 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Removed this: [1] (Swept Volume PDF link), because it wasn't used as reference for the article content.
To avoid any WP:COI issues, I suggest you don't edit this article yourself. But you're welcome to provide sources and links to yourself on the talkpage and make suggestions for what should be added, and wait for independent editors who are familiar with the topic to evaluate the material and consider it for expansion of the article. Femto 12:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I have inserted the judgments of the Australian Federal court so that the truth can be seen, It will very likely be removed by User talk:60.226.130.228.
sincerely Malbeare (talk) 20:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
User talk:60.226.130.228 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search [edit] Jack Brabham
Hi there. Since you're down in the Brisbane area, and given the nature of your edits, I guess you either work for JBE Ltd or the Brabham family, or are one of the Brabham family. Wikipedia puts great weight on referencing all the material on the site and deleting references, or referenced material, as you have now twice done, is generally speaking against the rules. Now I can certainly see that the original wording mistakenly gave the impression that JBE was no longer in business - my bad drafting - but can you explain why there should be no mention of Malcolm Beare (who did invent the technology, despite recent developments) or of a court case, which seems to have been quite big news? We reach agreement here on Wikipedia by discussion and reaching consensus - please reply at my talk page here. In the meantime, I've changed your latest edit slightly for sense and to give a fuller idea of what (according to the website) JBE does, but won't replace the material on Beare just yet. 4u1e (talk) 10:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, the Jack Brabham Engines site, from memory has information regarding the technology and its inventors if persons are so interested in that particular information. The site is the official Australian site for Sir Jack - Dan Gurney's site is the US site on Sir Jack as well - both contain photographs from Sir Jack's personal collection and factual information from "the source". Thanks.
I know. But that doesn't address the question, does it? Why do you not want there to be any mention of Malcolm Beare or the court case in the article? Non-notability or factual inaccuracy would be good reasons - simply not wanting 'bad' news in the page is not. 4u1e (talk) 15:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)