Wikipedia

User talk:Typ932/Archive 7

< User talk:Typ932
Latest comment: 14 years ago by 842U in topic Karmann Ghia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

DIN rated power outputs

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I thought we had previously discussed this! As I've just stated in the Audi R8 edit summary - ALL Volkswagen (and subsequent Volkswagen Group) engines have been (and still are) rated using the Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN) standards. The Germans have always used the watt as their unit of measurement for engine power ouput - power (physics) - but will then use the kilowatt to actually display the rated output. It is much more logical to state an engine produces 150 or 200 kilowatts, rather than 150,000 or 200,000 watts!

Yes, you are technically correct that in accordance with the International System of Units (SI), the SI derived unit of power is the 'watt', but if you look at the watt article page - specifically watt#multiples - it clearly states that the kilowatt (emboldened on the wikitable on the right) is not only a formally accepted SI multiple of the watt, but also that the kilowatt is a 'common' multiple.

Regarding the European Union (EU) comment, and how it referrs to the DIN . . . . if you look at the DIN article, you will see DIN was formed in 1917 (which clearly pre-dates the orginal Volkswagen Beetle - aka Volkswagen Type 1). Therefore, DIN obviously pre-dates the EU, and also predates the EUs predecsssor - the European Economic Community (EEC). Furthermore, if you look at at Deutsches Institut für Normung#DIN standard designation - it shows you the 'variations' of DIN standards. The original (German-only) standards were just "DIN - followed by a number" (eg. DIN 123). But when the EEC and subsequent EU were created - DIN standards (especially when renewed or updated) would then 'adopt' any existing EEC/EU standard - to become say "DIN EEC 234", or the current "DIN EC 3456". This is exactly the same 'evolution' as the British Standards (initially say BS:987, then BS EN:5750, etc).

Regarding citations, look at ANY of the PDFs (or actual printed brochures) for VWAG models, and they will state (often in 'small print'!) that the engines are DIN rated to either "Directive 80/1269/EEC" or the later "1999/99/EC". Furthermore, ETKA, Volkswagen Groups official electronic spare parts catalogue, officially lists engines first in kilowatts, and then subsequently converts them into hp/PS. And when engines are listed by 'PR' codes (both in ETKA, and also in ElsaWin - their official 'workshop manual'), their engines are ONLY listed kilowatts.

Onto the "PS" bit. I don't have a definative answer - but my guess is that the Germans used the Pferdestärke (PS) for English language publications simply because it was virtually equal to the exisiting horsepower (hp) and brake horsepower (bhp) which was/is prevalent in English speaking locations - and has become a commonly accepted (but not factually offical - "Pferdestärke = horse strength, is no longer a statutory unit") terminology. And I think that this is sometimes (if vaguely) explained in the small print in their sales brochures. In Germany, they generally only use the kilowatt.

A couple of final points, on ALL Volkswagen Group vehicle 'data plates' (basically a self-adhesive sticker - one placed on the inside cover of the vehicles 'service record' booklet, and the other stuck on the floorpan underneath the boot/luggage compartment carpet) - again, the engine is ONLY detailed in kilowatts - maybe there is an image in the commons. And when their vehicles leave their respective factory gates, each car/truck will have a legal document - a "European Certificate of Conformity" - this is frequently/generally never seen by the vehicle owner (though I know that Vauxhall/Opel, and Mercedes do provide the owner with one) - but is used by the car (or truck, or bus) dealership to formally 'register' the vehicle in its actual country of operation (in the UK, the DVLA - but I'm sorry I can't specifically name any other European licensing agencies) - and again, this European Certificate of Conformity only states the engine power output in kilowatts.

Oh, as a final final point! - look at the second paragraph of the horsepower article - it states Most countries now use the SI unit watt for measurement of power. The use of horsepower in the EU is banned since the implementation of the EU Directive 80/181/EEC on January 1st, 2010

HTH :-) 78.32.143.113 (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Give the link to those PDFs or some source that says what kind of measurement arrangements they are using, I cant find any source that says they are using DIN standardized measuremetn methods to kilowatts. I still prefer it wrong to say DIN rated kilowatss as we live 2010s now.. if you would say DIN rated horsepower (PS) it would be different story and it looks very silly to refer DIN when speaking watts, I would use 97/68/EC or ECE R24 rated power --Typ932 T·C 18:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
You can NOT make up you own 'desired' standards. DIN is the rating authority, to which ALL German engines comply with, and Directive 80/1269/EEC is the standard. Please stop vandalising these articles - just because you personally seem to have a problem with the DIN organisation, or I will be forced to report you to the relevent Admin noticeboard. If you disagree with DIN, put a 'citation needed' tag, but do NOT delete something which you have a personal prejudice over. Kind regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 11:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Im not makin my own standards, DIN is not anymore standard in Europe and unless you give proper source that DIN is authoring European standards they can go,, try to find prooer source for you claims, and now it says its RATED not AUTHORED, you should make your mind how is DIN involved in power ratings in current measurements. --Typ932 T·C 12:01, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Prods

