User talk:Scalhotrod/Archive 1

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to List of jazz festivals. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to List of banjo players. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 20:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Bink, I am learning new things about Wikipedia on a daily basis. Scalhotrod (talk) 00:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a weird little subculture, familiar to me after three years of banging at it but I still remember the shock I got when I realized this or that aspect of it. Binksternet (talk) 03:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I would have to agree with you wholeheartedly and sympathize in much the same way. I'm reminded of the old Prodigy Network in the early 90's with its subculture and micro-communities on its various single topic message boards. A bit of misplaced grammar or the posting of a differing viewpoint could unleash waves of vitriolic message flaming. Luckily Wikipedia has its NEWBIE policy, but the edit warring I'd say is unique to it. On a different note, I think its important to have rules that one uses to conduct themselves or that are applied to various areas of their life. For example, I am the owner of several groups on LinkedIn.com and decide who is allowed to join each group, but otherwise I am hands off when it comes to how the members use the group unless they undeniably violate site guidelines. I have two rather simple rules for membership, but exceptions happen on occasion for the good of that community. Another example is in the police academy and how potential officers are educated; I have first hand experience with this. From day one cadets are taught about "The Letter of the Law" versus "The Spirit of the Law". Its the application of those standards and how they are imposed that determines the success or failure of a person's efforts. Unfortunately, intentions will inevitably continue to be questioned and/or misunderstood. Scalhotrod (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Customisers
Re list of professional car customizers (North America): if you cut this down to people and companies who already have articles then it will probably be acceptable. I saw your note: "if you are one of these people or represent them &hellip;". No, please, no. We delete articles by spammers and self-promoters day-in day-out. Under no circumstances should you actually be encouraging them! &mdash; RHaworth 17:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi RHaworth,
 * Thank you for your comments and help, I'm still a Wiki newbie. So a list of Wiki article links about a specific topic is OK, but a list of Wiki article links that includes, in this case, people mentioned in Wiki articles is not? I'm just trying to understand the point and/or distinction that you are making.


 * Would changing the list name to "List of notable car customizers (North America)" make it more clear?


 * I have removed the request to add articles. Thank, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

"A list of Wiki article links that includes, in this case, people mentioned in Wiki articles is not". The whole point is that the ones I object to are not links. If any of the currently unlinked people are actually discussed in detail in a different article then use a "piped link", eg. . But please note, this is just an example of a piped link - Roy Brizio is not discussed in sufficient detail to justify his inclusion in the list. If there is going to be any name change, it should be to list of car customizers (North America) - whether they are professional is irrelevant and, this being Wikipedia, it is implicit that they will only be in the list if they are notable. &mdash; RHaworth 19:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, got it! Great advice! So a name change AND a "cleansing" of non-linked and non-piped links would make the list OK. Am I getting the gist of it? Scalhotrod (talk) 19:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you are. &mdash; RHaworth 21:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Roger! Regards, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 02:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again, one quick question or appeal for advice. In my relatively short travels across various Wiki article Talk pages, there seems to be significant debate about something that you mentioned, "The whole point is that the ones I object to are not links."

There are some that that agree with what I understand as your view (and I can understand/appreciate what I consider a purest viewpoint) that lists should only contain items that have Wiki articles and are linked appropriately. Then there are others that will argue for inclusion of a non-linked or non-piped link on a list because (not my words, copy/paste of others comments): 1 and 3 seem to be making the same point, but in different ways. Granted, I will be the first to admit that my list is not the quality of List of Telecaster players yet, that is a level that I aspire to and invite others to contribute towards. What are your thoughts? Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 04:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Note the following from the beginning of WP:RED: Sometimes it is useful to create a red link to indicate that an article will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because it is about an important, verifiable subject. WP:LISTS does not prohibit including red links either.
 * 2) Some people seem to assume that "non-notable" and "red linked" are the same thing. But actually, there are plenty of notable people who simply do not have entries yet; in time, one would expect that many of these articles would be created. WP:NN does not say anything about red links...
 * 3) Categories vs lists, particularly noting the following: Categories can't include page names that don't exist yet. Lists can. Redlinks are useful as gap indicators and as task reminders (to create those articles). There is similar language in WP:CLS in the section "Advantages of lists".
 * Yes, of course red links are allowed if they point to notable topics. My best advice is: leave the article as it is and start to create articles for each of the red- and un- linked people. Each one needs to be tested for notability and the best way to do that is by separate articles rather than insisting on the list having loads of references. &mdash; RHaworth 08:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Wonderful, stellar advice! I will start working on them. Scalhotrod (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Roger, First off, thank you for tidying up the top section of the code. I do have a question about the sections removed from the rest of the edit page. How are instructions to editors that are intended to encourage uniformity and consistency in an article thought of as "vain"? I borrowed this practice from another learnèd Wikipedian who has been kind enough to give me advice as well. It didn't come across to me as being vane, just a good idea. The reason for the inclusion is that some Wikipedians will edit the entire article, while others will edit just a particular section. In the latter case, they would not see the format instructions in its current state. I chose not to assume that any other editor would automatically recognize the format.

Would adding the word "recommended" to the instructions make them less "vain"? Thanks, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Charlie Tagawa
Huh? The content is all there; maybe you are confusing it with the talk page: Talk:Charlie Tagawa. You can always see a page's changes in the history and virtually nothing is every really deleted from Wikipedia. Please post to my talk if you need more help. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, my bad, and you are exactly right. I did not realize it the Talk page. Sorry for my alarmist post... :) Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 04:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries That's what I figured. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way, thank you! thank you! thank you! for that tip about the history pages! Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 04:53, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Cigars
Hi there. I see you've recently made an entry on the Cigars talk page and was wondering if you'd have any interest in participating in a "Cigar Work Group" to try to improve the histories of the various cigar makers, write up pages for key cigar components like filler, binder, wrappers, etc., and to otherwise improve the coverage of cigarmaking on Wikipedia... Drop me a line if this is of any interest and I will see about setting up a formal work group. best, —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR Carrite (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am happy to contribute, but I must admit that my knowledge of cigars and the industry comes mostly from issues of Cigar Aficionado I have read. I do smoke them on a regular basis and know what I like, but that's about the extent of my expertise. Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 17:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Are you packing back-issues of Cigar Aficionado by any chance? If I could have you pay a quick visit to WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Cigars to weigh in and sign up for the proposed project, it would be very much appreciated. Carrite (talk) 18:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I know I have some issues lurking in my garage. Let me do inventory and then head over to the Project page. Scalhotrod (talk) 18:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Peninsula Banjo Band
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Peninsula Banjo Band, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.peninsulabanjoband.com/pbbhist.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Peninsula Banjo Band and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Peninsula Banjo Band, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Peninsula Banjo Band with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Peninsula Banjo Band. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Peninsula Banjo Band saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! VernoWhitney (talk) 15:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic! Thank you, I am learning more and more about Wikipedia every time I sign on. Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 16:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Bill Lowrey (musician) and references
You created this biographical article in August but without references. I was in the process of flagging it in line with the Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people policy and notifying you as the article creator, but then decided instead to put the Banjo-Rama text as a reference. So two things: (1) Mr Lowrey's article really needs more refs - as you're interested in that field of music then you may be able to lay hands on better refs and improve the article? and (2) given the BLP policy, you really need to include at least one solid reference when creating a new biographical article in future. AllyD (talk) 19:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough... :) Thank you for the suggestions, I will work on this and make the edits in as timely a manner as I am able. Chris 04:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Internet Movie Firearm Database


