Garage Talk/testing

Contents: 1 Community bulletin board 2 To do lists 3 Collaborations 4 Help and Resources

Garage Talk is the central place to find out what's happening on Wikicars. Learn what tasks need to be done, what areas and portals need to be developed and get or post news about recent events or current activities. Feel free to join in. Article Counter: 25,914

Community bulletin board Post your Wikicars related news and announcements here! New portals, collaborations, and wikiprojects seeking contributors. New initiatives, proposals, discussions, or article drives, and current maintenance backlogs.

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 Awards What if we create wikicars awards, like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Award_templates. We'd use auto imagery, of course. Thoughts? LuvWikis 16:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC) Sure, I like that idea. 0-172 19:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC) Cool. LuvWikis 20:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC) I think it's a good idea as well. Would our award designations be similar to those of Wikipedia? - Pastrami on Ry 16:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC) I thought we might create our own. The Barnstar is a bit dull for the exciting topic of cars. We could have more fun. One image I thought of is: The Racer X Award. The work of this contributor is truly extraordinary. What think? LuvWikis 12:08, 9 January 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. =) I suggest that for now, we keep one category for each make, to be denoted as [[Category:Make Vehicles]]. Also, several vehicles, especially the classics and vintages, spanned over several decades so we should have another category for the decade associated to it. Other categories we should consider are: [[Category:Current Models]], [[Category:Discontinued Models]], and [[Category:Model Reviews]]. We should also have categories for the types of cars and body styles out there: [[Category:Sedans]], [[Category:Coupes]], [[Category:Trucks]], [[Category:SUVs]]. 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) 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 Awards What if we create wikicars awards, like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Award_templates. We'd use auto imagery, of course. Thoughts? LuvWikis 16:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC) Sure, I like that idea. 0-172 19:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC) Cool. LuvWikis 20:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC) I think it's a good idea as well. Would our award designations be similar to those of Wikipedia? - Pastrami on Ry 16:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC) I thought we might create our own. The Barnstar is a bit dull for the exciting topic of cars. We could have more fun. One image I thought of is: The Racer X Award. The work of this contributor is truly extraordinary. What think? LuvWikis 12:08, 9 January 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. =) I suggest that for now, we keep one category for each make, to be denoted as [[Category:Make Vehicles]]. Also, several vehicles, especially the classics and vintages, spanned over several decades so we should have another category for the decade associated to it. Other categories we should consider are: [[Category:Current Models]], [[Category:Discontinued Models]], and [[Category:Model Reviews]]. We should also have categories for the types of cars and body styles out there: [[Category:Sedans]], [[Category:Coupes]], [[Category:Trucks]], [[Category:SUVs]]. 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) 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) 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) 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) VOLUNTEERS NEEDED 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 "First Stage". I'll fill in the volunteers later on succeeding "Stages" in my plan of attack. Right now, all i need is whomever created the "subst" shortcut for the infobox to do the same for these two templates below: 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. Search By Model (insert logo here) Defunct Search By Model (insert logo here) 2012 Current Models (insert vehicle type) (insert vehicle) Search By Model (insert logo here) On Hiatus Red_marquis 14:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Count me in, I'll do whatever I can to help. Also, all please don't forget to check out my user page for my Questions section  :-) Yankee, 06:20 20 February That's it? No other takers? Ok, Yankee, right now all you'll need to do is copy down these three codes on your user page: {{subst:Defunctmake}} {{subst:Activemake}} {{subst:Hiatusmake}} -RM Since there will be only two of us, the plan's going to be very simple. As I've said, i'm already finished with the first stage so now all we'll have to do is copy and past the appropriate template into each make depending on whether they are defunct or still active. You start from "B" (I've also finished all of "A"), I'll start from "Z" and we'll meet halfway. To chart our progress, after every session, let's simply report how far we've gone into the list right here. ok? Red_marquis: Nysa Magna Steyr Hommell Yankee: Red_marquis 10:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC) Scans I was wondering if it'd be alright for me to make some scans and upload them. They're advertisements from the different makes, so they should fall under fair use for promotions. We have the Virginia Motor Trend International Auto Show here in Richmond each March, and I have brochures from the past several years that I could put up. Argen 16:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Probably OK. We'll all apply our good judgement.

To do lists Wikicars is undoubtedly the fastest growing wiki on all things automtive. However, that comes at a cost: many are stubs, or otherwise need attention. If you'd like, go ahead and jump right in. If you aren't ready to fly solo, you can participate in a Collaboration.
Things to do Help update to the infoboxes across ALLmakes and models. Expand create and expand different portals, including Exotics, Concepts, SUVs, Crossovers, Sedans, Convertibles, Roadsters, etc. Fix-up projects Help clean up and classify articles into necessary categories	Here are some other tasks you can do: Build out Lincoln MKX article Build out Jeep Wrangler article Build out Nissan Altima Hybrid article Nominations: Featured Member Nominations Featured Article Nominations Featured Review Nominations

Collaborations To improve the quality of articles which are short or lacking in detail, Wikipedia's community organizes collaborations to expand articles.

Other collaborations Active improvement teams Cleaning department Cleanup Taskforce Counter-Vandalism Unit Spam fighting team Categorization projects Countering systemic bias Encyclopedic Standards Version 1.0 Maintenance Help clear up the backlog of articles to be wikified! Wikification is the process of making an article conform to the model templates and model review templates. This involves formatting, links, sections, and checking for other things such as copyright violations and references. If necessary, you may propose it for deletion. Wikification is an easy way to improve Wikicars! WikiProjects WikiProjects are ongoing team efforts to improve articles having to do with a particular subject, and to manage the logistics of that topic. Hundreds exist — examine the master list to find one that interests you. They are separate from, though may work with, Collaborations. Language translation Wikicars will not just be in English! Versions will exist in many different languages. To fill in some of the English Wikicars's gaps, we translate articles from other languages into English. You can view a list of articles that need translation from any language, or, in a few cases, by only one language (this is only available for the more popular languages).

Guidelines, help, and resources Wikicars is staffed by a small army of experts. Here are some of the most general.

Help Wikicars FAQ Editing The Manual of Style guidelines and tutorial Policies and guidelines Wikipedia has many established policies, guidelines, conventions, and traditions. This is a very brief sampling of some of the most important; for more information, see the main policies and guidelines page. Policies and guidelines apply both to articles and how to work with fellow editors. For easy access, the shortcuts to the pages are also listed. Article standards Be bold! WP:BB • WP:BOLD Citing sources WP:CITE • WP:REF Working with others Assume good faith WP:AGF • WP:FAITH Civility and etiquette WP:CIV • WP:EQ

Resources New user information Ways to communicate Community support groups and programs Common Procedures How to resolve conflicts Community information About Wikicars · Wikicars' members · Administrators Administrators FAQ · Template:Tip of the day - community portal