User talk:Mariordo

Welcome!

Hello, Mariordo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Brusegadi 05:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The Brazil Star

		The Brazil Star
		You are awarded this barnstar for completely revamping after more than 70 edits the Ethanol fuel in Brazil article. So much information was added that this article that once had just 16 source citations now boasts over 85 source citations. Good Job! ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 02:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Japan/Costa Rica without army

I don't read Spanish, but believe your source is incorrect. Here's a link to the constitution of Japan, promulgated in 1946 and enacted in 1947, which abolishes any war-time force. http://history.hanover.edu/texts/1947con.html I can't find a source that compares the two directly, and am not that familiar with wikipedia mores to try an edit again. Can I entrust you with this one? I'll check back in in a couple weeks. Cheers. -Matthew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.144.183.24 (talk) 07:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for droping by and clarifying. Indeed I will check the facts and make the correction if supported. My understanding is that Japan has a peace-time army for defensive purposes only, CR none, but sure I will check on that one, only give me some time since I am right now in the middle of something else.--Mariordo (talk) 11:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
  • • Wiki has this issue well documented, see Japan Self-Defense Forces, List of countries without armed forces, and particularly read Defence policy of Japan for the interpretation of the Japanese constitution you brought as reference. I hope these articles clarify the issue.--Mariordo (talk) 16:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Hi, thanks for looking into it. For further clarification, I think there's absolutely an argument to be made that Japan today has an army. More precisely, the Japan Self-Defense Forces page states that in 1950 the government created a National Police Reserve, which could reasonably be called an "armed force." But it also states that after 1945, Japan had zero military capability, and as you know this was constitutionally prescribed in 1946. What I'm pushing for is that even if Japan recreated its army in the 1950s, the statement "Costa Rica was the second country to constitutionally abolish its armed forces" holds true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.144.183.24 (talk) 08:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
        • You made a good point, but it is kind of weird because Japan was without army for only for 9 years, CR still does not have one today. A good solution will be simply to state that CR constitutionally abolished its army in 1949, and delete the "first" part. However, I think we should move this discussion to the CR Talk page to give other editors the opportunity to comment and bring more facts. I will do so copying this entire section. Let's continue over there.--Mariordo (talk) 13:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Congratulations, Mariordo, on bringing Flexible-fuel vehicle up to GA. Well done! Johnfos (talk) 05:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for San Francisco congestion pricing

On March 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article San Francisco congestion pricing, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

North American blizzard of 2010

Hey Mariordo, just wanted to drop by to say great work taking and uploading pictures for the North American blizzard of 2010, it's greatly appreciated. Kind regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 08:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• Your welcome.-Mariordo (talk) 15:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for Your Work on EV Articles

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your tireless and excellend work improving many articles on electric vehicles! Ebikeguy (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome.--Mariordo (talk) 01:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Electric Bicycle

Wow! You've put a tremendous amount of work into this article, and you've done a superb job. The only problem is that I now feel horrifically guilty for neglecting my own good intentions to improve the article. Thanks! Ebikeguy (talk) 16:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome! I have googled a lot, and it does not seem to be much RS info available. If you know of any reliable sources please let me know, I will have plenty of time during the following weeks to improve it even further. I am particularly interested in developing a summary for India and Australia, that I believe have also significant fleets of e-bikes.-Mariordo (talk) 16:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Good work, great read!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work on electric vehicle warning sounds. It looks great what you did, I couldn't have done as good a job. - Epson291 (talk) 01:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much.-Mariordo (talk) 02:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for electric vehicle warning sounds

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for BMW Mega City Vehicle

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Renewable Energy Portal

Hi. Some of us are setting up a new Renewable Energy Portal. Feel free to contribute and discuss the matter at Portal talk:Renewable energy#Merger proposal. Johnfos (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar for you

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Congratulations, you have contributed a large body of work to WP without sacrificing quality, and now have four excellent GA articles. Thank you for your efforts. You really are the kind of editor WP needs... Johnfos (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you.-Mariordo (talk) 06:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Capital Bikeshare

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jaguar C-X75

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for City Car (Concept)

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Renewable energy task force

Please see Portal talk:Renewable energy#Task force ?... Johnfos (talk) 19:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Looking for Wikipedia Ambassadors

Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you are listed as a Wikipedian associated with Harvard. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors to help with Wikipedia assignments at schools in Boston and Cambridge (including Harvard), which will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester. The role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.

Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).

If you live near Boston and you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone else from the area who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page.

