User talk:Stepho-wrs

←

Toyota Hiace/Toyota Liteace
What on Earth are "biskut kacang hubcaps" ? 2001:E68:5432:E2EC:986D:D67F:709A:B1B (talk) 16:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Problem Editor
I have noticed a string of highly problematic edits by user Carmaker1:. As with Volvo V70, Nissan Murano, Audi 100 and Honda Odyssey (North America), he inserts the names of car designers based on missing, misleading or spurious references. In the Volvo V70 article, he inserted the name of a dubious designer into an article in such a way as to leave a direct and referenced quote by the actual designer attributed to his newly introduced spurious designer. And from what I can tell, he's pretty much blazing a trail through lots and lots of articles. His responses are... well... not helpful, to say the least. I notice that you ran into some similar issues with him recently. Is this something you could help with?842U (talk)

Model-T edit
This is a reminder of why I just took a 3 year break editing.  Nyth 63  01:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


 * We have a minor disagreement. I'm happy to discuss on the Model T talk page and come to some agreement over the best grammar to use. Please read MOS:NOTE first.  Stepho  talk 02:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I've just seen your revised changes and I have no problem with them. Cheers!  Stepho  talk 02:25, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Re: motor spirit
Perhaps it is a bit archaic in vernacular use: I used it because it is the absolute generic name for the fuel which is used in government documentation. For example this report on gov.uk, which includes the line "Total petrol excise duty receipts which are calculated by summing together excise duty receipts from several different motor spirits, over 95% of which is unleaded petrol." It does use "petrol" as well. "Motor spirit" is used to distinguish petrol manufactured for use in land vehicles from that used in aero engines ("aviation spirit"), which are both called "petrol" in vernacular parlance but for tax reasons are considered very different products, hence HM Revenue & Customs' continued use. 𝔖𝔱𝔬𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔷 (talk) 13:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


 * True, motor spirit is technically more correct. But only older British/Commonwealth readers would understand it. Younger British/Commonwealth readers would not understand it. Americans have enough trouble with "petrol" - they would be totally lost, perhaps thinking that motor spirit means drinking gin while driving.  Stepho  talk 00:49, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries, you were right, I was wrong. Its fine.
 * Or maybe they would think "motor spirit" means a ghostly car! 𝔖𝔱𝔬𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔷 (talk) 07:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * All good. Try a YouTube search for "Toyota HiLux - An Unbreakable Connection" :)  Stepho  talk 08:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Ghost riders in the sky! XD 𝔖𝔱𝔬𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔷 (talk) 10:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Toyota Land Cruiser J300
I changed the 3.4 to a 3.5 due to the V35A engine nomenclature. 3.5 (3445cc) is correct, but look at the engine code nomenclature, if you write 3.4 it means the correct engine code is V34A. FelixGinting (talk) 07:13, 2 September 2023 (UTC)


 * 3445 cc rounds to 3.4 L, not 3.5 L. The name of the engine is not always a true indication of its capacity. Toyota gave it a name that implies it is 3.5 L and markets it as a 3.5 L but it is in fact a 3.4 L. Marketing and facts do not always agree and Wikipedia always aligns with facts. However, if you disagree with me then please feel free to raise the question at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles.  Stepho  talk 07:55, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Reverted Edit
Hi Stepho-wrs,

I see that you reverted an edit I made on the Tesla Inc. article and wanted to ask you about it. I changed "2019-present" to "Since 2019" and you commented in the reversion that MOS:TOPRESENT is for textual paragraphs, not applicable for infoboxes. . ."

The tables and infoboxes language in the MOS says that "pres." can be used when space is limited (with the example "1982-pres."). But the essence of MOS:TOPRESENT is to remove ambiguity. That plus MOS:DATED combined essentially say that terms like now, currently, present, etc. should not be used unless they also include a reference to the time it was written. The part about infoblocks and tables seems to be an exception when space is limited (probably because there isn't room to include additional wording for when). I do not see anything that specifically ties MOS:TOPRESENT to only textual paragraphs and do not see anything about headings.

