AKADriver

Welcome to my talk page!

Hooray!

Please make use of edit summaries.

I have been looking over your recent edits to all S-Chassis related pages, and I am concerned as to the verifiability and method behind many of these edits. Since you have neglected to use edit summaries in the majority of these edits. Particularly your edit to the Nissan Silvia page here which I should also point out is not a minor edit, and should not have been marked as such. I am also concerned about the paragraphs you reduced, eliminating information without explanation. Whenever information is removed it should be indicated in the edit summary why, and if it is a substantial amount of information, it would bhe appropriate leave a not on the article talk page with a detailed explanation of why the information warranted removal. I am asking you to please go through and make these notations on the talk pages, or here, explaining the reasons for these removals and reductions. If you are unable or refuse to do so, I will revert to a previous version until I, or another wikipedian can identify a valid reason for removal.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 20:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added comments about my changes to the Nissan Silvia article to its talk page.

Expounding on what I wrote there, I'm trying to improve the signal-to-noise ratio and reduce ambiguity in the S platform articles. My source for all Japanese-market version info for these cars (except the Sileighty) is the "Nissan Museum" [1] maintained by Nissan Japan. Sileighty info comes from the original printed brochure for these cars and the info provided by the Gran Turismo series of games... I'll try to find a web-accessible source. Further S12 Silvia/Gazelle info comes from a Japanese owner's website. [2]

I've tried to keep references to production years consistent with model year as it's defined in North America. The Japanese don't use our model year system but they have a registration year system that's similar. I know Australia, at the least, is more familiar with calendar years, though. If model years are too confusing to non-American readers, I don't mind seeing it changed back... or better yet, changed to year + month; readers familiar with the concept of a model year should know that a car introduced in October of year x will have been sold as an "x+1 model".

I dont see model years as any way confusing, so long as it is wikilinked (which I believe it is).--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 21:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

looking for help with a wikibook

I started a Nissan 240SX performance modification book. I'm looking for help with fleshing it out, thanks. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Nissan_240SX_Performance_Modification Sean1978 14:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

new Portal:Korea

User:Visviva has worked hard to create a brand new Portal:Korea. Please take a look & contribute if you can. I think the new Template:Korea topics has the potential to be a more useful reference tool than categories or lists, if editors continue to expand and update it. It's also a good reminder for help & requests on ye olde notice board. Hopefully, this will help revive some activity all around. Appleby 22:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Kumdo

Hello. I am Michael Friedrich. You may remember me. I am the one who made a suggestion that Kumdo be merged into Kendo. I left an answer to your comment. Please read it and leave a comment, whether you're still against the merger or not. As for now, 3, including me, are for the merger and 3, including you, are against it. This talk is not over yet. If you don't leave a comment, I understand it as approval for the merger. Thanks.Michael Friedrich 15:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FM 5-31 Boobytraps

In case you're not watching the page, I've added a response/question to your vote there. -- Hirudo 20:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

My apologies

Didnt mean to revert you there. Got a edit conflict, and I thought the nom was blanking now. Dominick ^(TALK) 17:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

greetings from australia re 200SX/silvia deliveries

Is this the messaging method we use? I couldn't find a "reply" option on your message to me...

As for the 200SX / Silvia naming problem with the Australian delivery, it's a sad sorry mess. Different marketing terms in different markets, with different engines on board. Cross-pollination between the Silvia line and the 180SX is also something I'm not entirely clear on, but I know there is one significant difference.

All the Silvia/200SX I have seen in Australia have been quite faithful renditions of the japanese domestic market (JDM) items. Since we drive on the same side of the road, there's been quite a grey market for japanese imports.

I don't recall seeing the "S13 Chuki" with the popup headlights, but I know we got S14 and S15 Silvias with the SR20DET badged as 200SX. Apart from the badging they are definitely Silvias. In fact, my car still has some Silvia badging on it, because Nissan Australia didn't want to pay for it's removal! By that time the Silvia name was already known and it probably helped them with the marketing.

I don't know if the JDM 180SX was the same basic chassis as the Silvia, but I do know that one major distinction apart from the engine capacity was the use of a lift-back rather than a coupe.

Then there's the American 240SX delivery based on the S-chassis, whereas our 240SX was a rather boring block of a sedan that didn't sell much. We also had a Gazelle in the late 80's but I don't know if it was based on the S platform as alleged in the wiki.

If I could show you the badgings of my S15 you'd see immediately the Silvia written in script on several places on the car. However I've left my quick-n-dirty photos on my home computer so I'll try to pass them on over the weekend. By all rights my Australian 200SX the entry should be in the Silvia section. Then again, if you go strictly on the marketed name, it does belong on the 200SX page. Perhaps the Silvia page should have a few sentences pointing out that Australia got the exact copy of the S14 and S15 Silvias but rebadged and "see the 200SX page".

