Talk:AMC Matador

message: Who keeps removing all the stuff that gets entered? Toys and stock car racing were just ripped out. (This unsigned comment was left by  131.107.0.73)
:I didn't see the stuff about NASCAR and toys get removed, but I removed the stuff about the Matador leading to the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, as I have explained on your talk page. --ApolloBoy 01:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are you getting this stuff from? You have not shown me why you think the Matador leads to the LH-cars and LX-cars, and you have yet to show me any references to explain this. If you cannot do so, then I will keep removing it because it is considered original research, which as I have said before, does not belong at Wikipedia. Also, please stop calling me a "nuisance", or you will be warned for making personal attacks. --ApolloBoy 06:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm only deleting your info because you did not provide sources or references to back up your observations. If you can add adequate sources and references to the page in order to back up your claims, I will keep them. I'm quite sure the Premier was AMC's next mid-size, but that doesn't necessarily mean the Premier was meant to replace the Matador. If AMC had intended to replace the Matador, I'm quite sure they would have done so shortly after the discontinuation of the Matador, not 9 to 10 years later. Plus, the Matador and Premier were  marketed in totally different ways; the Matador went up against other American intermediates of the day, while the Premier competed with the likes of Audi and Volvo. --ApolloBoy 07:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: "Edits for which no reliable references are provided may be removed by any editor".  Please feel free to re-add it if reliable sources can be cited.  --Interiot 11:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Early editing

message: The article says that Matadors were used in the TV version of The Dukes of Hazzard - however, the comprehensive list of cars in that article doesn't mention the Matador.  In fact, the only cars not listed explicitly in that article is the police cruisers.   Were those Matadors?  SteveBaker 23:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dukes of Hazzard? 

message: Useful tip for the future: It seems like there was no photo of an actual, for real, not NASCAR-ized Matador on the page - so I found someone selling their car on eBay and asked really nicely if I could feature their car in the Wikipedia article - and (no suprise) they were very happy to hand over the rights to their photo.  This trick has worked for me half a dozen times - and it's a LOT better than relying on 'fair use' images. SteveBaker 02:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scans from brochures are dubious (at best) fair-use claims.  It's definitely illegal to use them if other sources exist - and they clearly do exist.  The only way we could use the photo from the brochure would be if we were discussing the brochure itself - and we aren't.  So please don't put the brochure scan back - in a gallery or whatever - because I'll be forced to revert it.  Re-annotating the image doesn't really help - it only confirms the suspicion that we can't use it.  The photo of the NASCAR Matador is also on the edge of being illegal (although we do talk about the NASCAR thing specifically - so it's not quite so problematic from a 'fair-use' perspective).  What we REALLY need is a photo someone took of that car that they are willing to put into the public domain.  Incidentally, the way they made hand-painted images look like photos between about the 1950's up to maybe the mid 1980's was to employ very good artists and to make copious use of airbrushing to create subtle highlights and faux reflections - those guys were incredibly skilled yet badly paid.  But in an age when computerised 'paint' programs didn't exist, that was really the only way. These days they are more likely to take the existing CAD model of the car and render it in a 3D graphics package. SteveBaker 16:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better Photo 

message: I've merged content from List of 1971 American Motors automobiles, but since it's a list of specifications sourced from Oct. 1970 Popular Mechanics, I think it's safe to delete the article as long as I provide proper attribution. So here is the article history before I deleted it:
* (cur) (last)  14:38, 26 June 2006 Wiarthurhu (Talk | contribs | block) m (moved List of 1971 American Motors Automobiles to List of 1971 American Motors automobiles: caps title)
* (cur) (last) 14:30, 26 June 2006 Wiarthurhu (Talk | contribs | block) m (moved 1971 American Motors Specifications to List of 1971 American Motors Automobiles: OK, no rule against lists of cars, right?)
* (cur) (last) 04:44, 26 June 2006 ApolloBoy (Talk | contribs | block) (This does not qualify for an article)
* (cur) (last) 02:21, 26 June 2006 Wiarthurhu (Talk | contribs | block) (Well, excel table is here, u r welcome to clean up html.)
* (cur) (last) 02:02, 26 June 2006 Wiarthurhu (Talk | contribs | block) (Table has data that can be placed in other AMC wiki pages. Pleeeez don't delete it. If you know how to do a table, please do it.)
--Deathphoenix ʕ 23:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of merged content 

