User talk:Andra Febrian

Sir/Mam! I request you to please visit the Maruti Suzuki Arena & Nexa Website. All the vehicle lineup of Maruti Suzuki is now built on HEARTECT platform except Celerio which is still on old Platform. YSSR1865 (talk) 06:59, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

YSSR1865, I can't find anything that says "Ciaz is built on the HEARTECT platform." And you said, "All the vehicle lineup of Maruti Suzuki is now built on HEARTECT platform", how did you came up with that conclusion? How about Vitara Brezza, Alto, Eeco, and S-Cross?

Any addition to Wikipedia must be supported with citations and sources. You had none. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haa!! Sorry for Mentioning all! Existing Alto800 & Eeco were based on old Platform itslef and same goes with Celerio. But Maruti Suzuki itself mentioned in the OFFICIAL WEBSITE that Vitara Brezza, S-Cross, Ciaz, Baleno, Ignis, XL6, Ertiga, Swift/Dzire are based on HEARTECT architecture! YSSR1865 (talk) 07:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

False. https://www.marutisuzuki.com/corporate/technology/heartect I can only see S-Presso, S-Cross, WagonR, Ignis, Swift, Baleno, Dzire, Ertiga and XL6. No Ciaz, no Vitara Brezza. Which part of the website are you talking about, YSSR1865?

As for the S-Cross, it is definitely a mistake. https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/official-new-car-reviews/226342-maruti-s-cross-1-5l-petrol-official-review-5.html Andra Febrian (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check MS Arena Website! and Nexa Website! and I deny the link that you've mentioned (team bhp) one is just being doubtful and there's no answer there. and official website itself is saying that S Cross & all lineup in NEXA based on TECT architecture (HEARTECT). I request you to recheck. I'm 100% sure about that. 07:55, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

"100% sure" doesn't justify an unsourced addition to Wikipedia. This article https://www.evoindia.com/cars/maruti-suzuki-vitara-brezza-review says the S-Cross is built on the same platform as the Vitara Brezza, which is Suzuki Global C platform. The Ciaz was developed before the HEARTECT platform existed at all. https://www.cartoq.com/maruti-suzuki-yra-b-segment-hatchback-could-use-the-ciaz-platform/ this link said it is based on the old Ertiga platform. Andra Febrian (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can check these links,

1) Suzuki Vitara Brezza https://www.marutisuzuki.com/vitara-brezza check the words under "safety to be wicked" title.
2) Suzuki S-Cross https://www.nexaexperience.com/s-cross/safety#element_submenu
3) Suzuki Ciaz https://www.nexaexperience.com/ciaz/safety#element_submenu

and this information is from official website. not any secondary websites like you've mentioned. And i deny your links because they're old.YSSR1865 (talk) 19 January 2021

I deny that because TECT is NOT the same as HEARTECT. They are two different things. TECT is not a platform, rather a marketing term of vehicle structure. Andra Febrian (talk) 10:40, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gu5YPzRqq8E

Crash Test Dummies NOT driving big bus yet!

NO! No driving big bus yet, this one first, go-cart first! 2001:E68:5432:9790:2431:C54C:BC94:29F7 (talk) 09:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you recently reverted a edit by 2A02:A319:403B:1B80:61C7:BF81:8C9D:2488 (talk · contribs). I came across them too, adding text or just 'odd' sources. I looked at several of the 'news' sources, and they look rather bloggy, WordPress style sites.

The oddest thing is ALL the 'stories' were written by "Adam". Looks like someone is trying to promote their own substandard sites. I've reverted several of their edits myself. Just FYI.
Regards, 220 of ^ßorg 12:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please differentiate between these two? Again I request you to recheck the website of NEXA. You're just being like a fan of Suzuki. I already said you to check the website of NEXA. If TECT isn't same as HEARTECT. Then Why did MS mention BALENO & S-Presso (includes S-Cross too) under TECT architecture?? huh. Why're you just covering the truth?? huh. YSSR1865 (talk) 07:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And Remember these are MONOCOQUES..not Ladderframes to be two parts(body & platform) YSSR1865 (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HEARTECT cars could have TECT, and non-HEARTECT cars also could have TECT. Those are separate things. TECT is not HEARTECT and vice versa. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I was too quick to revert your helpful removal on the sales information section from Isuzu D-Max. I've now undone my reversion to your latest version :) Jonathan Deamer (talk) 08:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, in fact you beat me to it with the reversion. Maybe I should go and have my coffee before I try to edit again... Jonathan Deamer (talk) 08:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haha no problem :) Andra Febrian (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mazda CX-8 is NOT anyhow related with Mazda CX-9. CX-8 is simply elongated version of CX-5. The CX-8 and CX-9 are build on two different platforms. CX-5 and CX-8 are of the same width. CX-9 width is 13 cm bigger, which in term of width is A LOT, and by far the most indicative the vehicles are not related. Why am I telling you that? Because once the width of a car is defined it is almost impossible to change, whereas length is easy to manipulate, weather by lengthening the wheelbase or by increasing the overhangs with different bodyworks. Maybe they look alike, but so do today's Mercedes C-, E- and S-class and I bet you will not say they are just a different versions of the same car. So, please revert your changes, because they are wrong.^[1] Zvrkljati (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zvrkljati: Right. So you're telling me the CX-9 is related with nothing? Mazda 6 is 14 cm narrower. You should remember that platform has different definitions depending on the manufacturer. In this case, 'platform' isn't just floorpan. Modern Mazdas are related to each other due to its SKYACTIV platform, perhaps what we should write as 'related' is the closest ones. Andra Febrian (talk) 13:26, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1) I understend related = the technically closest one. 2) In a way all vehicles of a particular manufacturer (or even a group) are related, but you are not going to put them all on a list. When decing the scope of related vehicles you have to use common sense. 3) I no where talked about platform width flexibility. Platform width flexibility is mauch bigger than vehicle width flexibility. So, Mazda 6 being 14 cm narrower is simply not an issue. 4) Even if manufacturer builds all its vehicles on a single platform, there are subplatforms within a platform. Mazda is the case. 5) The closest to CX-9 is Mazda 6. Everything else is much more distant. CX-5 is as much (un-)related to CX-9 as CX-8 is. Give me one prove why in your opinion CX-8 is more related to CX-9, than CX-5.Zvrkljati (talk) 08:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zvrkljati: "Mazda 6 being 14 cm narrower is simply not an issue." but somehow Mazda CX-8 being 13 cm narrower is an issue? If you think the CX-9 isn't related to CX-8, same goes to the Mazda 6.

