User talk:Jenova20

You found my talk page! Feel free to leave me a message, i don't bite and i promise to respond as soon as i notice!

Cleanup

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_pages_needing_factual_verification

New copyright lesson

Hi Jenova. I've re-written the copyright lesson, and was wondering if you had any thoughts on its clarity. User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Copyright. Worm^TT · (talk) 21:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

That's amazing, got it spot on there Worm! =]

Congrats Jenova20 12:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that for me :) Worm^TT · (talk) 12:56, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

No problemo =] Jenova20 12:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Dell Inspiron Duo

We really don't need any more entries in the table with only question marks instead of the specs. If you don't want the entry to be removed during clean-up, fill in the cells with question marks. Hakimio (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

1) They are filled with question marks, your statement is contradictory.

2) You don't decide solely what goes into the article just because you work there a lot.

3) I provided you 3 sources with all those specs because i figured you would do it faster than me.

Thanks Jenova20 08:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

1. Just because there are many entries in the table with question marks instead of specs doesn't make it ok to add even more entries with question marks.
2. Before I started working on the article it was a total mess and looked like this. I don't just "work a lot on it" - I am currently the only maintainer.
3. The links don't really matter until you actually use the info they provide.

Long story short, it's pretty simple to add the missing info, but if you don't do that, ultimately the entry will be removed with all the other entries that don't provide valuable info and just waste space. Adammw already removed some of the useless entries with this edit. Hakimio (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Kia Picanto

Okay, I can understand your will. I did the edit because I find those tables a little unaesthetic in the layout of the page with and such little text around them. I suggest we drop the tables and use a non-text layout like in Hyundai Getz. By me it looks a little better. Also, I suggest to use only "Kia Picanto" in the photo captions because it improves readability, and there's a little issue with the first Euro NCAP ref link. I'll save my revision directly on the article and if you don't like it you can revert to a version you want. Regards, BaboneCar (talk) 09:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe adding a multiple image template in the left, with an additional rear view makes it a little better? BaboneCar (talk) 10:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I think the original safety section on Getz was mine although i can't be sure.

I'm updating all because i realise how some cars can have really critical statements from NCAP and others can fare worse and get an applause from them.

So i'm doing all of them to cut out Weasel/POV statements and leave it completely unbias-able.

I'll look at your new revision but if i do revert then it's only because i'm waiting for a response from the auto club on their opinions.

Like i said, i did like the way you laid it out in a row but i think it's less confusing for the reader if they are in the proper sections and can't be confused that way.

Also i'm no good at adding pictures and captions so change something if you want me to understand and i'll take a look.

Thanks for the speedy response Jenova20 10:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

auto safety "template"

Hi, as I stated in my edit comment, what's amiss is that "adult", "child", and "pedestrian" are common single words that are gratuitously wikilinked, per WP:OVERLINK. Please unlink them across the board. Rostz (talk) 00:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I have already agreed to change that at the auto club talk page.

Thanks 82.132.138.133 (talk) 07:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)