User talk:ELandry1979

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! --Dbratland (talk) 20:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Drag racing
Hi. I just undid your recent edit from Drag racing. As far as I can tell, the only edits you have done are for the purpose of promoting the http://www.evostreetracers.com/ web site. Is that correct?

Please take a look at WP:Reliable sources and External links to help get a better understanding of what is and what isn't appropriate.--Dbratland (talk) 20:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

ELandry1979 (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)No the purpose of my edits were to add the content found on Evo Street Racers huge website into wikipedia. I have found that Evo Street Racers offers a lot of information on the topic that I could not find anywhere else including wikipedia. Upon finalizing my intial copy of the report they were offering over 1000 pages devoted to just illegal street racing as well as research studies on the topic that no one else has ever considered let alone completed. They were the only organization including NHSTA, IIHS, and the DOT that had statistics for modern day illegal street racing. Not only do I have to meet the standards for my class on this report; however, I know that I am only one of many students that study illegal street racing. Had the info from Evo appeared on Wiki it would have made my search sooo much easier.

As per the Drag Racing section it spoke about the sports compact car section. Upon doing my report I found out that they are making extensive efforts to build the sports compact car series back to its orginal standards as a part of their Evolution Solution, creating viable alternatives for people to race in... so i thought it appropriate to add.

Thanks for the link I will check it out!

ELandry1979 (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Eric

ELandry1979 (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Hey D Upon reviewing the street racing page after reading the reliable source section that you recommended I found it disappointing to see that Evo Street Racers would be considered an unreliable source. I would personally challenge you to find a more reliable source on the topic of illegal street racing than Evo Street Racers on the internet or in person. They have been featured, to name a few, on CNN, Good morning America, National Public Radio, on Fox News... They have a list of Ambassadors that are actively affiliated with their program composed of active policeman, pro and amateur drivers, that spread across not only America but also into places like Canada and Australia

You accept a blog from Street Racing Online (SRO) as an authorized source but not Evo Street Racers? I find this hard to believe. I have yet to authenticate SRO in my own report besides an enthusiast site.

Compare RASR against Evo Street Racers... When I visited RASR five page website they offered little to no information on the topic for my report other than sponsor’s names, locations of tracks, and how to become a member which doesn't even work. To be honest after nearing the completion of this project the entire Wiki article should be re-written as illegal street racing as street racing is a legitimate sport. There are STREET RACES on STREET CIRCUITS across the entire globe, F-1 does it, Indy does it, and in fact some sports cars series’ race on the street too. I have spent a lot of time on my report and the Wiki section is the last part. As with my report and the wiki section of my report I have to prove all my sources in order for it to meet the minimum scholarly recommendations of my school.

Thanks for hearing me out. I know your intentions, much like mine and my professor, is to have credible information on the internet and to keep the junk out. Have a great night, and thanks for teaching me the "Wiki Way!"

00:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Would you please stop putting links to this web site all over Wikipedia? Their so-called "studies" don't even have anyone's real names signed to them.  What is the "Evo Street Racers Studies & Research Department"?  Does anybody recognize Evo Street Racers as a reliable source?  Anybody?  You said they have been around since 2003, yet not one credible source has quoted them or cited them.  Why is that?  It's great that you have talked to them and you trust them, but that is original research.


 * The more you do this, the more of a mess you create for someone else to clean up. I would rather work on something more productive.  Please do not continue this until you can show that Evo Street Racers has any credibility.--Dbratland (talk) 00:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Evo street racers
I have nominated Evo street racers, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Evo street racers. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Donnie Park (talk) 13:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Use of helpme template
Regarding this edit, please note that this is not what the helpme template is for. helpme should be added to your own talk page, when you have a question on which you need assistance, not when posting a message to another user on their talk page. Regards,  AJ Cham  18:36, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Also regarding this! ((Thank you contributors who were on my talk page ASAP, but this has indeed been a matter of template confusion, sorry!)) Thanks for the information and links given-- I read through them and those are all the types of things that are perfect to use in expanding and tweaking your article and is all the more proof that the 'Keep' consensus was a good outcome of the AfD. My biggest lingering concern on the page was a few peacock terms of things that made it solidly appear as though an involved party was editing the article; The use of the term "most" as subjective without citation stuck out. I saw you were quick to fix it and the resources and information you provided to me would be perfectly reasonable to work with as the article progresses. Your good will in this has been fantastic and I can't see why you wouldn't be able to handle a full clean-up now that you've had a lot of feedback. Still, I'm going to say the tags on the article should remain there for the timebeing... I'll leave it on my watchlist and look from time-to-time. In my opinion, the peacock and unbalanced tags can probably go soon. At the very least, I can't imagine it being proposed for deletion any longer so you can relax a bit! I do very much appreciate your asking for further opinion. Cheers~ Datheisen (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)