I'm not trying to push the opinion that the CX-8 is more related to CX-9 than CX-5. It combines both. We'll write both as related to the CX-8. The CX-8 has the same wheelbase as the CX-9 at 2,930 mm, which is probably not a coincidence given it is extremely long for such car. Not to mention it is easier to just take CX-9 platform than stretching CX-5 platform to match CX-9.

I have sources.

• "...because the CX-8 employs the CX-9’s platform but the body is 17cm shorter in length and 13cm narrower in width."^[2]

• "Ensuring this, Mazda opted to go straight for the CX-9’s platform, down to the 2,930mm wheelbase."^[3]

• "The Mazda CX-8 is a crossover vehicle which is based on the same platform as the CX-9..."^[4]

• "First, it’s built on the CX-9 platform, not the CX-5 elongated, as is commonly reported."^[5]

• "This CX-8 employs the CX-9’s platform but the CX-8’s body is 17cm shorter in length, 13cm narrower in width and its heighy is almost identical." ^[6]

• "It is based on the CX-9 platform and has the same 2930mm wheelbase..." ^[7]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Ford Focus (fourth generation)

added a link pointing to Taoyuan

Ford Ranger (international)

added a link pointing to Taoyuan

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Automotive industry in Brazil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chevrolet Joy.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kia Optima, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hwaseong.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nissan Livina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hòa Bình.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thank you for explaining and helping the Toyota Concept Vehicles article. DestinationFearFan (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

BMW 1 Series (F40)

added a link pointing to Mini Clubman

BMW X2

added a link pointing to Mini Clubman

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is your rationale for the changes you made to this article? It seems to me that the original was more descriptive. My Gussie (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the original was more descriptive. Care to elaborate which part do you think is more descriptive? Andra Febrian (talk) 05:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SAIC-GM is more specific than General Motors. The original also showed the country of assembly and provided links to the brand of the car (Chevrolet) as well as the company directly responsible for it. My Gussie (talk) 01:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But "Chevrolet" is not a manufacturer. The original did not show the country of assembly. Andra Febrian (talk) 03:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misread the changes - I agree that the new version is better. My Gussie (talk) 23:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, my first impersonator! Thanks.  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, I'm actually surprised an admin quickly noticed the impersonator and blocked it before anyone in the WikiProject Automobiles (that are familiar with you) noticed... Andra Febrian (talk) 15:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no single test of corporate nationality. Let’s stick to information released by the company itself -> Polestar is jointly owned by Geely and Volvo, making it a Sino-Swedish company.

See: http://zgh.com/our-brands/polestar/?lang=en

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiddo (talk • contribs) 11:57, April 26, 2021 (UTC)

By that logic, why not stretch it to Proton and Lotus? Please start a discussion at Talk:Polestar and try to gain consensus there. Andra Febrian (talk) 12:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that full model change is more important than facelift in vehicle manufacturing? But There is just facelift article in wikipedia.

I think japanese model change article is very informative. This article explains the difference full model change and minor model change and facelift

Please use translator and check out below article

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%A2%E3%83%87%E3%83%AB%E3%83%81%E3%82%A7%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B8_(%E8%87%AA%E5%8B%95%E8%BB%8A)

Facelift article has just 7 lines and very insufficient

What do you think of expanding of facelift article like japanese article?

Can you help me? Footwiks (talk) 16:26, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, "facelift" is a branch of model change yet it is used more often. If anything, a "Model change (automotive)" article should be a separate article, while also listed as a related article in the "See also" section.

And yes, the Facelift (automotive) article needs expansion. The Japanese Wikipedia article seems like a great start for that. I'll try to improve it soon since it's an interesting topic. Andra Febrian (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, "facelift" - As a separate article, It has a limit. Also, "Full model change" and so on - As a separate article, It has a limit. Like Japanese Wikipedia article, What do you think of that one article have all branches of model change?Footwiks (talk) 07:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Volkswagen Jetta (A6), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chakan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not sure whether this is enough to prove it seeing as there is a Livina badge on the back of the car but Nissan Malaysia's marketing seems to only ever refer to the model as the Nissan X-Gear, not the Nissan Livina X-Gear:

• Brochure

• Press launch

• Website (in the vehicles dropdown menu)