I'm inclined to agree with whoever suggested that the 200SX and Silvia pages should be combined. Perhaps also combined with the 180SX and 240SX pages too!

Anyway, I'm comfortable with the move at this point. I still have a few facts to chase up that I haven't had time, and I want to show you some poor-quality pics of the Silvia badges on my car. I'll also put up a nice pic of the actual car; you'll see immediately that it's definitely a Silvia despite the marketing confusion.

This is the right place!

I have no doubt your car is a Silvia in everything but name... it's really just how they broke up the articles even before I came along. I've just tried to stay consistent, and your content was a perfect fit for the 200SX article, especially because I know the Australian meanings of "Spec-S" and "Spec-R" were very different from the JDM versions.

It'd be much nicer if we could combine all these different variants into the Nissan S platform article and compare and contrast, but it'd be enormous! — AKADriver ☎ 13:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

contradiciton in 1229

Which contradiction were you refering to when you tagged it? (see it's talk page) -- ∞Wirelain 07:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The wording for the two entries about the Sixth Crusade is confusing. Was the truce signed in February or March? It says both. The Sixth Crusade article says the truce was signed in February and the coronation was in March. I don't know if this is correct, so I just added the tag and left it. I thought I had made a talk page comment, I guess I forgot. — AKADriver ☎ 13:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Neon / PT replacement

It's certainly a fact that when the Plymouth Neon was dropped, the PT cruiser was introduced, and it fit into a similar though not identical niche. Will you revert if I restore this? --matador300 17:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The Dodge Neon continued in the US as well as the Chrysler Neon in export markets until 2005. Not to mention, the PT is a Chrysler in all markets, never a Plymouth. Most Plymouth dealers were Chrysler-Plymouth, but not all. As far as I'm concerned, there were no replacements for any Plymouth-branded vehicles, and the PT ran concurrent with the Neon under the Chrysler brand.

The PT was also just plain never intended nor sold as a Neon replacement. The Caliber, on the other hand, is marketed as a Neon replacement even though it too is a different type of car.

I and a few others would revert that, yes. — AKADriver ☎ 22:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Honda S2000 page

Hi AKADriver. Instead of taking up the case (as stated in the title) myself for mediation, I would recommend you to seek the advice for the arbitration committee instead. They can better deal with this. Alternatively, contact some administrators to initiate a lockdown on the page (and just keep the short criticism section instead), and/or block SpinyNorman from constantly imposing his version on that page. Mediators can only mediate something when all parties are willing to compromise - something tells me SpinyNorman is not the compromising type. Jsw663 07:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Honda S2000

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Honda S2000. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Honda S2000/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Honda S2000/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --FloNight 10:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Honda S2000 page and Spiny

Hello, just wanted to make sure that you noticed one of the things that spiny did. On Sep 9 at 4:19 Spiny was seemingly nice and encouraged me to add my sales numbers content to the S2000 page, see the bottom of the S2000 discussion page. Then he ruined it by citeing it in the arbitration, See bullet two under first assertion. I would think that using examples that occured after arbitration started wouldn't be fair. Also, the encouragement was contrieved to create evidence to support his case. RedruM 00:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I saw, he's also tried to backtrack things like editing his "nice try, short pants..." to say "actually..." to try to paint himself as the victim here. But the diffs are on our side, he's presented no evidence to the case (only weak refutations of things that are right there in black and white), I'm confident it will be open and shut.

Awwww, what's the matter boys, afraid I'm not really the boogieman you've tried to show to the arbcom? I think maybe the problem here is that you guys haven't figured out yet that I adopt the "what comes around, goes around..." attitude toward dealing with others. If a person is respectful to me, I will treat them with respect. If a person is rude or confrontational with me, that's what they'll get back. And as for your interpretations of my conduct, while I find it extremely amusing, you'd better be careful or Jsw663 is going to call you "paranoid". --SpinyNorman 07:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks are no concern to me, though they're not helping you, either. I'm just trying to enforce NPOV in automotive articles. — AKADriver ☎ 13:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Honda S2000

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

SpinyNorman is required to edit using only one account. SpinyNorman may be banned from any article he disrupts. SpinyNorman is placed on personal attack parole. He may be banned for an appropriate period of time if he makes personal attacks. SpinyNorman is placed on revert parole. He is limited to 1 revert per week on any article, excluding obvious vandalism. Should SpinyNorman continue to disrupt Wikipedia he may be banned for an appropriate period, up to a year. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Honda_S2000#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration Committee. Arbitration Committee Clerk, 14:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I would not like you to misunderstand what I am thinking.

