Hi Charles01, Thanks for being such a nice person with the edit revert. My name is Nim, as if you want to know who I am (I want users to address me by my actual first name than 'EurovisionNim').

Just on a side note, what do you mean by "...Unencumbered by EurovisionNim's blindspots concerning reflections and backgrounds..." "...done much to degrade wikipedia in the last couple of years..." Whilst I totally agree with your edit, I'm not an academic, so would it be possible to simplify it down for me please. Also can we work together along with Mr.choppers to make Wikipedia the best place possible !! Take care, and happy editing --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best place to discuss the image in question is on the page in question.

I address you by your user name. I was unaware that you wished to be addressed by a different name. Naturally I apologise in respect of any discourtesy that you infer from my having addressed you by your user name. I'm still confused that you want us to use more than one name for you, though. Um .... what is the point?

Your wiki-contributions more generally can speak for themselves. And do. Your own talk page - and your contributions to Vauxford's talk page (and no doubt elsewhere) also tell their own tale. I do think that cumulatively you have blindspots (we all have blindspots) and the way in which you have inflicted your blindspots on wikipedia has cumulatively degraded it. That bothers me. My opinion. You do not have to share my opinion. But you might perhaps do well to think about it! With all due respect...

Regards Charles01 (talk) 11:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The username issue is not the important one at this stage. You can call me either EurovisionNim, or my actual name Nim. I prefer the latter, but if you wish to call me otherwise by username thats fine for this. If this was Facebook or something, then it'd be a problem. Best --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:06, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles01, It may have been 2 months since I last made a revert on my image, but I want to bring up a discussion. Vauxford believes his Audi image would be the better example to mine because his was taken at a car dealership and therefore his would be the better example. Two months ago we had this discussion that based our discussion on which of the three were better examples. I was deadlocked, because I knew mine was a better example as the colour of the vehicle was less reflective. Doesn't matter if the car is new, because where I photograph in Fremantle, there are plenty of rental cars which are brand new but he believes that his images are better than mine. 3 (my photo) replaced image 1 on October 20 2018 @ 12.40. Then on October 21 2018 Vauxford replaced image 2 with the edit summary "Previous is fine." I do not understand how an image taken at a car dealership with cars in the background is really an improvement. He also says he deviates away from WP:CARPIX which has been used for a long time on car articles. Again, i am not sure whether he is delibrately trying to sabotage Wikipedia or whether he is trying to just ruin for everyone. Also if he were to say that, he'd be reverting back to image 1. He never takes anyones advice in regards with his editing behaviour telling me I should focus on other areas. Well Vauxford, unfortunately for you, what happens if an Australian car (Holden Commodore) comes into Europe and you picture it? Then you claim its higher quality. its not fair how he is taking the upper gain

• 
  Image 1
• 
  Image 2
• 
  Image 3

In other words, Charles01, out of the three images, which would be the better choice for illustrating the relevant articles. I am fine with Vauxford's however I notice there are some 'blindspots' and I've made some recent edits on mine to illustrate the better example. The Audi I pictured is relatively new as well, but because of the colour and the neat background, I believe its the better example. Yes blindspots can be helped, just don't picture a darker coloured vehicle. Also the colour of the vehicle shouldn't really matter, because if the colour is brighter, then it should be the better example. Again another complaint I have is User:Vauxford not following WP:CARPIX guidelines and thinks I should "work it out myself." Yes I am not stupid, I can work things myself, however I follow the guidelines that is established on Wikipedia that we have discussed over the years and I use that for my car photos and we prefer brighter colours. I am getting a polarizing filter for my 2019 shots to be improved and therefore reduce blindspot error as you previously made complains about. To sum it up could you please tell me out of the three , which would be the better example. Also please let Vauxford know too !! To prevent further conflict, if Vauxford's and mine are of similar quality, then we will have a discussion, as I do not think he listens much. Also I don't mind the Mondeo revert you did, I was about to replace it with yours, its a brilliant example, so thankyou and happy editing. Mr.choppers if you want to get involved, help yourself !! --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They're all three of them - in my judgement - moderately bad. The one you identify as Image 3 would be ok if the photographer had put his camera about half a meter (that's just over a foot and a half) higher and stood a bit further back and thereby zoomed at bit less wide. And if the building behind the car at the back was more different in colour from the car itself. Right now the roof at the back tends to blend into the backdrop too readily, at least if you blow it up to full screen size. Tho of course most of these pictures are intended to be looked at as a small part of an overall page on the screen. And certainly there are many worse in respect of zoom use and background. There are some weird reflections on the metal paintwork on the side of the car but, again, there are plenty that are far worse, many of them uploaded by you and some, no doubt, by me. And someone with the appropriate skills and ready to take the time and care necessary could probably improve the reflections problem further with software manipulation, though a good picture should not need that in the first place, and that path can easily take one little by little further away from "realistic" unless you are very careful indeed.

The other two pictures have their own issues in terms of reflections and background. I'm sure they have redeeming features, but the problems that hit you when you first look at them are hard to get past. I think I prefer the one you call Image 2. Less zoom distortion and pictures taken indoors under spot lights such as "Image 3" introduce a whole new range of challenges in the lighting department.

In my sometimes humble opinion wikipedia commons doesn't really have a decent picture of the Audi A4 B9. Give it time and someone will find one with the right kind of light coming from the right angles, a reasonable background, a foreground that means you can stand not too close and not too far from it and not too much camber in the road (which makes finding a decent angle for the car more ... um ... challenging). Photograph it from chest height rather than from ... um ... pelvis height (assuming you are of conventional height). Your chest is approximately halfway between the height from which an average-sized wiki reader see the thing when sitting in his/her own car across the road and the height from which you see it as a pedestrian waiting to cross the road. Higher or lower can sometimes be justified by other factors, but it should not - at least in my opinion - be your default.

But please don't rush out and photograph the first A4 B9 you see and assume it's better than what we have. Look at what you have first.

Regards Charles01 (talk) 09:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have added more thoughts while I was replying to your earlier ones. The foregoing does not, of course, take account of these!

Of course Charles01, again sorry what do you mean by backdrops. Yeah look, no worries mate, I don't usually take time, because I have been struggling. Please re-evaluate Image3 and feel free to add corrections. What do you mean by "backdrop blending in?" Again, how do I improve these? I'm not too sure mate, just thought I hit you up for advice. What are your steps and recommendations? Please feel free to talk it on my page :). Also I'd probably be run over if I took an extra step by buses. Can you please explain what good backgrounds would be when I take a photo of a vehicle? I'm not too sure how to approach it and do the right thing. Of course, I do not replace any image that has QI rating as it is the best quality and what we expect --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:59, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why should the image constantly change? It just Nim getting upset that his image is not being used as much and determining to correct, he been doing this for a while. If what you say when it comes to reflection etc. I might as well stand hours waiting for the sun be in the best position. It completely impractical. Funny enough, "Image 2" is what he personally requested me to photograph few months back. I told him to focus more on the cars that are exclusively sold in Australia since I already have a good grasp with location for things like Audi A4 and if I recalled, Nim and I seem to have reach a consensus to that, only to suddenly complain about something that could of been discussed two months ago. --Vauxford (talk) 14:28, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vauxford, Polarizing filters are the best to reduce reflections (which I'll purchase). Again, sometimes I like to revisit the thing again to see whether theres any need. Also Vauxford, read WP:BIAS, it might not be an official policy, but its critical :-). Best --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:32, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CARPIX doesn't require a specific angle of a photograph like you put it. Plus your requirements for a photograph are very strict, given that there is no rule on Wikipedia that suggests to do so. U1Quattro (talk) 10:38, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi U1Quattro. How are you? Yeah look, WP:CARPIX is technically not an official policy, however myself and Charles are quite strict. Do you have the actual image you wish to replace. Please bring it to the relevant talkpage discussion mate, and we can work on finding the best one. Hey don't worry, if you wish to replace it in your opinion, go ahead, but please note, users have the right to revert mate. :) Take care for now :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:00, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First off, EurovisionNim I'm not a talk page stalker as you put it. Charles01 himself instructed to take matters to his talk page in case of any disagreement. Second off, I put the following image in place of the V6 4Porte image:

This is a high quality image and is taken at the right angle.U1Quattro (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually mate, showroom images are discouraged. WP:CARPIX doesn't actually mean anything if its in the showroom. There are lots of distracting backgrounds. I was planning to picture one, but my friend says I won't have any luck in Australia. Charles01, why don't you photograph the Maserati Quattroporte. Also the angle is not at 3/4 so it won't be a good replacement unfortunately. Sorry mate. But I'll let Charles01 be on your case :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:09, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking you'd like to use the German image. It may be sunlit, but its sure a good example :} --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in the showroom but at the Paris Motor Show. Do you not understand the difference?U1Quattro (talk) 11:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My request that you take discussing to the talk page was intended to mean the talk page for the entry in question. I am sorry I was not sufficiently clear on that and you took it as an invitation to take the thing to my talk page.