A tag has been placed on Internet Movie Firearm Database requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  ttonyb (talk) 03:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi again. It seems that the IMFDB was not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia and so an administrator has deleted the page. Per our notability guideline all topics must have reliable coverage by independent sources. I.e. if no other media have reported anything about a specific website it's unlikely to pass the check. So I think there won't be any template soon either.


 * That said, I'd like to answer your question about the images I removed. All of them were actually not from Wikimedia Commons but are hosted directly on the English Wiki server. That's a big difference because film posters etc. are copyrighted and for each of them we need a detailed rationale why using that image in a certain article is not a copyright breach under US law. And these fair use rationales only apply to the article stated on the relevant file site. Commons though is a collection of either free content or such images that are licensed under the GFDL or CC-by-SA licenses; it mustn't contain any copyrighted material. I know that may sound complicated but there's more about it at WP:Fair use. De728631 (talk) 16:19, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, thank you De728631, I appreciate the explanation for the deletion and about the images. I had no idea that images existed on two separate sites on WP servers. Still, my primary concern and confusion is the speed at which it was deleted. Ttonyb1 gave me notice here and before I could respond, it was gone.

As I cited on your talk page, there is a list on WP of articles with identical subject matter and many do not have references, yet they are allowed to exist.

Also, I have since found a reference to the online database in American Rifleman. Given that, what's the proper procedure for getting the article back and adding this reference? Thanks, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 17:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

@ ttonyb (talk) I am requesting the retrieval of the article Internet Movie Firearms Database. After our conversations here and on your talk page, via your recommendations I believe that I have satisfied the WP requirements for its creation. Thank you, Chris Scalhotrod (talk) 18:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Icons
Hi. I have a subpage, User:Malik Shabazz/Header, that has the icons I put at the top of my pages. To include it on my Talk page, I added to the top of the page.

Feel free to borrow what I've done, just as I've borrowed from others. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Brilliant, thank you! This is exactly what I was looking for... :) Scalhotrod (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Parking Miss Daisy
To answer the second part of your comment here (where, TBH, it really doesn't belong... :( being too off-topic): I've got a tempremental '89 Beretta I'm waiting for to die so I have my excuse to stuff a 5.3 V8 in it. (No metal cutting required, believe it or not.) I don't have space for both it & the '55 Pontiac I found at a wrecking yard not too far away... (Not exactly as shown. ;p) *sigh* So many cars, so little time. ;p

