User talk:Hondasaregood

Testing...[1]

"Vandalism"

You repeatedly use the word "vandalism" in your edit summaries. Please note that as per Wikipedia:Vandalism, "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." Furthermore, as per What vandalism is not, NPOV violations, Mistakes and Unintentional Nonsense are not considered vandalism. Finally, from the same page "If a user treats situations which are not clear vandalism as vandalism, then he or she is actually damaging the encyclopedia by driving away potential editors."

You may also wish to read the essay Wikipedia:On assuming good faith and the accompanying policy Wikipedia:Assume good faith, which you may in fact be in violation of.

Regards, --DeLarge 18:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acura RL size classification

Please read the following Wikipedia policies and guidelines:

WP:Verifiability: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source."
WP:Reliable sources: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable published sources."

I request that you once again check Fueleconomy.gov, where every model year of Acura RL is listed as mid-size. I am interested to hear how verifiable information from a reliable primary source "...may not be suitable for the article."

Further, I noticed in your edit of 03:32, November 28, 2006 that you stated "wheelbase of 110.2 inches makes the RL a fullsize car." I'd recommend you read the EPA's FAQ section, where they explicitly state that car classification is "determined by measuring the interior passenger and cargo volumes" (at 112 Cu. Ft., the RL falls well short of the full-size class's 120 Cu. Ft. threshold). I feel this misunderstanding of how vehicles are classed may be the root of the problem, and further research would be of future benefit to both yourself and Wikipedia.

I would also request that you read WP:Vandalism: while "...any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism", it also points out that sneaky vandalism is defined as "Adding misinformation, changing dates or making other sensible-appearing substitutions and typos, hiding vandalism e.g. by making two bad edits and only reverting one, or reverting legitimate edits to hinder the improvement process." Having been informed of the correct information, and having been provided with multiple citations from reliable sources to support that information, to revert it again would invite others to question your good faith.

Finally, please consider reading through the classification of other Acura vehicles. Your edit of the Acura TSX was also in conflict with the EPA's website. --DeLarge 12:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding information to Wikipedia. Your addition to Acura RL has been reverted or removed, as it was deemed to be unhelpful or unencyclopedic. Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopedia, and information included here is expected to maintain the correct tone and level of accuracy. Personal views and gossipy information are not permitted: see What Wikipedia is not. Please take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --DeLarge 16:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Vandal alert

Unfortunately due to workload I'm probably not going to get a chance to look at this for a day or so. If the matter you alerted me to is particularly urgent, I recommend contacting another admin or reporting this on the Wikipedia:Vandalism reports page for more timely intervention. For my part I have alerted another user regarding the Pete Townshend content, since he's sort of nursemaiding things related to the Who musician. Cheers. 23skidoo 16:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. --Geniac 18:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

I somehow came across your user page in the category of candidates for speedy deletion and wondered if you actually want it deleted. --WikiSlasher 01:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Winhunter deleted your user page because there was a deletion tag on it ({{Db-userreq}}) saying that the user requests deletion. If you want it back just ask on the user's talk page. If you added the tag yourself you cannot really complain but if someone else added it you could have removed it yourself. Seeya, --WikiSlasher 02:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'll just ask you (the bold is so it catches your attention I'm not yelling): Do you want your old user page back? --WikiSlasher 00:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{test5}} question

Can this be used by non-sysops? Please tell me. I really need to know.Hondasaregood 15:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no real point considering only sysops can block. After a vandal has gone past test4 or bv, there's no point issuing new warnings for every new edit. You should report them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and continue reverting all their edits until they are blocked. -- Netsnipe ► 15:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wingo changed again.

Hey hondasaregood, I just want you to know that Wingo's car model changed again. So can you do something about it again? SnotRod1137 01:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hyundai Azera

Edmunds.com calls it both: mid-size and full-size, and in fact according to Google, favours the latter over the former, statistically speaking. It's the difference between a source and a reliable source.

You get the same with Consumerguide (51 mid-size references, 18 full-size references), Yahoo Autos (78 mid-size references, 128 full-size references), MSN Autos (39 mid-size references, 43 full-size references), etc etc. And, as can be seen, in three out of four occasions, there were more references to it being full-size than mid-size.

Journalists are clearly as capable of you of making the mistake of assuming the EPA still uses wheelbase measurements to define class. So, if you insist on using Edmunds.com as a source instead of the EPA themselves, then I insist on you doing a count of how often the references appear. And, once again, "full-size" trumps "mid-size". --DeLarge 17:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: your message on my talk page

Care to elaborate on which of my edits you find to be controversial or "vandalism"?--Isotope23 17:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BOLD. The content I removed from Barney & Friends was uncited original research; you can't just add something like:

"For example, one episode made use of the phrase "A stranger is a friend you have not met yet", which some parents say could be sending a dangerous message to their children."
to an article without any sourcing whatsoever. Who are "some parents"? Where is a reliable source establishing this? WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV are non-negotiable and there is no reason to discuss removal of unsorced original research from articles. This should be boldly done by any editor who comes across it. The information I added back to Honda S2000 on the other hand was well cited. If you have reservations about the sources used that could be discussed, but from where I stand they are reliable sources and the criticism was not overly POV. As for the AfD of The Delinquent Road Hazards, I explained my reasoning on the AfD page. There are several core policies and a few guidelines that this page goes against. Originally I was of the opinion it should be massively edited and cleaned up, but the more I researched it, the more I realized that the very concept of the article is inherently flawed. If you disagree, you can always visit the AfD discussion and argue against my reasons for deletion. Happy editing!--Isotope23 19:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honda S2000

Please refrain from removing sourced edits w/o discussion as you have been doing here. If you feel you are right than please discuss that w/ other contributors. -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 21:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for violating WP:3RR

I have blocked you for 24 hours for violating WP:3RR on Honda S2000. Please discuss changes on the article's talk page and obtain consensus instead of endlessly reverting on the article page without discussion. Thank you. —bbatsell ¿? 23:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of the image on your userpage

That is a copyrighted image and thus falls under Fair Use rationale on Wikipedia... which means you can't have it on your userpage.--Isotope23 21:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can read more at WP:RFUI; our fair use policy is available here. —bbatsell ¿? 23:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uncivil

I would watch how you go about commenting your edits like you did in this one. That could be seen as being uncivil, which is an act that is blockable, but it looks like you may already know about that. Roguegeek (talk) 07:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barney & Friends edit

The text you just added to Barney & Friends was attributed to the "user reviews" section of IMDB. User review sections, blogs, usenet postings, etc do not constitute a reliable source for basing encyclopedic content upon. You can read more about reliable sources at WP:RS.--Isotope23 19:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch on your recent revert by the way... I didn't go far enough back!--Isotope23 16:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks!Hondasaregood 16:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Truce

Are we edit warring? I wasn't even aware of that :)

I honestly have no problem with you Hondasaregood and I'm glad you didn't leave. I've noticed your edits have been getting better. In regards to the Barney & Friends, I have no problem with criticism in the article... it just needs to be reliably sourced. The Honda S2000 reverts I did were nothing personal either, I just didn't see a good reason to remove the section (though you can see on the talk page that Zunaid made a compelling argument why that section was not reliably sourced and I agreed. Like I said, I have nothing personal against you. I'm sorry if it came across that we were in some sort of conflict.--Isotope23 20:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On an unrelated note

On a completely unrelated note, I've noticed you created a User:Hondasaregood/request for adminship page. I don't want to presume what your intentions are with this, but if you are planning on submitting a request for adminship at this time, I'd maybe consider waiting. You've been here for just about 2 months with this account and with 568 total edits, 64 of which are in the Wikipedia space, I think you will face quite a few oppose votes with the reasoning that you lack policy experience. Don't take this the wrong way; I'm not trying to rain on your parade, I'm just saying to be realistic about your chances if you choose to submit this RfA right now (and you can see here for an example of the criticism you would probably face). If I could offer a suggestion, brush up on policy and guidelines here and then go out and demonstrate that you know how to apply them. In a few months you should have a decent shot at an RfA. Of course if you are just creating that page for future use then disregard this, though I'd still suggest getting more article, talkpage, and wikispace edits before submitting a request for Adminship. Cheers!--Isotope23 20:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did not subst {{test5-n}} on User talk:125.25.135.68

When using certain template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Because you didn't subst the template, I had to edit the page twice. Once to subst. Then again to remove my sig. The template includes the ~~~~ for you. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete?

Why do you want your talk page deleted? I'm normally happy to delete at user request, but talk pages contain historical information that is of value to the community. Friday (talk) 19:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Unless you are exercising your m:Right to Vanish, then we really can't delete your talk page unless there is a specific reason to do so, usually for legal reasons. Please see the guideline. —bbatsell ¿? 20:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why, you ask? Constant Vandalism. I want all of it erased.Hondasaregood 20:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's not possible. And please review Wikipedia:Vandalism to learn about what is and what is not vandalism. Thanks! —bbatsell ¿? 20:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see some things that sure look like vandalism, but that's not a good reason to delete the whole page. Friday (talk) 20:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, usually in cases of vandalism you just revert the page to the non-vandalised version and move on. You should see it as a badge of honor... usually if someone is vandalising your page that much you've done something right...--Isotope23 20:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your AFD requests for college football players

Please stop nominating high profile college football players for Speedy Deletion as you have done for Greg Olsen (American football), Jamaal Anderson, Victor Abiamiri. They clearly qualify under the guidelines "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league or a competition of equivalent standing ... including college sports in the United States". You've wasted far too many editors' time with these frivolous nominations. If you have any questions please discuss this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football -- KelleyCook 21:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HTML colors

In Template:Pontiac, it should be #C0C0C0 (C-zero-C-zero-C-zero), not #COCOCO (c-oh-c-oh-c-oh). --Vossanova ^o< 16:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FCC

The KB Vs. FCC is episode is true because Al Jean mentioned it in an interview. Please do research before removing "false" information. -- Scorpion 12:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page rendering

I had to revert your formatting experiments. The page was obscured by what other people noticed as "black triangles" - actually, they were million point letters caused by using far too many "big" tags. Orpheus 00:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets

So what? that was a long time ago. Dont "screw around" with my userpage and I wont with yours. Randazzo56.209.244.31.190 01:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Wikipedians - Spiny Norman

Hello. I've removed SpinyNorman from this list, as he/she is a suspected sock-puppet. Lra drama 19:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traitor

How can you wonder why your a target for vandals? your userpage slams Ford Pintos and promotes hondas-as well as unfair trade and the support of our economic deppresion. The only people buying Hondas are those who are so sellfish as to not give a damn about their own country. If your so concerned about the accuracy of these articles on Asian imports then why not include the fact that our government has allowed the Japaneese to wage and win an economic war against us. What do you know about cars anyway? Go ahead and ban me, soon youll wake up out of work and shit your pants as you drive to the unemployment line. Kiss my ass. Kaltenborn (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because it has been identified as an account used for promotion of a company or group, with a username that implies that this has been done by that company or group. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Organization and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

This kind of activity is considered spamming and forbidden by policies, and also violates our username policy.

However, if you feel that there has been a mistake in your blocking, please appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below or email the administrator who blocked you. Your reason should include your response to this issue and a new username you wish to adopt that does not violate our username policy (specifically, understand that accounts are for individuals, not companies or groups, and that your username should reflect this). Please check that your new username has not already been taken by checking this list.

--Orange Mike | Talk 23:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kia Cee'd

Rememeber back to 2006 when you move Kia Cee'd to Kia cee'd. The logo for the car has no capital, but at all others times it is spelt with a capital. Therefore, it should have been left as Kia Cee'd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sco1996 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]