model T or racing posters of the GT for Ford, on the other hand, are much less esoteric and would be better received, I think. That's not to say that the picture in the Alfa Romeo box isn't nice; I actually think it's quite beautiful. I just think that if we cater TOO much to the enthusiasts, we may lose the more casual browsers who might otherwise be inclined to register and contribute. There is a happy medium to be found here, in my opinion. - Pastrami on Ry 19:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

A brief caption under the red dress (like: "The Alpha Grill As Fashion" would address this point: "While I'm sure those who are in the know will appreciate a touch like the picture in the Alfa Romeo box, I myself an not that familiar with the marque, and so I'm personally not aware of the relevance of the picture." LuvWikis 19:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Testimonials?

I've been noticing here and there that some users have been putting statements of their personal experience into the model articles. In lieu of the recent discussion on nav boxes, I do understand that perhaps we might consider changing Wikicars to be more than just a simple informational site, but for the time being, I'm of the opinion that personal testimonies do not belong in the model articles themselves. Therefore, I wanted to know how you all felt about possibly including a "Testimonial" section in the model reviews instead, since that would be a more appropriate place for subjective content. I do recognize the potential for people to post ridiculous statements there, so I think we would have to exercise some common sense in deciding which ones to keep and which ones to delete. If you want to see an example of this, I recently removed a subjective statement from the Hyundai Sonata page and placed into a new Testimonial section in the Hyundai Sonata Review. I'm not suggesting we keep the particular comment in question, but I left it up there for you to examine. Thoughts? - Pastrami on Ry 19:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

If we let personal comments in generally, the weeds will destroy the garden. As for a contained "testimonials" section, I'm mixed. As you maybe suggesting, the example you gave is lame-- could well be written by an OEM plant; but I could imagine more thoughtful ones. My proposal would be to strike lame ones, but consider alternatives if we see better ones show up. In the long run and overall, I'm pretty cyncial about "spammers" hijacking those sections. Other thoughts? LuvWikis 19:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, the example I left on the Hyundai Sonata page is not a very good one. And I too am cynical about spammers hijacking the testimonial sections. I'm fairly confident in the ability of our administrators to weed out the less thoughtful testominials. - Pastrami on Ry 21:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

External Links

Another question I thought we might consider is a set of guidelines for external links. On WikiTravel, for example, they have implemented a policy that only allows links from primary sources to be used. They apparently had a problem with people posting far too many links that led to all kinds of sites, all with their own biases. I know this isn't really a problem for us just yet, but I wondered if this would be something we'd like to consider in the long term, once our community has grown. Since we eventually may not be able to monitor every link that is posted, this would help us to avoid random people posting links to their own sites to drive up traffic and whatnot. Here is a link to WikiTravel's External Links policy: http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:External_links Again, thoughts? - Pastrami on Ry 19:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

While I don't tihnk a policy will stop people, it will give admins an agreed upon approach to police the site. In that context, I like the idea of a link policy. LuvWikis 19:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Lamborghini Alar 777

• 
• 
• 

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/14/yikes-lamborghini-alar-official-pics/

We have a slight problem here. how do we categorize this? technically it is a real Lambo but it is not manufactured by by Lamborghini but by an argentinian dude by the name of Joan Ferci who have somehow acquired exclusive rights to build custom Lamborghinis that retain the Italian marque's historic name and feature an official badge of the raging bull on the front end. He's also created a pair of models in the past called the Coatl and the Eros GT-1, both based off of the Diablo. Do we merge these with Lamborghini? Or do we create a standalone manufacturer's page for these? Red marquis 01:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

http://www.e-lamborghini.com/

here is the company's official site. Red marquis 01:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Well...I would say to categorise them seperately. Even though they may be considered Lamborghinis, they are completely different cars. You could place the company under see also on the Lamborghini article. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey I don't know if you know this but it's real name is Alar 777 again don't know if you knew this just checking Mugen Power 21:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

So what should we call them? Red marquis 00:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Does the modifying company actually have a name? Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Im not sure Red marquis 01:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

How about a separate article from the Lamborghini page, marked the 'Alar Cars' or 'The Joan Ferci Cars', which would feature all the models he's produced? delays 17:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's finally put an end to this issue and cal it "Lamborghini Motori". If anyone disagrees now is the time to voice them over. Red marquis 05:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Our 3000th Article

looks like were just 90 pages short now. Red marquis 23:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