I don't agree with your reversion unless there is more that you can provide in reference. Please let me know your thoughts on this as I see a lot of "-present" out there.

Thanks,

Edward Bednar (talk) 22:19, 2 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi Edward,
 * MOS:TOPRESENT applies to text paragraphs. It allows other parts to differ. In this case, we have a number of related section headings that say:
 * Founding (2003–2004)
 * Roadster (2005–2009)
 * IPO, Model S, and Model X (2010–2015)
 * SolarCity and Model 3 (2016–2018)
 * Global expansion and Model Y (2019–present)
 * The format of each is perfectly matched. To change the last one to "Global expansion and Model Y (since 2019)" breaks the pattern and jars the reader for no good reason.


 * However, if we still disagree then I am happy to have it raised at Talk:Tesla,_Inc.  Stepho  talk 22:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm more interested in MOS:TOPRESENT generally than with this article specifically, so this thread doesn't really belong on the talk page for this article. But you're welcome to post it there, if you find that appropriate.
 * I see what you are saying about the pattern being broken, but I don't understand what that means from a Wikipedia orthographic standpoint. So, some natural questions are:
 * 1. Where in the MOS, or elsewhere, is there specific guidance on not breaking the pattern in a list or "jarring the reader" the way you are describing, and how does that apply specifically w/r/t MOS:TOPRESENT, especially if contradictory? In other words, does not breaking a pattern across headings, which I agree can be good from a readership standpoint, override MOS:TOPRESENT?
 * 2. Where in the MOS does it say that MOS:TOPRESENT (or MOS:DATED or others) only applies to text paragraphs, and, as you've said here, allows other parts in the article (e.g., headings) to differ, beyond what it says about infoblocks and tables? I have already asked you this question.
 * 3. I really hate to have to ask this one this way, but is what you are saying just your opinion or a preference?
 * @Stepho-wrs, you have reverted an edit that was based on, and specifically referenced, MOS:TOPRESENT, and you have not yet offered a conclusive explanation with your rationale, one that is grounded in specific language from the MOS. I understand that there are overlaps, gaps, and edge cases, that, at times, have to be taken into consideration, which you may be touching on, but you have not done that, up to this point, in an objective manner (i.e., with citation).
 * Edward Bednar (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it is best to raise the question at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers (which is the talk page for MOS:TOPRESENT).  Stepho  talk 11:54, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Reverted Edit: ALKS (Automated lane keeping systems/Automated Lane Keeping Systems)
I have seen your reverted edit on Automated lane keeping systems/Automated Lane Keeping Systems due to assumed vague (and unverifiable[sic]) references.

I agree, this means that it would be possible to add URLs and more details.

Please, find hereunder few pieces of information to help you in that sense:


 * What I mean is that it is the responsibility of the editor adding the fact to also provide a reference to directly back up that fact and that reference should go directly to the supporting evidence. Eg, when we use a book for a reference we also supply the page number. When we use a journal then we provide the volume/issue numbers or the issue date, along with the page number and article title. Or we provide a URL that goes directly to a web page that supports your fact. Instead, you have given me the bare minimum of clues and expect me to do hours of research to see if your facts are right or wrong. Double checking your facts via references should be the work of minutes, not hours. Obviously you know where you got your facts from. I ask that you tell us where you got them from, with enough details that we can check them in a simple manner without having to do hours of research ourselves. See WP:VERIFIABLE.  Stepho  talk 14:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * If I give a source of information, and if one only rely on a single source of information I give, and if this source is ill-written, or poorly reflecting reality, or reflect a local view, I wonder which kind of verification the process provides.
 * In such a case it might have been an error to add such pieces of information, as it would be a good thing that information is confirmed by other sources. This is because with those new things, the media do not always use the exact right words and confusion may occur. I will let native speakers write it.

