Talk:Barouche

Can Mikkalai please explain why references to Lexicus, Fotosearch, Central & Western Massachuetts Digital Library Project, and Science and Society Picture Library were deleted. I have identified a number of apparently reliable sources for information on various types of carriage, which I was planning to insert in the relevant articles, many of which have no references at all, but I won't bother if they are to be deleted. Fbarw (talk) 22:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a web directory of all good places where information can be found. Please keep in mind that people can use google themselves. Please restrict yourself to adding external links as references/footnotes for information you add into articles or to larger, detailed text with significant info absent in the article (although the preferrable way is to write the article text itself). Please also keep in mind that an encyclopedia does not need links to thousands of photos of barouche. The two photos in the article are quite enough. `'Míkka>t 22:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge Barouche-sociable, now title Sociable (carriage) into this article?

The brief article on the Barouche-sociable carriage might easily, as to content, be merged into this article, and make this one more substantial. How does one make that happen? I put the same note at the Sociable (carriage) article's Talk page, the current title of Barouche-sociable. --Prairieplant (talk) 01:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Barouche. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090130011852/http://nfb.ca:80/film/caleche_driver__the/ to http://www.nfb.ca/film/caleche_driver__the/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Changes

"Moved some text out of lead into article. Moved photos around, too many at start. Restored text commented out, and restored sources to text moved away from its source. Calash redirects to this article, so text about it seems logical."

• @Prairieplant: Thanks for your interest.

Kalesch was left in to indicate the link in some languages. Photos covered just 3 examples: 2 Swedish, 2 American (few Americans are aware they have or had this kind of vehicle too), and 1 British photos were displayed Otherwise its always the British royals getting a mention. One of the extra non-British ones was to show the luxurious interior of a real barouche and the second to show the seating pattern that distinguishes the layout of a barouche from other carriages. All those five photos are there to do a job, you have just created confusion by destroying the links between the two Swedish images and the two American images and then returning the others!

A Caleche, like a calash, is certainly related, usually in the way that a battered taxi (calash) has four wheels an engine and a driver just like any presidential limousine (barouche). Some people call both taxis and limousine cars making no distinction. Some variation depends on the country the carriage is in.

I am going through all the articles about horse-drawn carriages and all the images in Wikimedia. I am deep in Wikimedia for the moment because it is a muddle with regards to horse-drawn vehicles and because in the process I find far better example to illustrate the articles.

The mention of Jane Austen ('s confusion — its a novel not a carriage-specification manual) like the (probable) origin of the word barouche just creates more confusion

I can see you have misunderstood some of my edits. I am trying to say politely I strongly dispute your changes but I am too involved in preparing material (that when it is available to you will give you a better understanding) to be distracted right now except I will remove the redirect from Calash after writing a separate article there. Do you really believe you have improved this article? Your thoughts please. Eddaido (talk) 04:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, Eddaido, I would ask the same question of you. But we can calm things down and speak of the specifics. The article was hard to follow with all you put in comment brackets, and it sometimes did not make sense, sorry to say. You removed the source citations from a sentence once part of a paragraph all cited to that source, and then marked it citation needed, which was sloppy. I restored the citation, leaving the sentence where you put it. If that word was Swedish, Google translate could not recognize it at all, but did recognize carriage and calash. So I put the English word in the caption and left the location in Sweden, which still makes your point about carriages being all over the world. I added a caption to the photo showing the door and the rear seats; without a caption, its presence was not clear. There are too many photos for the text, as you left it, so one had to go in the gallery. I do not think it matters that the photos are paired in your mind; the pairing is not relevant to why two photos of the same barouche were included.

Those who read Jane Austen articles find many references to the carriages in their exact names of the day, and in one novel, scenes on a barouche are key to the exposition of several characters. As barouche is not one of the carriage words that was kept when automobiles took over, I was tying the vehicle to something many people have read. Perhaps when you slow down with your edits, you will see things differently, be open to other views on this article. --Prairieplant (talk) 06:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

When I left it the article remained unfinished but at least it no longer misinformed. I'll be back when its simple to show you the mistakes you have re-displayed. Eddaido (talk) 09:38, 10 May 2018 (UTC)