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)