Front Wheel Drive Toyota Crown (New)
I've saw on YouTube that Toyota Crown was imported to the Philippines Do you think that price is Php 5.6 mil, a Flagship VIP Sedan 64.226.63.144 (talk) 06:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I do not understand your question. Be aware that Wikipedia does not list prices - see WP:NOTPRICE.  Stepho  talk 07:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Category:Toyota dealerships has been nominated for discussion
Category:Toyota dealerships has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Australia topicon
Template:WikiProject Australia topicon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 19:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Toyota Crown Signia in USA
It's officially release 110.54.158.233 (talk) 03:12, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

General Motors
Why did you delete all my revisions? Kyeniy (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Why did you delete all of my GM revisions?
Randolph WAS purchased by William Durant in 1909. He sold it back to the original owners in 1911.

Yellow Cab was bought by GM in 1925

Yellow Coach was purchased by GM in 1923.

Both Yellow companies were part of the GM Coach Division (GMC) Kyeniy (talk) 22:19, 17 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Oops, a mistake on my part. I saw the defunct brands you listed in the "current" section (they belong in the "former" section) and did a revert. I didn't notice the many other good changes you made. I will undo my revert but you do need to shift the defunct brands out of the current section.  Stepho  talk 23:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I will delete those marques under the Chevy brand. Kyeniy (talk) 23:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for restoring my edits.
 * I recently was finally able to purchase the Beaulieu Encyclopedia of Automobiles, Vol 1 &2.
 * I've been making a spreadsheet for over a decade with every car company I can find that has ever existed. My car book collection is so vast that it's broken the shelf on the bookcase, so I can't retrieve son on the lower shelf. (To me, that's still a proud problem to have) I'm fascinated by who was bought by who, what reminiscences still pop up every now and then. (When Jeep came out with the "Overland" trim, the whole history of Jeep/Willys/American Bantam, flooded back. Kyeniy (talk) 15:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Currency
Hi Are you still willing to make the change to currency with regards to CAD like discussed at  so that it matches CAD? Cheers, microbiology Marcus (petri dish&bullet;growths) 18:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Antares600
Stepho-wrs, I have started a discussion at AN/I regarding Antares600's disruptive editing. The thread is here if you have any input. --Sable232 (talk) 23:56, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Looking at the short list of editors that you have pointed this out to, you could easily be accused of canvassing. I suggest you make the same post at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles.  Stepho  talk 00:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I only went through their past couple pages of contributions looking for editors they've recently reverted, but I'll do that as well, thanks. --Sable232 (talk) 00:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Differential ratios
I find that there's a lot of confusion in the non-enthusiast public about how to define a "higher" vs "lower" gear, because it's customary to refer to first or second gear as "low" gear, while fourth or fifth is "high" gear; however, a "low" gear in this context has a higher numeric ratio and a higher engine RPM at a given speed. This causes a muddle when trying to decide whether to say that a gear ratio was "raised" or "lowered". I don't know about where you live, but it's common for enthusiasts in the U.S. to refer to a higher numeric gear ratio as a "shorter" gear and a lower numeric ratio as a "taller" or "longer" gear to make communications clear; however, I think this qualifies as WP:JARGON that would make little sense to the uninitiated, and I'm not sure it's universal throughout the English-speaking world either. Carguychris (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Yeah, we have the same problem in Australia. Properly a diff ratio should be like 1:4.3 or 1/4.3 but most magazines just put 4.3 and leave it to the reader to know what taller/shorter/higher/lower means. Australian magazines use the terminology from both the UK and US, so we get all the combinations.  Stepho  talk 23:06, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Celicas
Hi Stepho; I was dismayed to see that your page is down. Banpei's mirror is missing a number of things, including the Celica brochures. I was looking to see which colors Toyota used on the 1979 Celica in Australia - perhaps you can help, or perhaps even send the brochure scans to Banpei so that they could update? Thanks,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  22:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Hounding
Looks like User:Left guide has it in for you - not only are they gutting all Toyota articles you worked upon, but they also did a bunch of edits to Wayne Stephenson - ha. They have over 10,000 edits in four months, most of them utterly meaningless.  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  00:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC)