And I confess, I didn't look here before, :( but I see you working a list of customizers. Excellent. Except, after taking a glance at it, all the "sources" fail: WP can't be used to source itself... Sorry. TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey Trek, sorry about the off topic comment. Sometimes I forget that its WP and not a social bulletin board. Very cool on the Beretta, should make for a potent street car.
 * As for my Car Customizer list, a big THANK YOU for adding the print references. When I created it last August, it passed some initial muster and I think it was left alone because I had the "Under Construction" tag on it. Anyway, it seemed like a start in the right direction to help round out the various hot rod and custom articles. I have learned A LOT about the inner workings of WP since then. I've been looking up supporting references in other articles in order to retrace them and cite them correctly. As such, I'm trying to go back and fix my articles and edits, I just hadn't got around to the list yet.
 * By the way I'll never completely disappear, I'm always lurking. I start writing/editing again when I can psych myself up to focus on it appropriately. Scalhotrod (talk) 18:23, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't apologize, it's a sign of weakness. ;p It's also completely unnecessary with me. I only bring it up to avoid you getting flamed by somebody less tolerant.
 * The customizer list was dead easy. The sources were just a lift from here. I did break some of your links for redlinks so articles can be created, & I meant to bring it up, here. Some of them, like Roy Brizio, & the links back to Custom Car, leave me a bit leery. If they're blue, they won't get created (if/when seen at the list), & they'll need to be reset if they're created out of Custom Car, where they're mainly red now. I also wonder if limiting to a "major talent" is needed, or a good idea. I take your point, don't make it a laundry list of accomplishments, but until pages get created, that might be a better approach. Since you've got the better sources at hand, I'll let you figure it out. ;p
 * The Beretta I'm going for a true sleeper, not a rocket, & trying to prove rodding can be "green": wrecking yard parts as much as I can, flex-fuel 5.3 (again a rebuilt), & maybe propane. As to when, or if, it gets done...that 4 has been hanging on longer than I ever dreamed. ;p  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  19:01, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, perfect. I forgot about my own methodology about checking existing references. Perfectly reasonable on the red links. Its just that I've received (and seen it doled out) so much grief over red links. As for "major talent", this is to fend off the Deletionists that seem to target articles with regard to the notability standards. Besides, in my mind notability is relative and should be with regard to the community it relates to. For example, you added a VW guy. That type of person is completely out of my personal realm of knowledge or experience, but should be included if he is significant to the VW community. Hence why Steve Dinan was added. He's one of THE professional BMW tuners, I just happen to know that because his shop is near where I live. I just added Arlen Ness, who is known for motorcycles, but is also a hot rod builder. I also added Jesse James of West Coast Choppers fame since he builds cars now. I truly love a good sleeper car! The look on people's faces is truly priceless. Scalhotrod (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠Oh, I know about the Deletion Nazis. ;p The car pages, AFAI can tell, don't attract as much attention as some others. (Tho, after the fracas over the pix on Custom Car, I do know there are a few loose nuts... : I completely agree, notability is relative. (How many people outside car guys have even heard of Chapouris or Ness? Pretty few, I'll bet.) I do wonder if that didn't contribute to the original deletion of Hirohata Merc (beyond the copyvio issues it had :. That said, tho, a quick glance at the Notability guidelines suggests anybody on the list, redlink or not, would pass. (They might not in other articles, or outside custom car or car pages, but that's not an issue.) Somebody once offered me a standard: is it likely there will ever be, or could be, a page on this person? All the redlinks on the list can support a page, & I know as a fact some have seen whole articles about them in one mag or another, so that's not a problem IMO. It occurs to me you might need to defend the whole page; I'll go to talk there & put up some reasons to keep, & hope that's enough. (I had my own List of military figures by nickname up for deletion, so I know about this... :
 * Cool, thank you for the support! Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠I don't have huge issues with adding just about any car guy, tho if the page is "customizers", adding tuners seems a bit off, to me. Jesse & Arlen I'd definitely leave in; "automotive" doesn't have to mean only "automobile". I'd also suggest a move off "North America"; they're the most common & best known, but by no means the only, ones, & our ignorance (certainly mine ;p) is no excuse to exclude Europeans or Asians. I'd suggest as well moving to "automotive" customizers, to include the moto builders; I'm not sure there's enough for a page just on them. (There may well be, judging just by the number of customized Harleys in Iron Horse. ;p)
 * Admittedly I was leery at first about tuners, but it occurred to me that these people are modern day professional hot rodders or customizers. We call them by a different name and they apply different methods and techniques, but their intentions are the same. For example, if ECU/ECMs existed back in the 50's I'd say its a safe bet that Carol Shelby or Dean Jeffries would have been tweaking them. Today's tuners essentially do the same. Instead of extensive body work (chopping, channeling, sectioning) they add body panels or ground effects kits. Same thing with engines and drivetrains. So that's my personal justification. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree on the change to automotive, you want to do it or should I as the article creator?
 * The North America thing was my attempt to fend off the over zealous. Since the U.S. is basically the originating point of hot rodding, I narrowed the field. Also there's the practical reason of its easier to edit and research the list. An early issue that a Sr. editor has was my original title, List of professional car customizers (North America). Using the term professional I guess set off a promotional/advertising flag in someone's head. In hind sight, it was a good move since there are/were plenty of notable people who built cars, but were not paid to do it. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠On Dobbertin, I used to read a bunch of carmags, so I've probably got a broader base than most. Unlike others, I take a Milton Berle approach: if it's a good idea, steal it. ;p (I lean to Chevy, but I could see working on a Ghia, 'stang 2, 'cuda (the best looking muscle car, IMO), or just about anything '49-58, & if imports were a bit more common in wrecking yards here, Populars, Heralds, Dauphines, & others wouldn't be safe, either. ;p I also tend to smaller; the Chevette with the 262 V6 that was done is more like it for me. (Which reminds me, Don Hardy, who did it, might belong on that list, too. ;p)
 * In regard to Don Hardy, you're talking about the engine guy from TX? If so, he may not qualify based on my opening criteria, but that's subject to refinement. :) Unless we categorize him as a tuner then I'd say IMO yes. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠Which raises a question: where's the line between "hot rodder" & "customizer"? Hardy's Chevette was mostly stock appearance; not a custom, I'd say. Li'l John has done mostly rods, from what I've seen; the Novette (which comes first to mind) did have 'vette IFS/IRS, but was mostly stock outside. Maybe this is subjective, but it might do to decide how broad we're going to cast the net & post a note somewhere so we don't get names taken off, or put in, without considering the intended scope. (There have already been adds to the hot rod glossary which haven't paid attention to the fact it's just a glossary, & a complaint about the extra detail being taken out again... :( And accusations of stupidity. :
 * So the rule of thumb that I started out with (and I should probably add this to the article) is about the quantity of cars they produced. If a guy built JUST one famous car, inclusion is questionable to me. It would have to be REALLY famous. Ideally more than three (the establishment of a pattern, 'one' is an instance, 'two' is a coincidence, 'three' is a pattern) is what I was going for. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠On inclusion, I had a thought: what about Thom Taylor? And wasn't there another guy with a regular column in Street Rodder? Some of those phantoms did get built, didn't they? Is inspiring a project enough to earn a mention?
 * Good point and one that I considered. I know Thom, he designed the front end (headlights, grill, etc.) of my dad's '61 Pontiac Ventura that was finished this last November. I agree he's a brilliant and talented guy, but when a guy like Chip Foose exists who draws the car and then builds it too, I personally would need more justification for someone like Thom. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As for the 'other guy', are you thinking about Dave Bell with the 'Henry High Rise' cartoon in Street Rodder (Nice guy, he did a t-shirt design for me back in the late 80's.) or maybe George Trosley, creator of Krass & Bernie? I used to build and sell R/C cars based on Trosley's outlandish designs. I will have to dig up some photos. Joe Iaconno is another one, his designs have been all over Custom Rodder magazine and the like. Scalhotrod (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠On sleepers, I like the low profile, but having it when I need it. ;p  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  10:54 & 11:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Remember the sound when you say "sleeper". A throaty growl gives it away. ;^)
 * Binksternet (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Couldn't agree more Bink, but that's one of the things that makes a sleeper so much fun...! :) Scalhotrod (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠"Today's tuners essentially do the same." I can live with it. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned: there's rodders & there's customizers, & the twain don't meet much. ;p It came to the question of "scope". I could see 2 pages, rodders (& tuners) & customizers (& stripers & painters): Li'l John on rodders, Boyd on customizers, & Chapouris probably on both... :/ :D Yes, a bit of an artificial "cutoff rule". I won't beef about one page with all of 'em, seeing how you were thinking.
 * ♠"attempt to fend off the over zealous" I'm not sure I see a problem. They'd have to pass notability for inclusion, just like Pete & Jake or Rick D. would. In fact, as I think of it, there's a Russian guy from the '30s & '40s I've read about who would belong.
 * ♠"If a guy built JUST one famous car, inclusion is questionable to me." I could see that. OTOH, if it was really influential, it might be enough. I can't name anybody, but if Barris had only built the Hirohata Merc, or Ala Kart, or Pete only California Kid, that would be enough: coverage in a national enthusiast mag, several copies, & the project remains known. Also, is the guy known? If I drop "Gene Winfield", you know him, even if he only built one project car. (OK, offhand IDK how many it was... :D )
 * ♠I tend to agree on Thom. (And I'm so envious you actually know him! :(p) I was thinking, if we're going fairly broad, then the guys offering inspiration deserve "honorable mention". (I'd add "Stroker" McGurk to the nicknames page, if I thought I could get away with it. ;p)
 * ♠It's not Bell; this is a Thom-ish "style section". Could be Iaconno, but the name doesn't ring a bell, & it's been awhile since I was current on Street Rodder. Could be Foose, actually; didn't he have a regular column for awhile?
 * ♠Hardy, I don't recall if it was TX, but he had his own rod shop. The V6 Chevette was around '85-8, about the time Grump built the 189hp 60°V6 for Hot Rod & there was a blown X11 on the cover of Car Craft (or was it PHR? :/ ).
 * ♠Since you created the page, I nominate you to make the move. ;p Check talk there for my comment from here on non-NAm.
 * ♠Have you seen this? Lots of neat stuff, but, unfortunately, really weak on sourcing... :(
 * ♠And the exhaust note proves nothing, seeing how many poseurs make them sound good. ;p It's about designing the exhaust to hide, without it choking when you need it. ;p (Let's see...OEM mufflers, 2 solenoids, 2" pipes, about 3' of wire... Do I need the 2d horn button, really? ;p) And if I'm really going to be "green", the Variable Displacement system will even mask the fact it's a V8. 80 ;p Sleepers have never been easier. ;p  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  22:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC) (P.S. I don't mind, but if you "intercut" your comments, other people are gonna bust you.)