84 more! Let the countdown commence! -Nidhi 15:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

55 more to go Ladies and Gents. Red marquis 04:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

39 more left Red marquis 05:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

19 more left. This is so exciting. Red marquis 07:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

4 more page left to build. Pretty close now. We should have this in the bag by tomorrow Red marquis 03:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Great milestone! Red, you drove a good chunk of the growth. A congratulations (in advance) to everyone. Thanks! LuvWikis 11:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

3 more...as of 1:00pm (PST)! Woohoo! -Nidhi 17:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

2 more! Red marquis 22:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Here it is, Ladies and Gents:

Tickford

Well, either that or this (if you count templates as "articles"):

Red marquis 01:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, templates are not considered as articles....otherwise we'd be up to 12,982! Click here to see all our article pages. -Nidhi 19:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Well then it's Tickford then. congrats everyone. Red marquis 23:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Maufacturers

I need help with the List of Manufacturers. I need a team of 4 OR 6 OR 8 volunteers to help me fill out the "List of Models" introduction on each make if we hope to fill it out in quick time. I've fully completed with my "Second Stage".

P.S. for the "insert current year" section on the activemake template, we might also want to create an automatic year changer (in the same way that we have an article counter) so we wouldn't have to overhaul all these pages (which number in the hundreds, possibly thousands) when 2008 comes along - and 2009 and 2010....and so on.

Second Stage

Second Stage is fully complete. Now all that's left are the third and final stage which is basically just putting the marque's logo in the make introduction template and replacing (insert current year) in the active make templates with a year updating code so we wouldn't have to update every single page's intro templates every single year. For those interested in importing logos I suggest visiting Cartype.com.

Red_marquis 19:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Traffic Growth

Hi Wikicars team, I was just looking at traffic stats for the site. We've grown 50% since Jan 1; 100% since November; and 200% since October. The world is noticing the fine work here. Congratulations! LuvWikis 02:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Great news! - MQuan 01:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

All Please Come Over...

To my talk page at your convenience Yankee, since we're low on space here. Be sure to scroll down to the "Questions and Observations for All" section. Thanks  :-) 18:44, 18 February (UTC)

Publicity

Wikicars has been out since around June 2006, and I don't know how busy it was back then, but today, the flow of contributions seems slow. We only have a handful of loyal contributors, and often times when I log on, I find almost no one active. I often find myself feeling a little lonely, looking at the minute amount of contributions daily. Is there any way to fix/correct this? Is there any way to advertise ourselves more? I would like to see more contributors hanging around here, but how do we achieve that? Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 14:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I've felt your frustration, Enzo. It's hard getting a new site to pick up momentum. We are driving a lot more traffic from Yahoo! and I'm a big fan of Yahoo! Answers, as well. I log on and answer questions and I try to refer people to Wikicars wherever possible. It's a free form of publicity that's genuine and helpful. I'm open to other suggestions that people have found helpful to help drive traffic to the site. -Nidhi 01:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, these things go on a non-linear life cycle. Wikipedia was around for quite a while under the radar, then all of a sudden hit the big time. But I think that led to its downfall. I think steady but under the radar gives a better product, when it's still a bunch of inspired and superior people, rather than anonymous high schoolers bored in class who need to tell the world that Ken is gay. Gzuckier 13:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Now that there are the great new quicklinks to all the bookmarking websites, that is another way of providing publicity for wikicars. When you're particularly proud of an entry you're writing or you come across a page that you think is really great, just bookmark that page so when other people search for subjects relating to that page on the individual page databases the bookmarked page will appear. Check the quicklinks out on the left hand side underneath the toolbox and register for the sites if you haven't already. -MQuan 22:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Videos

Is there anyway we can upload videos? Red marquis 13:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

We uploaded a short YouTube segment on the Audi A4 page (Safety section). We need to add in a disclaimer about what constitutes a legitimate Wikicars' caliber video and other copyright laws, before we start uploading more clips. -Nidhi 12:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Homepage Layout

Unfortunately, I haven't seen the great response in nominations for featured articles and featured reviews that I had originally hoped for. These sections were created to help highlight recent articles that people have made to the site. I'm happy to change the layout of the homepage if that's something the community would like to see. While I think it'll add a fresh perspective and look to the site, I want to be sure that this is what people want. I just hate hogging the nomination space. What do you guys think? Spice it up a little or keep the same layout and nominate some "fresh meat"? -Nidhi 01:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I still like them. When Google reindexes the site (hopefully soon), I think we'll see another surge in new contributors. LuvWikis 18:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Spyker Template Image Voting

Voting is officially closed

Voting Chart

Picture	# of votes
Image #4	5 - Winner

Red marquis 12:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Is no one interested in voting?

