Talk:BMW R1200RT

message: 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)
replies: text: 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%. --Cheesy Mike 15:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Best viewed at

message: 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)
replies: text: 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 . -- Brianhe 22:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: 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)
thread_title:  Blanks (reprise) 

message: I notice the  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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Understood. So what changes would you suggest? Be bold!! --Cheesy Mike 09:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Advert

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  I think this article should be removed from Wikipedia.  Motorrad-67 (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: deletion

message: I was wondering if any one can comment on the reliability of the refence link i repaired. The reference was no. 13. Id this link reliable? (http://www.automobilsport.com/bmw-motorrad-rider-power-survey-r1200-rt-uk-ride-magazine-comfort-reliability-handling-overall-impressions-best-motorcycle-plymouth---15371.html). Hextad8 (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a reprint of a BMW press release. It would be better to link directly to BMW's press section, here, and to title the reference "BMW Motorrad claims top accolades in the 2006 RiDER POWER survey (press release)" so it's clear it is not an independent source. I think it's acceptable to cite it, but because it's a biased source, I would de-emphasize it. The quotes from Motorcycle News fail RS and should be deleted, because they are self-published comments on a forum, not edited work by named, authoritative sources.<P>The effusive peacock puffery in that section looks all the more silly when you scroll down slightly to the embarrassing safety defects in the braking system described just below. The whole section needs a rewrite to be more objective and lean on better quality sources. --Dbratland (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The puffery is a legacy from Jeff Dean who put it there. I'm happy to see it go, despite thinking that the R1200RT is a fine bike - I have owned two (but won't buy another as I'm too young for pipe and slippers)--Biker Biker (talk) 22:10, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable news link 

message: Is there any particular reason to break WP:MC-MOS and mention San Marino Blue more than once in this article? — Brianhe (talk) 19:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors 

message: thumb
:File:B. Un samedi à Bordeaux... (7863588160).jpg was a bit gray so I adjusted the color balance a little to fix it up. It is a better photo than :File:R-200-rt.jpg because there's less pixel noise and other distracting flaws like glare off the reflectors.  Cropping out the unhelpful background would be an improvement but that would only exacerbate the low resolution. Another quality photo is :File:BMW R1200RT 2014 Liquid Cooled.JPG. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: I think I fixed my mangled ref.  At least I hope so.  If I did not I hope someone will step in and fix it. Jeffrey M Dean (talk) 14:19, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mangled Ref 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on BMW R1200RT. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724005038/http://www.lasdhq.org/sites/motorcycle-test/2010.pdf to http://www.lasdhq.org/sites/motorcycle-test/2010.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://bmwmotorcycles.com/etc/utils.jsp?t=accolades
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614135425/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=2FB2C9140B693C4980257448004A4385&freeText=Blank to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=2FB2C9140B693C4980257448004A4385&freeText=Blank
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614140848/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=E981F14894C3D468802575E40032769F&freeText=Blank&tx= to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=E981F14894C3D468802575E40032769F&freeText=Blank&tx=
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614135431/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=7802F713BF36E6898025713B003ECCD2 to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=7802F713BF36E6898025713B003ECCD2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614135441/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=3931D4B7E0CCF9208025713B003F3828&freeText=Blank to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=3931D4B7E0CCF9208025713B003F3828&freeText=Blank
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614135448/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=971223298BFD22C9802570450036D627&freeText=Blank to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=971223298BFD22C9802570450036D627&freeText=Blank
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614135518/http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=3EEE463E2EDBA5438025713B004149C9&freeText=Blank to http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/expand.asp?uniqueID=3EEE463E2EDBA5438025713B004149C9&freeText=Blank
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion