Last modified on 11 October 2013, at 00:40

User talk:Akela NDE

Return to "Akela NDE" page.
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Akela NDE!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

hiEdit

Im glad I could help with identification, just upload those photos Im sure someone will identify those, names can always be fixed afterwards. Merry Christmas also --Typ932 (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token b09cbbd720457788c288cfe03876ed96Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!



Afrikaans | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | eesti | français | עברית | हिन्दी | italiano | Lëtzebuergesch | മലയാളം | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | norsk nynorsk | polski | română | русский | српски (ћирилица)‎ | srpski (latinica)‎ | slovenčina | svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | Tagalog | українська | +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012!

Dear Akela NDE,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world!

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012.

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Wiki Loves Monuments logo
Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 17:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 openEdit

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

  1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
  2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
  3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee


Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 08:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

Alvis TE 2 Graber SuperEdit

Hi Akela NDE, thanks for the new Alvis Graber images. I've been trying to sort out the slightly muddled heap of Alvis images and I would like to reclassify, I mean recategorise, your images so that they appeared individually under: Swiss Classic British Car Meet (as now), Category:Alvis Te21 (instead of a separate category for the one car) and Hermann Graber (at present only in bulk or en bloc). Would you mind if I made that change? How would that fit with what you would like? I have done that for just the one image so you can see what I mean. regards, Eddaido (talk) 06:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC) (Pasted from User talk Eddaido) Hi Eddaido,

thanks for your message about the Alvis TE2 "Graber Super". I'm far from being an Alvis specialist, so if you really think that's better, then you should probably do it Clin Anyway, I put it in a separate category for 2 reasons:

  1. it was marked a TE2, not a TE21. Maybe that was only an error of the owner who wrote the identification card.
  2. it looks clearly different than the others TE21's, especially regarding the wide radiator grille, front lights (guys in Morges told me they were from a Facel-Vega), boot with no handle, etc.

As I'm understanding things, Alvis chassis were bodied by various coachbuilders (I'll soon upload 2 TE21's I saw in Morges, a Park-Ward bodied coupé and a convertible whose coachbuilder I'm not sure, but I think it was Graber too. It has different front lights than the other ones, but if you can help me identify it …). I know for having seen it on last years' Morges' TC 108 Graber identification card that Graber had made various different bodies for Alvis chassis of the same kind (apparently there were not 2 similar TC 108 G's), so I suppose it may be the same for the TE21, or at least some of them.

So, I suppose it would be a good idea to have separate categories for cars with such special bodies, especially if there are several pictures of them. So we could have Category:Alvis TE21, with subcategories Category:Alvis TE21 by Graber and Category:Alvis TE21 by Park-Ward, and Category:Alvis TE 2 Graber Super as well if it's established it's only a particular version of the TE21, and not a different car. What do you think of it ?

Cheers, Akela NDE (talk) 10:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

This is my take on events, please understand I am not laying down a system of recognised historic facts. I've arranged reference books which I should go and collect.
1.Graber made beautiful very well finished very luxurious bodies, they put bodies on Bentleys, Lagondas and Alvises and . . . others. Indeed English cars were very popular in Switzerland in the 1940s and 50s. Alvis, it seems, still had a racy aura round the sanatoria.
2. Alvis seemed to prefer making big money out of defence contracts and then maybe making a few cars (as if a sideline). Eventually their car offering became an acute embarrassment. A speedy solution to a very urgent problem ( read this) was to gear up Graber and sell cars with their body as the now standard Alvis. This was the Alvis TC 108 Graber and Very expensive it was with all that duty on an import from Switzerland - no Common Market‎ or even EFTA?.
3 Because the Graber car was a great looker it got attention but not enough sales at such a high price and so instead Alvis got the same body made in England by various parties finally settling on Park Ward.
4. Graber went on making the same bodies and putting them on Alvises (and other cars) and there is every reason why your car should be a TE2 Graber on a TE21 Alvis chassis because it is not a stock Alvis, it iis pehaps being described as a stock Alvis TE 21 chassis with a TE 2 Graber body - does that make sense? Yes Graber did use bits from other cars like Rolls-Royce tail lights etc and why not Facel Vega too.
5. With 1930s and 1940s and early 50's Bentley there were many coachbuilders. With Alvis there were only the two of any real consequence once they threw away the TC 21 body and they were Graber and Park Ward.
If you don't mind I would rather we had no sub-categories for Alvis coachbuilders but just put the Alvises in their own Alvis categories and their bodies when non-standard under the coachbuilders' names. Would that be OK? I don;t mind discussing it further.
In any case with the Alvis type of car it is always important to learn the coachbuilder if at all possible. I look forward to seeing your new images, I've admired quite a number in the recent past. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 11:09, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that pretty clear answer Smile fasdfdsfoiueire.svg So I will upload the other Alvises in, say, the TE21 category for the first one, and just Alvis Cars for the one I'm not sure of (I sutpidely forgot to take a picture of its identification card) ; you or another Alvis specialist may be able to decide whether it's a TE21, TF21 or other, by the normal coachbuilder or by a custom one.
Concerning the TE2 Graber Super, as it's apparently a custom body on a standard chassis, I still think it should be in a category of its own: a car is made of chassis and body, so if it doesn't have a standard TE21 body, it's not a normal TE21, but a particular version of a TE21 - hence a specific subcategory of the TE21 cat' for the pictures of it. But, once again, that's only my opinion, cause I'd hate people to spot a picture of the Graber special and imagine its features were standard to all TE21. So, if you think it's better to put it in the "normal" TE21 category, feel free. I'm totally ready to admit I'm a fanatic of divisions in subcategories of subcategories Clin
Oh and thanks for your compliments on my pictures, too. I'm trying to do my best with limited talent and, unfortunately, a poor camera. But it's really nice to see people like them!
Cheers, Akela NDE (talk) 20:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
1937
1955 available ground clearance
restricts suspension movement
Its clear you see a conflict which I don't. I guess its because what was normal is now exceptionally rare, maybe now only historic.
You suggest a reader might go to this page and (if my thoughts were acted upon) find six images of your one car and six images of examples of a slightly different shaped car with a different radiator grille. --> reader is now confused but sees a link to WP which might (soon) explain and takes that easy way out.
I suppose because it is today such an outdated concept whoever wrote up the TE21 for WP omitted to mention that the chassis was still made available to (any?) coachbuilders and that Graber, at this moment only noted as "Stylists" of the standard model, continued to produce their own version. That needs to be fixed and perhaps one of your nice Graber at Morges images displayed beside it.
Alvis cars really died with WWII. After that they continued their 12/70 calling it a fourteen then added a couple of cylinders to make a 3-litre engine and put that into the same chassis with only slightly modified bodywork so that by 1955 they were still offering a 1937 quality of car (without nave plates over the wire wheels). I think we should keep the post 1955 cars consistent with the prewar cars. To do as you suggest, treating the Graber TE2 as a distinct model would mean that to be consistent we would have to split all the prewar models by their different coachbuilders and it isn't practical because we do not have certain knowledge of a coachbuilder's name in each case.
You with your concerns are a shining example of a photographer who finds out these things!
To my mind, if a reader notices that there are two slightly different shapes of car in the category and looks around the explanation will be quickly found.
Why can I find no photo of a Citroen Picasso? regards, Eddaido (talk) 22:04, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello again,
I'm sorry if I made you think I saw a conflict there: I see none. We apparently have different opinions on how to organize pictures categories of cars who share the same chassis and engines, but have different bodyworks: I don't think that's really important. it's only that, to me, the bodywork is part of a car's identity. But I definitely have no problems with anyone not sharing that opinion.
I thought keeping the TE2 Graber pictures in a category that would itself be part of the TE21 category would have been a good compromise, but if you are definitely sure these pictures have to belong directly to the TE21 category, that's fine by me. You can move them following your idea: you're the guy organizing the Alvis car categories, I'm only the guy who came to spot some Alvises while I had my camera.
Thanks for the bit of Alvis history, seriously. But don't worry, I'm not a photographer, just a classic cars enthusiast who likes to share his passion Clin. Oh, and for the Citroën Picasso, look here and there ! Smile
Cheers, Akela NDE (talk) 23:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the Picasso pics, the Commons search function must have been having a rest, would only bring up references to police vehicles. But I do agree with you, the body is a major part of the car's identity it is just that under the particular circumstances of Alvis and Graber I don't think the Graber body should be listed as if it were a Factory option - except for the brief period when it was (in theory) the only available Alvis - the TC 108 G.
My concern has been that so many (I am grateful to them for their images) contributors catalogue with originality arrm maybe I mean casualness we can end up with a deep litter of subcategories all about, many of them duplications of each other. So I am resisting sub-sub-sub-sub-categories on old cars just as much as I can. However, Compromises Can be made.
OK, I'll change things to suit me but please do not regard the subject as closed. Re-start it whenever you want. With kind regards, Eddaido (talk) 00:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)