Talk:Chevrolet Camaro/Archive 3

message: Added footnote reference functionality into the article. We should definitely be using this a lot more in the future to keep things organized starting with all of the info in the article that needs sources. I've tagged some of it already with the  tag. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes. Roguegeek 20:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote References 

message: If you guys take a look at the Pontiac Firebird article, you'll see they do not make every year it's own section. It seems to keep the contents panel nice and clean as opposed to the long contents panel that the Camaro currently has. It also seems nicer for editing because changes tend to be made over several years at one time and now you wouldn't have to make several edits to several sections. I'm finding this very much a problem when trying to clean up references. I'd like to make the change as soon as possible if there is agreement on it. Thoughts? Roguegeek 23:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to agree with you.  Perhaps a better example would be the Chevrolet Corvette article, where they list each generation, and each generation has its own main article...it makes sense since there's enough info on each generation alone to be a standalone article.  Ayocee 18:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we take the years out as sections, it will section then by generations already. I'm just saying it might be cleaner to not make years real sections and, instead, make them bold subtitles that wont count towards the Contents panel. Maybe we can start with this first and then see how we could start merging years together if you guys want. Seems like the Camaro article has enough info to keep things split by year, but we could talk about that after the first edit. Thoughts? Roguegeek 19:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Alright. I'm going for it then. Let's soak it in and see what we think. Sections will be defined by Generation and not Year anymore. Roguegeek 07:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Sections by Year 

message: I have cleaned up the external links section and removed every link that did not categorizes as a reliable source WP:RS as defined by Wikipedia. Removed personal sites, personal blogs, any site with advertising on it (considered spam), and any other site that was just insignificant. This was very much long overdue. Official policies are currently being discussed about how an "External links" section should not be included in articles and that articles should only rely on references (either footnote like we have it set up already or any other the other ways to reference facts) as the only external links of an article. This will keep things like small forums, personal sites, and other insignificant links out of articles from now on. I'm proposing we move to this kind of system since we already have a fair share of references. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 20:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: http://www.camaros.org
This link keeps getting thrown back into the external links. I'm removing it for now and submitting it to DMOZ to be linked here. That is unless there's some significance I can't see as to why this should be there directly? Roguegeek (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  camaros.org 

message: ? on front suspension  1995 Z28 and 2002 Z28 can I use pieces and parts from one to the other....Signed elbows almost in it...any help will due —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.188.90.109 (talk) 01:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  need to know 

message: I don't exactly see how a fuzzy, overexposed photo of a modified third-gen Camaro in poor condition adds to the article. Ayocee 18:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent RV of photo