 * 2002-04 Toyota Camry LE.jpg.]] 2019 BMW 118i SE 1.5 Front.jpg It is somewhat irritating. The Camry (XV30) page was significantly worsened by Left guide until I spent hours looking for sources, most of which were pretty poor quality, that were for some reason absent before (OSX didn’t add sources on a lot of his edits for some reason). Left guide substantially removed the important markets, retaining only the Chinese and South East Asian markets. Additionally, he changed the lead photo, and after all of the removing, the page showcased one single image representing the global Camry, and that is the image on the left. After he removed all of the markets, he changed the lead picture. His edit summary was “swapping out image selection that was based on WP:OR (which is forbidden by policy), since there have been no sources in this article that verify the existence of an Australian version of this vehicle”. This is not a consistent rationale. Many, many automotive Wikipedia articles, such as the [[BMW 1 Series (F40)]], do not mention the countries where the cars are sold, yet they use lead pictures taken in those respective countries. If anybody would like to see the revision before that, here it is. Main point is, please don’t make the page look bad, or remove the important things without searching, because the XV30 was practically ruined when Left guide removed all of those markets and changed the lead pic. I apologise if my explanation was unclear.


 * It appears that his focus is not solely directed at Stepho. When I edited the Toyota RAV4 page, which had not been modified for two weeks, about six hours after my edit, he came, looked at any unsourced content, and removed it. 750h+ (talk) 01:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I've notice that he seems to be following my edits. In general, his edits have been good. And he pays attention to the corrections I've made to his edits (mostly formatting). He is a bit, shall we say, enthusiastic about deleting unreferenced material. Hard to criticise him when this stuff has been there for years with references, even though the info is probably true.  Stepho  talk 22:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Holden Commodore
Holden Commodore has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Vauxhall Viva
The problem with adding

is that it makes articles look messy and amateurish rather than professional and encyclopaedic. Which, to my mind, is far more important than matching up endless images with text. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Actually, my opinion is the exact opposite. Have things lined up and each image within its section looks far more professional. Having images creeping into the wrong section or creeping halfway across section titles makes it look amateurish and makes it far harder to relate to each image. Also, without the

's, the article suffers even more from WP:SANDWICH.  Stepho  talk 10:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Each to their own. If you think huge patches of whitespace in the article look good then so be it (not so much a problem on phones, but certainly a problem on monitors). I'm not getting into a edit war over it. But personally, I loathe them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * That's okay, we each have our own opinions. Personally, I loathe random things that don't line up nicely. As you said, each to their own.  Stepho  talk 10:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

New message from Jo-Jo Eumerus
Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

MR2 height
Hi, I'm somewhat new to wikipedia so if my sources didn't go through, I have links here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNCXJ1RAcWw

Best Motoring lists the height as 1240mm at 0:41

Contemporary US Toyota brochures also listed the height as 48.8in. http://importarchive.com/brochure/toyotamr21991_01

I did have to buy access to that scan via a small $2 donation, just so you know.

