Diskussion:Vibraction

Mängel

Der Tilbury stammt aus 1986 von der Firma Stylisme et Mecanique aus Sportive in Coignieres. (nicht signierter Beitrag von 79.97.206.182 (Diskussion) 22:51, 13. Dez. 2010 (CET))

Dies war meines Erachtens ein typischer Artikel des Erstellers AlexanderFPbusse. Die Quellen (1997-2002) stimmten nicht. Der mehrfach betonte Markenname Vibraction steht so gar nicht in den Autokatalogen. Der Pachiaudi war auch keineswegs eine Entwicklung von Vibraction, denn Pachiaudi steht von 1995-1997 in der Beaulieu-Enzyklopädie unter P. Ich habe jetzt Rotlinks zu Martin (Automarke) und Pachiaudi angelegt, zu denen ich mir vornehme, im Laufe des Jahres Artikel zur jeweiligen Marke zu erstellen. Vibraction als Hersteller kann bestehen bleiben, aber nicht als Marke und somit nicht in der Navileiste. --Buch-t (Diskussion) 16:52, 6. Apr. 2013 (CEST)

Artikel ausgebaut. Artikel zu Pachiaudi und Tilbury (Automarke) folgen. --Buch-t (Diskussion) 19:37, 6. Dez. 2013 (CET)

Rectification apportée par Michèle CHARLES (Fille de Yves CHARLES) : Le Roadster Tilbury est une création originale de Yves CHARLES depuis 1976. Martin Automobiles a assuré la production en série de la SMS TILBURY (sous licence d'exploitation du créateur et unique propriétaire Yves CHARLES) et la commercialisation des véhicules clés en mains ou vendus en kit (de 1991 à 1996 date de liquidation de l'entreprise Martin). Toute exploitation ultérieure a été réalisée illégalement, sans autorisation ni licence d'exploitation autorisée de Yves CHARLES. Ce modèle de véhicule, propriété de Yves CHARLES et de ses héritières, est protégé par les droits d'auteurs enregistrés à l'INPI (Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle). Monsieur Pachiaudi (Vibraction) n'a jamais disposé d'aucun droit d'exploitation de la Tilbury (voir histoire de la Tilbury sur le forum officiel SMS-TILBURY. Cette exploitation du roadster Tilbury par Vibraction fut illégale ... (nicht signierter Beitrag von MicheleCharles (Diskussion | Beiträge) 09:44, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET))

En ma qualité de propriétaire des droits sur ce véhicule, je demande la suppression sur l'article "VIBRACTION" du paragraphe "Modelle : Tilbury Roadster" et de toutes les références s'y rapportant. 10 décembre 2013, signé Michèle CHARLES la Fille de Yves CHARLES créateur du Roadster Tilbury.

If this firm has produced that cars (if illegaly or not) then there is abolutely no reason to remove the car out of the history of this firm. If that firm has actually produced the cars without license then this would be an interesting aspect of the history of that firm. But for that we need reliable sources that proof this interpretation. It does not suffice that simply somebody (of the family) declares it nowadays as illegal. And forum postings are no reliable sources. --Micha 11:59, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

The forum which I am director, was created by me (owner of the rights and prototype vehicle for my father Yves CHARLES died). In this private forum exclusively for owners of Tilbury, a page tells the story of Tilbury (written by me). How can you doubt my writings? I have all the evidence of my writings. Join the forum and you'll have access to all official documents and title (thank you send me an email so I validate your registration) Nobody has the right to publish false information and appropriating a vehicle that does not belong to him.

This has nothing to do with trust or doubts. That are the rules here and the rules of scientific work. Wikipedia:Belege, fr:Wikipédia:Vérifiabilité. Everybody has to follow them inside Wikipedia. Personal point of views such of forums (or there owners) are actually no reliable sources. If you have official documents which proof the facts then make it public and it can be used as references. --Micha 13:17, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

The forum is private ... and I do not have to publicly publish these documents no other manufacturer publishes. That's why I invited you to check them and to come visit the Yves CHARLES's pictures gallery ... I note that it is not reasonable to allow publish information without checking the sources, which is the case for Vibraction which publishes the U.S. and Germany not to be seen in France but does not publish any evidence. I also note that "Allcarindex" is advertising publishing anything (I wrote him about it). It is for this reason that our documents and photos remain private so that nobody uses it to do anything. Leaving publish anything, wikipedia loses credibility ... This is very unfortunate since you refuse to see the evidence. Shame ... I think the least we can do is put the link of the official site Tilbury on the page Vibraction so that everyone is entitled to the expression ... The Tilbury site is French but English links you post, so this may be possible. (nicht signierter Beitrag von MicheleCharles (Diskussion | Beiträge) 14:18, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET))

(edit conflict) Reliable sources are only that ones which are verifiable for everybody. A book in a library can be loaned out of everybody. A document of a public archiv can be accessed by everyone. A public link in the internet can be seen by everyone. If I personally checked the evidences on your forum and I was convinced later then I would become only a witness. I would also not become a reliable source for this article too. The only way is to find reliable and verifiable sources which can be accessed by everyone. Otherwise your truth will stay just like it is at the moment, a private one. --Micha 14:19, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

The language of the source is irrelevant. Public accessable and reliable (ex. official documents) are important. --Micha 14:22, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

French Wikipedia - sms-Tilbury

Officials documents are written in french ... The language of source is irrelevant also ... (nicht signierter Beitrag von MicheleCharles (Diskussion | Beiträge) 14:43, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET))

Search on this French Wikipedia page "SMS TILBURY" / 4L Renault & SMS TILBURY (nicht signierter Beitrag von MicheleCharles (Diskussion | Beiträge) 14:48, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET))

Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source for other Wikipedia articles. If this is your purpose. - If it wasn't I do not find the sources there. There are the same links to the forum. - Sorry, but I have ask again: Are there any official documents there which proofs your point? If yes, show me. And show me them in a way which other also can verify it. --Micha 14:58, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

I ask you the question in another way: show me proof that Vibraction manufactured and sold Tilbury and was involved in the design of the Tilbury ...--MicheleCharles (Diskussion) 15:40, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

I have to proof nothing. --Micha 15:22, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

The actual reference: The Beaulieu Encyclopedia of the Automobile. Volume 3: P–Z. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers, Chicago 2001, ISBN 1-57958-293-1, S. 1169 und S. 1592. (englisch) --Micha 15:23, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

This link, the journals are cited, they are not evidence? / 4L Renault & SMS TILBURY--MicheleCharles (Diskussion) 15:40, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

To conclude, I do not come on Wikipedia to the war, but I do not accept that false evidence about me were published. Vibraction not part of the history of the Tilbury "Legal" and I do not accept that serve the creation of my father to be false advertising. This is called plagiarism and that is legally wrong.--MicheleCharles (Diskussion) 15:53, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

(edit conflict) I'm not the author of this artice (and honestly not even interested in). I'm a sysop and that's why I explained the rules. If you think you have found reliable sources like magazines about automobiles then use it. But I recommend to write the changes first here on the talk page. And find somebody which is able to contribute in german. --Micha 15:57, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)

There is no advertising and no plagiarism. Have you actually understood what is written there? --Micha 15:58, 10. Dez. 2013 (CET)