Talk:BMW R 1200 RT

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Motorcycling BMW R 1200 RT is within the scope of the Motorcycling WikiProject, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of motorcycles and motorcycling. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Contents

[edit] Best viewed at

I had added the tag, "Best viewed at 1280 x 1024." I had not written, "ONLY view at 1280 x 1024." It is best viewed at 1280 x 1024. Good grief! Jeff dean 15:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

But the point is that an open project like Wikipedia should design pages that can be viewed on any machine with any browser at any resolution. If the page is best viewed at 1280x1024 then something is wrong with the design of the page and it needs to be fixed. I track browser resolution closely on websites that I own. What I see month-on-month is that proportion of browsers with a resolution of 1024x768 or less is around 50%[1]. --Cheesy Mike 15:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
This is true. To add: Wikipedia also includes cascading style sheets for viewing on devices like PDAs and devices for the visually impaired. So it is not necessary to recommend a viewing resolution. —Malber (talk • contribs • game) 17:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Now that the infobox is added and it contains most of the key elements in the specifications section, is the specifications section now redundant and ready for removal? i.e. is there anything in the specifications that is not adequately covered in the infobox? --Cheesy Mike 19:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I think See information box for other specifications is good, and I will remove redundancies in the specs section as I have done for other articles when adding the {{Infobox Motorcycle}}. -- Brianhe 22:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blanks

Dear Jeff dean,

  1. Please don't revert unless you assume vandalism. Please see WP:Revert for details.
  2. Please don't assume that any article on Wikipedia is yours. If you look at the bottom of the edit page, you will find the sentence "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." Please read WP:OWN for details.
  3. As your changes are obviously contested, please at least provide arguments for them. As shown above, your personal preference is not an argument.
  4. Please don't make assumptions about me, in particular, don't accuse me of breaking WP's rules unless you have evidence. This is clearly a personal attack. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.189.126.6 (talk) 21:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC).
Dear anonymous person. Thank you for your comments. How can I make assumptions, as you suggest, about an anonymous person? It is not a personal attack. How can it be inasmuch as you are unsigned and anonymous?
How indeed? Yet you assume that I'm a sock puppet, something which would conveniently carry a block.
Please check this PDF file: [2], and this: [3]. Should we name bikes like this -- R-69 -- with a hyphen?
On the R-27: It's a contemporary source, so it looks that way. Stuff original from BMW like owner's manuals would be even better. I would even prefer German stuff over anything else possibly foobared by the importer, but I see that the alternative has merit, too.
On the R-50: More interesting because it looks like foobared by the importer, as the bike is called both R-50 and R 50.
To be fair, my 1937 and 1938 German BMW motorcycle brochures have a space after the R and before the number. So do my brochures from the 1950s. Indeed, my own uploaded photo on Wikipedia from 1964 show the following:

thumb|left|250px|1964 manual

I don't understand you guys. Is there a mandatory religion for WP editors, the Church of IPs Are Always Wrong? Sorry that I blew your believe system. --87.189.116.19
Entering this debate late: But what about the 1st 2 points? And I note that BMW themselves use the spaces. Paul Beardsell 01:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. M-72 re-emerges as "87.189.xxx.xxx.x" His/her writing style is, let's just say, unique. Jeff dean 08:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually., it's not me. That IP address is from the Netherlands, a country I've not yet had the pleasure of visiting. The use of the hyphen seems to me to be un-BMW-like. It's almost mandatory in Soviet nomenclature, but rare (from what I've seen) in BMW literature, (though it does exist). As to spaces in early advertisements and literature, are they typographical/artistic, or do they also appear also in text? A point of interest is that BMW rarely seems to have used Blackletter/Gothic script for model designations. A final point is that my writing style may be unique, but I'd never make the mistake of saying "believe system". The correct usage is "belief system". M-72 12:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
My apology. Jeff dean 12:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
It really does not matter by whom the points are made. And anonymous edits are allowed. Neither is the style pertinent. The points are well made. No one person or group of people owns the article. WP:Revert and WP:OWN are pertinent here. Address the argument, not the man. Paul Beardsell 08:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I do not support the move to R 1200 RT, just as I do not support the changes for F 650 GS or any other BMW motorcycle article. --TimTay (talk) 10:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The changes are clearly demanded by primary sources. Why do you oppose them? Remember that WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY. --87.189.62.202 (talk)
To space, or not to space: "that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them? To die: to sleep ..." Motorrad-67 (talk) 18:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

So, The result of our little discussion seems to be that the move is unambigiously demanded by primary sources, supported by secondary sources and that the only reason not to do them is WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --87.189.71.248 (talk)

[edit] Blanks (reprise)

BMW itself uses blanks in its motorcycle model names. To be 100% correct we should do so here also. One argument against this is that it makes referencing WP articles difficult. Another: In text we will forever be using nbsp markup to prevent the model name being split over lines. Paul Beardsell 08:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advert

I notice the {{advert}} template has been added stating that the article is too fulsome in its praise of the RT. I disagree. I think it contains a lot of useful factual information and the only real praise is appropriately cited magazine / award quotations. Bottom line - I think the use of the template is unjustified. --Cheesy Mike 08:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The motorcycle is great. I own one myself. But the language is too fulsome in its praise. There is not one word of criticism. I just want a few small tweaks to what is otherwise a good article. Paul Beardsell 09:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Understood. So what changes would you suggest? Be bold!! --Cheesy Mike 09:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Now you put me on the spot! It is, unfortunately, much easier to criticise than it is to contribute. That doesn't preclude criticism, and you seem to agree with the criticism I make. I'll give it a think. Bide with me a day or two. Paul Beardsell 09:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] deletion

Others have worked on the page besides Jeff, so speedy is not appropriate. (from WP:CSD: "Author requests deletion... provided the page's only substantial content was added by its author" As I have not created or worked on the page, I can and did remove the tag. On the basis of the talk page & the history, it seems the deletion will be controversial, so the best course if still serious about deletion would be to list it on AfD.DGG 18:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There's no prospect for deletion: It's a good article. All the contributors to it deserve praise, even the main contributor, who now wants to throw all the toys out of his pram. But no article is finished, there is always room for improvement. Paul Beardsell 19:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I think this article should be removed from Wikipedia. Motorrad-67 (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)