The reason for the lowered height for 93+ model year cars was that Toyota lowered the car during the Rev2 suspension geometry changes. https://markdormangarage.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/mr2-sw20-technical-information/ Midship Runabout (talk) 15:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I was curious, so I looked up some info from my own archives.
 * A Nov 1992 Japanese brochure lists the MR2 height as 1235 mm. Note: Nov 1992 matches the US 1993 model year.
 * An undated Australian brochure for the SW20 intro (assuming mid 1989) lists it as 1240 mm.
 * An undated Australian brochure for a mid-generation SW20 update lists it as 1235 mm and specifically says it got suspension updates with more negative camber front and rear to drop it 5 mm.
 * Metric conversions are: 1235 mm and 1240 mm
 * The YouTube video from 1990 says 1240 mm, so that also checks out. Beware that YouTube videos by random contributors are often seen as unreliable. But videos like this that are actually proper, professional productions (eg, old TV programs) are fine.
 * Beware that the Mark Dorman page refers to Wikipedia. We need to be careful that he hasn't sourced height information from WP because that becomes WP acting as its own reference. See WP:CIRC.
 * Sorry that I was harsh on you but WP lives and dies by its references. Anything without a reference must be considered as being unreliable. And the references must be in a place that can be checked in years to come, so they are usually done inline in the text and put inside  tags and . See examples inside the MR2 article. References in edit summaries in 2024 will be practically impossible to see in 2030, which is why we put them inline in the text.
 * I don't mind helping you learn, feel free to ask questions.  Stepho  talk 08:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Estate/Signia release confirmed
The last body style will be released on June 6 in USA and 7 in Japan 49.145.227.209 (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia lives and dies by its references, as per WP:FACT and WP:RS. Can you supply these references please.  Stepho  talk 22:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

My Toyota edits are not intended to annoy
Hi,

My contributions are a result of my mechanic's curiosity, and I research from articles why something was added or introduced, also known as "root cause" and where it led to. With Toyota, who built their engineering reputation on what is called "The Five Whys" it is pervasive in everything they've done, and are currently doing, including why they are the international "gold standard" for hybrid technology.

Beginning in the late 1970s, the tech race was on. Every five years, they changed each platform, and installed the tech in each class of car, from the Crown all the way to the Starlet. I research on Japanese Wikipedia and add it to the English side. If my formatting isn't "proper", it's not meant to annoy.

Sorry, Regushee Regushee (talk) 22:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Apologies - I was a bit grumpy. I do appreciate the information you bring in. The occasional mistake (eg Corona hardtop) doesn't really bother me - I make occasional mistakes too. I'm just a bit OCD about formatting.  Stepho  talk 23:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Non-breaking space removal at Toyota Auris
Thank you for reverting to this article: Toyota Auris. I notice that removing nbsp (non-breaking space) is not necessary. Infobox automobile is legitimately inserted nbsp (non-breaking space), but hasn't been added yet. I'm sorry for the response. Thanks! HirowoWiki (talk &#124; contribs) 23:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi! The purpose of the nbsp is not make sure that the number (1.33) and the unit (L) are not separated by a line break. However, when they are at the beginning of a line they will never be separated. Therefore, the nbsp serves no purpose and makes the wiki mark-up harder to read. So, in this case it is best to use a simple space. In other circumstances, the nbsp is needed but not here.  Stepho  talk 02:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * That's fine. The two decimals of 1.33 shouldn't insert the nbsp (non-breaking space), but the one decimal like 1.3 is allowed to insert the nbsp (non-breaking space). HirowoWiki (talk &#124; contribs) 02:59, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Why does the number of decimals change anything? All the engine capacities are at the start of new lines, therefore the number and the unit will never be separated by a line break.  Stepho  talk 05:15, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Understandable. I will not insert nbsp (non-breaking space) again. Thanks! HirowoWiki (talk &#124; contribs) 06:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * nbsp is not needed for the start of each new line in an infobox or table but nbsp is still good in many other places. Thank you for your contribution.  Stepho  talk 21:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
I hope that this kitten will make your moments as Wikipedian more happy :)

SoshingekiGoji (talk) 20:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC) 

Caldina/Carina
While I agree with removing many of these, I think that the Carina/Caldina hatnote makes some sense, especially because they look near identical - the Caldina is actually the exact same car as the Carina E Estate. Also, the katakana is even more similar - Karudina v Karina. Would you mind if I restored that one?  Mr.choppers &#124;  ✎  14:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I can live with that.  Stepho  talk 20:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Toyota website with 1st through 11th generation PDF scanned JDM brochures found
Hi,

As I've been translating from this website for the Chaser, Carina ED, Corona EXiV and soon to be Cresta, I found someone uploaded the link to the Crown, and found "the mother lode" for the Crown.