I'm outta town for the weekend, chat more Sunday night or Monday. Have a good one! Scalhotrod (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Parking Miss Daisy, Part Deux
OK, so where were we....
 * ♠"Today's tuners essentially do the same." I can live with it. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned: there's rodders & there's customizers, & the twain don't meet much. ;p It came to the question of "scope". I could see 2 pages, rodders (& tuners) & customizers (& stripers & painters): Li'l John on rodders, Boyd on customizers, & Chapouris probably on both... :/ :D Yes, a bit of an artificial "cutoff rule". I won't beef about one page with all of 'em, seeing how you were thinking.
 * ♠"attempt to fend off the over zealous" I'm not sure I see a problem. They'd have to pass notability for inclusion, just like Pete & Jake or Rick D. would. In fact, as I think of it, there's a Russian guy from the '30s & '40s I've read about who would belong.
 * ♠"If a guy built JUST one famous car, inclusion is questionable to me." I could see that. OTOH, if it was really influential, it might be enough. I can't name anybody, but if Barris had only built the Hirohata Merc, or Ala Kart, or Pete only California Kid, that would be enough: coverage in a national enthusiast mag, several copies, & the project remains known. Also, is the guy known? If I drop "Gene Winfield", you know him, even if he only built one project car. (OK, offhand IDK how many it was... :D )
 * ♠I tend to agree on Thom. (And I'm so envious you actually know him! :(p) I was thinking, if we're going fairly broad, then the guys offering inspiration deserve "honorable mention". (I'd add "Stroker" McGurk to the nicknames page, if I thought I could get away with it. ;p)
 * ♠It's not Bell; this is a Thom-ish "style section". Could be Iaconno, but the name doesn't ring a bell, & it's been awhile since I was current on Street Rodder. Could be Foose, actually; didn't he have a regular column for awhile?
 * ♠Hardy, I don't recall if it was TX, but he had his own rod shop. The V6 Chevette was around '85-8, about the time Grump built the 189hp 60°V6 for Hot Rod & there was a blown X11 on the cover of Car Craft (or was it PHR? :/ ).
 * ♠Since you created the page, I nominate you to make the move. ;p Check talk there for my comment from here on non-NAm.
 * ♠Have you seen this? Lots of neat stuff, but, unfortunately, really weak on sourcing... :(
 * ♠And the exhaust note proves nothing, seeing how many poseurs make them sound good. ;p It's about designing the exhaust to hide, without it choking when you need it. ;p (Let's see...OEM mufflers, 2 solenoids, 2" pipes, about 3' of wire... Do I need the 2d horn button, really? ;p) And if I'm really going to be "green", the Variable Displacement system will even mask the fact it's a V8. 80 ;p Sleepers have never been easier. ;p  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  22:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC) (P.S. I don't mind, but if you "intercut" your comments, other people are gonna bust you.)

