Bonneville Wikipedia Article
#21
Originally Posted by BillBoost37
Originally Posted by Jim W
Why is there confusion re: chassis of the 00+ Bonneville? Per the VIN, its an H body car, just because it shares a lot of features with the 01+ Aurora, doesn't make it a G-body.
#24
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine it was someone who dislikes Bonnevilles, lol...probably someone from the GP site..haha.
It is slightly bias, and maybe unsubstantiated, unverifiable claims should be removed. I think it looks good to me, but a college professor would freak out over the way its written. I have personal experience with this, lol.
The idea when writing something worthy of inclfusion in a scholarly work like Wikipedia is to be CONCISE, PRECISE, SUCCINCT and avoid things that can't be proven (i.e. only facts, no opinions). The article needs to be approached in the same manner one would write a college paper.
It sucks because naturally as lovers of the car we want to gush over how great it is...but Wikipedia isn't the place for that sort of thing.
Just my 2 cents on the topic.
It is slightly bias, and maybe unsubstantiated, unverifiable claims should be removed. I think it looks good to me, but a college professor would freak out over the way its written. I have personal experience with this, lol.
The idea when writing something worthy of inclfusion in a scholarly work like Wikipedia is to be CONCISE, PRECISE, SUCCINCT and avoid things that can't be proven (i.e. only facts, no opinions). The article needs to be approached in the same manner one would write a college paper.
It sucks because naturally as lovers of the car we want to gush over how great it is...but Wikipedia isn't the place for that sort of thing.
Just my 2 cents on the topic.
#25
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montevideo, MN MWBF '05, '06, '07 WCBF '06 '07 survivor
Posts: 3,882
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by wjcollier07
Its not neutral, it was written by people who love the car. seriously..who else would write it? who posted the neutrality notice? someone here?
what a tool
#26
Hey, RJG.
Care to rewrite it in total neutrality? I could try, but I have problems not throwing opinions in there. Personally I find it to be a very valuable resource to have peoples honest opinions on something, but yes, non factual info has no place on wikipedia. However, I don't understand how people like that put notices like that and yet do nothing to try and fix it, just care to point a finger.
Care to rewrite it in total neutrality? I could try, but I have problems not throwing opinions in there. Personally I find it to be a very valuable resource to have peoples honest opinions on something, but yes, non factual info has no place on wikipedia. However, I don't understand how people like that put notices like that and yet do nothing to try and fix it, just care to point a finger.
#27
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree, its worthless to post a notice like that and not submit some form of help to the article.
It'* hard for ANYONE to write something in total neutrality, let alone someone who loves the subject being written about. I'd like to do it, but I don't think that I could rewrite it without being opinionated either. It'* a very hard thing to do, I've had to do it many times in college papers that I was passionate about the subject (such as political things).
Personally I think the article has the right mix of facts and opinion to give the reader an accurate picture of the car. However, approaching it from a purely collegiate/scholarly standpoint, it doesn't exactly meet the qualifications. I say leave it and let the people whine, just like superchargers
It'* hard for ANYONE to write something in total neutrality, let alone someone who loves the subject being written about. I'd like to do it, but I don't think that I could rewrite it without being opinionated either. It'* a very hard thing to do, I've had to do it many times in college papers that I was passionate about the subject (such as political things).
Personally I think the article has the right mix of facts and opinion to give the reader an accurate picture of the car. However, approaching it from a purely collegiate/scholarly standpoint, it doesn't exactly meet the qualifications. I say leave it and let the people whine, just like superchargers
#28
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GonneVille
Actually, it was me, but the way I wrote it, there wouldn't be a bit of confusion. I never said that it was not an H-, I just said, CORRECTLY, that it shared the G-platform while retaining the H- VIN code, as did the LeSabre. I feel it needs to be noted that the entire car was redesigned for 00+, not just a "freshening-up" like the W-body got so many times...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post