If you're an experienced and active Wikipedian, you might be interested alternatively in becoming an Online Ambassador. The role of Online Ambassadors is to serve as mentors for students; it doesn't require any in-person outreach. Take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 21:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Canvassing votes

I am not going to put up with you strategically canvassing votes, nor am I going to to waste my time reporting anything this time. However, for each person that you "canvass" I will be notifying an editor in return (a futile process I know). OSX (talk • contributions) 23:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

As the admins explained during the ANI you started against me, what I did is not considered canvassing and it is allowed. In this particular case I have the courtesy to let the main contributors of three articles be aware of the discussion, regardless of my position on the subject (I actually opposed one merge, support the other and I am hesitant in the third - they might not show up, vote for or against, the point is having the courtesy to let them know). This is exactly what you did with the mass merger, you indeed have the courtesy (which I really appreciated) to let all parties involved know about the new proposal. If you cool down, behave according to WP:Civil, read Wiki policies and guidelines, and above all, concentrate on the arguments instead of attacking the persons, the discussions will be more productive for all of us.-Mariordo (talk) 05:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, I thought you wanted a "motion of order" to stop the discussions as it was eating into your valuable holiday time. Maybe you should practise what you preach because it is coming across as very hypocritical to be fully engaging in the discussion if you are as busy as you claim. OSX (talk • contributions) 23:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

FYI check the IP address from where I did my last edits. Last Saturday when I posted the off the air tag I was in the US (Arlington, VA), there is a 24+ time gap (I was travelling), and today in the evening I was editing from Brazil (Sao Paulo). I jumped in the discussion because against the rules you innapropriately blanked a discussion I had began. How I spent the time on my vacation is my business, and if you do not stop the personal attack (just like this one and the other I removed from my talk page) and concentrate on the arguments, you let me no choice but to request a disciplinary action against you. Read carefully the rules, you have already exceeded what is acceptable.-Mariordo (talk) 05:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Mariordo, if interpreting your "request for assistance" (euphemism) at WP:ANI and on Stephan Schulz's talk page as a "tantrum" constitutes a personal attack, then I apologise if you were offended by that. However, it is hardly "exceed[ing] what is acceptable" and threats of "disciplinary action" will not deter me from continuing to discuss the mergers. Without too much trouble, I could dig up some equally lousy "personal attacks".

I asked you a question about an inconsistency (you said you had no time to participate in discussion because you were on holidays, but you still seem to be fully engaged in the discussion). This is not a personal attack at all, it is simply an observation of your behaviour. I do not doubt that you are actually away from home at all, what I am doubting is the motive behind the "motion of order" which comes across as a request for Wikipedia to stop all discussions pertaining to hybrids and EVs because you don't like it. I find it difficult to assume good faith in this instance, because each time there has been some sort of discussion surrounding the merger of a hybrid vehicle-related article, you are always trying to come up with an excuse to end or delay the discussion, or to make it extremely difficult for those proposing the merger to do so. Originally, the discussion was not in the format of your choosing, in the case of the Elantra LPI Hybrid, the discussion was not held on your preferred talk page.

You may well be telling the truth in this instance, but based on your previous track record, you can't blame me for being a little cynical.

Additionally, I don't see what delaying the discussion is going to achieve because your rationale was so you could formulate "arguments, particularly WP:Notability". As you seem to have already made solid points (both in the current discussion and the previous ones), I can't see what you are trying to achieve. Just today you expanded your opposition to the Civic Hybrid and changed your stance regarding the Honda Accord. Regards, OSX (talk • contributions) 05:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Nissan Leaf GAN

Just to let you know (if you haven't noticed already) that I have started reviewing Nissan Leaf for GA. After I finish going through the entire article, I'll post everything.

Just double-check and make sure that the content is supported by the sources given. I just found (and tagged) several things in lead which are not in the given citations. Also, make sure the dead links are taken care of. –MuZemike 01:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your throughout review. Before proceeding I have a question regarding style. My understanding is that you try to avoid many refs in the source in the lead unless the subject is highly controversial or certain claims that might be questioned. In this particular case the fact that Nissan announced a 100 mi range is fully supported by RS in the main body of the article, as well as the Dec 20 launch. Please confirm if you still consider indispensable those cites in the lead. As you might be aware I am on vacation but I will try to complete the sources you requested as time permits.-Mariordo (talk) 04:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

