Talk:Panhard Dyna Z

Automobiles Mid‑importance

	Cars portal 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.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Image copyright problem with Image:PL 17 manual.JPG[edit]

The image Image:PL 17 manual.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "Driving impressions"[edit]

The note about un-encyclopedic tone in the "Driving impressions" section has been there for seven years now, if I understand things correctly. I'm going to be bold and remove the section. Partly because it's un-encyclopedic, and partly because it's untrue ("The steering was quick and light", I drove one less than an hour ago, and maneuvering it through a parking garage was borderline impossible). The tone of the entire article indicates that it's written by someone who is devoted to Panhards, and that's hardly suitable for Wikipedia.

Unless the entire article can be rewritten, I would suggest that it's reduced to a stub. I used to believe that the Wikipedia community wouldn't allow this kind of articles.

Greger 85.235.1.129 (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it has become rather a dog's dinner. You clearly have views, and if you can channel that into a few hours to rearrange the thing into something coherent, please do it.

Somehow your contributions would carry more conviction with the crusties if you took an extra thirty seconds to get yourself a wiki-identity - can't remember how it's done, but I did it at the time by following some instructions I found on the page, so it must be possible. But maybe you have your reasons for not doing that, and it's not really "of the essence": while you have the bit between your teeth please do go ahead and do what is needed. On steering, you'll appreciate that way back when, no one had power assisted steering on a car of this size so we expected to use our muscles a bit more. Also, this Panhard put on quite a lot of extra weight as time went by and steel replaced aluminium, so other things being equal the steering would presumably have become heavier on the later cars. :Success Charles01 (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the supporting words. I feel that I don't have the knowledge to make major contributions to the article, but I think that just the removal of the driving impressions section is a step forward that I can actually contribute to.

Regarding my wiki-identity, you're absolutely right that making edits under just an IP feels a bit... Well... Shady, but I try not to get too involved in the Wikipedia community (knowing myself I would start pouring a lot of time into it, and that would be time that I currently don't have). The only time I feel that I have to make edits are when I see things like this that seems too unencyclopedic to stand (extremely angled opinions being presented as facts, for example).

On another note, I realized that I forgot to write an edit summary. Is there anyway to do this after the edit is saved? Sorry about that.

Greger 109.228.140.47 (talk) 21:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]