Talk:Ford GT

message: Someone needs to review the line about Production beginning on August 17th, 2001.  Ford GT concept car wasn't even exhibited until January, 2002... http://media.ford.com/newsroom/feature_display.cfm?release=18238
:That seems true.  I can't imagine that it took two years to build the first vehicles as they didn't go on sale until 03.  As I can't find a source for the 01 production beginning, I am going to remove it for now. --Leivick (talk) 05:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production date appears to be an error 

message: though it is assembled in america, the engine and the Ford badge are the only american things about this car. The rest of it comes from Europe so technically it is a Euro Ford. Plus its a remake of the British made GT40 that was built when the deal made between Ford and Ferrari went sour.  --Warhawk-mgsv-r 21/6/09  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.105.236 (talk) 14:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parts Used 

message: JGTC has changed it's name to Super GT
I thought Kazunori Yamauchi drives his car known as Opera Performance S2000.
I just want to let someone know that I was searching for "ford gt" and I think I might have accidentally created a blank page at Ford_gt (instead of the legitimate article Ford_GT, note capitalization).  I'm uncertain as to how to delete the blank page.
--Electronbrain 17:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Change 

message: This is the most poorest cars in terms of quality and fuel economy,it does 4 miles/g only. Seen all this in T.V programme "Topgear".
*You're wrong, read the specs. Clarkson is exagerratin g as usual. This car is very durable compared to its competitors. Also, in fuel economy you will find it superior to F430 AND Mucielago.
*Indeed, Clarkson was making a tongue-in-cheek jab as regards to his love/hate relationship with his own GT. It wasn't supposed to be a serious remark.
* "In the last episode of Season 7, during the Top Gear Awards, Clarkson awarded the Ford GT the "Gas Guzzler" award, beating out the Range Rover (8MPG), the Bugatti Veyron (4MPG), and (as a joke) the Hemel Hempstead Hertfordshire Oil Storage Terminal fire (60 Million gallons and never moved an inch)." - I suggest someone rephrase or remove this. It's misleading. In fact, I think the whole section should be removed. It's biased and uninformative; it's more of a series of jokes than encyclopedic material.
*Agreed. Its not encylcopedic CJ DUB 14:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most poor car in terms of Quality 

message: Other editors created a monthly production table for 2004-2006, but abandoned updating the figures after March 2006.  I found the sales figures for June-August and YTD.  Still searching for April and May 2006 - still TBD.  Production officially ends at the end of September 2006 , but sales of remaining inventory may continue through the end of the year, and possibly into 2007.  Source for sales figures:  http://media.ford.com - although the archives only go back so far.  --T-dot 18:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales Figures 

message: I'm kinda new here so I don't really know the etiquette of adding a picture, so I'll just say that you guys have my permission to add my picture of a Ford GT if you want to:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=320210261&context=set-72157594406337776&size=l
-- Mike 19:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Mike - that is indeed a very nice image - far better than the ones currently used, one of the best automobile images available I think, and better than most on the Wikipedia.  But the source page also says "all rights reserved", which means it is copyrighted; and copying it to the Wikipedia would likely constitute a copyright violation for which we could be sued.  We would need to have verifiable "proof" that you are the creator and owner of the image, and that you have released it to the public domain as free use, before we could use it.  It is very high quality though - exactly the sort of image I like to see posted, but it has to be legal.  Click the "Upload file" link (see left column) if you are indeed the legal owner and creator of the image, and we'll try to help you get it posted in the article.  See Wikipedia:Images and Wikipedia:Uploading images for more information.  Very nice piece of work.  --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 11:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture of Ford GT 

message: You do know that copying and pasting entire segments of an article, even if you do reference it, is still plagiarism? Get a clue wikipedia, you bunch of egghead wannabes wouldn't know academic editing and referencing if it bit you in the rear end.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.10.83.103 (talk • contribs) 
:Thank you for pointing out what you see as an apparent rule violation.  The Wikipedia does not tolerate plagiarism within articles, but requires that posted information is neutral, verifiable with reliable sources, avoiding weasel wording, and not constitute original research.  If you think a source has been improperly plagiarized, then please help by providing examples and evidence of your charges, so the article can be properly cleaned up.  Thanks again for your comments, although you want to avoid making personal attacks on other editors.  --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 11:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  plagiarism 

message: The price figures are very confusing as figures are sometimes given in reference to the recommended price, and the chronology is broken. I do not understand the section well enough to fix it, and there are no sources given for the figures Canterwoodboy 13:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pricing 

