Talk:BMW 3 Series (G20)

M3

I see my edit from June 2019 on the forthcoming M3 (with reference to https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2020-bmw-m3-be-lighter-and-produce-500bhp) has been reverted without discussion. Please can the 2020 proposed launch be included, this will be a significant event for the BMW 3 series. Other forthcoming car launches are on WP, where notable. John a s (talk) 07:19, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Design staff

As mentioned by @Toasted Meter:, it seems as if Alexey Kheza has been added to the article as the sole designer of G20 3er. Well I must say that he might be responsible on the exterior design level, but he was presided over by Alexey Kheza possibly.

This link [1] proves the connection, however like I have mentioned in the past, multiple designers do get credit for these projects, even if BMW favors only one exterior designer working on a vehicle.

Thanks to Toasted Meter sending me a message, I actually did learn that via research, G20 design work probably began in April 2014 and via mutually researched info of ours, finished around November 23-27/30 of 2015.

So, do we add both Alexey and Marc Michael? Shockingly enough, @Gentleracoon: has exercised due diligence and unearthed something we/I entirely missed.Carmaker1 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

A more reliable source is needed than a personal Linkedin site. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:26, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

That's a resume, not a personal website. How well does it serve someone to lie on a resume about something so simple? That's the issue right there with Wikipedia. An obvious selective bias to favor news media who can easily make up or misconstrue context, versus a professional providing their own work history.

Verifiability is often a joke in this automotive section, because of things like this. A design patent registration is considered not verifiable (depending on the user) nor a professional resume? That's absurd, considering how I've noticed that I have ironically become a source for a few recently published automotive books using Wikipedia as a citation and copying text from here, word for word. Ditto for YouTube video descriptions, video content, and news articles being so lazy, to use my research on background info as their go to. Whether music or automotive.

Eventually you are all going to have to realize, using usual methods of verifiable sources and templates for other sections, isn't necessarily going to always work for the automotive side of things.

Different industries and topics demand different results or methods of research.

The few invested users are not collecting this information out of thin air, if they are providing you a way to vet what they submitted. Believe it or not, information about upcoming model programs regularly come from Linkedin. Including leaked information on what we're (industry folks) developing. Most people just (thankfully) miss or don't notice it being there.

Not everything source wise is a press release or interview, which can also be even taken out of context by editors here from what I've seen.

This is a novice editor, but their explanations are very, very sound and have credibility. I wonder what @Guiletheme: thinks or @Stepho-wrs:?

I hope no offense is taken Magnolia, but it was just my two cents over a lingering issue. Carmaker1 (talk) 21:06, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Carmaker1 if you hate the policy of providing citations at this site, then go discuss it on WP:RSN instead of breaching WP:CIVIL. U¹ _quattro TALK 16:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Don't cast aspersions on me or I will take action against you in the proper forum. False claims against someone without providing sound evidence, is casting an aspersion and deserves administrative attention, if you can't reign yourself in. WP:CIVIL has nothing to do with the matter at hand, so to even imply that is rather petty and indicative of looking to antagonize an editor and obviously indeed unwelcome. Mind your conduct. Carmaker1 (talk) 18:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

You're not an administrator and neither you reserve a right to threat me of administrative action. If you continue down this path then you sure have your history as a proof of breaching the said guideline. I asked you to go to a proper forum and discuss your opinions with other users. You don't own this site and neither should you dictate what others should do here. You have already been advised by the administration to improve your attitude with the link of the said discussion present on your talk page.U¹ _quattro TALK 19:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Further more, your comment expresses general hatred towards the policy because it's not what you'd like to prefer. Others might disagree with you, so the best way is to obtain their agreement instead of dictating what should be done when you don't have this authority. U¹ _quattro TALK 19:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Back to business, as what I was previously discussing with Magnolia677. I agree with the RSN perspective of U1Quattro and will discard the rest of the text. This isn't worth the trouble, unless other good sources can be provided for Alexey Kheza. Having been summoned here, I will leave it to @Toasted Meter: and @Gentleracoon: to sort out themselves, as I frankly care not enough to conduct an exhaustive search. Carmaker1 (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

PHEV CO2 study

In the "Design and Development" section, someone added a note about a 2023 study regarding the carbon dioxide output of the PHEV version. I don't think that really belongs in the "Design and Development" section, but perhaps under "Engines" or a new section. Igneon (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)