Intercut? Wow, didn't even know a term existed for that, but I am not surprised in the least that it irks some on WP....
 * About tuners, Bear with me, I'm about to get fairly esoteric. In my mind, this is list is ultimately finite. Automotive technology will likely be replaced in the same manner as it replaced horse wagons. What will the evolution of transport be? Dunno and doesn't matter. Somebody will customize those too, but that's a separate list for the future. I have to admit, I'm a traditionalist like you, but I'm thinking in terms of the broader and long term interests of this list and Wikipedia in general. Future generations just won't appreciate the subtleties that we do.
 * Over zealous, I'm probably still a bit paranoid about Sr. editors having the ability to just wipe an article out based on their personal application of WP guidelines. I'm always looking to others for guidance and input in this area.
 * I totally agree on the "really influential" possibility. I couldn't think one when I was writing my previous reply, then over the weekend Norm Grabowski's Kookie Kar popped into my head. Such a HUGE trendsetting car that it should have its own article. And I would agree on the "Barris - Hirohata Merc" scenario as well. BTW, Gene Winfield has built a ton of stuff. He's associated with just about every major award and custom event in the last 60 years. Lately he is promoting his own self named award, the Winfield, like the Riddler and AMBR. He needs his own article! I have regular access to him so I'll do what I can to start compiling info. We usually wish each other Happy Birthday at the LA Roadster Show around Father's Day, he and I have the same birthday, June 16th.
 * Taylor, et. al., so what about a list of (notable) automotive designers? Harley Earl, John DeLorean, Zora Arkus-Duntov, Pinan Farina, Thom Taylor, (sorry, just kind of throwing out names), and on and on...
 * Sounds like Hardy could use his own article or a mention in a related article about the Chevette or something similar. Seems to me that if someone is notable, but its unclear as to what list is appropriate, then they deserve an article or at least the mention I described above.
 * Name change done.
 * Kustomrama is pretty cool. In fact, unreferenced or not, I have found mentions of people, cars, events, trends, and such that I have not seen anywhere else. I'd have to say that its a great place to store a good car article before its referenced and then put on WP. For example, my dad's cars from the 50's AND the guy who did the customizing are listed. My dad found magazine features listed that he never knew about.
 * Ahhhh, bench racing... :) Scalhotrod (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠"About tuners" Point taken. IMO, the separation is more in attitude than fact, so trying to break it out for general readers is hard, & sourcing the reason for a break is damn near impossible. I'm not sure about "finite", unless you're going pretty far in the future. Even then, I imagine you'll find people doing custom work on antiques. Can you see "Tom Paris' Custom Repicator Shop"? ;p (OK, I find his working on a 400 year old Camaro silly, but...) 100 or 150yr out from now, would 2070s cars be less than 50yr old, & so "classic customs"? Hybrid crate engines, SMES, & 20-way airbags retrofitted in 2000 Caprices? (California politicians still advocating stupid crusher laws? ;p)
 * ♠"I'm probably still a bit paranoid" With some reason, sad to say. The good thing is, you can find reasonable people, sometimes. It doesn't seem as if lists attract as much protest. If you/we can keep at least most sourced, the redlinks will probably not bring delete noms, & the nom can be argued. Or, at least, I'd hope.
 * ♠"Influential" Thx. I also completely agree, any car well known to earn a mag article deserves a page. If you can source anything on the building of Kookie Kar, add it to the "notable customs" section on custom car & redlink both of them. (Will you format it Kookie Kar ? I'm hoping we can generate enough pages to cat them separately as "notable custom cars", or something. And I'm treating the others, like Ala Kart, as ship names, so ital is apt.) BTW, am I right that's the first T-bucket, & the one Tommy Ivo drove in "Dobie Gillis"? Either one would earn it a page IMO, & you'd easily be able to defend it.
 * ♠Winfield, I know, has done a bunch of stuff, I just couldn't think of a name attached to only one project. ;p Does he deserve a page? Hell, yes! Just for being around so damn long. ;p And you share a birthday? Very cool.
 * ♠"list of automotive designers" Yeah, I can see that... We'd have to argue about "stylist" over "designer", & whether Zora belongs on a stylists' list, but there's also Larry Shinoda, Giovanni Michelotti, Giovanni & Nuccio Bertone, Bob Gregorie, Gordon Buehrig, Hulki Aldikacti (Hulki...? Really? ;p), & the geniuses Alec Issigonis & Anthony Chapman.
 * ♠"Kustomrama is pretty cool" Yeah, it makes great reading.
 * ♠"Intercut?" I'm borrowing the film term: multiple stories "flipping" back & forth from shot to shot. (So next time you see a film that uses it, you can impress your friends. ;p Also, next time somebody complains about a show having all the "mini-crises" just before a commercial, ask, "Don't you know? They're written that way to get you to come back after the commercial". ;p {Something I learned in Grade 8, when I first read David Gerrold's book, The Trouble with Tribbles--& our Gr8 English teacher didn't seem to know...})
 * ♠Bench racing is the environmentally friendly, politically correct kind: nobody gets hurt, & no GHGs get released. (Unless you count all our hot air. ;p :D)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  01:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC) (P.S. Congratulations, Homer, on deleting your own page. I was going to give you a vandal warning for it. ;p Except I don't think that image of Homer is free use. :(p)


