lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Alfa Romeo 2000

message: Who thought including photos without the model year was a good idea? Or, at least, what series?  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 07:28, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year of the huh
Talk:De Tomaso Vallelunga

message: I'm removing this whole paragraph.  Mid engined cars had been built since at least 1923 with the Tropfenwagen.  And Lotus had been racing mid engined cars since the Lotus 18 in 1960.  The Porsche 904 predates the Vallelunga.Scottanon 05:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First MR car?
Template talk:Classicpow-auto-stub

message: Do we have an operative definition for "classic post-war automobile"? What makes this car classic? After which war? I can guess which one, but what's the point of saying post-war, when the template already has a date range (1945–1975), and the war is not directly relevant to the automobile?Or more bluntly: why does this template exist? I'd say we should just replace this with , and perhaps a category from :Category:Automobiles by decade when known. TheFeds 23:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "classic post-war automobile"; if none, why not replace?
Talk:Mako Shark (concept car)

message: A photo image  has been added to the infobox. (Vegavairbob (talk) 06:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Four new images added; new sections, titles started, and article revised to proper format(Vegavairbob (talk) 05:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Images/Format

message: The voice of the article is written in a way that breaks the fourth wall, mentioning how you may have noticed something. Should be changed to reflect facts and not your supposed opinion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.124.128 (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopedia Voice
Talk:ZIS-101

message: The statement that the 1936 ZIS 101 was equipped with a "three-speed automatic gearbox and a torque converter" CANNOT be correct.  The first fully-automatic transmission was the Hydramatic on the 1939 Oldsmobile in the USA. The torque converter did not come into automotive use until the late 1940's.
RogerInPDX (talk) 03:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ^He's right, Oldsmobile created the first automatic. Where'd the data for this article come from? --76.115.67.114 (talk) 10:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Automatic transmission??????

message: About the ZIS-101automatic transmission that was an crazy ruskie imbeciles propaganda,I had just fixed that shit. Neverguesswhathappened (talk) 22:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automatic transmission hoax 
Talk:Moskvitch 400-420

message: it is said that Stalin hated copied German technology then why chose a German car?!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:582:7C50:4800:47D:2EDE:9915:43C1 (talk) 15:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  a comment 

message: I put the paragraphs in what appears to be chronological order, although it almost seems like there were two different articles interwoven with each other. It is still not entirely easy to follow, and there is still contradictory information on the Opel Kadett origins; I deleted one unsourced paragraph, but the rest is still there. I'm not familiar enough with these cars to get to the bottom of it. --Sable232 (talk) 21:29, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Page layout
Talk:Bentley S2

message: Any advertisement for Bentley, a British car, in the Times, a British newspaper, would use British rather than U.S. spelling, e.g. "aluminium" rather than "aluminum". So either it is being misquoted, or some U.S. newspaper is meant. But we need to know which to determine which correction to make. Suggestions? PMLawrence (talk) 11:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal evidence of error in cited advertisement
Talk:Rolls-Royce Phantom V

message: 1. a reference that Patten's car was removed from Hong Kong. Akrasia25 (talk) 18:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: To be researched [[User:Akrasia25|Akrasia25]] ([[User talk:Akrasia25|talk]]) 18:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

message: I have been researching this for days and even wrote the Norwegian Rolls club and there is little chance that he had a Phantom V. I am removing it. 
I found references for all other ownerships but not this one.
"XXXXXXX wrote:
> 
> As I remember, King Olav never had Rolls-Royce models among his cars - only American cars."
--Akrasia25 (talk) 01:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: King Olav

message: Undid deletion of edit. Please explain why you removed this reference?--Akrasia25 (talk) 09:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: James Bond car
Talk:Rolls-Royce Phantom VI

message: The latest Phantom is to tiny to be called Silver Phantom VII.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.252.11.10 (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

message: Quote:
"In a 1979 upgrade the engine capacity was increased to 6,750 cc (412 cu in), a 3-speed automatic gearbox with torque converter was substituted, and separate front and rear air conditioning units were provided.[1] Inclusion of the engine from the Rolls-Royce Silver Spirit in 1982 increased engine displacement once more, to 6,750 cc."
How is that an increase in displacement? It seems to be the same before and after! --Stizzleswick (talk) 04:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  6,750 cc  vs. 6,750 cc 

message: Can we not do better than this?--Akrasia25 (talk) 21:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is so bad

message: "A Rolls Royce Phantom VI with the chassis table PRH 4574 was delivered in 1969 to W.A. Shapland, Chairman of Hunsbury Machinery, Ltd. in Great Britain. Mrs. Adnan M. Khashoggi’s flamboyant husband also gave her a Rolls Phantom VI with the chassis PRH 4567 in August 1969 and it was delivered in Great Britain."
:That was rejected for being promotional, and it's a reference from a book with a valid isbn #.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kushmania (talk • contribs) 13:57, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: These essays and policies might help explain why every car can not be included in an article about the car. The essays are meant to be humorous so please do not take offense but they are based on a lot of agreed WP policy. The funniest one is WP:GARAGE. Also look at Wikipedia:Relevance and the longest one is Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Again, love your passion and I hope that you continue as an editor. There are things to learn in WP but it is a great relaxing hobby. PS. Please sign your entries.--Akrasia25 (talk) 16:54, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help Me Understand
Talk:Alfa Romeo 1750 Berlina

message: Fixed link for the 1750/2000 GTV models to the renamed 105/115 Series Coupes article.  Suggest this article be renamed Alfa Romeo 1750/2000 or 1750/2000 Berlina. Gkaraolides (talk) 01:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe with longer one with Berlina in it ?--— Typ932T | C  06:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

message: This was Alfa's top of the line Sedan/Saloon therefore it was not replaced by the Alfetta, its nearest replacement would be the Alfa 6. The Alfetta was meant to slot between the 2000 and the Giulia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevjgav (talk • contribs) 07:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Predecessor and Successor

message: Being that this car is larger than the Giulia, I think it would be an executive car. But if anyone really knows it's not please tell me and put the right niche in the "class" section. Thank you.--Kevjgav (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Car Classification
Talk:Checker Superba

message: I was thinking about Checker's "civilian" models, the Superba and the Marathon, and the thought occurred to me: I'll bet Wiki gets it wrong. And of course I was right! Now there can be confusion when talking about models that are introduced in the fall...in the case of the Superba, it began as a 1960 model first available in late 1959. If the year of a car is mentioned, it is understood to be the model year. When then car was built and sold includes the model year but also the fall of the previous year, unless it's introduced in the spring or summer. In any case, the Superba did not start in 1961, it started in 1959, as a 1960 model...and the Marathon began in the fall of 1960 as a 1961 model, a replacement for the Superba Special, the fancier of the 2 original Superba models. (There was Standard and Special, no Custom.) I'm not changing the article because I believe it's important that when wrong, Wiki should stay wrong, to demonstrate to people just how worthless it is. 71.162.113.226 (talk) 11:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong dates
Talk:Maserati Boomerang

message: A decade ago, there was a auction in New York City. I know they sold a Maserati Boomerang with the chassis no. 67. Some years later, another Maserati Boomerang was sold at an auction in Uganda. So there are circa 70 built units of this model. I think this can't be referred as a concept car even it was only for well-heeled clients. --195.254.134.234 (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Concept car???

message: Sold 3 289 500 € in Chantilly in 2015  : Vente Bonhams : la Maserati Boomerang dépasse les 3 millions d'euros ! (French). DocteurCosmos (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sold in 2015
Talk:Packard Cavalier

message: removed photo request as there is one integrated now. --Chief tin cloud (talk) 07:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: This article needs reworking. There was never a "Cavalier sub series"; this car was available only as a Touring (4dr) Sedan on the longer 127 in. wheelbase which it shared only with the plushier and more powerful Patrician 400. All other Packards had a 122 in. wheelbase.
When introduced in 1951, longer cars were considered "Seniors", all others "Juniors". "Seniors" had the center section of the grille filled with chrome "teeths", "Juniors" were plain. Packard realized soon that it was a marketing error to sell convertibles and 2dr hardtops in the lower line when everybode else had them in their priciest range; sometimes added by a second offering in the lower line. Packard couldn't do much about the short wheelbase, but they could go "upmarket" with these models. So, a few months after introduction they recieved "Senior" grilles, chrome trim on rear fenders reminiscent of the Patrician 400, and a taillight treatment that distinguished them from 200s and 200 Deluxes. 
The Cavalier is exactly the same as was the 300 before: A less expensive, large sedan. For 1953, it got a similar but less elaborate side trim as the Patrician; Mayfair/Convertible were completely different. This changed for 1954 when Cavalier, Mayfair and Convertible had similar side trim. At that time, although, the ladder shared the 212 HP engine with the Patrician. The Cavalier did not, but had more power than the Clippers that had replaced the 200 meantime. And there was a Clipper Hardtop, too, the Super Panama.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 12:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Work 

message: https://www.quora.com/In-1953-did-they-really-invent-a-car-that-can-park-itself-How-did-they-have-that-kind-of-technology-or-was-it-some-sort-of-clever-device-and-physics
Drsruli (talk) 02:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1953 Packard Cavalier
Talk:Ford Gyron

message: Note that many pictures of this car show it with three wheels.  http://www.retronaut.co/2011/09/ford-gyron-concept-car-1961/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.73.247.178 (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Lincoln Lido

message: May I be the first to support SteveCof00's desire to merge the EL-Series and Lincoln Lido articles. Lido was not a series strictly speaking but a bodystyle. One of my intentions in creating the EL-Series page was to alert people to this fact. Sadowski (talk) 23:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Lincoln El-Series and Lido Merger
Talk:Lead sled

message: This should be merged with "leadsled" because the articles describe exactly the same thing. I'm not sure whether the version of the term with or without the space is more "correct;" they both have the same order of magnitude number of hits on Google. Mrchaotica (talk) 07:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I redirected Leadsled here (finally). Beeblebrox (talk) 23:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I modified the text to form a lead, fixed some grammar and polished it up a little. It's a charming article  Rt3368 (talk) 19:49, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little polish 

message: The aircraft nickname and the shooting sport topic seem like simply different topics from what the article is about. Perhaps there should be some hatnote or disambiguation page instead of a discussion of these subjects in an article about automobiles. Currently the article reads a bit list a disambiguation page.
Also, it might be helpful to provide some clue about pronunciation and interpretation. In my initial reading of the article, I thought a "lead sled" might be something like a "pace car" – referring to being a leader rather than being made of a heavy metal. I just added an explanation of the terminology in the lead ("lead" in the sense of a lead paragraph, which is sort of like leadership since it involves going first).
—BarrelProof (talk) 21:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation and disambiguation 

message: "Ancient art", "true craftsman", and similar phrasing used in this article are nothing but puffed-up trash. Writers using that language have only second- and third-hand knowledge of the topic. True craftsmen don't call themselves by that name.
It would really be helpful to see documented evidence that the material in this article is historically accurate, something to prove that the techniques described and the words used are the original ones, not modern reinterpretations. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah this article needs a lot of attention. Its one i've been meaning to go through and improve, but which I haven't had the time to do the research for. For now i'll remove some of the more egregious inclusions like you mentioned and add an expert needed tag. TKOIII (talk) 20:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writers grandstanding
Talk:Fiat Campagnola

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Moneytrees🌴Talk🌲Help out at CCI!  00:29, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem 
Talk:Pierre Ryckmans (governor-general)

message: Ryckmans was the author of a book explaining enlightened colonial policy 'Domineir pour Servir'(1931)  [Dominate to Serve]. Are there English translations that the article could link to? A short summary of it would be a useful addition to the article, anyway. 69.181.249.69 (talk) 06:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The article seems to be the work of a single person, with the historical present being used throughout. 
Rewriting in encyclopedic language is necessary. 
There is also some discursive language "one should read ..." which is out of place in article of this kind. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for rewrite 
Talk:Mercury Commuter

message: Is this correct? The "Standard Catalogue of American Cars 1946-1975" (revised 4th Edition) says that the Marquis wasn't introduced until the 1967 model year and then only as a two door hardtop. GTHO (talk) 23:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commuter based on Marquis ??
Talk:Jeep DJ

message: An ultra-light vehicle.  Very attractive.--76.244.162.255 (talk) 06:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jeep
Talk:Standard (Indian automobile)

message: It is logical to shift the whole article to the Standard Motor Products of India page. But still this page will have the redirect feature.
--Race27 (talk) 16:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you explain why is it logical? czar · · 05:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like pointless work, oppose.  Mr.choppers | ✎  06:14, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved to newly created [[Standard Motor Products of India]] page

message: '’’Standard Motor Products of India’’’ was the name of the company that manufactured the Standard Cars in India under license from Standard Motors UK. The page title “Standard (Indian automobile)” seems to be not in tune with the Wikipedia pages concerning the Automobile Manufacturers and their Brand.
 
For Ex: “Ford Motor Company” has the details of the company and then a list of Cars manufactured by them. Ford’s European operations were under “Ford of Europe” page.The Ford EU company, tough fully owned subsidiary, was operating as a separate entity in a different continent/location. Also the cars made and sold were different in most cases from Detroit. 
In this case, the “Standard Motor Products of India” is the name of the Indian company whose equity was not fully owned by the “Standard Motors UK”, but was into a partnership between an Indian Investor and the British Counterpart. This Indian company also survived long until 1990’s and was liquidated sometime in 2006, while the British company (the original) got absorbed into British Leyland was back in 60’s or early 70’s. So forth, the page title “Standard (Indian automobile)” sounds like “Ford (European automobile)” which does not meet as per Wikipedia page title standards. This was the reason behind shifting the contents into the newly created “Standard Motor Products of India” page. Also the text and tone of the original “Standard (Indian automobile)” has to be toned down as the page itself seems to be lifted off from some much opinioned article.
So I feel it is logical to merge with the original edit history of the “Standard (Indian automobile)” page into ‘’’Standard Motor Products of India’’’ rather than having a page title with a rather insipid title. Request your help in improving that page and I hope my explanation helps you understand the reasons for that page change edit. Please leave a message in this page in case of any queries and clarifications. And sorry for the trouble.--Race27 (talk) 09:18, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Standard Motor Products of India
Talk:Wartburg 353