Red marquis 07:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm torn between 4 and 1, but 4 is just such a great pic.

User:Argen 21:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll choose #4.

Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 14:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, these are some great images. I really like #1, 4, and 5 the most. While #4 is indeed a great pic, I also rather like the clean, sleek images of #4 and #5. At this point, however, it looks like #4 is in the lead. - Pastrami on Ry 20:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I like #4 and #8 best. #4 is great, I had the pleasure of visiting Monte Carlo and although I didn't see a Spyker there, I certainly did see some exotics!!! CelsiorFan 03:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Definitely 4 has got my vote! Pepperpop11 00:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Another vote for #4

Yankee 14:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

That clinches it. # 4 is the winner. Voting is officially closed. Red marquis 06:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Our 4000th Article

Coming along pretty quickly now. I have a feeling we'll have arrived there within the next week or the week after that. Red marquis 13:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

300 articles to go.

Red marquis 07:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

200 to go. Red marquis 08:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

120 to go. Red marquis 07:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

100 TO GO. Red marquis 08:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

75 left. Red marquis 08:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

58 left. Red marquis 02:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

49 TO GO. Red marquis 06:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

45 AND COUNTING. Red marquis 08:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)-

40 left Red marquis 01:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

30 left. -Red marquis 07:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

25 - Red marquis 07:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

20 and counting. -Red marquis 11:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

19 :o) -Nidhi 14:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

15!!!!!! -Red marquis 07:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

6!!!!!! -Red marquis 08:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

5! -Nidhi 22:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

1 left. -Red marquis 07:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

and 0. Our 4000th article is the disambiguation page for GTO. Red marquis 06:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

• For some reason the counter is saying there's three more left. Red marquis 08:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Fixed it. Red marquis 08:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Isn't there anyone who wants to take this last one? Can't just all be me. Red marquis 05:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Pricing

• Voting for the Pricing box is now closed

Voting Chart

Picture	# of votes
Light Olive-Sand White	2 - Winner

Light Olive-Sand White

MODEL Trims
Trim1	Trim2	Trim3	Trim4
MSRP
$Price1	$Price2	$Price3	$Price4
Invoice
$Price1	$Price2	$Price3	$Price4

I'm closing section of the voting. It's pretty clear no one wants to vote anymore. Light Olive-Sand White Wins. Red marquis 04:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Resale Values

• Voting for the Resale Values box is now closed

Voting Chart

Picture	# of votes
Jarama Beige/Light Olive-Sand White	2 - Winner

Jarama Beige/Light Olive-Sand White

<MODEL> Year
Year X	Year X-2	Year X-3	Year X-4
Resale Value
$	$	$	$

I'm closing section of the voting. I think it's pretty unanimous that Jarama Beige wins. Red marquis 07:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Gas Mileage

• Voting for the Gas Mileage box is now closed

Voting Chart

Picture	# of votes
Black/Left	3 - Winner

Black/Left

Trim
Trim1	Trim2	Trim3	Trim4
MPG
c/h	c/h	c/h	c/h

-Red marquis 06:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I like the Black/Left. -Nidhi 12:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm closing section of the voting. I think it's pretty unanimous that Black/Left wins. Red marquis 06:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Separating Pages

I was wondering if it'd be alright to separate some pages into groups of pages due to generations of a particular vehicle. Yankee has done this before with the Camaro/Firebird articles, and although I was originally opposed to the idea I realise that this needs to be done for other pages due to lack of space and to aid organization. Argen 15:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Let's put it to a vote Red marquis 00:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Voting Chart

Choice	# of votes
For	3 - CLOSED

Hello? Anybody want to vote? I desperately need responses on this. Argen 00:00, 04 August 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you profile this higher (where people would notice it) and create a voting table or somesuch. I know, wikicars can be sometimes frustrating. Red marquis 04:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I vote yes on it. Ive started to do something similar with the BMW 6 and 5 series. Red marquis 04:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Table up now, 2 votes for yes. Argen 18:27, 06 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone else really wants to vote anymore. It's pretty unanimous then what you should do Argen. Red marquis 08:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm also throwing in my vote to say you should go ahead and do it, Argen. - Pastrami on Ry 21:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking of still having a main page (i.e. BMW 3-Series) that contains a short summary of each generation and links to more complete pages for the individual years. -Argen 17:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly what I've with the BMW 5 and 6-Series. Let's just go ahead and get this show going. No one wants to vote anymore. Red marquis 04:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Then closed it is. -Argen 00:59 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to say

Thanks to all who have added pics to the infoboxes in my contributions, especially Red Marquis. It's apparently something I'm not very good at, I gave up trying a while back lol. I've got alot of contributions that still need pics so if anyone can, please - keep them coming!  :-) Yankee 20:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure! I'd be happy to. Red marquis 00:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

NOTICE TO ALL BUREAUCRATS AND SYSOPS

I need to give Pepperpop11 both blocking and protecting rights. He has signed up for my Spam Police program and won't be able to function in RC patrols if he doesn't have these powers. I'm also still waiting for my Bureaucrat promotion. We cannot maintain this site properly if ALL of our Bureaucrats and most of our sysops are absent for weeks and months on end. I'm not.

Red marquis 00:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Considering "Sustained Contribution" and "Varied Participation" (someone who helps with site building and maintenance projects; someone who fights vandalism; who participates in areas other than their own projects) are two of the main qualification required of sysops and bureaucrats, I believe ALL of you should be stripped of your powers. This website has seen absolutely no activity from most of you for months. Doesn't anyone even care about Wikicars anymore? This past few weeks, I have been nothing but frustrated at the general apathy and neglect every single one of you have displayed - if at all any of you even visits the site. I've been asking for emergency bureaucrat powers so that I and others volunteering can help better protect us from spam and vandals. I have been patient but as of this moment that patience has since run out. GET UP OUT OF YOUR COLLECTIVE ASSES AND HELP - OR GIVE THE ONES WHO WANT TO THE POWER TO!!!

Red marquis 02:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ouch! Dude, thats harsh! I am absolutely sorry about my absence, but, I've no doubt this may seem like an insult, I have a life elsewhere. Over the summer I got caught up in the forums over at Neoseeker. I got so wrapped up in it that I forgot my responsiblities elsewhere, and for that I am sorry. But I find the fact that you seem to expect us to be here all of the time, a little extreme. The simple fact is this: People have other things going on in their lives. And you should respect that. I understand your anger, trust me, I know what it's like to be in your position, but you've gone overboard. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, as I've mentioned in your talk page, I'm sorry for blowing up. Not just at you but to all the admins here at wikicars. It's just been exasperating to be met with silence at my repeated appeals. I acknowledge that it was not very sysop-like behavior, that I am in the wrong and I apologize. I will be more moderate in tone the next time. Mea maxima culpa.

Red marquis 00:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

ATTENTION WIKICARS USERS

P.S. Does anyone here know how we could implement an infobox system like Wikipedia's where we'd make use of a master template and each page will simply have a set of codes with each field written down for a contributor to fill up so that whenever we decide to revamp our image we could simply change the master template/s w/o affecting the page's individual information? I really don't think any of us would like to have to waste our time manually replacing the templates on every single one of thousands of pages made and thousands more yet to come.

I have recently discovered how to format our infobox in similar fashion to Wikipedia's Master Template System whereby a we will no longer have to replicate the infobox again and again for each individual page. What will happen instead is that from this point on there will be a set of codes similar to the ones below that will act as a "surrogate" and where you will be filling out the basic information. It will replicate the "master template" on thepage but with the individual information you've written filled out on it. What this allows for is that if and when we finally decide to change the design/update the infobox we will no longer have to manually alter each infobox from page to page.

{{Infobox |
|Image = place image here in 300 pixels
|Marque = place marque here - not manufacturer
|aka = Type aka here, not up there
|Production = produced from when to when+total units made (optional)</nowiki>
|Class = denote market class
|Body Style = how many doors+how many seats+what type of body
|Length = length - type here
|Width = Width - type here
|Height = Height - type here
|Wheelbase = wheelbase - type here
|Weight = Weight - you get the point
|Transmission = transmission + drive
|Engine = engine
|Power = N/A hp @ N/A rpm<br>N/A lb-ft of [[torque]] @ N/A rpm
|Similar = similar (competition)
|Designer = Designer (lead designer if it was a team effort)
}}
Red marquis 08:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Adverts

I just noticed we're now hosting adverts below the navigation column (or is that just my browser doing that?). Has wikicars really become that popular and seen that much traffic? lol. The cost of running this site must really cost alot.