 * "Tuners", I'd say that you just defined the 'limit line' for them. They are notable relative to the car community if quite simply there is a credible reference (magazine, tv show, etc.). I forgot about Star Trek: Voyager, but that is quite the perfect example considering that its in the future, hence fictional for now (a holodeck restoration, heh!) Your example reminds me of Back to the Future when Christopher Lloyd's character comes back from the future at the end of the movie after having had some modifications done to the Delorean (a flying hovercar powered by nuclear fusion), now THATs hot rodding if there ever was IMO! :)
 * "Influential", so how's this for a storage area / "thinking out loud" space for car articles, Notable customs articles?
 * Kookie Kar, I would have to say that its the first "hot rod, street car known as a t-bucket". I'm qualifying it that way because there were dry lakes roadsters that loosely resembled it, but were not intended to be that way. Pretty much every hot rodder still alive when Grabowski created his car agrees on that. I think Ivo mentions the Kookie Kar in the American Icon show. I will have to go back and check. I will always remember "TV Tommy" Ivo's 4 engine dragster. Heh! And the automotive world thinks Bugatti created the high performance all-wheel drive super car...!!
 * "Designer v. Stylist" IMHO anyone who wields a pencil, sketchbook, stylus, mouse, and/or drawing tablet that has directly created or traceable influenced customizing, then they belong. I keep thinking about Richard Burk's TV series Connections. Often times it was not known just how influential a person's efforts were until centuries later.
 * Bench racing, should be an article. I know that Hot Rod and others have devoted articles to the concept over the years. Scalhotrod (talk) 18:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠I forgot about Doc Brown! That makes him a candidate, too. ;p (List of fictional customizers? ;p)
 * ♠"Designer v. Stylist" I was thinking more engineer =designer, but maybe that's semantic. Outside that, I'd agree: the definition is, & IMO should be, broad. I'd limit it only to people actually in the industry; if that includes Thom, IDK, because I'm not sure car mags qualify. At 1st blush, I'd say no, but as well known as he is, I could be persuaded "honorable mentions" like him should go in, too.
 * ♠On Kookie Kar, if we limit to street car, I think that would do it, because a lot of early rails (pre-slingshot, I'm thinking) & altereds resembed it. (I wouldn't be surprised Norm did it for just that reason.)
 * ♠"4 engine dragster" I seem to recall a 4-engined LSR car even before that... Which reminds me, if you come across anything on LSR history, that page could use it.
 * ♠I honestly never considered a bench racing page. :( You're completely right. It should be.
 * ♠I loved "Connections" (all of them). I especially liked "The Day the Universe Changed" (which I saw first); I'd love a copy of the book. (One tiny quibble: it's James Burke... : TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  19:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't call me Surely...
♠I forgot about Doc Brown! That makes him a candidate, too. ;p (List of fictional customizers? ;p)
 * Tongue in cheek aside, and far be it of me not appreciate a good absurd comment, but I am earnestly trying to prevent a particular kind of scenario from happening. This is what pops into my head when this completely preventable situation. In an episode of the tv show Dr. Who, some '21st Century Earth artifacts' are put on display in one of the scenes. In particular a Wurlitzer model 1015 is shown and an actor then announces that it is an iPod...!?#@$! :P Other examples are too numerous to find across cartoons, movies, and TV. There's a few more in Woody Allen movies... :)
 * I hope you don't think I'm taking this stuff too seriously, but even in my lifetime I have seen similar misconceptions arise on a far smaller, but no less disturbing of a, scale. Details and practical information about common things are too easily confused or misplaced. OK, back to the fun stuff... :) Scalhotrod (talk) 18:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠I'm only kidding on stuff I know we both get. I totally agree, keep it as clear as possible on pages the uninformed will come to.
 * ♠I do think the TV writers are doing it for effect, tho. The kinds of misconceptions we get about ancient matters are the product of no information, & that's awfully hard to achieve anymore. (Thus, mistaking a Wurlitzer for an iPod is functionally impossible.) The "citation needed" tagging we see here is because we've gotten used to excellent information: spoiled, you might say. It's why the "nuclear holocaust & civilization collapse" stories are nonsense. Destroying knowledge on that scale is damn near impossible anymore: mass-publication printing means so many copies of everything exist, you'd have to systematically set out to destroy them. (Have a look at A Canticle for Leibowitz & Fahrenheit 451; Canticle is the single best example of what you'd have to do, & what the response would be.)
 * ♠Do I think you're taking it too seriously? Maybe a bit, but not obsessively so. ;p I think the misconceptions are mainly ignorance. That's why I respond the way I do, frex, here. I used to let ignorance go, even in my teachers, but I began to realize, if I don't correct the mistakes, they wiil be perpetuated. 80 As I understand you, you'd say the same. So it's probably more a difference in style.
 * ♠My browser is faster than your browser. It's got fake woodgrain, too. ;p  Rosco P. Coltrane   shine on  18:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, got it :) Cool, its good to know that there are other well intentioned and reasonably minded individuals like myself that have not gone the wikinazi dark side route. By the way, thank you for corrections. I for one appreciate it greatly and for the same reason. Besides, stylistic differences have created some fantastic results. Way back when, I used to work at Hanna-Barbara Studios in Hollywood (Yes, the Scooby Doo, Yogi Bear, Flintstones place) I was lucky to call myself a friend of both Bill and Joe. Those two had some of the most stylistic differences I have ever seen in a pair, but it worked and really well. Nice guys, I miss them. Scalhotrod (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠Hey, I don't expect your style to be the same, & as long as your goals are the same, we're good. If everybody did it the same, it'd be a dull world. :D I completely agree, joint efforts can produce great results. Some of my favorite work has been collaborating with other people here.
 * ♠H-B proves collaboration can lead to great outcomes, doesn't it? ;p
 * ♠Did you know James Best played the sherrif in "Sounder"? And the sheriff in "Moonrunners" was Rosco P. Coltrane?  Lon Chaney   nobody knows me without my face  00:10, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool, very cool. I never knew about Moonrunners, good thing that they picked a better name for the TV show! BTW, I have a WikiProject Automobile Sister Project idea, see you on your considerable user/talk page... Scalhotrod (talk) 00:17, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠Yeh, I saw it on late night TV shortly before the "Dukes" debut, recognized them immediately. ;p
 * ♠"Sister project"? Sounds very interesting... I'd definitely agree, there's room for it. Count me in. (Word of warning: mostly for moral support; my sources are mainly in storage ATM, & likely to stay there for the forseable future...)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:42 & 05:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC) (P.S. Can I ask what the "WTH" was in ref to?)
 * WTH = my own flavor of strange humor... :) I've been noticing your comments and I'm trying to follow suit. As they say, "imitation is the..." Scalhotrod (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠Why thank you. :D That may be one of the nicest things anybody ever said to me. ;p (I'm also very familiar with jokes not going how I expected. :(p)
 * ♠As for the sister project, you seem to have the idea well in hand. I'd suggest you also add proposed pages, like Bench racing & the list of customs (or name some of the top candidates), to indicate both notability & possible breadth of scope. I'd also suggest you post a notice on the Auto, Motorsport, F1, & Art Project pages for members & ideas. (I say "Art" because I consider customizing a form of visual art.)  Erik Nielsen   the smarter brother  19:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I picked up on the Art Project aspect as well, great idea! As for 'moral support', are you OK with me making a statement to the effect of "User:TREKphiler and myself are proposing a new project to provide organization, consistency, traceability, and standardization to extensive subject matter that exists on Wikipedia and new material that falls under its scope."?

American Icon: The Hot Rod
Excellent! Thx for the head's up! (Now if only I wasn't so busy with every other blasted thing... :( :  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * My next steps are to re-watch the series and take notes on who was featured in each episode. Since I am a contributing member of IMDb.com, I'll submit each featured person's name so they are credited by episode. Roy Brizio is going to be excited about this when I tell him! I might go to the effort of contacting each of these people to let them know that they've been added to the Entertainment industry database. OMG, this is cool. I know several of the "big names", but now they are going to owe me a favor for legitimizing their screen time!


 * By the way, I have not given up on my "Car Customization Project" idea. This is just another step in my master plan for submitting it AND ideally having it accepted. --Scalhotrod (talk) 14:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I did wonder, but no worries. I'm slow on a lot of things here, myself.
 * Damn, I'm envious you actually know those guys! Good luck with the watching.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I set up a Sandbox page for us to organize things a little more formally, Code Name: MotoMod. We've discussed the idea sufficiently that I think its time to start compiling.


 * I have to admit, it didn't really sink in as to how fortunate I've been to meet, get to know, and/or bench race with the icons of the hot rod community until I watched the American Icon series. These guys are telling stories some that I knew (and had heard first hand!) and others where I went, "Oh cool, that makes sense...". Next month the NHRA drags are coming to Northern Cal at Sears Point Raceway (I refuse to call it Infineon, naming rights be damned). Don Prudhomme, Don "Big Daddy" Garlits, and Shirley Muldowney are going to be signing autographs. The last time I saw all of them in one place was in the late 80's at Fremont Dragstrip. I'm tempted to take the same autograph cards to the race and ask them to re-sign them with the current date. Having them each sign the same thing 25 years apart would be cool.


 * Shirley is one of the kindest and most cordial of any racer I've ever met. What a classy lady. As opposed to Bill "Grumpy" Jenkins, who I was introduced to back in '91, who earned his nickname... :)


 * I do have an ulterior motive in all of this. As a project I want to build a Mooneyham & Sharp 554 coupe tribute car. But rather than a straight nostalgia duplicate, it will be updated looks-wise along the lines of the current Mustangs. Basically a modern funnycar version, longer, lower, wider, meaner... Then with any luck I'll make a pass at Bonneville at least once, drag race it where I can, and see what other trouble I can get into. Anything that I can do that gets me closer to that, I work on whether its making connections, learning about race car construction, etc.