I do know Japan suppressed Korean culture and forced Japanese culture on the Korean, especially in the last 10 years of the occupation. I never denies that fact (although I found some exaggeration and descriptions against reality in Korean history textbooks[3]).
Why I put the sentence "Many young Koreans, who studied at school the suppression of Korean culture on the last years of Korean occupation by Japan......." on kumdo is not because I think the occupation is just something taught at school, but because most Kumdo practitioners nowadays do not "remember" the Japanese occupation. People who claims kendo or kumdo is originated in Korea are mainly those who were born after the occupation. And I often hear that somehow the young have stronger anti-Japanese sentiment than the elderly[4]. That is why I editted kumdo. I would not like you to misunderstand me because I trust you as a man who postpones passion to the fact.
But I really lament that the sentence "Some practice Kumdo without giving respect to Kendo, and believe and claim Kumdo or Korean fencing is the origin of Japanese Kendo and its swordmanship, but that is historically not the case.", which we agreed to keep after a long discussion, is deleted, no matter how many times I add it. --Michael Friedrich 03:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Automobiles Notification

Hi AKADriver, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.

To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting {{Wiki Auto Project}} where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add [[Category:WikiProject Automobiles members|AKADriver]] to your userpage.

If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086^{Talk | Contribs} 04:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Great Work

I've noticed your work on the drifting page which I've also contributed too as well as the Ford (Volvo) C1 Platform page in which I found an image of the C1 platform developed by Volvo with funding from Ford. Great to find someone who shares an interest in automobiles. Not keen on drifting though :P

Keep up the good work Friggit 20:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I heard you got married

congratulations (?)

-P.W.A. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.211.40.2 (talk) 17:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

Dokdo naming dispute

Hey, another Dokdo naming dispute has arisen, & RM has taken place. Please check archive for previous discussions & pariticipate in the vote. Thanks. I'm also going to note all others who participated in the previous poll. (Wikimachine 18:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC))

Your user page appearing in a category

Hi AKADriver. Your user page User:AKADriver/Honda S2000 is showing up in Category:Sports cars. Would you mind removing (or commenting out) the category tag from that page? Thanks. DH85868993 02:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. — AKADriver ☎ 12:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. DH85868993 15:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup", "trivia"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:18 23 September 2007 (GMT).

I heard you had a baby

wowzers (!)

-P.W.A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.102.163 (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

heh... word travels fast huh? That's right... I'm an old man now! I'd love to fill you in on what I've been doing - besides the obvious - I turned on e-mails through Wikipedia, send me one! — AKADriver ☎ 15:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

IPA pronunciation guides

I notice you reverted the Miata pronunciation to IPA... the IPA's... seem hugely strange. Why use them? 842U (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The Manual of Style requires it. "Sound-alike" pronunciations can be used in addition to, but not instead of, IPA. — AKADriver ☎ 11:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Would you please help me?

Hello. I don't want to be rude but would you please give me a little help?

There is a dispute in Kumdo now. There are some who even say that the expression that "Kumdo is the Korean equivalent of Japanese Kendo" is an original research. What do you think about it? I wonder how Korea Kumdo Association could belong to International Kendo Federation if Kumdo were not the Korean equivalent of Kendo.

I cited a website and changed the expression into "Kumdo is a direct interpretation of Japanese Kendo"[5]. But they keep saying that this is an original reseach or Japanese POV although it is cited and the website is very favourable to Kumdo.

Finally, I cited other websites and changed the whole expression.

Kumdo is a martial art of fencing in Korea. It is mostly identical to Japanese Kendo as you can see from the fact that the Korea Kumdo Association (KKA) belongs the International Kendo Federation (IKF), and accordiong to Alexander Bennett from International Research Centre for Japanese Studies, "in many countries around the world kumdo and kendo coexists side-by-side, and apart from a few differences in terminology, most people accept that they are doing essentially the same thing, and train and compete in the same environment.". KKA officially states that Kumdo as a sport was developed in Japan but the origin of Kumdo is in Korea. But the All Japan Kendo Federation officially denies KKA's theory that Kendo is originated in Korea and there is a dispute.

But they keep saying this is an original reseach. I do not understand why they keep saying so and I don't know what to do next. I cannot solve this problem without any help from a third party. If you have time, please would you please add what you think about it at Talk:Kumdo? I do not force you to be on my side. But I believe you are so wise that you can think of an idea that will solve this dispute. I believe whether the sentences above are an original research or not. Thank you very much.--Michael Friedrich (talk) 16:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)