KA467 (talk) 19:10, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, I see you have reverted my edits on the Toyota Mark X page. I will admit my edits were leaning towards personal preference, which is not acceptable. However, the Toyota Mark X, despite its presence in the grey market, is not an international product. Therefore, I felt American English was correct. If you review my sources, you will see there are many inconsistencies about Japan-related topics on this website. CarCrazedAlex586 (talk) 15:18, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ENGVAR, specifically MOS:TIES mentioned that "An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the (formal, not colloquial) English of that nation." Since Japan is not an English-speaking country, there is no need to change this article to American English, regardless of their preference of any English variety. Not to mention, it is also advised by MOS:RETAIN to keep whatever English variety that has been established, which in this case is British English. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand now. But can you try and give me some exceptions? I get that EUDM car articles should use British, like the Honda Civic Type R for example. CarCrazedAlex586 (talk) 15:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not a user with any kind of authority so ideally for that you might need a consensus from the article's talk page. But I also want to point out that other JDM cars predominantly use British English too, so as to maintain some consistency I think it should be also in British English. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:57, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's unfortunate. One more thing, Japanese does have some English loanwords, but they're a mix of varieties. They say gasoline and not petrol, but number plate and not license plate. Also, their dates are year/month/date.CarCrazedAlex586 (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andra, an editor opened a new discussion at the talkpage of the Honda Mobilio article, you may consider checking it out. Thanks! VictorTorres2002 (talk) 05:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chevrolet Aveo (T200), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ravon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Small car shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Still you have not started a discussion but you did start editwarring The Banner talk 16:17, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And if you ask again what the problem is: take it to the talk page first to properly discuss your change. The Banner talk 16:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have warned The Banner that they are also engaged in the edit war. For what its worth, I think the DAB page seems appropriate although needs to conform to WP:MOSDAB i.e. reduce length of entries and only one wikilink per entry. But please don't edit war over it. Better for you both to discuss at the talk page and you can always seek comments from other noticeboards or dispute resolution. Polyamorph (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion was what I have been asking for all the time, but I see nothing from his side yet. No reasoning or so. The Banner talk 20:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Banner this is not how you settle disputes. Reasoning was clearly articulated in edit summaries. I see you have opened a discussion at Talk:Small car. This is where further discussion on this matter needs to take place. Polyamorph (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting my edits of Crossover SUV what is wrong with the edits I am making. Also, a sedan isn't a Crossover either. And lastly, in Full-size Crossover you are also reverting my changes. And anyway why do u care so much about the Flex being head image??? I see you are edit warring on Small car. Please stop edit warring me and read my explanations. Take it to the talk page. Just stop reverting with an unreasonable explanation. And furthermore, I was the one who improved Crossover. Adding missing segments and starting the galleries. Did, you start the galleries? Best, 2007DodgeRam (talk) 21:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You seemed to have a lack of understanding of the "Crossover-styled cars" section. No, these cars are not a crossover, but crossover-styled with body kits and such, so that they could say "hey look buy our cars because this is a crossover". Would anyone develop a "crossover-styled" SUV? That would be redundant.

I explained in an edit summary many months ago that if you put Traverse as full-size, it somewhat contradicts with its article which clearly said that the vehicle is a mid-size since 2018. We need something that is firmly full-size, and the Traverse is not one of them. By the way, is this you sockpuppeting? I'm seeing some patterns.

And lastly, don't claim you're "the one who improved Crossover" when your authorship is 1.1%. Andra Febrian (talk) 03:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No that is not me sockpuppeting. He is some Texas Ip. I live in Az. And furthermore , we need more examples in the Full-size crossover segment. I get that there are very few of those but we need examples. Just because you are the number 1 contributed to the article doesn’t mean the article is yours so stop bossing me around. You have no more rights on this sight than me. Please just stop being bossy like you own the article. I’ll make it to #1 contributor of the article in no time at all 2007DodgeRam (talk) 04:16, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're the one that claimed you improved the article. Then I presented a proof that you probably don't, now you're accusing me of bossing around. No, don't twist my words.

Yes, we need more examples in the full-size segment, but i can't think of any other models. We shouldn't just shove in things just because "we need more examples". If we can't get more, probably just let it be. Andra Febrian (talk) 05:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll give you examples: Ford freestyle Ford Taurus X Lincoln MKT Buick Enclave 2007DodgeRam (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea, although for the MKT and Enclave we need to sort out the respective articles, whether they're really a full-size or mid-size. That would require some source-checking though. Andra Febrian (talk) 17:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MKT: https://www.cars.com/research/lincoln-mkt-2016/ 2007DodgeRam (talk) 17:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As for enclave it was full size until 2017 2007DodgeRam (talk) 17:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there,

Seems like you've deleted some information about the Hyundai N1/N2 Platforms here.

Although this information is unsourced, it seems to be mostly correct, from what I can tell.

It would be better to find sources for this information and correct errors, rather than wipe the whole section out.

How do you explain Hyundai-Kia Y platforms then? Most of N1 and N2 platform cars are listed as Y6 and Y7. I think it should be sorted out first. Also there is a lack of sources since i cannot find much about N1/N2. Andra Febrian (talk) 04:01, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Andra Febrian: I am a Rivian employee hoping to improve our article. Some information is new, and some is old and needs updating. Because I am in a COI relationship, I am reaching out to see if you would consider it a good use of your time to take a look at my proposed edits. I noticed you have an interest in automobile articles, and was wondering if you might want to work on improving this page as well. It is always my intention to work within the Wikipedia rules. Currently, on the Rivian talk page I have a proposal regarding updates to our facilities section, and a second one with info box updates. All accompanying sources are formatted. I look forward to your feedback, and appreciate your time. Best IanRivian (talk) 22:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Peugeot 206, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peugeot Hoggar.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

1

It appears that you are intent on undoing my contributions to the article. This is disheartening, and appears to be approaching edit warring. I would appreciate if you would consider that my edits are made in wp:good faith, and try to find a way to collaborate rather than undo my contributions. In the meantime, I will ask user The Banner talk to review the recent edits and keep an eye on the situation. 842U (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a misunderstanding. I did not undo your contributions for the sake of undoing, neither it is an edit war. I could just press the undo button if that is the case, but i didn't because my intention is to improve your good faith contributions. I think my edit summaries are clear enough to explain my edits. Andra Febrian (talk) 11:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like you to consider this again. It's not going to help to simply dismiss my understanding of how you've come across. You're approach has been to respond to all my edits, pick them a part, and leave your imprint as the last word. Your response to me is basically "I din't do that." This response isn't going to work, and can lead to edit warring. I'm interested in editing the article, but not if my contributions are summarily restructured out of the article. You may not be hitting undo, but the net result may be the same. I'd like to think my edits, especially to the introduction, were constructive. It's hard to understand your edits are in good faith when you keep editing out my contributions. It's apparently ok with you to leave the intro with a glaring typo, but not another editors reasoned contributions. Please give my points further consideration.842U (talk) 11:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure that is an exaggeration. I suggest to not take this personally or emotionally, because nitpicking to revert your edits is absolutely not my intention. My edits to your contributions are simply what I think are the better way to do it. If you think I made a mistake, or if you don't agree with my edits, let me know and we can always discuss it instead of giving this kind of ultimatum by assuming bad faith. Andra Febrian (talk) 11:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know why I was selected to give advice as cars are way outside my comfort zone. But I recommend that you guys stop with unsourced edits. Instead, only edit things that can be backed up with independent, reliable sources. The Banner talk 12:18, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra, I noticed that you removed the additions I made to the fourth-generation Chevy Spark page. It was marked down as formatting issues, is this something we can work on? I'm trying to input the information I have on the car as I'm an enthusiast who would like to add to the car's page. I'm still a newbie at Wikipedia, so any help would be appreciated. Thank you! Puffin77 (talk) 18:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra, I see that you have made a lot of edits to BMW X2. Another editor is absolutely opposed to the inclusion of metric hp (aka PS) and is removing this unit from all BMW articles. Not sure if you have an opinion but I welcome you to check things out. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:44, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

STOP; the Chevrolet Spin is GMB,worked there as engineer for years, stop . Indonesia is second row

Yes, I can already tell you're an insider. The article is sub-par, but you did not address the problem. Reverting. Andra Febrian (talk) 10:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was not vandalism I'm love abc (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What did the sentence supposed to mean? Because it's gibberish. Andra Febrian (talk) 01:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Hi Andra, just passing by because I saw you were undoing my work (07/12/21) on the HR engine page (I was in anon), you specificaly deleted the HR18, HR12 and HR15 thread. And I just wanted to know why? as the info are correct but not complete obviously since engines are not out yet. TY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex57290 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know your info is correct and I like seeing insider info like these but since the engines are not out yet based on Wikipedia rules of no future product information (WP:CRYSTALBALL) it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. As response, I hid them out of sight, but not deleting it. Once the engines came out, the info can be easily retrieved because it's only commented out or hidden, not outright removed. Andra Febrian (talk) 16:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no problem then. I'm not an insider but have all these info from forums and wanted to complete it to let everyone know about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex57290 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of production battery electric vehicles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra, I was trying to make some minor copyedits to id:Opel Blazer/Chevrolet Blazer S-10 and some sort of automatic filter blocked my edits as vandalism. I tried to ask for help elsewhere, but I cannot make a single edit anywhere. Do you think you would be able to help figure this out? I am not using a VPN or anything. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:02, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tested with some minor copyedits and found no issues. I personally never encountered this problem in any wiki (although I once edited in German Wikipedia and made a grammatical error, which was then reverted because it comes out as gibberish), but perhaps you inserted some words that might be frequently used for vandalism and tripped the automatic filter? I'm interested to know what kind of edits that you made, maybe it's crucial to the problem. Andra Febrian (talk) 14:17, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added some breaking spaces, made an enormous picture smaller - nothing offensive at all. I also tried to write some text on a few talk pages and tried editing my own user page and everything is flagged. Here is the text I tried to write on another person's user page (google translate):

Halo. Saya mencoba membuat perbaikan tata letak kecil ke Opel Blazer/Chevrolet Blazer S-10. Ada filter yang tidak mengizinkan saya melakukan pengeditan. Apakah Anda tahu bagaimana saya bisa memperbaikinya? Terima kasih.

I am not blocked, but I only have 26 edits. Could it be because I am editing from outside of Indonesia? Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.choppers: Anonymous IP here. The abuse filter log stated the edits were done by a "bocah nakal" (naughty boy). It's somewhat a weird reasoning. 101.128.126.251 (talk) 15:12, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's peculiar - did I make an enemy or is this some sort of automatic filter? And how did they know I'm a bocah nakal?  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:06, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking in order to know that, maybe you can try editing without logging in and see if it trips the filter? Andra Febrian (talk) 02:10, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey- I'm sorry for editing your article so much and reverting your article. I just wanted to make the article more accessible for the information that was being seeked, but now I saw the other links and your credibility, so I figured you knew what you were doing. Sorry again. -Dr. Moist Vanilla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Moist Vanilla (talk • contribs) 02:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and to clarify it's not anyone's article I just happened to create it first. The article functions like a disambiguation page so I figured the current one is the right way to do it. Andra Febrian (talk) 06:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited B-segment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My point that I was trying to make came from a reliable source and the EPA classified the Maxima in the same league as the Altima, even while having smaller interior and luggage capacity. It is odd how it's classified full-size by Wikipedia. Every time people try changing it to midsize it is back to full-size within one month. Even its exterior dimensions are smaller than that of the Altima's. Midsize is more realistic, though I would omit the classification altogether. It's more VW Arteon or Kia Stinger than a full-size sedan like an Avalon or an Impala. 71.94.157.155 (talk) 05:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing my edit without any valuable proof behind this? I've mentioned couple of times VW Sharan is still produced and available to buy in plenty of European countries, production clearly hasn't stopped in 2020 because you're still able to order a new one 2 years after this alleged date of cessation. Here you are, Germany ^[1], Poland ^[2], Czech Republic ^[3]. And you're simply reverting my edit just because. Sorry bro, this is vandalism, hope you won't do this again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.64.96.29 (talk) 07:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I provided retroactive attribution in this diff for the content you merged from Audi India; just be sure to note it in the edit summary for future merges. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not repeatedly engage in deliberate, malicious vandalism of BYD e2 and Dolphin hatchback. It is not notable to you but it is notable to others. Please take into account the viewpoint of others. Fiextqbe (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Others" are plural. As far as I can tell it is only notable for you, no one else expressed their agreement. I disagreed so I reverted it in line with WP:BRD. If you insist, please take it to the talk page and explain why is it notable. Andra Febrian (talk) 03:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is deemed not notable according to you. But according to me, it is notable. Just because others have not expressed their viewpoint does not mean that one can just vandalize encyclopedic information. The information are encyclopedic information for the public and not personal information. BYD is one of the world's largest EV maker and considered as China's second largest automaker. Fiextqbe (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting an content addition due to a disagreement is not considered vandalism. I know how important BYD is as a company, no doubt in mind, but I don't see the importance and the value of adding a not-well-known vehicle (in English-speaking world, or outside China for this matter) in articles such as Hatchback. The article is not a list of every hatchback cars in the world, popular vehicles or industry-changing vehicles (such as firsts) are prioritized as examples. Even in the context of the Chinese market, these BYD vehicles are nowhere near the most popular or the most influential. Therefore I reverted your edits.

