User talk:DonIncognito

Infoboxes

Don, the generation infoboxes need to be in the same section of the generation they are discussing. The heading for the section needs to be above the generation infobox. See, the way you aranged them, there are line-wraps and the top of the genertaion infoboxes are above the section heading. I know how the infoboxes in most car articles look - because I put many of them there. Please beleive me, the infobox needs to be placed below the heading and the technical specifications are blocking the view of the introductory paragraph- this table needs to be moved to the bottom. If you'd like further reference please look at some car articles that have made it onto the Wiki 1.0 such as the Lincoln Town Car and Ford Taurus, as you will see the generation boxes in all of them are within their section. Also, in terms of esthetics it is important to remember that the text should look contious. There should not be any large blank spaces breaking up the text. Thank you for your contributions. I moved the generation infoboxes below the section heading and the technical specification table should be placed at the end as it otherwise breaks apart the text. Regards, Signature ^brendel 16:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brendel, the method of arranging infoboxes that I used is used in many articles in order to keep the infobox together with the section. It is especially useful if there is very little text per generational section, so that each generational infobox is paired with its corresponding generational section instead of having the infoboxes pile up on the right and the corresponding sections in a different part of the article. I won't change the Lexus LS article again because there is enough text to keep the sections and infoboxes synchronized. Also, in my browser, there are no issues with tables blocking text—I use the latest version of Safari, which is fully standard-compliant.

Regarding aesthetics, I disagree with you a bit; I think that it is preferable to have corresponding infoboxes and sections together—again, this is not significant in the Lexus LS article, but more evident in articles where the infoboxes are longer than the section text. See, for example, the Lexus GS article before and after to see what I mean about the aesthetic aspect. In such cases, having the infobox above the generational heading is necessary from a syntax perspective to achieve the desired appearance.

Let me know what you think. I appreciate your input and maybe we work on a way to standardize the way infoboxes are displayed in automotive articles. DonIncognito 18:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, infoboxes need to be in the correct section and yes when the infobox is longer than the text, there is a problem. For me that's the standard, the infobox in the right section. It used to be that infoboxes were just listed below the main infobox without any regards for the article's sections, so the sections and infoboxes wouldn't match. Then I and other editors changed that. So, yes in an article with short sections and long infoboxes you did the right thing, but as you said in articles such as the Lexus LS or Lincoln Town Car it isn't neccesary. Whenever possible we try to place the gen infoboxes under the heading. Also, I understand about different browser settings, that's why I do my editing in the standard Microsoft Internet Explorer and not Mozilla, because most of our readers have the Internet Explorer and while editing it's important to consider how the average user with his MS IExplorer is going to see the text. Otherwise than you for your valuable contributions. Regards, Signature ^brendel 20:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Resolution and Infoboxes

I just set my monitor to 1280X1024 and see what you mean. I found that at 1156X864 the infoboxes seemed to fit in their sections again. While the infobox displacement is quite bad at 1280X1024, I think few useres use that high of a resolution, I usually edit with 1024X768 as I think that that's what most people have their screens set to. But I am open to the ides of changing the infobox mark-up, especially since this isn't the only car article with that problem. What did you have in mind? Signature ^brendel 19:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article merge

Greetings, I noticed that you contributed to the discussion on merging the Lexus SC and Toyota Soarer articles back in May, it appears that it has been suggested again. It says in the history "consensus not to merge" -- I have agreed with this and suggested it on the Talk:Toyota Soarer page, although it appears that my comments and that of the merge advocate are the only ones there. Was there any additional detail regarding the consensus not to merge? I found the talk page empty when I added to it. Any contributions would be appreciated. Enigma3542002 09:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Chrysler Newport 1977.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chrysler Newport 1977.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chowbok ☠ 19:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Automobiles Notification

Hi DonIncognito, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.

To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting {{Wiki Auto Project}} where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add [[Category:WikiProject Automobiles members|DonIncognito]] to your userpage.

If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086^{Talk | Contribs} 05:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Civility is a requirement, not an option, at Wikipedia. Calling another editor a "liar" is not appropriate. Rather, simply say, "you were incorrect when you wrote...." This is project runs on consensus and so we try to maintain a collegial atmosphere. Thanks, -Will Beback · † · 00:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Siberie.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Siberie.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Toyota Corona 70's.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Toyota Corona 70's.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Toyota Corona 70's.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Toyota Corona 70's.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Epstein.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Epstein.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, DonIncognito. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]