EurovisionNim has invoked WP:CARPIX to justify uploading a lot - a LOT - of second rate pictures of cars (and some that are truly terrible) taken by himself and a fellow called Vauxford with whom he has a very odd wiki-grooming relationship. I think he wishes to take over the world which would - or at least might - be fine if he was God. I believe the overall effect of the pictures he uploads has been to degrade wikipedia. I have mentioned this to him before. He knows that I think this but he continues down his path. It is my opinion. He does not say he disagrees. But then again, if ever he stops to think, he may do.

Since you guys have dumped on my talk page here's more of what I think:

"doesn't require a specific angle of a photograph like you put it". You are right. This should be no more than a statement of the bleeping obvious. The page you are looking at is one of guidelines. Guidelines should not be used as an excuse for attaching lousy images to entries on cars. Jimmy Wales says rules are there to be broken, I think, but here we are not talking about rules. We are talking about guidelines set down by people who know what they're talking about - or should do - and hope thereby to be able to help you to take better pictures of cars. If only...

As far as the various pictures of the Maserati Quattroporte VI are concerned, the place to discuss it is surely on the talk page for the Maserati Quattroporte. Maybe you already started doing that. There are, of course, no right answers on this stuff. Or wrong ones. Only opinions. More generally. if you think the pictures that EurovisionNim are brilliant - or even if you think they're quite good - you should say so. You might even persuade me. Then again ...

Happy days Charles01 (talk) 12:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EurovisionNim has already lost the credibility that he had by identifying an image from a motor show as an image from a showroom. I whole heartedly agree on your opinion about him. He do has taken some terrible pictures (recent pictures of the E46 M3 are an example) and goes about replacing the pictures on articles by those taken by Vauxford, thus identifying him as biased. Wikicommons sure needs a major overhaul and the deletion of terrible images, especially in the automotive sector (what I know of). I do apologise for annoying you, if I had done so by discussing the matter on your talk page.U1Quattro (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

U1Quattro. Its mainly Vauxford's fault. He doesn't really listen to the guidelines set 😂😂. Yeah my mates really think I go a little bit overboard. I always act as the 'Captain' of the ship, however like the enemy ship, Vauxford tries to sink us 😝. Yeah whatever, opinions opinions, who cares. I would actually do deletion of many photos, but I got blocked along with OSX for nominating junk files of mine for deletion. I think we have been based amongst political bias rather than trying to get the thing overwhelmed. Yeah look, if I were you, i'd get a sample of images and post it to Talk:Maserati Quattroporte and have a consensus discussion. And mate, you are almost there, I don't do just me and Vauxford, I do M 93's images as well. Yeah I am biased, but not what you think I am 😀. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:17, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Charles01 "second rate pictures of cars (and some that are truly terrible) taken by himself and a fellow called Vauxford with whom he has a very odd wiki-grooming relationship" Let me clarifying this first. I am in no shape or form in some buddy relationship with Nim. In fact, I'm more against him and his delusional views and as you can see right now, he just threw me under the bus because U1Quattro (like me) disagreed with the need to follow this CARPIX since he keep treating it like some official policy which is not.

Why now you seem to be venting about how terrible some of my pictures were despite the fact we never ran into problems with each other? If you really have a problem with some of my pictures, then revert it and discuss it with me, rather then keeping it all to yourself and then express it when I'm not looking. Show me examples that you find oh-so degrading? In the beginning when I was starting out and before Nim began stalking me everywhere I go and tried to be exactly like. (how I speak, photograph and all sorts), I asked you advice of what a good picture of a car and over that time I presumed you think I improved and we didn't have creative difference. Like I said, please do not mix me and Nim with the pictures we took because that is not the case at all. I have always doing it in my own style rather then from some essay, too bad it keeps getting tarnished by this smug Australian with his smileys as well as mistaken as to be part of some "wiki-grooming relationship" where me and his pictures get labelled into one which I find out of this discussion the most frustrating.

I tend to compare Nim's pictures as a Chinese knockoff of mine since he tries to copy everything I do. As a example you mentioned, he has been using buzzword and jargon like chromatic aberration and "sundreached" and then regurgitate them out and use it to justified what he said, he doesn't think for himself that much and heavily leech on others like you and me which I find just lazy.