 * Anyway, back to the less lofty... :) --Scalhotrod (talk) 21:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ♠What a life. I wish. :(
 * ♠"naming rights be damned" Amen! They may've paid somebody to get their name on it, but nobody paid me to use it.
 * ♠I have gotten the impression Shirley was one who, on the track, would drive right over you, but the rest of the time was as sweet as you could want & wished no ill or harm. So long as you weren't keeping her from winning :p (or at least racing... ;p ).
 * ♠I do look forward to seeing what you have in mind for the Mooneyham replica. :D Good luck with that, too.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  21:56 & 21:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC) (BTW, in law, more than one makes a conspiracy, as I understand it. 8o Tho your mileage may vary. ;p )

v1.0 beta
(pre-28-07-2011) OK, so a list of article to include existing articles/lists (Automobiles project tagged or not), proposed articles/lists that would fall under the scope, a proposal of what the project scope would be that includes why this new project would be beneficial to Wikipedia. Sound good? Scalhotrod (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. I'm not sure I should be included as "joint proposer"; this is actually your idea, & I don't want to steal credit. :D If you don't care, put me down. Or just say you've already got one member signed up. Have you thought of a name? WikiProject Custom Cars? (Not thrilled with that...)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm a believer in 'strength in numbers' and happy to share credit with you as a co-founder if you are OK with that. Admittedly, having an association with someone that I view as a more seasoned and Sr. Wikipedian is a plus IMO. I consider you a mentor and someone who can keep me honest and consistent with the ways of WP. I'm creative, organized, and a fairly logical thinker, but by no means a WP expert.

Yeah, I'm stuck on a name too. It needs to be blatantly descriptive yet be broad enough to cover cars, motorcycles, and trucks that acknowledges the international nature of the project as well. Hence the "MotoMod" code name. Taking a cue from SEMA (Specialty Equipment Marketing Association, which seems appropriate since it started in the U.S. and has since gone int'l), what do you think of "WikiProject SAE: Specialty Automotive Expression". Yes, I realize that there may be some confusion with the other big SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers), but it kind of rings in my head. Wha'd'ya think? Scalhotrod (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * ♠I'm with you on numbers. I'm less inclined to claim credit I don't deserve. (It's the writer in me. ;p)
 * ♠I'd avoid using any name(s) where there's potential confusion. There's also merit in simplicity. What about "WP Automotive Customization"? That seems to allow the breadth of the subject to be whatever we want (or whatever membership agrees on). It's descriptive, clear, & simple. It avoids potential confusion with other (non-WP) groups. (I'll stop short saying, "It's great because it's my idea." ;p) Much as I'd like something fancy (fancier...), it would do.
 * ♠As for "mentor", I'm deeply flattered, but I'm by no means as expert as you make me out. (I feel like I'm going to turn into Walter White. ;p) "Partner", maybe. "Collaborator" & "advisor", certainly. Éminence grise? ;p (Or, given my Marvel Zombie fanboyishness for yellow spandex, ;p genrō?) TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the new project, we'll also need a userbox. Like either of these?


 * I'd rather use the Merc pic, but it could use a bit of Photoshopping to remove the extraneous stuff. If you've got it...?  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd rather use the Merc pic, but it could use a bit of Photoshopping to remove the extraneous stuff. If you've got it...?  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd rather use the Merc pic, but it could use a bit of Photoshopping to remove the extraneous stuff. If you've got it...?  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  00:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

"Automotive Customization" Der... Perfect name and thus it shall be. BTW Breaking Bad rocks! That scene in the first season when he tosses that piece of fulminated iodide and nearly blows the whole place up was brilliant...! Don't f*&# with a chemist, gotta love that. Collaborator works, I like Éminence grise. Damn, and I thought I had a pretty decent vocabulary and command of the English language. I'm happy to put my ID on the front line as "founder". At the very least its good to know that I'm not alone in wanting to organize this stuff. Hey, maybe the effort will get nominated for stuff.

As for userboxes, I like both, nicely done. Since its such a broad subject what do you think of a series of them? A hot rod one ('32 roadster, maybe the Doan-Spencer car or the SoCal speedshop) probably a '40 Ford too, a custom (Hirohata Merc or some smoothed out Tri-5 box or a Roth/Starbird creation), a muscle car (GTO, Barracuda, Mustang, Camaro, or T/A), a truck ('56 F-100 and maybe a 80's mini-truck, remember those, those.... things? Ugh!), a monster truck (Bigfoot, Gravedigger), motorcycle (Arlen Ness or maybe Ron Covell's "Chezoom"). Maybe one that has a car club plaque. What other stuff am I missing? I can pitch in with the Photoshopping. In addition to working for Adobe in the past, I used to be a graphic designer. But I'll be the first to admit that my Adobe skills are rusty. I guess I have an excuse to start uploading various pics I've taken over the years.

BTW, which Project page do you think we should copy? I like this one WikiProject_NASCAR, but others in the Automotive Projects arena are workable too. I'm convinced that it needs to be a combination of informational and practical with Wiki code, templates, and such.