message: are you sure that 12 and 19 for fuel economy is correct? cars.com puts fuel economy for both 05 and 06 at 13 and 21.70.91.74.9 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fuel economy listing is the manufacturer's recorded values.  Consider that the manufacturer(s) retain a handful of professional drivers, and over a fairly short period of time, they will drive a small population of vehicles (often prototypes) during the collection of the data for the listed figures.  Now consider a publisher, employing what is often a retired professional race car driver, using one single production model car, over the course of one or two days collecting data.  Cars.com has the luxury of both these collections of data, plus the collecive reports of consumers from every possible variation of driving skill level, as well as reports from new cars, used cars and cars used in professional race venues.  Cars.com has years worth of data to compile, resulting in a more accurate mean value...manufactures and publishers do not.  Cars.com uses data from vehicles that have been abused, pampered, maintained properly, driven in a state of disrepair, driven carelessly, wrecked, driven by poorly skilled drivers, professional racers, and everything in between.  Simply put, any figure such as this will change over time as the population of useable data increases.  Fuel ecomony is most often directly relevant to the mechanical state of the vehicle and the skill and driving habits of the driver.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.198.91 (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  fuel economy 

message: There are egregious arithmetical problems.  Can someone with access to raw data fix them? Huw Powell (talk) 00:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Ford has confirmed the total production run at 4038 cars here, but the actual month to month US sales figures came from monthly press releases that may be hard to recover.  Looking for a reliable source for the collective sales totals.  Note that the difference between the total sales and the total production run is at least partially attributable to sales outside the US. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 12:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production numbers table 

message: I'm new here, so please forgive me if I'm making a mistake. I was reading the article and I noticed that the GTs top speed is appearently greater than that of a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport. I checked out the source and the speed that is written in this article does not match the speed posted in that article. Should something be done? 
Sigridundset (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top Speed 

message: 720hp power figure stated but citations at end of the sentence pertain to other information stated therein. As the manufacturer states "600-plus horsepower" (https://www.ford.com/performance/gt/), this should arguably be the power figure of record unless a reliable source can prove otherwise.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scalapaedia (talk • contribs) 22:53, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd Generation: Power Figure 

message: BaT Article
Toneron2 (talk) 05:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Its an aftermarket race car ran privately in motorsports with no association to Ford. These reasons don't warrant its addition here.  U1 quattro TALK 04:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010 Ford GT Matech GT1 section add? 

message: I have been collecting American, British, German, Swedish, and Italian magazines since 1995. Also, if there's a reason why I upload some scans to Imgur, it's because downloading directly from the magazine costs too much money. I do not intend to infringe copyright in any way. The AMS test appears in the English version of the 18/2016 issue of Auto Motor & Sport.
Although some PDFs do fly by directly from magazines and can be downloaded for free. 2607:FB90:A44F:251B:0:5:5DA3:801 (talk) 16:51, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Jason when are you going to stop with this garbage? What satisfaction do you get out of vandalizing pages? What a waste of a life you have Jason that you continue to make these hoaxes for years. Your hoaxes are written with the grammar and editing skills of a 1st grader. Not to mention the new Ford GT hasn't even been tested yet by anyone.2601:601:600:4E4C:748E:4183:47A3:F6DD (talk) 17:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is Jason Haddad, stay off Wikipedia. If not, add this content only when it becomes available here. Until then, leave it off per WP:VER and WP:BRD. Bahooka (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Who is he? 2607:FB90:A485:1F0B:0:49:BFE5:2101 (talk) 21:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Who do you think you're fooling Jason? You've been adding your easy to spot very amateurishly made hoaxes here since 2009, IIRC, so people here have had enough of you. As evident by the fact that it's not just the regular vandal hunters here who revert you, but also casual readers. - Tom | Thomas.W  talk 22:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, if there is one thing I need to correct, you need to add a comma between the question and the name in that context. It is kind of like a huge difference between letting Uncle Jack off the horse and letting uncle jack off the horse, or being aggressive and saying crap, and being aggressive and saying "crap." This is why grammar is very important. 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides, take a current look at the Lamborghini Huracán and Koenigsegg CCR. None of those have their performance edits reverted, and some of the sources are Imgur and Flickr. Nobody seems to care about those pages. 2607:FB90:2701:FA2C:0:4B:AB1B:A201 (talk) 22:18, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't matter, see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Bahooka (talk) 22:21, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are people here acting like losers? You all know damn well you can't just guess who someone is. I never made an account on Wikipedia before. But all you guys are just wasting time browsing through edits and afraid of reality. I never made a single hoax for someone to read. I never make the info, it's the magazines adding the details. In fact, in some cases, some parents are strict and won't let their children download on their computers, and in other cases, sometimes it's just easy to spot one thing or section and just read the entire thing. There is this thing we have called "technology." Back in my day, there were no "trolls," no "butthurts," and no overreactions towards facts or even opinions. No educated person has ever been as much of a loser as some of you have. 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only loser here is you, having wasted seven years on creating crappy hoaxes. And not only here but on other web sites too, which is about as pathetic as anything can get. - Tom | Thomas.W  talk 23:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon me, but one doesn't simply track through every website* (you get that, not "web site") or call something a hoax just because they haven't researched anything. I am not going to make any excuses or troll someone or browse through every person who has similar (extreme) car hobbies because that's immature behavior. I hang out with my friends, but this stupid reverting and replying and patheticism is all what you guys do?! 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

text: Also, I can write much better than all of you guys. These "casual readers" are actually just one of you hopping through IP addresses, using fake proxy servers, and making up one account to disappoint a fully educated magazine collector who had graduated from college with a Master's Degree at age 26. In reality, all of you guys' grammar and photoshopping skills suck more than a first grader. Besides, I'm not even a fan of photoshopping. I've only ever had photoshopped three times, but they were just relatable memes, nothing to even do with cars. 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said: who do you think you're fooling, Jason? - Tom | Thomas.W  talk 23:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Jesus Christ, bro, can you already tell me who the hell "Jason Haddad" is? Besides, I'm not some pathetic idiot who calls someone out there "Tom" just because it looks like you did the edit. shakes my head 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

text: Okay, you know what...I'm just going to quit editing Wikipedia for the rest of my life if this is what you guys do every day. I don't make hoaxes and have never enjoyed being a troll, but now you're making me become one by trolling you two editors. God, I'm so tired of trolls on Wikipedia. I really wish you guys were blocked from editing. I have never made any plans to make an account and I still don't. That's it... 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Geolocates to the San Jose area? Check. Creates crappy hoaxes on car articles? Check. Behaves lika a pre-schooler? Check. Still thinks he can fool people here, after being blocked over and over again for his hoaxes for seven years? Check. Well, if something quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and waggles its tail like a duck, then experience says that it is a duck, and should be treated like one. - Tom | Thomas.W  talk 23:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

text: Okay, why would someone judge a person based on where they are at? All you are doing is acting like a cisgender bigot. I don't even understand, bro. You're acting like a pre-schooler by giving me all of this worthless, pointless, cringy crap. Give me more information about him and I will tell you if that is me. Give me his age, his phone number, his street address, his email address, his social media accounts, what websites these "hoaxes" were also posted on, the names of all of the friends he knows, even his password to his Wikipedia account. 2607:FB90:2701:EC70:0:49:B195:ED01 (talk) 23:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

text: I just noticed that the page is protected now. I think it's that everyone needs to know that more than one person can be in the same location with the same hobby. We are all humans. San Jose is a popular place. Actually, I am in Stockton. Some of the moderators on Wikipedia are pretty outdated and should know that downloading is not easy and sometimes not allowed by families in households. I do include links and download links directly to the magazine who formed the test when needed. Sometimes, direct references are just not needed, usually because they require overcomprehensible readers. Sometimes I use Flickr links that have scans that are available to download, especially those from DeDe. 2607:FB90:A485:65DA:0:46:4B0F:EA01 (talk) 17:37, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please explain to me how the AMS test for the new Ford GT is a hoax 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ford GT. 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/20090714023851/http://media.ford.com:80/article_display.cfm?article_id=24226&make_id=trust to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=24226&make_id=trust
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Ford GT. 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/20121005091249/http://media.ford.com/press_kits_detail.cfm?presskit_id=845&item_id=3493&press_section_id=2861 to http://media.ford.com/press_kits_detail.cfm?presskit_id=845&item_id=3493&press_section_id=2861
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121005092102/http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=18864 to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=18864
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100822175909/http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2005-ford-gt-2.htm to http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2005-ford-gt-2.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=24226&make_id=trust
*Added  tag to http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/sportscar/168819/ford-gt300.html%20Ford%20GT300.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100118132232/http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/sportscar/168818/ford-gt-gt3.html to http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/sportscar/168818/ford-gt-gt3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012045117/http://www.fordgttv.com/ to http://www.fordgttv.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Not that I can afford it, but how does one go about buying a GT?  Can you go into any Ford dealer and order one?  Or - considering the limited production - is there a special procedure?  Elsquared (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: probably the lamest assertion I have ever seen about this car. Anyone can buy this car now given that they have the money. The article now mentions it too. I'd also suggest to keep this whole "supercar", "hypercar" made up garbage out of wiki.U1 quattro TALK 03:55, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  how to buy one?