U1Quattro The difference with me and Nim is that I don't actually follow this CARPIX guideline because you are right, it is very strict and Nim always get worked up when I don't follow it, claiming that I'm "violating CARPIX policy" Personally I think the "talkpage stalker" here is the one I'm despising. --Vauxford (talk) 14:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vauxford: Guidelines are in place to follow. Think of it, you are at school or university and you decide that hey maybe you can bend the rules a bit, then you run into trouble with your dean or teacher. And no Vauxford I am NOT a Chinese knockoff. Stop trying to accuse me of being 'lazy'. I was here longer than you and I've contributed plenty of my images for Wikipedia for the last 4-5 years and I have believed myself to be a well minded editor. Regardless, Vauxford, I was the one who mentored you into improving photos, because i didn't particularly fancy your other ones. Further to that, I do not replace a lot of images (well I do sometimes), but I do that knowing that my images are better improvements – but likewise I am NOT a Chinese knockoff, thats an insult because I'm Australian, and I do contribute the same way as everyone else. I reserve the right to showcase my image, Charles01 deserves the right to do that, and you do as well. I actually started the trend, but its the other way around. Okay, please do not accuse me again. I don't actually like your Audi Q7 images, because it is very grainy. I don't care if you weren't able to afford a better camera, at the end of the day, your image is low quality and thats that. Its plain simple, stop arguing with me, I don't know you, and you seem to be just as SquiddyFish said to me on Facebook "pixels on a screen". It's funny that I began the trend, and you kept egging me with 'list' of vehicles. I told you to focus on the European manufactured cars that sell well in your country not doing Japanese cars such as Nissan, Toyota, Mazda etc. I don't mind him, I can be delusional, yes, but I can say what I want as long as its appopriate. Cheers --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You just proven your point, really showing your true colours that U1Quattro was trying to point out with playground bragging rights like "I started this trend" "I was here longer then you". You're like a broken record player. I don't see being here longer makes you any more justifiable, looking back your timeline between 2014-2017 (Which is a good 3 years), your pictures were pretty abysmal as a comparison of me who (I like to think I have improved but Charles01 seem to think me and you are the same person) been on here for just over two years and there a big difference between what I took September 2017 to August Summer 2018 (around 11 months) which during that time period were not that good but it is a much shorter time gap. --Vauxford (talk) 15:10, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The EurovisionNim-Vauxford relationship is something I do not begin to understand. The more I look at your respective talk pages the more gobsmacked I become. This really is not an area where I can claim any special expertise. But, as the lawyers sometimes like to say whether they mean it or not, "I note what you write".

• On the quality of images linked to articles, I have begun to be a bit more active in sharing my opinions. But I'm afraid no one except possibly you and EurovisionNim has time to form a view and then share it every time you introduce (or he introduces) another picture.

• I do try and take time to write what I think about a picture when I take the time and apply the chutzpah to become involved. In the case of "your" pictures I find I tend to write the same things about why I think what I think. Maybe there is a clue there. And where you think I am wrong you are very much at liberty to say so.

• I think I have written before - certainly thought - that your pictures have improved a lot in the last couple of years. Will they improve more in the next few years? I hope so. I hope mine will too. And even ... everyone else's. Should you value my opinion on this? Well, it would be nice (for me) if you did, but what you seem to be doing - and need to do much more of in my ignorable opinion - is develop your own objective judgment of your own pictures. And of everyone else's.

• Are your pictures and those of EurovisionNim so good that uploading them to wikipedia without discrimination and on an industrial scale has improved the wikipedia coverage of cars? Um ... I think not. But what do you think?

• I am, within reason, happy to share thoughts on my talk page. But where they concern primarily discussions between EurovisionNim and Vauxford about pictures uploaded by EurovisionNim and/or Vauxford, it probably makes more sense, usually, to conduct those discussions either on the talk page connected with the images you are discussing or else on th talk page of EurovisionNim and/or Vauxford.

No further thoughts. Except whatever happened to Saturday? Regards Charles01 (talk) 15:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Charles01 Like I said, what happened on my talkpage is just Nim pestering on everything I do and started these discussions. I rather not be bothered on my talkpage everyday and if Nim wasn't on Wikipedia you wouldn't hear much from me. I value your opinion, although can be a bit gritty but it usually true to some extend. In my logic (A certain individual might steal what I'm about to say) I upload bulks of I what think is good, balancing the quality and quantity as much as I can, rather then spending months evaluating every picture that you took that might deem a Renaissance masterpiece and ended up uploading just 4 pictures, it inconvenient. Seeing now new cars, facelifts are coming out almost every months, you don't have much time before having to move on to look for the next new thing. In my honest opinion and please don't take this personally, if everyone were to upload and contribute to car articles at a rate as you do, we will be about a good decade behind, there be barely any progress with these automobile articles. --Vauxford (talk) 15:40, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to point out thatEurovisionNim floods articles with pictures which is also a violation of the article guidelines. Like mate, give the guideline a read, it's better to just upload the necessary photos and leave the commons link at the end of the article rather than flooding it with photos. This is an article site, not a photo gallery.U1Quattro (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Charles, hope you are well, please see discussion on Talk:Toyota Hilux. I would love your input into the matter and a second opinion, to prevent bias. Have a nice one :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 04:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]