- Red marquis 07:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Concerns

I'm starting to get concerned, the site is really being let go. We haven't had a new featured user, article or review for months. We're awfully shorts on frequently contributing members (I know I'm being a hypocrite :-P) and more. I'm starting to fear that the site is beginning to die, sure Red Marquis keeps up constant contributions, but thats not truly keeping the site alove, is it? If I may note, where have all of the original (and the main mass for that fact) administrators gone? It seems they've left this all to us and picked up and ran. That may not be true, but thats what it feels like. I miss the days when I first joined, we were a tight community and there was a fair amount of activity, but sadly, that is no more. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 15:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess it's up to us to keep the torch aflame. Even Wikicar's parent company Internet Brands seems to have bailed out. Red marquis 03:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll do what I can to keep the contributions up - as long as no one object to my own narrative style that I've been doing. Once I do an entry, anyone is free to add to it or tailor it to whatever style they want (within reason), and I still have several that I've done lately that are in need of pics. In fact, I think it'd be great if we could have a page devoted strictly to pics (that fit perfectly in the infobox) that anyone can just copy and paste at their discretion. I may not be as active as I once was... but like bad breath, I'll always be around! Yankee 11:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Main Page Error

To me, it seems that when Luvwikis removed the birthday announcement from the main page, he removed some piece of formatting/coding. Now the main page looks off. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 17:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I can no longer see the Navigation sidebar on the Main Page. Works fine in all other pages though. Red marquis 06:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Image Renaming

We really need to come up with a template and category of some sort for the purpose of re-naming images and pages.

Take this image for example:

File:Nice1.jpg

If you look at the image, the name is dreadful. Nice1 does no justice in describing the image. Images like this need to be taken care of. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

A template? Red marquis 06:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I've always done it like this: Manufacturer_Model_Year_Other_Orientation. The first three are prety self-explanatory, the Other is where you'd put other descriptors such as paint color or option package. Orientation is the position of the car in the photo. This is ainly to help remind you of what the picture isjust by looking at the name of the file. Orientation would be something like FrontSide, which means the the car is at an angle and facing towards he left. If the image were horizontally flipped, then the name would say SideFront because the front is now on the right. Profile is the side of the car, then Rear is the back, RearSide would be a rear angle with the rear to the left of the image.

I just do it like this to make it kinda like a filing system and use he names to really describe the image.

Argen 10:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Concerns

I'm concerned with where the site is going. We're always creating new articles, but never taking the time to fill the articles with information. This, to me, is a major concern. Say, a year from now, where will we be? At this rate, we'll have very few articles properly filled out. We really need to get working on existing articles rather than new ones. I'm not opposed to the creation on new articles, but we really need to start filling out articles rather than making new ones. I have a few ideas that I'm willing to share if this idea is taken well. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 13:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. However, this is a wiki site. The point is everyone gets to put in their contribution. Some prefer to contribute by creating pages for others to have a crack at.Red marquis 01:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

In the spirit of this discussion, I'd like to bring up a page that's been bugging me for quite a while: 1964 Imperial. What's the point of this article? It doesn't have anything on it of any value other than it's the vanity page of Flint Plywood. It doesn't even specify if imperial is a standalone marque (like Continental was to Ford) or a model of the Chrysler Corporation. Whatever is written on it is mainly biased fodder and the article is, pretty much, an image farm. Not to mention that he is an article hen who removes any mmodifications or improvements anyone tries to add to this page. I suggest a speedy deletion, revamp or Flint Plywood's blocking. Red marquis 03:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that page has gotten on my nerves too. The page is more of an image depository than anything else. Some sort of action needs to be taken in regards to this article. Of note, I have deleted a biased sentence from the article. If Flint Plywood restores that line of text, I'd say that deserves a warning and/or block if necessary. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

If I may voice another concern... I've been a major contributor to many of the older American car entries in the past, and I've noticed that many of the entries have now been filled out with these empty ready-made "templates" - which is precisely why I have NOT contributed a new entry in many months. With apologies to Red Marquis (or whoever came up with these templates), I'm sorry... I just don't like them. They're too much... too cluttered... WAY too much information (I think we all know there never has been and never will be a Chevrolet Beretta Hybrid...). I've been waiting to see if anyone has been making any entries using these ready-made templates and I've hardly noticed any. I'd really like to make some more entries in the style that I've been doing in the past with a more personal, narrative style instead of using these templates - most of which would bore readers with "NA" under most of the categories anyway.

