Talk:Lancia Flaminia#IP edits

This is a fine article. I went through and changed some of the units and abbreviations to conform with the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles/Conventions, but otherwise enjoyable. --SFoskett 18:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

It was interesting to read and I learned a lot. Little tweaks on maybe the history would help improve it more but as it stands its still really good. Lincher 14:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

:Personally, I'd convert the wild URL links into refs or remove them. Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 16:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

:I am not sure what you mean, so I would encourage you to be bold and just do it! Thanks in advance! Bravada, talk - 16:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

{{Talk:Lancia Flaminia/GA1}}

Pasted from their talk page, as they insist on ignoring best practice:

:We also suggest engaging in discussion rather than just reinstating your edits after they've been reverted. Please read WP:BRD and circle back.  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

::I disagree with the reverts. They do nothing to improve the article. 202.47.32.60 (talk) 06:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

::First off, you just reinstated the previous version of the article which had poor sentence structure, poor quality photos and issues with the infobox. Second, you keep insisting that each body style should have the individual design house which designed and produced them in front of them when this has been already mentioned in the design section. So repeating the same information in the infobox makes little to no sense. 202.47.32.60 (talk) 06:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

:::Not here, at the Flaminia talk page. Did you read WP:BRD? Also, it is very hard to converse with a person or persons who use a roving IP.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

::::I have responded here, it should be sufficient. That talk page has not been active for more than a decade. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 13:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

:::::Also from WP:BRD "This process is not mandated by Wikipedia policy, but it can be useful for identifying objections, keeping discussion moving forward and helping to break deadlocks. In other situations, you may have better success with alternatives to this approach." 223.29.234.202 (talk) 13:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

::::::None of the alternatives are "ignore all other editors because I always know best." The body styles have been listed with the designer included since at least 2008, and all of a sudden you alone want to remove them.  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

:::::::Time has nothing to do with incorrect or verbose content. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 06:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

::::::::Best example of this can be seen at Casio F-91W which had the incorrect release date listed since atleast 2011. Furthermore, you have not presented one solid reason why repetitive information should be included in the infobox. Instead, you went on a spree of edit warring. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 06:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

{{outdent}} The additional information regarding which body was designed by whom is presented in a different, clearer manner than what's in the designer box. It was added there for a reason and has not offended anyone but you in a decade and a half.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

:Because it is repetitive information. Why would one field a need to repeat the same thing over and over in the infobox? It does not benefit the reader but makes things verbose. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 06:40, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

::It is not the same - it is different, mainly because there are three coupés designed by three different people.  Mr.choppers | ✎  12:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

:::That is made clear in the design section. Also people are not even mentioned in the bodystyle section. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 13:25, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Thatis because bodystyle is coachbuilder dependent not designer focused. YBSOne (talk) 13:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

:::::Again, people can easily see that which coachbuilder designed which bodystyle in the design section. As is, the infobox is very messy when its meant to be a summary. 223.29.234.202 (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)