message: FSO Warszawa states that pictured Warsazawa was the prototype of the body of the Wartburg 353 Randroide (talk) 22:11, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know from personal experience that a heavily loaded (5 persons + full trunk) 20 years old plain Wartburg 353 could reach at least 135 km/h on the shaky East German autobahn (Rennstrecke Dessau, A9) without problems. It didn't even take too long. 79.194.13.175 (talk) 20:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

message: The picture of the "Volkspolizei Wartburg" is not a 353, this is a Wartburg 1.3 with a 4-stroke engine.
You can see the plastic bumper and the blinker lights next to the headlights, which were introduced with the 1.3 model in 1988.
(By the way, even the picture description says, that it's a Wartburg 1.3 ;) )  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.244.198.163 (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volkspolizei Wartburg
Talk:TVR Griffith 400

message: This article contains contradicting facts concerning engine, production numbers and production data. I have never seen - all over the WIKIPEDIA (!) - an article that tells you specific facts and in the paragraph underneath it tells that all these facts should be wrong and gives you contradicting facts! Could anybody clean up this article, please? Many thanks in advance. --MartinHansV (talk) 10:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - it's a shame. A classic and rare car deserves a little attention, some jump off points here (retrieved 17-Sep-12) for further research. Might look into it if I get chance. FrankieCola (talk) 22:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradicting Facts
Talk:Iso Lele

message: Someone entered a flag that the article needs a photo.   Here is a photo.   It's not the best ever, but it may currently be the only one accessible to wiki.   However ... I am only about 90% confident that it is of the right car.   If anyone has the knowledge to boost that to 100% - even 99.5% would probably do - please feel free to copy the picture to the entry itself.   Thank you.  Regards   Charles01 (talk) 17:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its 99% lele, see:  http://www.californiaclassix.com/archive/72_Iso_Lele_c107.html   --— Typ932T | C  17:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Talk:DAF 600

message: @Gidonb, could you explain how you think I violated WP:PLACEDAB. To the best of my understanding, the link Eindhoven, Netherlands fulfills this exactly. Thanks.  Stepho  talk  02:28, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see any problem with my version (which was also the original version) and it has been 3 days with no answer. I can only assume that it is okay to resume back to the original version.  Stepho  talk  21:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:PLACEDAB
Talk:Holden 48-215

message: thumb|right|Chev 1948
"The design was penned for a 1938 model"! Make that 1948 - look at any 1948 Chev. Eddaido (talk) 10:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1938 model 

message: I don't know about you, but I'd be extremely disappointed in a 28-second 0-100k time for a car with 60hp that weighs just under a tonne, even if it does only have a 3-speed transmission (presumably less of a problem with a 2.1L that only makes 60hp, as there'll hopefully be a very wide torque band?) and poor aero. Last time I had something of that rough power-to-weight, it managed about 14 seconds through the gears (OK, a more modern car, but actually an economy model rather than sports, using the 1990s idea of a larger but detuned engine and long gearing, and it was still in 3rd as it passed 100). Heck, I had a late 80s one with very bad aero that was lighter, but also less powerful, probably 50hp/tonne, and it still did the sprint in 20 seconds. Both of them could probably easily manage it in under 28 seconds starting from 2nd gear.
Indeed, the only thing I've driven which takes that long to get moving is a loaner turbodiesel... with a blown turbo and very long gears. Given its top speed (about 140k after a considerable run-up), slippery profile and considerable weight, I wouldn't be surprised if it had less than 2/3rds of the Holden's PWR. It's a very stodgy car to drive, you have your foot flat to the deck pretty much all the time unless you're in a stream of traffic cruising at less than maybe 90k, almost always have to redline it in 1st from a standing start, and even in the late 40s its performance would probably have been deemed at least "disappointing" for the class (in the modern age, it's edging into "dangerously slow").
Thus I figure the 18-19 second estimate is the more accurate of the two... but it'd be nice if an actual owner could at least time their car on a sprint, or far better (as it's then citeable) provide an owner's manual that happens to quote the figure... 193.63.174.211 (talk) 08:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance
Talk:Ford Falcon (XP)

message: The US Mercury Comet was a badge-engineered variant of the first generation Falcon, sold in NA. It appears the XP's front quarter panels and bonnet were taken from the Comet rather than being a local design (although the grill and headlights appear unique). Is there a way to confirm this and perhaps add it to the article? 114.72.64.208 (talk) 11:35, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mercury Comet connection?