So I need you all to decide whether I can continue to do my entries using my personal narrative style (anyone is always free to add to them if they feel it necessary). I cannot, and will not, use these "templates". These might work fine for a current model, but they're mostly irrelevant to the cars that I've been covering. If it is decided that I can scrap the templates and use my own style that's worked well in the past, then I'll continue with more entries that still need to be done. If it is decided that I am to use the templates or nothing... well I guess, regrettably, it'll be nothing. Yankee 12:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not responsible for the design of the ready-made templates however I'm mostly responsible for creating those pages. For me, it really is all a matter of creating a streamlined and professional look but I have no problems whatsoever with you modifying them to suit the article's needs. There have been a few changes since you've been gone, Yankee. For instance, we've moved to centralize infoboxes and other templates. What this means is that individual pages will no longer have a copy of the infobox's codes, instead they will have to carry the surrogate codes listed on the model page template. This is important. What this means is that, unfortunately, all infobox categories are now standardized and cannot be altered but it can no longer be mutilated by neophytes and in case wikicars, at some point in the future, decide to overhaul its design, this makes it much much easier. I'm mentioning this because I've noticed your propensity for altering the template. Anyway, welcome back Yankee. Red marquis 09:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough RM (and thanks for the welcome back), can you give me an example of this new infobox? I've still been perusing the site as a casual reader every so often, I just haven't made any contributions other than minute corrections (to mostly my own entries), so I haven't been totally gone ;-)

This is how the infobox looks like. Same old, same old:

place image here in 300 pixels
Garage Talk/1
place marque here - not manufacturer
aka	Type aka here, not up there
Production	produced from when to when+total units made (optional)
Class	denote market class
Body Style	how many doors+how many seats+what type of body
Length	length - type here
Width	Width - type here
Height	Height - type here
Wheelbase	wheelbase - type here
Weight	Weight - you get the point
Transmission	transmission + drive
Engine	engine
Power	N/A hp @ N/A rpm N/A lb-ft of torque @ N/A rpm
Similar	similar (competition)
Designer	Designer (lead designer if it was a team effort)

...And this is how the codes will now look like on the individual pages:

{{Infobox | |Image = '''place image here in 300 pixels''' |Marque = '''place marque here - not manufacturer''' |aka = '''Type aka here, not up there''' |Production = '''produced from when to when+total units made (optional)''' |Class = '''denote market class''' |Body Style = '''how many doors+how many seats+what type of body''' |Length = '''length - type here''' |Width = '''Width - type here''' |Height = '''Height - type here''' |Wheelbase = '''wheelbase - type here''' |Weight = '''Weight - you get the point''' |Transmission = '''transmission + drive''' |Engine = '''engine''' |Power = N/A hp @ N/A rpm<br>N/A lb-ft of [[torque]] @ N/A rpm |Similar = '''similar (competition)''' |Designer = '''Designer (lead designer if it was a team effort)''' }}

Red marquis 06:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Administration-Archive Integration

I'm recently creating a master template for administrative introduction boxes (like the one in our List of Administrators page and Nominations for adminship page) and one major issue that arose is the question of whether we integrate the Archive template into the master template as well. This begs the larger question of whether archives are part of the administrative sphere of Wikicars or not because I need to know if I am to integrate them or create a separate Master for the Archives template. Red marquis 01:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Anyone? I need to know If I should do it. Red marquis 03:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybach Template Image Voting

The polls are now closed.

Picture	# of votes
Image #2	3 - winner

A new round of elections here. This time its the image for the maybach template. Red marquis 01:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

including my vote Red marquis 01:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

LuvWikis 14:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

While the second is cool, the first has my vote. Argen 17:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Same here, I think the first one is a bit more "Maybach" impressive, however the second one is cool. Perhaps if there were a third image choice? CelsiorFan 05:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately these are the only good images i could come up with. Red marquis 09:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I will place my vote on the second image. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Closing all polls. Pretty sure all who wanted to vote has already done so. Image#2 wins.