Your allegiance towards BYD in your contributions is also quite suspicious, to be honest. For example, you went as far as removing controversies of the company without a clear explanation. Andra Febrian (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BYD e2 and Dolphin hatchback is under the China section. The BYD vehicles do not have to be the most popular or most influential to be listed. BYD is a well-known vehicle brand inside and outside the China market. I am reverting your edits. Fiextqbe (talk) 14:23, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I noticed you did a partial revert of my edit to Chrysler PT Cruiser. I assumed that the British term was the one used throughout the article (and also the user's username who I was reverting seemed like they were WP:NOTHERE but I'm AGF for now) so that was why I had changed it to be the British term. Looking at it now, that appears to have been the only instance of the British term on the article. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, the engvar was kind of unclear anyway. Since it is an American vehicle i figured using American English is the way to go. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Renault Austral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hybrid.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

None are variants CornyTheEditor (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Toyota Gazoo Racing logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Smart 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WLTP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a discussion at AN/I regarding the disruptive editor that you and I have been cleaning up after on List of Ford vehicles and numerous other articles. If you have any details to add, the thread is here. --Sable232 (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andra. Just a question, are you editing while logged out and using the "101.128.126.242" IP address in editing vehicle-related articles? I'm sure that's against Wikipedia policies so I'm just letting you know about it. Thanks! VictorTorres2002 (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha no, my IP is something else, I never logged out and as you can see I primarily use VisualEdit. I should say this is not the first time someone else mistook an IP as myself, since the IP location is in Indonesia with similar editing habits. Thanks for the concern though! Andra Febrian (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Andra. I was just wondering though and I thought it was you the all the time. Cheers! :) VictorTorres2002 (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of production battery electric vehicles, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of production battery electric vehicles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to discuss about the existing red links on Renault template (or any other template related to automotive industry), I suggest you to discuss on the template's talk page. I'm not sure if you have read the Red link article, but it states that:

“

"Avoiding creation of certain types of red links (title); Do not create red links to: Articles that are unlikely to be created and retained on Wikipedia.... "Red links may be used in navboxes which also contain links to existing articles, but they cannot be excessive. Editors who add red links to navboxes are expected to actively work on building those articles, or the links may be removed from the template.

”

Therefore If you are going to create (or are working on) the articles in red links, just go ahead and restore them on the template. Otherwise, your reversions are disruptive so you would restore unuseless links.

If you disagree with me or want to debate this, you're welcome to open a discussion on Template_talk:Renault. Thanks. Fma12 (talk) 09:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I overlooked the paragraph in WP:REDLINK (ctrl+F'd 'navigation' instead of 'navbox'), so I agree with you. Andra Febrian (talk) 09:27, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian

Thank you for creating Peugeot 408 (crossover).

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Andra Febrian: The page was reviewed as part of the WP:NPP page review. The article is effectively unsourced and is directory-like. Its not ideal as a disambiguation page either. scope_creep^Talk 09:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep It is not a disambiguation. It is a Wikipedia: Set index article, go ahead and read what it is. It doesn't require citation, even though Suzuki Landy cites two sources. "List items do not require citations if they only give information provided by the source(s) cited in the introduction to the list. If an item gives more information, that should be backed up by citations." Andra Febrian (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Andra Febrian: Right oh. I'd hadn't came across that before, seems an interesting concept. scope_creep^Talk 09:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, no agenda at all. I just try to craft pages the way in which I think is best. While I feel the "warning" is a bit ridiculous, I'll cede this and just move on. You can't win them all. Rjohnson1980 (talk) 20:11, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you reverted this edit on Baojun 510, you also reverted a wrong wikilink that I had disabled (Chevrolet Groove, is a different model so it is an electric vehicle not related to the rebadged "Chevrolet Groove" commercialised in Latin America. That's the reason why I had also added a tag to avoid confusions.

So I'm going to fix that. And please, try to check what other users editions consist of before reverting impulsively. Thanks. Fma12 (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I trusted your edit summary. The tag is misused because "Chevrolet Groove" is nowhere near "Baojun 510", uneducated readers will be confused before they scroll further down. The tag is more suitable at the export market section. Also none of the Grooves is an EV, confuses me for a second. Andra Febrian (talk) 10:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why revert the changes?! My edit was not spammy or destructive.

The car has a new model and all-new look. It should be the highlighted image not the old looking model. 89.147.0.201 (talk) 08:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The same image cannot be used twice in the same article. In addition, WP:CARS convention stated that the top image doesn't need to be the newest one (WP:CARPIX). The same section advised against using indoor images in car shows whenever possible due to the lighting and reflections. Andra Febrian (talk) 08:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Ford Escape (first generation), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:28, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that revert. I think I got carried away. I'm still trying to work out what some of these terms are in Australian English. So what are "mid-forward wings" I google it and all I get is the Honda Accord. StAnselm (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I also need help with headlamp / headlight / taillamp / taillight in the article. StAnselm (talk) 15:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The mirrors are situated in "mid-forward wings", which is a very uncommon term. What they mean is this. I'm not an English expert, let alone Australian English, but I would call it "fender-mounted wing mirrors". Andra Febrian (talk) 14:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:FAW Toyota logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on MG Marvel R requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PK650 (talk) 06:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Ford Escape (first generation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Moved to main namespace

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. AudiGuy-1204 (talk) 21:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WP:NAVIMAGES is just an essay. I have reverted your deletion of an image in the Mazda template. Bruxton (talk) 02:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Just an essay" doesn't mean it can be ignored, it was written for a reason. WP:NAVIMAGES is written based on MOS:DECOR, which is not an essay. Andra Febrian (talk) 02:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that your contributions are filled with reverts. Ragarding this subject, essays are not policy or guideline and yet that is your justification for 2 reverts. Opinions may vary about whether a Mazda logo is appropriate in a Mazda template. It is clear that Wikipedia suffers from a lack of images and perhaps edits like this are one reason. I will not revert your latest reductive edit to the Mazda template, but please consider not forcing your opinions based on an essay. Bruxton (talk) 02:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because there's too much repeated vandalism or incorrect edits around WikiProject Automobiles (yours isn't by the way), am I supposed to hold back reverting them? That has nothing to do with the issue we're discussing, in fact that's ad hominem.

It's not just the essay, many other automobile navboxes had their image removed for the same reason. As a matter of fact, I used to be fond of images in navboxes until I found that essay, so I'm not even forcing my opinion here. If you added an image at Template:Mazda vehicles‎ it's just the matter of when will it be removed. Andra Febrian (talk) 04:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that it provides an insight into how the native name of the car is pronounced. To remove it seems pointless to me. Sprucecopse (talk) 13:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you didn't provide context I would assume you're talking about articles of Korean cars. Most Korean (or even Japanese) cars are named in a Western way instead of native, with Latin script, Western origins (such as name of a city, words in the English/Spanish/Latin/Greek/etc dictionary) and Western pronounciation. A transliteration would just provide a corrupted form of the words are pronounced, making it useless. The Chinese names of cars however, are Chinese in origin thus a transliteration would be very useful. Andra Febrian (talk) 14:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

VictorTorres2002 (talk) 03:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Suzuki Fronx. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Acura Integra (DE). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello! Thanks for writing this article. I encourage and hope you will write more! Have a good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra. You deleted my All New Ayla, Innova Zenix image and "Suzuki Neo Baleno" part of Suzuki SX4. why did you deleted it? please respond. Thank You. Davin1011 (talk) 15:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Ayla image is unlicensed. Hopefully I can capture one this week to replace it. The Zenix image is mine, and it shouldn't be repeated twice in the same article. Andra Febrian (talk) 01:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so sorry. Thank you for replying. Davin1011 (talk) 13:02, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra, just asking, why did you revert the image I added on Mercedes-Benz GLC? Fukswityu (talk) 11:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly because I know exactly who you are. But the legitimate reason is, the car is in a darker colour with sun reflections. We have several images of white GLCs (that are already qualified as Quality images). Andra Febrian (talk) 11:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who am I? Fukswityu (talk) 11:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanna know why did you delete the vehicle segment description in the article of Chery? for example Chery Tiggo 8 — Mid-size CUV.

Is this some kind of convention? Infinty 0 (talk) 01:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is subject to change, and doesn't match the articles (CUV vs crossover SUV). Andra Febrian (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra, yet another IP is off swapping pictures of BMW 3-series. Would you mind checking in at BMW 3 Series (E36) and BMW 3 Series Compact from time to time? Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Ford Escape".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Omoda, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian Have you ever been uploaded Japanese "Mitsubishi Motors Vehicle Lineup General Catalog 1997 Volume 2" brochure to Internet Archive (archive.org)? Yuliadhi (talk) 23:58, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, and I never saw one either. Why are you asking that? Andra Febrian (talk) 01:12, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure this is another pointless bot of some sort; they asked me a similar "question".  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:28, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I was reverting a sock of an LTA - if you've checked the edit and stand by the changes,then no worries with reinstating Girth Summit _(blether) 10:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Volkswagen Virtus, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Volkswagen Virtus, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does related have any special meaning? I didn't think it was disputed that one of the models made before the model 3, just like the model y, is a "related" model to the model 3. At any rate I reverted that <removal>, and ignored the summary, both because I thought it made no sense and because it was done by an LTA's IP.

If related has any special meaning then forgive my ignorance. – 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:D427:B819:5DC8:2330 (talk) 12:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also the Design section seems to imply that the Model 3 "will use"(outdated section?) technology from the Model S. – 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:D427:B819:5DC8:2330 (talk) 12:33, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Toyota Vitz has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Editor, I edit here too bearing the username TheProEditor11. I noticed that an edit made by me on Honda Amaze was reverted by you. You reverted the edit for some baseless reasons since my edit was really correct and valid. The edit was also not my opinion but a statement which rely on citation. I also even own Honda Amaze VX and hence know about changes. I am also a good follower of Honda Cars. I would like to request you don't revert edits for baseless reasons as editing on Wikipedia is a very serious task. If you even think that I am wrong then prove me how my edit was wrong Sir. I am a good listener! Pardon me for any mistake -_-

Have a good day editor! :) - TheProEditor11 (talk) 06:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, when you added this message [1] to WT:CARS, you forgot your signature. The missing timestamp has caused the auto-archival bot to keep missing the notice, leaving it at the top of the talk page for the last 2 years. I've added a {{unsigned}} to correct the issue for you. -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 00:38, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - would you like to explain your edit summary in your recent revert at Mitsubishi Lancer? Girth Summit _(blether) 15:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I meant you accidentally reinstated a vandalism - I'm not saying you did the vandalism. Apologies for the confusion. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fair enough. I was reverting a sock's edits but for sure some of them might have been valid. No worries Girth Summit _(blether) 16:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andra Febrian, before you say anything to the admins, as you already know who I am, there's just a couple of things I'd like to say, if you don't mind.. MrDavrSock (talk) 06:41, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Baojun RM-5, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please add more pics as there are now other colours that have been spotted (Silver, Yellow, Grey, White). Theres also some info regarding a Long range variant being added as a third trim to the line up in China.

Also prices have been mentioned in China for all trims. LeeBanj (talk) 12:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://carnewschina.com/2023/08/24/mg-cyberster-leaked-ahead-of-the-official-launch-at-chengdu-motor-show/

https://i0.wp.com/evmagz.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/MG-Cyberster-Price.jpg?resize=1024%2C254&ssl=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeeBanj (talk • contribs) 13:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Lexus TX. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello! I trust you're enjoying a wonderful day. I wanted to express my gratitude for your valuable contribution to Wikipedia through your article. I'm pleased to let you know that your article fully complies with Wikipedia's guidelines, so I've officially marked it as reviewed. Wishing you and your loved ones a fantastic day ahead!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 04:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can I ask you a question? Last time I put BYD Yuan Plus images (the China version of Atto 3) into BYD Atto 3 article, but you rejected it because "it's the same car". Why don't you do the same thing for BYD Dolphin? Guyrichtheman (talk) 12:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because it has a different bumper design, demonstrating this paragraph:

"For the exported model destined for the global market, the Dolphin is lengthened by approximately 20 cm (7.9 in) in order to accommodate a new front-end crash structure, which is claimed to be designed for a five-star Australian ANCAP safety rating. The global model received different front and rear bumpers, front hood and wing fenders that extended its overhang, which increased its length to 4,290 mm (168.9 in) and placing it as a C-segment car." Andra Febrian (talk) 14:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I added all the sources in many article but you and Sable232 rejected them because "It is a vandal". Why don't you do the same thing for car articles. 122.164.83.39 (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to remind you that one thing has nothing to do with the other, as per WP:OTHERSTUFF. Andra Febrian (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just asking

On the Lexus LBX article in the table, why did you add unannounced, but hide the power/torque figures? Just asking QuattrostagioniIV (talk) 11:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You know, in case it's correct anyone can unhide it. Can't risk giving out false info. Andra Febrian (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have to be pretty honest, the mk3 is an ugly car. Does not represent the micra well. Psyfly2 (talk) 10:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. But I'm not editing based on my personal opinion. Andra Febrian (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personal preference on various generations is irrelevant - the photo of the blue Mark 3 is a verrrrryy good photo, and that's what counts. Please see WP:CARPIX. Personally I would take the Mark 2 every day of the week.  Mr.choppers | ✎  14:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why doing the math for sizes and dimensions of vehicles put out by manufactures and comparing them by doing math is considered original research when saying it is the smallest Volvo ever made forgetting about S60 sedan Volvo which is smaller. The dimension are sourced from the Volvo website and materials put out by Honda for accord size. Also the article reads like an advertisement which is also not advised under wikipedia rules. The point of a wikipedia article is not to sell stuff but to provided useful information at a glance and if that is by providing information that contradict the official word of companies then that should be what happens. Rabbipika (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dimensions are alright, we can use it in a Wikipedia article. What is not alright is pulling far-reaching conclusions from it.

From dimensions, we can conclude by math and say that the EX30 is smaller than the XC40. What's not alright is saying the EX30 is not an crossover SUV because it is smaller than sedan. You're saying that as if it's an obvious knowledge, no it's not. Crossovers are not always big. Plenty of SUVs are smaller, journalists (not only Volvo themselves) say the EX30 is a crossover.

Pretty sure "smallest Volvo ever made" (no the article didn't say 'ever made', it says 'currently on sale') came from an article, not my thinking. If it is incorrect I'll remove it. (It is in fact correct. The S60 is much, much longer by a large margin.)

If it reads like an advertisement, you or anyone can fix it. I personally don't think it reads like one but I might be biased. Andra Febrian (talk) 00:54, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand I have a bias against SUVs as I think that they are to big and as an American that is saying something or not

but seriously I don’t like that some hatchbacks being marked as SUVs as it sets a dangerous precedent and size arms race so that is my perspective so I get it I have bias but I think that we could and a section or something on what category it is as I read a review on it where it was referred to as a hatchback

though the article does kind read as a advertisement as almost all reviews are positive but a lot of those reviews were sponsored by Volvo or given early access to the vehicle by Volvo which encourages positive reviews in order for the reviewer can get better relations with the car company Rabbipika (talk) 01:43, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Honda Elevate, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Toyota bZ3, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:23, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mazda CX-50, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Marque" is just a synonymous of "brand" when talking of cars in British English, especially in England. It isn't at all a grandiose term. The Smart article move can be supported anyways by the fact the article seems to be written in American English (mostly). Urbanoc (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I explained the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#"Marque" and WP:PEACOCK. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed your extensive revisions to articles on various car brands, changing 'marque' to 'brand.'

These moves were made without discussion and appears unprofessional. Before making such widespread changes in the future, please carefully consult the relevant sources (in this case, I suggest referring to several major English dictionaries, like Oxford or Collins) for proper justification. Infinty 0 (talk) 10:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I already check dictionaries. So voice your opinion of this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#"Marque" and WP:PEACOCK. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:28, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to edit every vehicle page and add their model codes to the generation Infoboxes as they're already added to the anchor/drop tab at the top (example, Crown: (Fifteenth generation (S220; 2018))). It's pointless to add them where they aren't needed. So, discontinue making such edits. It's just a waste of time, and a pain to undo them individually. Antares600 (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you realize there was always been two model codes mention in every section, one in the section title / header and one in the infobox title? What i did was moving it from the infobox title to its dedicated field. I didn't duplicate anything. This helps if we wanted to cite a source for it. Perhaps model codes in the section title are excessive, might consider removing it.

And consider that not every Wikipedia readers understands cars. Presenting model codes without telling them what it is might be a little confusing. Andra Febrian (talk) 01:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt majority of Wikipedia readers actually care about that. Again, I've looked at numerous models on the site and they do not have the model codes in the generation Infoboxes, specifically below the image as what you're doing. It is nothing more than a pointless, disruptive edit. It has not been a thing until now. Looking at pages such as the Matrix, Celica, Vibe, and Accord further backs it up. Antares600 (talk) 11:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well duh. It was a new field added 2 weeks ago. I raised the issue and advocated for the new field in this discussion, which was met with support and no objections.

Whether readers care or not is an entirely different issue. Model codes was already around for years in Wikipedia car articles with no context whatsoever. The new field rectified that issue, so now readers know what the cryptic letters are. If you want to remove them outright, make another proposal.

That pages will see the new model code field soon.

Apparently improvements and innovations can be judged as 'pointless' just because it was never done before. Andra Febrian (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andra, partly related to the above, I have started a discussion at AN/I regarding Antares600's disruptive editing. The thread is here if you have any input. --Sable232 (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ford Explorer EV, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ford Explorer EV, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited SEAT Ateca, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cupra.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That IP's other edit was to replace a good image with a bad one from one of his favorite uploaders on an article that's long been a favorite target of his. While the IP geolocates to the other end of Java, I don't see how it ccould be anyone else. That said, I'm not going to re-revert, if you think the addition is accurate and constructive. --Sable232 (talk) 16:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I didn't really notice what the IP's doing in the other edit. Yes, this one seems to be constructive. Andra Febrian (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Fangchengbao. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 18:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have reverted my change compact suv from subcompact. class based on wheelbase. i suggest you to search. also xv is high version of impreza. how can be xv subcompact suv while impreza compact. thank you.in your idea cupra formemtor, corolla cross compact but xv crostrek is similar yaris cross. not evem imposibble. Skyside (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you translate GAC Aion into Indonesian Wikipedia? Thanks. Veracious ^(•‿•)^ 13:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at a loss to understand why you chose to edit out important ...and verified info from the Isuzu Vehicross wiki page. You have removed both USA domestic AND Japanese JDM production number charts...with the associated exterior/interior trim and color info.

This is ALL verified info..which you claim is unsourced in your edit notes.

Why didnt YOU verify first...what makes you change info like this without checking FIRST ??

IF you want to verify this info..or ANY info regarding the Isuzu Vehicross I suggest you join the very active and knowledgeable Facebook Vehicross group :-

https://www.facebook.com/groups/32929439606

In the meantime..Please undo all your edits right away. Thank you. JoFotoz (talk) 02:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is very upsetting, but as per WP:NOTDATABASE Wikipedia is not a place for such specific statistics, even if its verifiable. There are other websites that would welcome these data, including that Facebook group. Andra Febrian (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect...Wikipedia is very much a place for this kind of info.

Hence that info has been part of the Wiki page for many many years.

One of Wikipedia rules is Verifiability ...

Please note..from Wikipedia "rules" :-

""A'll articles must strive for verifiable accuracy with citations based on reliable sources""

All that info including charts etc are/where 100% verified through Isuzu USA

prior to their closing....and the JDM charts where verified through Isuzu japan.

Indeed...they are both the source of that info.

I am not sure why you feel its your place to change it ???.

Again , I respectfully ask you to undo your edits ,immediately ...

...and by all means join our Vehicross group if this Vehicle really interest you. JoFotoz (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Kia K3 (BL7). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jaecoo, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Andra Febrian. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Jaecoo".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Andra, Just wondering why have you deleted the Belgium: Vilvoorde RIB on the Clio 1 information? I have 1996 Lutecia (Clio) and that car is built in the RIB (the fabrication code start from H: RIB) Neknek (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone who looks like a vandal added it. Feel free to add it back. Andra Febrian (talk) 13:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi--if you're going to revert someone a couple of times, especially a new user, please leave them a welcome template and an explanation of what you think they're doing wrong. Drmies (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I edited the smart page a few times where I fixed mistakes of untrue information and added more content. Can you let me know why are you reverting my changes to the old page? Smartexpert (talk) 10:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I explained it very clearly in the edit summary. Andra Febrian (talk) 12:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the edit summary? Smartexpert (talk) 13:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Tata Curvv. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 08:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andra Febrian. Thank you for your work on Hyundai Ioniq 9. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Have a wonderful and blessed day today!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 10:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]