https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/vehicle_lineage/car/id60004580/index.html Regushee (talk) 19:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you, very useful.  Stepho  talk 23:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I just found on the same Toyota website every Mark II brochure too.

https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/vehicle_lineage/car/id60012868A/index.html Regushee (talk) 13:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Yep, every model on that site has 1 brochure per generation - usually for the Japanese market. Of course, there were far more brochures printed than those ones (eg https://web.archive.org/web/20230710220854/http://members.iinet.net.au/~stepho/brochures/Cressida/ ) but the 75 years site tries to give a representation of each model generation.  Stepho  talk 22:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Here's the Crown Eight, and now we can add a reference to this section.

https://www.toyota-global.com/company/history_of_toyota/75years/vehicle_lineage/car/id60005913/index.html (Regushee (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC))

On the back of each Cresta and Chaser brochure, they listed which Toyota dealership they were sold at. Vista store sold the Cresta and Auto Store sold the Chaser. This now makes sense because why would Toyota sell these two at the same location? Then later, Vista and Auto Store were combined as NETZ. The Aristo was exclusive to Auto Store. (Regushee (talk) 21:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC))


 * Hmm, I'd seen the dealer logos at the back of the JDM brochures but never stopped to think about their significance for exclusive models. Thanks.  Stepho  talk 05:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024
Hello, I'm Graywalls. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, SSC Tuatara, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Please see WP:SPS, WP:YT. It's not appropriate to include contents on the basis of having been on YouTube.'' Graywalls (talk) 06:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I disagree but I will answer on the article talk page.  Stepho  talk 07:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Question
Hello, I was wondering if there are any rules/guidelines for what counts as getting templates and categories. On the Seres (automobiles) page, I added a U.S. template and two categories since the article states that the company's headquarters is based in the U.S. However, a user named "Infinty 0" reverted my edits. When I asked them on their talk page to explain what they mean by "Not a U.S. based manufacturer" and I game my example. They basically said the company  is just R&D and never made a car in the U.S. and the article is about Seres and not SF Motors. Even though the article mentions (formally SF Motors). Therefore, they don't think it gets the template and categories I've added. 2600:6C5D:5CF0:8420:A408:4F:34ED:2438 (talk) 18:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The guideline would be WP:TIES. The company must have strong ties to the US and not have strong ties to any other country. I'm not familiar with the company but a quick read of the introduction says it is Chinese, not American. Therefore US templates and categories are not appropriate. SF Motors Inc. is the US subsidiary, but it is merely a redirect that points back to the same article. However, you can put SF Motors into a US category by putting the redirect into a category. Just edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SF_Motors_Inc.&redirect=no (found by clicking on SF Motors Inc., then clicking on the "(Redirected from SF Motors Inc.)" near the top of the page.  Stepho  talk 22:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sound like a weird rule that a company needs strong ties. But alright, I guess I'll leave it alone then, thanks. 2600:6C5D:5CF0:8420:A408:4F:34ED:2438 (talk) 02:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The rule was made because some US editors would change an article to be US dates, spelling and categories. Then some Brits would change it to British. Then the US editors would change it yet again. And so on, with both sides getting angrier and angrier. WP:TIES, WP:DATETIES, WP:RETAIN, WP:DATERET and similar were implemented to cut back on the edit warring. It has been mostly successful and no better method has been found.  Stepho  talk 02:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry about this
Sorry that I’ve copied something on a page because it was hard and I tried editing something on the type 2 page but it was hard and I won’t try to copy again, thanks for the advice you gave me, even though I’m not trying to vandalise the page, I’m trying to fix mistakes on wiki pages, because I have knowledge on vehicles and trying to fix things correctly not wrongly. Liam200351 (talk) 07:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * No problem. Wikipedia can be hard to work out all the rules and even us old hands get it wrong sometimes. Your enthusiasm is welcome. Perhaps try doing the link as Clayton, Victoria.  Stepho  talk 10:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)