Revamping Our Pages

In anticipation of our 4000th page landmark (and as it turns out our 1st Birthday), I've gone ahead and updated the template boxes for Pricing, Resale Values and Gas Mileage in our Template:Model page, thus completely liberating ourselves from the tyranny of cellpadding. They are already up and running and will be used on all succeding pages from here on out. However, in the course of creating these new template boxes, I created several others that might be preferable and so I would like to open the floor to a voting. I will divide the election into three categories, namely Pricing, Resale Values and Gas Mileage. When voting I'd like you all to think not just of the boxes individually but of our pages as a product as a whole and how they fit together or not. Some of them might seem cool or cute but I'd like you to vote with an eye towards whether or not it actually reflects an automotive mindset. Check out the Template:Model page to see what I mean. If you have any suggestions, I'd be glad to accomodate them. Maybe some colors clash or are a bit too jarring, etc. let's see how we can fix it.

• Note: I've included my own votes already.
• Note: You also do understand that this would require us to change all of the existing boxes in all 3,960 pages that we have already created.

P.S. Does anyone here know how we could implement an infobox system like Wikipedia's where we'd make use of a master template and each page will simply have a set of codes with each field written down for a contributor to fill up so that whenever we decide to revamp our image we could simply change the master template/s w/o affecting the page's individual information? I really don't think any of us would like to have to waste our time manually replacing the templates on every single one of thousands of pages made and thousands more yet to come.

-Red marquis 06:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, Red, these are awesome. Great work! As for your P.S. request, I don't know how this would be done, but I think someone in our tech dept. does. Try leaving a message for Carguy. - Pastrami on Ry 15:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

All look good to me. Thanks for your hard work Red marquis! CelsiorFan 02:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: ALL VOTING HAS ENDED AS OF 12 AUGUST 2007. Red marquis 08:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Special Infoboxes

I've been toying around with new infobox designs for engines, trucks, race cars etc. tell me what you think.

ps. none of the infobox designs are set. expand the category fields (length, diameter stroke, manufacturer, Dry Weight, etc.) as you see fit.

PS. BTW, forgot to mention, I also created a template for engine pages. Simply type {{subst:engine}}.

Mercedes-Benz DiesOtto
Engine
Manufacturer	Mercedes-Benz
aka	"DiesOtto"
Type	Gasoline
Production/Introduction
Status	Concept
Displacement	1.8 litre (1800cc)
Aspiration	Turbocharged
Configuration
Cylinders	Four (4)
Bore
Stroke
Displacement
Length
Diameter
Width
Height
Dry Weight
Output	238 hp @ N/A rpm 400 Nm of torque @ N/A rpm
Fuel Consumption	39.2 mpg (6 litres / 100 km)
Chief Engineer

-Red marquis 03:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I like it! Great idea. Yankee 20:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Added some new fields Red marquis 05:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Not sure I'm so hot on the colors, but I do like what I see. You are seriously workin magic here, Red. - Pastrami on Ry 16:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Tone it down a bit? The yellow is just a tad too much, huh? Red marquis 02:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Changed the color from pure yellow to 'corn'. How does it look? Red marquis 07:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that color is better. It still does clash a little bit with the plain Black and Grey, but it's not bad at all. One thing I might suggest, however, is possibly changing the Black lines. The only reason I say this is because, if you look at the line for "Manufacturer," the Mercedes-Benz link is not very easily readable, due to its dark blue color. - Pastrami on Ry 21:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Mugen Power

Wow. I may have found my rival here in terms of prolific editing. lol. Red marquis 01:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Red...you are the pace setter...but it's great to see Mugen Power stepping up! LuvWikis 11:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Mugen Power is showing effort and dedication. I asked him a few questions having to do with adminship, here were his answers:

"First, what do plan to do with your admin powers? Second, why do you think you deserve to become an administrator?" - Enzo Worshipper

1. I plan to help make the most accurate and helpful articles, and make sure there is no inaccurate/useless information on Wikicars.
   
2. Because I really love cars and i think i would be I really think I would make a great addition to the administrative staff and I would do great on fixing up the Honda/Acura pages.

--Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 12:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are good answers. I think Mugen Power may quickly grow into an admin here. I agree with your earlier posts that we should create some guidleines for becoming an admin.

--LuvWikis 22:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. he's definitely giving Red a run for his $$$. :o).