message: This user put his favorite pinewood derby car back into AMC Matador again - I rv'ed it...again...<sigh>. This is a photo he took of a car he built (at least according to the image description) - this is definitely 'original research'. If you make a model of a car take a photo of it and attach it to an article about that car - you did original research - and it's flat out not allowed - no matter how relevent it might be to the article. It's also 'WP:Vanity' - which is also not allowed. Also, we do not put material about toy cars into articles about real cars - just about every real car ever made has one or more toys made of it - so this fact is quite utterly non-notable. If we're going to document the toys made for real cars then I'm going to have to start photographing my 300 toy MINIs! This has to be the fifth or sixth time we've been through this - and I'm getting pretty sick of it. SteveBaker 01:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm in agreement with User:SteveBaker (edit - and User:ApolloBoy) here. The excision of the 'Models' section and the accompanying photos does not reduce the amount of information about the car itself, especially with a photo of an actual Penske Matador already in place. Its addition, by contrast, seems to be adding only some skewy formatting (WP:MOS#Pictures recommends against justifying two photos opposite each other and letting the text run between them). Removal of it has been discussed here, agreed by consensus, and is not therefore (a) "careless", (b) "unnecessary destruction", (c) "vandalism", etc etc. --DeLarge 01:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All the usual suspects....--matador300 02:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User:Wiarthurhu (aka matador300) and Toy cars. 

message: For a car that advertised its obscurity, it was the subject of not a  small number of scale models and toys, compared to the higher volume but rarely modeled Hornet. Aurora AFX HO-scale slot cars made police and taxi versions of the 1972 hardtop, including one painted like the Penske / Mark Donahue "flying brick". The overstyled 1974 coupe was also produced as an HO slot car, but not the better selling Ford Torino. The coupe was the subject of 1/24 scale plastic models by AMT. Cox, maker of gas powered models, produced a 4 door Matador sedan, and a larger slot car of the 1974 coupe. While the Plymouth Superbird is a common Pinewood Derby muscle car subject, its boxy shape makes the 1972 Penske Matador a relatively simple project.
Does this rule apply to all auto and toy pages? Airplane pages? Ship pages? Are all model and replicas banned on all WP pages? All auto pages? Certain auto pages? Toy pages? Who makes the rules? Why can you post a picture of a Matador on a pinewood derby or matchbox page, but not on the car it represents? What if no picture of the actual car is available, and no promo picture is available? Who made up these rules? Which pages do they govern? Can you use a model of the Boeing 787 on that page if the airplane hasn't been built yet? What if after it has been built? Are digital models allowed? Are links to movies of digital models allowed (see SA-6)? Are drawings allowed? If so by whom? What about a stack of Hot Wheels Dodge Caravans? What if you have a sourced reference to a notable toy? Can a toy have an entry (such as GI Joe?) Can a single scene from a movie have an article (Killer rabbit?) Can a single character from a movie have an article? Can a single model of a car (The Machine) have its own article? Is an automotive reference book an unreliable source? Is an article with many references and links unsourced? And what is the meaning of life anyway??? --matador300 02:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who objects to Scale Models?

message: Please justify the removal of Adam 12 and Pink Floyd and Cox  from this section:
While V-8 power was down for many sedans, AMC used a 401 cubic inch V-8 that outpowered most other police sedans. 0 to 60 times were within 7 seconds, comparable to the 2006 Charger Hemi police car. Top speed was about 125 miles an hour, which took only 43 seconds, much faster than the previous 1970 Plymouth Satellites. These cars would be seen on later episodes of Adam-12, and Pink Floyd The Wall (film). The Adam-12 police car would also be the subject of a now-rare  Cox radio controlled gas powered replica. List of AMC models--matador300 02:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They aren't notable. Sure Adam-12 and The Wall featured Matadors, but so did some other 1970s and 1980s TV shows, like The A-Team for instance. Plus, the Matador was just used as a "generic cop car" in those movies/TV shows, much like the LTD Crown Vic or the Monaco. --ApolloBoy 02:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting, not Fixing 

message: *In the television series Adam-12 one of the patrol cars used was a 1971 Plymouth Satellite.
--matador300 02:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And what does that have to do with this article? --ApolloBoy 02:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plymouth Satellite in popular culture

message: How's  that for a simple guideline?? --matador300 02:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So your theory is that if any one of the 1.2 million Enlish language articles on Wikipedia is breaking the WP guidelines - or the bounds of good taste and common sense - or the laws of several countries - then it's OK for you to go and screw up every other article in the same way?  Um....let me think about that....NO!!  SteveBaker 06:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: If a link already exists in the other article, it's ok to put on in here

message: The Matador Coupe never had roll-down quarter windows.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.251.114 (talk) 10:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All of the regular Matador Coupes came with roll-down quarter windows. Only with the Barcelona version were they non-opening "opera" windows. CZmarlin (talk) 03:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Barcelona

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on AMC Matador. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20131017163907/http://www.matadorcoupe.com/history.htm to http://www.matadorcoupe.com/history.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120229174614/http://www.matadorcoupe.com/images/CoupeProto.jpg to http://www.matadorcoupe.com/images/CoupeProto.jpg
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050715000206/http://www.matadorcoupe.com:80/ to http://www.matadorcoupe.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified