This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This page was previously nominated to be moved. Before re-nominating, please review the logs of any previous moves and/or any discussions listed below.
The primary dispute has been whether the article should be moved to Petrol. Many arguments were presented for both sides, but after all else failed, consensus was to keep the original editor's title, as per the relevant style guideline:
"If an article has evolved using predominantly one [national variety of English], the whole article should conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic. In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used."
Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination::
The techniques and technologies described for preventing evaporative emissions and vapor lock in automobiles are terribly obsolete. The conversion to electronic fuel injection and pressurized fuel-rail delivery was largely complete more than 20 years ago and vehicles without fuel injection are now reasonably considered antique. The paragraph needs a total rewrite to be current. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drcampbell (talk • contribs) 16:50, 2 October 2012
Hi User:DMahalko. Per the talk page guidelines, the talk page is supposed to be used to discuss improvements to the article, not for asking questions about the subject matter. Please feel free to ask this question at WP:RD/Science. You don't have to re-type it -- just go to the history tab, bring up the version that had your question, and copy-paste it. --Trovatore (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Recently, there has been a very strange sequence of edits revolving around the image of gasoline in a mason jar. One editor was apparently shocked by it and added a sort of "don't try this at home" disclaimer with an edit summary about how we shouldn't be teaching people to make Molotov cocktails.
My personal view is that idiots will be idiots, and that it is fairly pointless to call out everything they could possibly be idiots about with disclaimers. The point of the image is simply to illustrate gasoline, not to say that mason jars are a good receptacle for the stuff. However, it's not clear that it's a very good illustration (who knows what the liquid in the jar is? there's nothing you can see that distinguishes it from any other clear liquid of similar refractive index, and even the color is obscured by the color of the glass). So maybe the best solution is to find a different image — maybe an industry worker taking a sample from a refinery or something, if such an image can be found. In the meantime I would rather have no image than one whose caption goes off on a silly legal tangent that has nothing to do with the image's purpose. --Trovatore (talk) 16:57, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the image. It contributes little with or without the warning. Sandcherry (talk) 03:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Still, it would be nice to have an image that actually shows gasoline, not just retailers and such. --Trovatore (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)