After some review of the other projects, it seems to make the most sense that {{WikiProject Automotive Customization]] should a sister project to WikiProject_Transport and a child project of WikiProject_Automobiles
 * ♠Yeh, "Breaking Bad" is one of the best shows I've ever seen. It's up there with "Hill Street" & "West Wing", for me, which top my list. Jesse & Walter are like an old married couple: can't get along, but better together than apart. (And Brian Cranston is the first guy I've ever seen who puts on glasses to be tough. ;p)
 * ♠"decent vocabulary"? I'm a writer. I'd better have an edge. ;p
 * ♠I'm not sure about multiple userboxen. I tend to prefer one, for ready identification of, & by, members. I will say I'm not strongly opposed to more than one. I picked the 'sled as a custom, rather than the flamed coupe of the Deuce at custom car, which suggest "hot rod" more than "custom", to me. (I also liked some of the small pickups, in particular the Datsun. :( Yes, I know, the spider-webbing looks pretty hideous now...but so do some of the early '80s car paint jobs. 80 As I said, my view was, & is, "steal from everybody".) I'm not sure the BG color is ideal; I picked it because I don't recall any other project using it, & it stands out. This page offers a lot of other options, if you want to try something else.
 * ♠I agree, the NASCAR page looks good. I like the "cleanliness" of it. I also like the "featured articles" part. As for where this belongs, I'll defer: I make no pretense of knowing how the various projects are organized or structured.
 * ♠Looking at those pages, I see we'll need help with coding for stub & project templates, at the least. (I'm in no way competent to do that.) When you put up the proposal, will you add a request at the Auto page (if not elsewhere, too), for somebody to design those? IDK how it goes to get Project userboxes templated, so you'll probably have to ask about that, too. (Which might argue against more than one, 'cause then you'd have to have somebody design a bunch of variants... Unless you can have a "modular" design which allows you to "plug in" your own image; IDK if that can be done, but from what I've seen, the box templates don't allow it. {I'm using a generic box template, not a project-specific one, so I could.})
 * ♠If you've got pix, definitely put them on Commons! And if you've got a good shot of a 'sled, or something, swap it for the Merc in the userbox. (I used it in part because it's one of mine, so no hassles.)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  05:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * After some additional thought, I realize hot rodding also falls under your proposed project. With that in mind, I'd say the flamed coupe is a better pic. Switch it?  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  19:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Great Minds Think Alike! I was thinking about suggesting the exact same thing... :) --Scalhotrod (talk) 20:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ;p Truth to tell, the coupe was my first choice, 'cause it's more visually interesting. The Merc was more "traditional" a custom...til it dawned on me, project breadth should EZly cover both. So go for the pretty one. ;p (John Nash would be disappointed with me... ;p)  Dallas McG. Meyer   {{sup| slip F-18 }}  23:28, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I love that film! My favorite part was when he reasoned out that he was crazy, he realized that his delusional people never aged. Brilliant mind regardless of his health. --Scalhotrod (talk) 05:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Different tastes indeed. I didn't get much past the "dating game" scene before I turned it off. :( (My exposure to economists is more limited to Thorstein Veblen. ;p)  The Italian Guy   {{sup| do you know me? }} 05:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

v2.0 beta

 * Had a new thought last night, what if we change the scope to "Wikiproject: Automotive Customization and Performance" with a tagline of something like, "For everything that's not stock." This would potentially encompass from a broad perspective both the "show" and "go" (and both) camps and allow for the myriad of crossover issues and instances.


 * So for instance, lets say we start roughly chronologically with Karl Benz filing his patent for the Motorwagen in 1885. One could argue that effectively not only was this the birth of the automobile, but the birth of "automotive self expression" as his creation was pretty much a home built one-off. OK, yes, it went on to being a production (i.e. stock) thing, but the seeds were nonetheless sown. From there the two tracks of chronological development or evolution, if you will, can be anchored by that time frame with the associated articles organized within that era since. --Scalhotrod (talk) 22:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)


 * ♠I'm not opposed to projects covering them both, but I don't think one for both is apt. Think about it: do you see a lot of customizers at the strip? Or a lot of rodders at the custom shows? I don't think so. Some will like both, agreed, so some overlap. Mostly, IMO, self-segregated. That being so, there's liable to be a proposed split at some point. Why not propose two projects to begin with? (Beside the obvious, that there seems to be so little interest on WP for either... :.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura 00:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, so I get the point that there are two distinct camps and the distinction to us is quite apparent to people like us. But isn't part of the point of the WP to educate and enlighten those that lack the level of knowledge and appreciation that you and I for example have? From my perspective, having grown up in the era of the heyday and final years of the Oakland Roadster Show before it moved to LA to become officially known as the Grand National as well as being in the midst of places like Fremont Drag Strip and the presence of guys like Joe Bailon, Gene Winfield, Arlen Ness, and the Brizio's, the trends are distinct but involvement is far from mutually exclusive.


 * For example, George & Sam Barris have a penchant for Dodge engines. Although neither considered theirself (grammar?) a "performance guy", they like Mopars and Hemis because they provide a lot of raw power without much tweaking. Conversely, guys like Iskenderian or Edelbrock I'm sure wouldn't be caught dead in a truly "ugly, but fast car" in anything other than extreme circumstances.


 * So what I'm trying to say is that I think all car enthusiasts are both "show" and "go" types, but for whatever conscious or unconscious reason they favor one over the other at that particular moment or on any particular project. It's the proverbial Quigley Down Under situation. Tom Selleck's character in the movie is supposedly the world's greatest rifleman yet the climax of the movie is a stereotypical western high noon shootout with sixguns. Referring to a conversation earlier in the movie about Colt pistols just after outdrawing the bad guys, they lay on the ground dying and confused when Quigley says, "I said I never had much use for one. Never said I didn't know how to use it." There are other comparisons like with professional sports, American League vs. National League, but everyone involved still likes "baseball".


 * I can appreciate how much of an uphill battle that this whole thing will be especially to the Wiki audience that I just mentioned above. But IMHO that should not make our intentions any less vital, noble, or notable for that matter for historical preservation sake. Restating my earlier questions, aren't we writing for a variety of audiences? The gearheads like us AND those that are not?


 * Admittedly, I'm on the fence about 1 or 2 projects. I just want to get acceptance for a project. How it evolves or expands will most likely not be entirely in our hands. I'm off with the family for the weekend, see yas... --Scalhotrod (talk) 18:42, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You make a good point. Especially the AL v NL. If fans can agree despite the DH rule, which appears to be more divisive than anything gearheads have ever seen. I didn't (& don't) have a deep, abiding opposition to an "umbrella" project. So I will withdraw my objection.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  23:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow, I must have been having a moment of enhanced clarity. Then again, you are one of the most logical and level headed Wikipedians that I have encountered since I registered. I think once we start to compile the articles to include list any major flaws will reveals themselves fairly quickly. On another note... --Scalhotrod (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I may also have been having a day of stubborn rejectionism to object in the first place. ;p As for level-headed, you haven't seen me on a bad day. :( You do bring out the better angels in my nature. ;p  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  07:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * * Hah! The first two daughters projects (for the sake of organization or comradery or what-have-you) just came to mind. Similar to Wikipedian deletionists & inclusionists, we can have "hot rodders" & "customizers" each with their own badge to proudly display.
 * I can entirely agree to that.
 * As a suggestion, what about 2 project userboxes, one with the Merc for the kustom crowd, one with the 3-window for the rodders? Let them self-select.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  07:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)