User talk:Gtofever

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Buick Skylark, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. --Sable232 (talk) 23:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm kinda new at this....I haven't worked with templates, and wasn't aware I had removed any, sorry.

I don't think I found any info in error, but some I deleted wasn't directly relevant on the Skylark page and could be found on other Wiki pages cited.

It would be nice if you had contacted me before blowing away the work I did.....my time is just as precious to me as yours is to you! I could have added the reasons once notified. It discourages me from future editing. Gtofever (talk) 10:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Example: "Buick purchased back the tooling for the engine from American Motors, which acquired them when the company purchased the Kaiser Jeep division from Kaiser Industries." This is great info, but not directly relevant to the Skylark. It can be found by following the cited Wiki page for the 231ci engine; no need for it to lengthen the Skylark article, so I deleted it.

I support the "timeline" narrative, but I don't think mixing engine details in with other yearly changes belongs there. There is a separate "Engine" list further down the section that duplicates much of the narrative, and that is a much better place to collect the engine links/cites and details (power, standard or optional equipment & years). Even better, collect in a table as was done at the end of the Sixth Generation section. Gtofever (talk) 10:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please stop adding "stuff you know" to Wikipedia. All your edits need a reliable source. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two models I added came directly from the Tremec website: https://tremec.com/menu/light-duty-truck-transmissions/

I don't see a citation beside any other model listed, just a link to the main page at article bottom.

You could have asked, , or checked the website, rather than assume it was incorrect. Gtofever (talk) 23:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what's considered a reliable source? I've been heavily involved with the Pontiac hobby for years, acquiring tons of knowledge about Pontiacs and shared GM platforms from every source; direct experience, from fellow club members & enthusiasts, and research for the last 29 years. I was our clubs newsletter author for years, and wrote many technical articles that were shared with chapters nationwide, but would I be accepted as a "reliable" source? With the subject of old car topics like GM bellhousings, its nearly impossible to find "official" sources. For example, I've spent WEEKS searching for dimensioned drawings of the bolt patterns, with very little success. The transmission and adapter companies don't post the info they have on their websites and they won't discuss it. GM doesn't keep details like that, especially for older stuff. Basically the only two sources are the few and far between old "hot rod" magazine articles that typically don't answer the questions, and the enthusiasts forums, where you have to read tons of scattered posts to scrape together tidbits of of info, then assemble and compare and "detective" out the correct "facts". I assume that a forum post would not be considered a "reliable" source (that's why I didn't ref them), but the only other option is leave the the Wiki article lacking. Gtofever (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Buick Engines (September 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:List of Buick Engines and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 20:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gtofever! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 20:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]