Talk:Flatbed truck

30 Aug 2017

I may change "Related Pages". Flatbeds do not relate to box trucks. Flatbeds are trucks, and there is no link to trucks yet. The first pic is of a semi-truck. I thought that the big links to large related pages should make things easier. Truck and Semi-truck are obvious from a foot away. My thoughts. Sammy D III (talk) 18:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

They may not be related however they're similar hence its inclusion, As for the image - I have no idea on how to word it without it sounding confusing so I opted for nothing instead, FWIW I do agree semi should be in the image caption but that's as far as it should go, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:01, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

My idea was since the first pic was a semi that a link to Semi-trailer truck would work. I have no opinion on caption. The article seems written in UK English except for the word "truck". Sammy D III (talk) 20:53, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I know but to me at least the link would be better in the caption as opposed to under related pages, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:02, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I missed a "truck" link in the intro, so that's overlink anyway. I just thought the two links together looked good and clear. EDIT: Your linking a five sentence unreferenced article with a one sentence unreferenced article improves both. Sorry. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 22:25, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Just 'cos it's unreferenced that doesn't mean you get to add more unreferenced stuff to it and FWIW it being unreferenced is irrelevant, Also unless you want to convert all of this to Simple English then I would appreciate the fact we have an article here at all - Sure it's unreferenced however it's a start and had I not created it it would never have been created, Anyway back on topic the link doesn't need to be included. –Davey2010^Talk 03:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't believe you posted this stuff:

"add more unreferenced stuff". I took down one link to arguably the lamest article in any Wiki. I put two links up. What did I post there that was unreferenced?

"FWIW it being unreferenced is irrelevant"?????????? Are you kidding me??????????

"it's a start". That crud would get you laughed off of any other Wiki.

"had I not created it it would never have been created". You feel that making a worthless article with no content and no refs that has never had a view is a good thing? I could have put more and better referenced stuff in a single paragraph in truck.

I have run across plenty of ownership, I've got the problem myself. But never on this scale. You are sitting on a penny's worth of knowledge like it is a bank vault and scream like a baby if someone tries to make a deposit.

By the way, those links were the only thing I planned on that article. Not only is it lame and largely pointless, you couldn't even use one language.

This seems so ignorant to me that I am going to post it all on your talk page (sorry, user page, you don't have a talk page). I thought this Wiki was a good idea, I guess I was wrong. I lasted less than a month, seems like this a knowledge black hole.

Don't worry, I won't step on your toes while trying to improve anything again. I don't want to mess with the self-appointed Mayor of Lilliput. I'm going back to the land of references. Sammy D III (talk) 11:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)