And by the way, see the values in Europe from the table, they are closer to 35K not to 30K as you corrected it in the lead. Also please take into consideration a couple of comments that were made recently in the Leaf's talk page, please provide some guidance because the car is Japanese but there is a lot of info coming from the US like the equivalent mpg.-Mariordo (talk) 05:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Are you adding the government incentives to the given prices, then? Because that may be a bit misleading to readers. –MuZemike 07:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the intend was to show all prices before any tax credits and subsidies. This criteria has been used in the Leaf's and all other plug-in and electric car articles. The reason is precisely not to misled readers as not everybody is eligible or might qualify for the maximum tax credit, some are not entitle to such credit (embassies, staff from international organizations, exempted entities as NGOs and other non-profits, etc), and some incentives are valid for a limited time or only to first buyers until allocated money runs out, etc. Therefore, the fair way to present prices is to show the retail price before any incentives and immediately refer (linking) the reader to the article presenting the details and restrictions of such incentives. For such purpose I developed in detail and for several countries the article Plug-in electric vehicle with a comprehensive section called Tax incentives for PEVs by country. See over there for example the $5000 incentive available in California, or how the UK subsidy budget was restricted. In general carmakers for marketing purposes usually present the price after discounting the incentives to make the price look lower. I await for your answer before making any changes.-Mariordo (talk) 14:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

PS: Since there is no GA review page I think this discussion should continue in the Leaf's talk page for the benefit of all editors regardless of the outcome of this review, and also to make current editors aware of the ongoing review.-Mariordo (talk) 14:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

A consensus was reached regarding the units issue and I already made the changes, so I believe this issue is solved.-Mariordo (talk) 18:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, let me get the prose issues compiled, and I'll post what I have on the GA review page. –MuZemike 19:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Vehicles energy sources comparison

I'd like to make reliable article comparing electric cars with conventional cars, and cars able to run on pure ethanol, how it looks like, and also how it would affect if theoretically all cars in the USA would be electric - how power plants chimneys output would compare to current cars exhausts output and how much more coal and gas would have to be used, and also how it compares to the ethanol cars. Would You care to help?SHAMAN 21:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

That is a subject I am very interested in but the way you put it I see a great risk of original research here (check WP:OR if you are not familiar with this policy). Also, a comparison with EVs is totally dependent of how clean the energy matrix is for a given country, which makes such comparison complex and only a few published paper have info for some countries (i.e, the results from Brazil and the US are completely different). If all content can be referenced from WP:Reliable Sources then I do not see any problems. Also, are you talking about neat ethanol vehicles or flexible-fuel vehicles? Anyway, right now I am on vacation until next weekend, and juggling with a couple of GA reviews, so my best guess is that I will have free time to work on such article (there will be plenty of research to do to get the sources) until February.--Mariordo (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC).

Original research that's something I want to avoid, I know comparisons articles are of special kind but I think that it's important topic and such a comparison is needed as there are no many places where people can make up their minds as most websites on that topic are biased towards electric or ethanol. I think of global approach, gathering data from as many countries as it's possible.SHAMAN 13:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Discussion: To merge Honda Civic hybrid

Hi. Any thoughts on if it's necessary to find an independent administrator ourselves, to avoid a repeat of simple majority rule? ---North wiki (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of comment

My apologies for deleting your Mini E comment during this edit. There was an edit conflict and it just shows why it is a good idea to edit section-by-section. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Apologies accepted.-Mariordo (talk) 05:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. I am looking into forming a Wiki project about electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles. Any thoughts? Are you interested? I have notified Ebikeguy ‎and Yegort. Do you know any other editors that may be interested? I would be grateful if you've any suggestion. I think we can start forming the project if there are five editors to sign up. Feel free to drop a line at my talk page. (I hope by putting discussions of the proposed project in one place would make it easier for every interested editor to keep up to date.) ---North wiki (talk) 07:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Would like to update you that there's a discussion at my talk page about editor Johnfos's suggestion for us to set up as a Green Vehicles Task Force associated with Wikiproject Environment. Stephno thought it would be better to be under Wikiporject Automobile. Any thoughts? I think at present there looks to be about four editors interested, one way or the other. We're pretty close. Just one more! ---North wiki (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

AN/I thread

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

DYK for Toyota Prius V

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar for you

		The Special Barnstar
		It was an inspiration to see the way you worked through your holidays to bring yet more articles up to GA. Well done! Johnfos (talk) 21:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.--Mariordo (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 01:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Jan 23, 2011

Would just like to inform you the Green vehicle task force is formed under WP:Project Environment. ---North wiki (talk) 04:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Diamondland

Hi, as I state in my edit summaries, please do feel free to restore anything from Diamondland that you deem useful. Also, he has a particular interest in one of your areas, green transport, and so if someone shows up shortly making similar edits, including oddly named categories, a multitude of redirects, overpopulation of See also, spam links to corporate news, copyvio or close paraphrasing, and a poor command of English (he's Spanish), please do let me know, if you wish. regards, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Incredibly, I just become aware of the allegation, baseless imo, that you are Mac. That can't be pleasant. I've weighed in at the SPI. best regards, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Plug-in hybrid

Hi Mariordo,

If you have a moment, could you please have a look at recent edits by me and Othersideofthecoin on Plug-in hybrid. I'd like to know your thoughts and to see if you would like to do any other editing in light of the recent changes. Thanks. Ebikeguy (talk) 05:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

The Environmental Barnstar

		The Environmental Barnstar
		For extensive, ongoing work on environmentally-important articles. Thank you! Ebikeguy (talk) 01:09, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

MPGe

Dang, my homey, but you did some sweet, sweet work on the MPGe article. I'd give you another barnstar for it, but you are probably getting tired of them by now! Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Veteran Editor Status

This editor is a
Veteran Editor
and is entitled to display this
Iron Editor Star.

I just looked at your edit count, and it would appear you are entitled to display the box above, if you want. If not, erase this whole post. Ebikeguy (talk) 22:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will display it.--Mariordo (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Club at Berkeley

Hi Mariordo, I'm just writing to let you know that me and some Wikipedian friends are launching Wikipedia Club at Berkeley, a student club for promoting participation in Wikipedia and face-to-face collaborations. If you're still living in the Bay Area and that sounds fun to you, please consider joining our mailing list. Thanks! Dcoetzee 01:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Three phase traffic theory and Traffic congestion: Reconstruction with Kerner’s three-phase theory

Hi, I wondered if you had any thoughts on the two articles above? User:Blueshifting and IP:141.113.86.94 (Registered at Daimler AG, Stuttgart) have suddenly been spamming links to these two pages around every traffic page they can find (even though they are irrelevant). The articles appear to reference just one author (Kerner, of Daimler AG), apart from some inaccessible critiques in subscription-only journals. The articles themselves are not written for an encyclopaedia (their titles are strange and ungrammatical, the style is very detailed but launch straight into theory without explaining what its for, where its used or why it might be useful) and I wonder if they are really WP:RS, WP:FRINGE, or even WP:SELFPUBLISH? I cannot say that I've ever heard of the theory before (but I stopped working in traffic modelling before the papers were published). Have you? Best, Ephebi (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I haven't heard about it neither. I will look into it asap, but this week I am on the road, so it might take some time. Thanks for letting me know. Cheers.--Mariordo (talk) 15:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - not much time here either... but as Daimler is one of the car companies that is making adaptable cruise control devices and I wonder if this relates to their patents. There is a better reference in I also see that there are rival "multi-phase" theories claimed by these ACC providers. So I wonder if its more to do with mechanical engineering than transport planning? These 'syncronised flow' theories seem to be physicists reiterating what we've long known - that variable speed limits can change separation between vehicles hence increase highway capacity. If they want to use ACC to bunch up closer then there would probably be an impact on filtering & weaving sections and also induced waves of braking on manual cars but I see no reference to this. Ephebi (talk) 10:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Gran Colombia

Hi Mariordo, I must first congratulate you for the high quality and quantity of your contributions. I also want to thank you for your recent contributions to The History of Panama. The section can sure use the help. The reason I write to you is that one of the edits you contributed -changing Republic of Colombia for Gran Colombia- needs to be addressed since this area is frequently the focus of heated debate. I seriously doubt Wikipedia will resolve the controversy anytime soon but what’s important is that the greatest amount of light be shed on the subject as possible. I put down some thoughts on the discussion page so whenever you have some time to, please let me know what you think.~~Castelauro~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Castelauro (talk • contribs) 22:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I will reply in the article's talk page.--Mariordo (talk) 23:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mariordo,

It is great to find someone obviously so passionate about their cause.

Your contributions are fantastic and are extremely informative.

Sorry for this approach in contacting you but I did not know of another way. I want to ask if you would be interested in helping us with editorial content for our website http://autoindustrysustainability.org/ ? We want to try to make it easier for car buyers to know what the real affect of their decision on car purchase is, not only to them but to the environment. I believe we can encourage consumers to change their buying habits if they are aware of the effects of their consumption. I did have a sustainability graduate help try to set this up last year but he now has a full time job and cant spare any time. It will be an interesting project and you seem to be the idea person to help get this off the ground. Obtaining much of the information we require will be difficult however we first need to legitimise the case for this by collecting and consolidating what information that does exist then we can name and shame manufacturers who don’t take part and make assumptions (being transparent) when this is necessary… I can pay $10 per hour and there is no rush at all with the project so just a few hours a week on an on going basis would be fine… I look forward to your reply. Regards amin saleem amin@btclick.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by AutoIndustrySustainability (talk • contribs) 10:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

prius isnt prii

even the fans, well, toyota doesnt have any fans, don't call it, plus, its not in the dictionary and nor is it a proper noun, nobody has agreed to that, they just are trying to advertise it, toyota hasnt officialized "prii" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.153.41 (talk) 02:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I just suggested you discuss it in the article's talk page first, since the use of Prii is supported by a couple of WP:reliable sources and your edit is not.--Mariordo (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Chevrolet Volt

Sorry about the revert. You did provide specifics. I caught it after the revert was done. It's back to your version now. Regards, --Manway 03:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Ford Focus

Hi Mario, thanks for closing those old merger discussions that have been clogging up the WP:CARS talk page for too long now.

With respect to the mess that is the myriad of Ford Focus articles, you mentioned that you may be open to a reorganisation of these articles into a neater compilation. That is, a "Ford Focus" parent article, with:

• Ford Focus (first generation)
• Ford Focus (second generation, Europe)
• Ford Focus (second generation, North America)
• Ford Focus (third generation)

Thoughts? OSX (talk • contributions) 11:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Your proposed organization looks much more reasonable, and in this case the WP:AUTO seems the best place to have such discussion, tagging all involved pages, just as it was done with the mass merger discussions. If you still believe the Focus Electric should be merged I think it is better to have separate discussions, this is, reorganized the whole Focus line first, and afterwards re-open the discussion about the electric version. As you know, I do not think the Focus BEV article should be merged, but following the discussion in this order allows to separate the issues.--Mariordo (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Gas Prices and MPGe

shouldn't MPGe's go up because gas prices and electricity didn't? should I edit the numbers? 76.91.57.122 (talk) 4:06PM, May 1, 2011 (PST)

or am I wrong in thinking it was based on money?

MPGes depend on the energy spend, so it is not based on money. The values I updated come from the citation provided in the table (see here EPA estimates), the previous values were for mid February prices.--Mariordo (talk) 04:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! -129.49.72.78 (talk) 19:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Future

Today we mostly use petrol and diesel from crude oil, but this is running out in resources within 30 years. Do you know what we will be most likely to use as an alternative? Pass a Method talk 18:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

From the wording of your question I understand you are talking about the energy sources for the transport sector. This is a complex issue that depends on how oil prices evolve (my guess, prices will continue to increase but fluctuations will occur as in the past) and technology innovation. My wild guess is that we will see in the upcoming years a more diversified energy matrix for transportation, and the actual mix depends a lot on the geographic location of each country. I might expect more ethanol and biodiesel use in tropical developing countries (modeled after the successful Brazilian sugarcane ethanol experience - see Ethanol fuel in Brazil), more use of natural gas vehicles across the board, and more use of plug-in electric vehicles in developed countries, but oil will still keep a significant market share, so higher fuel economy is key to reduce consumption, and here hybrid electric vehicles and high efficient internal combustion engines will play a key role. As for the fuel cell hydrogen vehicle it is the long term dreamed solution, but after two decades of research and development, we are still several decades away from having a practical and economically viable solution. Let's hope the electricity will come every time more from wind, solar and other renewable sources, but the US has a lot of coal, so it will take a lot of time to switch to more clean sources of energy, unless there is a technological breakthrough. In the short term, a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid is the best solution available, whether using ethanol, biodiesel or natural gas to power the internal combustion engine. That my shot at the crystal ball game. Best regards.--Mariordo (talk) 16:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, i'm a bit more optimistic after reading that. Pass a Method talk 18:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

CVRP Real Time Funding Availability

I appreciate your offer re: creating a CVRP article, but my time/motivation is limited. Would it be OK to just add the sentence you removed from the Nissan Leaf article to the California section of the article on Government Incentives for Plugin Electric Vehicles? Thanks. Stoater P (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)