Key features to look for in Wikicars admins should include the following:

1. Admin should be Wiki savvy.
2. Admin should patrol for spammish content, including link spam.
3. Admin should delete any posts that are irrelevant and detrimental to the site.
4. Admin should fend off trolls and stop arguments and flame-wars.
5. Admin should block all users and IP addresses that are vandalizing the site.
6. Admin should moderate on all talk pages and put arguments to rest.

Feel free to add to this list. There's a lot of potentially good candidates for adminship on Wikicars. I think those members that are interested, should contact one of us here. -Nidhi 17:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Mugen Power has shown excellence. He has reported vandals that have snuck past me under my RC patrols (I can't belive I missed those dirtbags!). He has also shown massive effort. So I say in my highest regard that he is deserving of joining our ranks. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 15:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Home Page

How about if we shrink the hybrid cars spotlight on the home page by removing the driving tips section; this would move the contributor section above the fold. Thoughts? Someone want to mock it up to see what it looks like? (Maybe keep the prius photo which is interesting?) LuvWikis 13:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea, because, at least on the resolution I'm running on my monitor right now (as well as the computer I have at home), when I first load the page, all I see is the Hybrid cars spotlight, which has remained static for as long as I can remember. If we can move some of the rotating content further up the page, I think it would help retain more interest in people who might casually check back to see if anything has changed. - Pastrami on Ry 22:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The hybrid cars spotlight does take up a lot of space and isn't as dynamic as some of the sections below it. Removing the driving tips section is a good idea to decrease the size of the section and I'd even consider putting it below the featured user/model/review sections. This will allow the initial homepage screen you see when visiting the site to be more eye catching as it changes often. However, I do like how upon initially loading the page there is a constant blue theme. Therefore, if the other sections are moved up and the hybrid section moved down, the banner color should be changed to match the blue theme for whatever section we choose to replace the hybrid one. --MQuan 01:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, Matt. I'm going to change the homepage so that the featured articles show up on top and the portal underneath of that. I'm also cutting out the hybrid driving tips section. I think we can even higlight other portals in this section. We've made tremendous progress with our exotics and I'd love to highlight some of those cars and articles in that portal section. I think the portals can be one of those dymanic sections, too. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks! -Nidhi 18:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

We should trim down the text for "Garage Talk" on the Home Page. At least in my computer it deforms the section for "Search By Make"

Red_marquis 11:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The new main page changes are looking good. Bringing the more commonly used features of wikicars to catch the user's eyes when they check the page is great. - MQuan 01:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks great!! LuvWikis 03:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Tagline

Has anyone ever considered a tagline for the site? Here's a link to the would be page MediaWiki:Tagline. A tagline is a line of text located in the upper left hand corner of the box. One example: Wikicars, a place to share your automotive knowledge. To warn you, I will be testing this idea, so don't be alarmed to find text where you wouldn't normally find text. Enzo Worshipper 15:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Trying something new

I think Garage Talk would be more functional if it was broken down by segments, e.g. Bulletin boards, To-do lists, collaborations, etc. I started to create more of a bulletin board-type template here. Feel free to add/delete to it as it is still a work in progress. Thanks! -Nidhi 22:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I like this new idea. it might take some getting used to but i like it.

Red_marquis 10:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I like it too....but strongly feel there should be a single portal page...we can break segments off, but keep links to subsegments on the portal page for easy navigation. LuvWikis 04:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Archival

Hey, I was thinking, this page is getting aweful lengthy. How about we archive some of the past or finished conversations. Once in archival, though, we should make a rule of not editing archived content. What do you guys think? Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 20:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks nice!

fine with me. Red marquis 22:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

me too. We could keep the featured _____ links at the top. LuvWikis 03:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

How would it be if we decided to archive things on a regular basis? Perhaps monthly? Quarterly? Every six months? Any thoughts? - Pastrami on Ry 22:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

My bet, because topics don't come up on a regular basis, to archive about every two months. Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 21:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcoming new users

When welcoming new users, we should start using this: Template:Welcome. To post this onto talk pages, use {{subst:Welcome}}. Thoughts? Enzo Worshipper ^{(Talk to me + Contribs)} 21:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Like it a lot! Should we also include Red's infobox templates? I've been doing so, but if we can refer them to the template or incorporate it into this one, that might be easier. -Nidhi 21:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)