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Typ, you placed a prod on Fastest production car, and I removed it, because I think the material is sourceable and encyclopedic. You put it back again, but that's against deletion policy. It is not permitted to put back a prod any editor has objected to-- See WP:PROD. I have a few years of experience here as an administrator, That gives me no special prerogatives at all with respect to editing, and gives my opinions about an article no extra weight of any sort, but it does mean that I know what the rules are here. If you still want to delete the article, the correct course is to nominate it for WP:AFD, according to the instructions on that page.
I have given my reasons for keeping in some more detail on the article talk pageAFD there. . DGG ( talk ) 04:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC) DGG ( talk ) 23:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (February)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 18:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Length of a Renault 5

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I was quite puzzled to discover that a Renault 5 was 127 mm at launch back in 1972... until I discovered the culprit. IMMD. Thanks ! --Maurilbert (talk) 23:02, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Automobile classification

Nomination for deletion of Template:Automobile classification

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Template:Automobile classification has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mighty Antar (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (March)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 12:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Kia Carnival etc

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Why does the robot delete the See also section? 842U (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I've never used [[WP:REFLINKS], but in this edit you left a {{name}} which I think was unintentional. Have you noticed this on other occasions?

I'm asking because I don't understand what template:name is used for, and want to use it for something else! - Fayenatic (talk) 20:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (April)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 19:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (May)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 16:37, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Fiat platform

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Can you correct this article: Fiat Group C-platform and Fiat Group Mini platform?? please, i can't speak english... :-( --Corvettec6r (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Typ932 this Kia Venga is a copyviol?? --Corvettec6r (talk) 17:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Matiz

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Typ932 please can you correct Daewoo Matiz and Fiat Strada?? ;-DD --Corvettec6r (talk) 17:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I notices you helped me with reference links on CNH_Global: can you please explain how to group references? It would help a lot. Thanks :) Smagliola (talk) 17:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Toyota Camry Hybrid Article

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. Sorry about blanking your edits. I was going to reinsert them after my revert, but hungry children demanding waffles distracted me. Next time I'll roll all such edits into one action. Does Twinkle make it easy? I need to research that. Thanks. Ebikeguy (talk) 23:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Nemo and Bipper

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

excuse me but can you correct Citroen Nemo and Peugeot Bipper? Is a stub! :-) --Corvettec6r (talk) 18:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

and can you correct Fiat Fiorino? please --Corvettec6r (talk) 13:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (June)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 17:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Renault Dauphine

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thoughts on what to do to bring this to a B?842U (talk) 17:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

PS/hp

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hej, I thought about what you said and you're right: PS might confuse English-speaking readers (I feel that en.wikipedia is the most international branch of wiki, so the anglophones don't get to have everything their way). Everyone knows what a hp is, whether German or Japanese or Samoan, and precision is worth nothing if it also obfuscates. So I reckon that as far as prose is concerned, using "hp" is the best way to provide the information. For any technical listings, however, I suggest using kW and either hp or PS, unless the car has been marketed in two zones and has been rated both ways. I have updated the Suzuki Fronte 800 article in this way, tell me how you feel.  ⊂Mr.choppers⊃  (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Suzuki Fronte

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hello typ932,

I put in a lot of work on the Suzuki Fronte page. While I wouldn't argue it's low importance, I would like to see it upgraded to perhaps a B-Class. Do you think it's ready for a post on the talk page? Best regards,  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 13:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks as if you agree, thanks!  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Compact executive cars

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

"Compact executive cars are usually available in saloon, estate, coupé and cabriolet body styles." hatchbacks aren't really compact executive cars, they are usually too small for this. Mercedes-Benz C-Class do not have any hatchbacks, but have coupe instead, and the CLC isn't a hatchback, just a coupe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.72.83.90 (talk) 04:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

?? --Typ932 T·C 08:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

engine capacity

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You have edited many vehicle articles where you changed '2.5 L' to '2.5L' (ie removed the space). The automotive project policy (and general WP policy) is leave a non-breaking space between the value and the unit name. This also applies to cc, km, miles, etc. Cheers.  Stepho  (talk) 08:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

ups have to be more carefully, it sometimes leads to wrong path, when reading articles where many of them are wronly written... --Typ932 T·C 08:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Supermini

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Are superminis available in 4-door sedans? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.72.83.90 (talk) 11:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Can be, but Linea is not supermini its small family car, its not small enough to be super mini..why you dont just use your own ability to determine right classes, this was already classed in Fiat timeline, there is no need to categorizy it again to wrong group. --Typ932 T·C 12:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Any supermini sedans sold in your country? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.72.83.90 (talk) 12:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

'Superminis are usually available in hatchback body styles.' sedans aren't really superminis, they are usually too big for this. Fiat Linea aren't in this category. The Punto is a supermini from this company.WKB|(talk here) 01:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC) (Talk to 180.72.83.90 (talk))

WPF1 Newsletter (July)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 21:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Small family cars and Euro NCAP

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

HI Typ932.

Are all small family cars are classified as small family cars by Euro NCAP? WKB|(talk here) 13:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (August)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 13:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Alfa Romeo

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WP:Lead gives some guidance on what should be in a lead section of an article. In a nutshell: The lead should define the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight, and should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. The lead of Alfa Romeo gives the barest of information. Many readers wish to have a short, detailed overview of a topic, and do not have the time to read a whole article. On average it takes 25 minutes to read a Wikipedia article with 70% comprehension. The current lead says little more than that the Alfa is an Italian car company - information that most people would already know. It says nothing about Alfa Romeo in motorsport, about the distinctive badge, about Nicola Romeo who gave his name to the company. The lead needs development. The {{expand lead}} informs editors that the lead needs attention - both through a direct notice on the article itself, and through being classed in a list that some editors work through. Tags do not always work. Sometimes the work remains undone. However, there is even less chance of the lead being improved if the tag is removed. SilkTork *YES! 09:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 10:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:Automobile classification

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Answered you at my talk page. Netrat (talk) 17:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Cars in films

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The appearance of the Alfa Romeo Alfetta in a James Bond is not relevant. We have a convention on trivia/media appearances, because many cars had lists for "XX in fiction" or "XX in film": WP:CARS/Conventions#Trivia_and_popular_culture_sections. --Pc13 (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I think its relevant, its very well known fact, and its even mentioned all pages listing James Bond cars. One example is not list of trivia. This is very different thing than listing cars of Top gear or other very trivial tv shows, or should I add see also section for James Bond cars? I think that would spoil more that article--Typ932 T·C 14:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't believe a simple appearance in a Bond movie rates it as a Bond car. This isn't the Aston DB4 or the Lotus Esprit or the BMW Z8. It's a random car Roger Moore steals in one scene. It was the Alfetta, could have been any other. The line I deleted was added by a user who had been putting Bond appearances everywhere, which I first noticed when he added a Bond appearance to the Renault 9/11 article. --Pc13 (talk) 17:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Try google with Alfa Romeo GTV6 and James Bond.. its mentioned also on main Alfa Romeo page and James Bond vehicles page, its not definetly random car, its carefully planned "role" --Typ932 T·C 18:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Citations

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

I saw on the Fiat Tempra article that you have adjusted some of the "Cite webs" to read "cite web" (lowercase). Fine by me, but there's another bot (or more) runnning around and doing the opposite... seems like a lot of wasted work. best,  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ye I have noticed it, ill think Ill check whats the right one and notice the bot or script owner, its the other features why I have been using that script. --Typ932 T·C 16:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I informed the script owner if he would fix it --Typ932 T·C 17:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Which one is correct? I changed my often used references (now capitalized), thinking that that was right.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 19:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
See page Template:Cite web it uses capital --Typ932 T·C 19:11, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems that its not so clear which one is right... see http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough&diff=prev&oldid=387597452#Could_you_not_capitalize_citation_template_in_the_future.3F --Typ932 T·C 20:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (September)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

--Midgrid(talk) 14:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Economy car

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. How are you? how exactly should images be arranged? or is it there are possibly too many? Vegavairbob (talk) 03:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

prose, why all pages are nowayds just lists.. - why is it when I say this I just get denials and ridicule? heh :) --Falcadore (talk) 23:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (October)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

– Cs-wolves(talk) 17:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Suzuki Cervo

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Typ932. You have new messages at Mr.choppers's talk page.
Message added 18:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Karmann Ghia

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article later contradicts your last addition to the intro; the car wasn't marketed as a sports car. I'm guessing that you feel 2+2 is insufficient. Might there be a better modifier to ad besides sports car... perhaps coupe — though this is added in the next sentence... perhaps those modifiers should be moved adjacent to '2+2'? 842U (talk) 18:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Typ932/Archive_7&oldid=1141364467"