Talk:Mitsubishi Eclipse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Mitsubishi Eclipse page is currently under heavy construction. What we've got already is OK, but could be extended significantly. Here is the list of what's in the works and what still needs improvements.

Contents 1 In the works 2 On the horizon 3 Problems 3.1 Links 4 Edits 5 Films/games

[edit] In the works

These are currently in the process of being written. Please don't duplicate any effort already being expended.

• 1G section with loads of information. The status on this will be updated by 20040901. --Milkmandan 22:37, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC) Forgot to strike this one out a few months ago. Whoops. --Milkmandan 16:52, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)

[edit] On the horizon

These are sections that need work, but which are currently not under active development.

• 2G section update (I'm willing to do this, but will finish the 1G section first and take another look then --Milkmandan 09:05, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC))
• 3G section update
• 4G section update--currently, we say Details of the fourth generation Eclipse were revealed during late 2003 and 2004. What were these details? Also, I've only seen very preliminary information regarding the 4G--are we jumping the gun on this?
• Market section that discusses how the Eclipse fits into the Mitsu product tree, and what types of competetion it's seen.

[edit] Problems

The only real question I've got at the moment is how to deal with the Eagle Talon and the Plymouth Laser. Presently, there isn't much of a problem as both the Talon and Eclipse pages are pretty skimpy. Soon, we need to identify where the information goes and how it's organized. I've got three ideas--what are your thoughts on these? Surely, there's a better way to handle this?

1. Lump everything into one big Talon/Eclipse/Laser page and redirect in. This is probably going to overload the page and won't do justice to the autonomous 2000-2004 Eclipse models.
2. Keep the Eclipse page as the main stem and use the Talon and Laser pages to mention model differences. The problem I see is that the Talon and Laser were just as important as the 1G Eclipse.
3. Spin each generation (1G, 2G, etc.) off into its own subpage and group all of the models under there (e.g., 1990-1994 Mitsubishi Eclipse/Eagle Talon/Plymouth Laser). I see this as the best organization option, but it makes a mess of the links.

I've looked through the WikiProject Automobiles pages and haven't found anything discussing exactly this issue--hopefully I'm missing something?

Any input on this would be great. Thanks --Milkmandan 09:05, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)

[edit] Links

As per the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles, I removed a couple of external links. Those remaining all have >1000 forum members and rank in Alexa's top 1m sites for hits. I also tried to correct a couple of grammatical errors in the opening paragraph, but it's still slightly clunky. I'll try and fix this in due course if no-one else does. -- DeLarge 15:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

To User:DeLarge, Like I said, you are making assumptions and are embarrassing yourself. I'll be nice and help you out a bit here.

1) What links am I posting that promotes a site? Why do you only remove my links and let the others remain? Based on your definition of promotion, every valid link in wikipedia within any article promotes a site, so you think they should all be removed? Are you biased against the urls I post? Please try to clarify this.

2) I own and maintain a website? Really? Which one? The only site I come close to owning would be a personal page from my ISP and I don't "own" that. What are you basing your information on, the fact that I am a member on 80% of those sites, so I "must" own my own site...? I posted some links so now I "own" them? Please, explain this as well.

3) If social/forum sites are not supposed to be linked to why do you only remove the ones I post and let the others remain? Why not remove ALL the links back to sites that provide social interaction and forums? Perhaps this is because you want to dictate what YOU and only YOU like/prefer?

4) The only club I ever owned was a comic book club about 20 years ago, are you referring to that?

I'm reposting the links because they are related to the article and will HELP other people. I will not allow you to dictate what can and can not be posted here. As I said earlier, it's NOT YOUR PAGE.

I don't know if I should laugh at you or feel sorry for you.

-- User:68.101.64.76

To User:68.101.64.76, as I already posted on your talk page:

Please read Wikipedia's policies regarding links:
Links to normally avoid -
3. "Links that are added to promote a site. See external link spamming."
11. "A website that you own or maintain."
12. "Blogs, social networking sites and forums should generally not be linked to."

Your club is (a) very regional, and therefore of no relevance to anyone from 49 of the 50 US states or Canada; and (b) far too small - it does not rank among Alexa's top 1m websites (and with only 67 registered members as of 12pm EST 2006-05-30, it's unlikely to achieve that ranking any time soon). If every car owners' club with 60+ members were to post links to itself on Wikipedia, the whole site would soon become nothing but a web directory. And Wikipedia is not a web directory. -- DeLarge 23:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No response, but spamming continues. "spam" tag added to User talk:68.101.64.76. -- DeLarge 13:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

To User:DeLarge,

I strongly urge you to cease your ongoing harassment here. If you continue to harass users you will be reported and your account will be banned.

Unfortunately, you do not understand how Wikipedia functions or works. The article in question is NOT yours, never was and never will be.

You do not call the shots here. If you did, you would be the only one with edit access and that is obviously not the case, and for a very good reason.

You have no case against these links or myself. All the assumptions you have made and about me and the links thus far are incorrect and you are only embarrassing yourself.

Have a good day.

-- User:68.101.64.76

I've restored my previous comments to prevent confusion. Please note that according to WP:Vandalism, "Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, or deleting entire sections thereof, is generally considered vandalism." When responding or communicating with others, please simply add your comments beneath. -- DeLarge

To address your points:

I have never claimed ownership of this article, to which I have not contributed, and I do not intend to challenge any content which is added by future editors. I have simply upheld the Wikipedia policies listed above with regards to restricting linkspamming, and I will continue to do so.

Please take the time to read How not to be a spammer, especially points #1 & #2:

1. Review your intentions. Wikipedia is not a space for personal promotion or the promotion of products, services, Web sites, fandoms, ideologies, or other memes.
2. Contribute cited text, not bare links. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm. If you have a source to contribute, first contribute some facts that you learned from that source, then cite the source. Don't simply direct readers to another site for the useful facts; add useful facts to the article, then cite the site where you found them.

Thank you, -- DeLarge 23:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits

Hey guys, I made a few minor edits on the article, mainly about the 4G. I've both a heavily modified 3G and stock 4G, if it helps to add credibility. I'd like to add a couple of links too, to 3G community message boards which, just like DSMtuners, hosts a myriad of technical information and discussion about the platform, and specifically the 6G7x engines found in the 3G and 4G.

How much detail can we, or should we, pump into this page?

--Slippercream 08:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to add content, however because Wikipedia is aimed at a general, non-expert readership, they recommend staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary details. (See Wikipedia:What is a good article?) Stuff like year-to-year changes of the colour of the lights in the dash or similar trivia are regarded as unsuitable; not that you'd know it from reading some of the car articles on here...

As per WP:External links, discussion forums are listed at number 10 as "Links to be avoided", and are also not considered reliable sources as there is no editorial oversight or third-party fact-checking. --DeLarge 11:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Films/games

DeLarge recently removed the Films/Games section of the article. I feel that this section is relevant to the article and is not "fancrufty". I decided to add the section back in, and add this section to the talk page incase further discussion is required. Johaen 22:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)