![]() Could always add the 'this article lacks global coverage' tag (or whatever it exactly says) if they do it again. Somebody from an AOL address really seems to want to have only the British info in there. – Kieran T ( talk ) 13:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC) Have just put this stuff back. I've also put an explanatory paragraph in the 'Mark 1' section to explain to the reader what's going on. However, since there are secondary sources indicating at least two alternative ways of using the 'Mark' system, I've kept a note of those in the text, along with the German 'generations' from the German-language Wikipedia article. Attempting to do otherwise would appear to be PoV or original research. I've therefore copied this into the article. It totally avoids using the 'Mark' system and goes for production dates as a model identifier instead. I dug out an official Ford publication, from the launch of the 1994 model, which has a full timeline and history of the Transit. If there's no further feedback here in a week or so, I'll return the 'alternative' numbering system found on some sources, with the 'a.k.a.' as before. The anon has not provided any reference, so I'd invite them to contribute on this talk page and explain their evidence, please. But we really need to know what Ford actually say about it. I've restored the paragraph, but left the Marks alone for now, since the current version has a logic to it. One last point: my apologies for forgetting to uncheck the 'minor edit' box on what was clearly not a minor edit! :) – Kieran T ( talk | contribs) 13:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC) An anon editor removed the 'first Transit' section and also changed the 'Mark' numbers system to fail to indicate any conflicts exist. I've used the production dates rather than 'Mark's in the photo captions for the more recent models, and I'd suggest we do that until we can establish (presumably from Ford themselves) what the correct 'Mark's are. That's why I've gone for the 'a.k.a.' stuff, where both reasonably applicable 'Mark' designations are given. I also found the 'generations' were out of synch with the German page, and on researching it on the 'net and in the various external links quoted in the article, I've found the confusion reigns all over the place. contribs) 15:04, 29 October 2006 I've taken some info on the original Transit, and some pictures, from the German Wikipedia and included them in this English article.Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.144.221.136 (talk Starting in 1965 is not the first line of transits, see the german page for pictures and data. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |