Questions about material in #214: accuracy?

[W Humble]

For Jay Coburn, re: pg.19 caption: is it 'cotter pin' you mean for the cylindrical securing pin on the scratch built flagpole mounts on the awesome '67 Camaro pace car, or 'clevis pin'?  Granted, it really isn't securing a clevis, but that's where the mechanism originated, I think.  The hairpin clips, I agree -- which often secure clevis pins!

For Jim Cassasa, re: pgs. 46: Do those three exhaust stacks on the Shelby 'Stang really resemble Curtiss P-40 exhaust to you?  Check out the real ones (six, not three per side) in SCALE MODELER.  Also, 47: Was it Mrs, Karl Benz who took her husband's new invention for a drive, or Frau Gottfried Daimler?  Seems like the famous first drive for a lady was in his four wheel benzin-buggy.

For Larry Greenberg, re: pf. 55: Didn't Chevrolet do it's styling 'rehash' on the Chevy II/Nova in 1966 (not 1965, as noted?  The body was still on the same inadequate chassis/suspension (yes, we had an original-buyer one until 2019) but the '66-67 was seriously facelifted in the newer GM styling idiom.  The '62 in many ways was a fore-taste of the '53 big Chevy styling look, but less distinctive and more mundane. I M Humble O.

Guess this doesn't matter much, but I'd like a response.  My mentors in automotive writing always insisted on true accuracy especially in historical issues, not 'sort-of' accuracy, but that doesn't go much anymore?  At the price of car mags nowadays, I can't afford not to read every darn word! Just sayin' 

Wick, age 76, modeling since '53!

[mikemodeler]

I think you made your point on the accuracy, why are you insisting on a response? The magazine doesn't have a full time staff to answer messages.

[bobthehobbyguy]

As said there isn't a large enough staff to cross check everything in the magazine. Besides most of the staff have full time jobs besides helping with the magazine.

You've been pointing out errors for the last couple of issues. How about offering some time to help with the proof reading for accuracy.

[bamadon]

"The '62 in many ways was a fore-taste of the '53 big Chevy styling look"  What?

[Michael Bentt]

I am not a native speaker of English, but "fore-taste" is a single word without a dash in the middle. From the Oxford dictionary. For someone so concerned with accuracy, this seems quite a funny oversight as is a car predicting a car from 9 years earlier. Proofreading applies to everyone ☺️

fore·taste

/ˈfôrˌtāst/

noun

• 1.a sample or suggestion of something that lies ahead:"the freezing rain was a foretaste of winter"

[Steve H]

With all due respect James, I find your comments ridiculous. As the above have stated, if you are calling out others for accuracy, maybe proofread your own comments before hitting send.
Thank you to all involved in the magazine for putting out a beautiful quality magazine, even if there is a the occasional imperfection. 

[W Humble]

Okay, I think you make my point for me.  I don't publish the product, I just sent a comment as a customer.  (OC, the typo was "53" for "63" and I suspect you knew it.  Same with "foresight".  Sigh.)  

And I guess getting something right in print doesn't matter, huh?  Got it! 

So, I'd be happy to help within my own field of expertise, which is 1:1 cars and trucks of a certain era.  My age would tell you which.  

[mikemodeler]

6 hours ago, W Humble said:

Okay, I think you make my point for me.  I don't publish the product, I just sent a comment as a customer.  (OC, the typo was "53" for "63" and I suspect you knew it.  Same with "foresight".  Sigh.)  

And I guess getting something right in print doesn't matter, huh?  Got it! 

So, I'd be happy to help within my own field of expertise, which is 1:1 cars and trucks of a certain era.  My age would tell you which.  

I see newspapers print corrections all the time, so as hard as they try, they make mistakes, they're human. As has been noted here and elsewhere, MCM does not have a full time dedicated staff to fact check, spell check and research whether it should be clevis pin or cotter pin. I would suggest you contact Larry Greenberg as he would likely welcome the help in making sure the magazine is as accurate as can be. Given the long history of MCM, I would have to say it's at the best it's ever been in terms of content and layout, the occasional misteak aside.

 

 

 

 

And yes, I purposely misspelled mistake.

[GLMFAA1]

"the occasional misteak aside"

Isn't that a steak order that's between rare,medium and well done.

Better trademark that, there is a restaurants in that name

greg

[Dave Darby]

8 hours ago, W Humble said:

Okay, I think you make my point for me.  I don't publish the product, I just sent a comment as a customer.  (OC, the typo was "53" for "63" and I suspect you knew it.  Same with "foresight".  Sigh.)  

And I guess getting something right in print doesn't matter, huh?  Got it! 

So, I'd be happy to help within my own field of expertise, which is 1:1 cars and trucks of a certain era.  My age would tell you which.  

Hi James, I think your comments show just how easy it is to create a typographical error. These may or may not be obvious to another person, just as I don't carry around the history of Daimler Benz to know who took what out for a drive. Does a resemblence to a Curtiss P40 exhaust hinge on the number of pipes, or the shape of the pipes? I like accuracy as well, but I have seen just as bad of proofing mistakes in well funded mainstream media than I've seen in MCM. Scale Auto was often worse, when it came to factual accuracy. Speaking for myself, as a contributor to MCM, I don't make my living from writing for this magazine. I have a day job. I do this purely for the benefit of the hobby. I do my level best to make sure what I contribute is as accurate as possible, as I am sure the other contributors do as well. But, we are all only human. Have you considered contributing articles to the magazine? Perhaps you'd like to volunteer to proofread articles. 

[casassa]

Wick, when I am preparing captions for photos of models I take at contest, I rely on the information provided by the builder on the photo information sheet. I only make corrections if I'm certain from my personal knowledge that the information is incorrect. 

This doesn't excuse the mistakes, it merely explains why they happen.  JIM                                                       

[W Humble]

Jim, you're right, it does explain it; I suppose even if you knew a 'factoid' to be wrong on the info sheet, you would be presumptuous to challenge it.  I judge 1:1 shows but only once rated models, and then that was aircraft!  Thank you for answering my query, which is all it was.  :-<)   Ole' Wick

[iBorg]

Jim makes a great point. If the info submitted is in error, should he correct it? What if he is in error? The info in the magazine can be only as good as what's submitted. 

I'm more than happy to look over the occasional errors for the inspiration each new issue brings. Since I used to get about four magazines a month I'm thrilled to get MCM with what looks like a fairly regular schedule. 

[W Humble]

Dave, does it matter whether or not one is a professional writer, or getting paid as a stringer, or ??  I'm sorry some of the readers have such thin skin, but when something goes into print, I don't believe in shooting from the him, so to speak.  Still: you have a good point.

I do have some bona fides: authored HOW TO RESTORE YOUR DATSUN Z-CAR which has been in print over 30 year, was Restoration Editor of Z Car Magazine for six years (along with day job as Kindergarten teacher, plus GrandPa, Husband, and 1:1 car restorer.  I'm trying to get some Young Adult market fiction published, right now, while also working hard to get my kit collection (85% bought before 1965 -- not typo this time!) done as my vision and muscle coordination sunset at age 77.

I really like MCM (also SA, once, but they were mad at me too!) and the forums; guys are 100% great -- and generous!

Best,  Wick (not James, if we're friends.)P

[W Humble]

Oh, Bob of Oroville: since we're practically neighbors, why don't we get together for a coffee and discuss how I might help?  Wick of Chico (still 'in the book')

[bobthehobbyguy]

I don't have any connection  to producing the magazine. Your best bet would be to contact Larry Greenberg to offer assistence.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Not to pile on MCM, but the concepts of "editor" and knowledgeable "fact checking" in journalism as a whole are largely things of the much-maligned geezer past.

Generations conditioned to swallow whole the FIRST result vomited up by Google for the most part don't care about whether it's RIGHT or not.

It can be frustrating going through life actually wanting to know the TRUTH, once you realize you're in a tiny minority.

[Danno]

"I don't believe in shooting from the him,"

Is that a sexist statement or did YOU make a mistake?

Just wondering. ☺️

[W Humble]

Bill, I think you summed it up very well!  As a former teacher with some experience of the upper grades, I know about that to which you refer..  but we know better!  I wrote for Hemming's SPECIAL INTEREST AUTOS, and Mike Lamm (and Dave Brownell) the editor and he would spare no expense to get faultless research!  A good mentor for the younger me, as I liked 'true history' already.  As I used to tell my kids, decisions based on untrue or partially-correct information can never be good!  

Having said that, I made a momentous goof on 'My Classic Car' when they featured my 240-Z and blurted out that the 'S.U.' on the carb design (licensed to Hitachi, oc) stood for 'Stewart Union', not 'Skinner's Union'.  I was docked 14-minutes on my '15-minutes of fame'...!   Wick

[W Humble]

Danno, it was >gasp!< another typo.  I haven't been able to enlarge the font on this blog so far, and I have big probs reading what is on the screen, much as I have with building my models now.  I'm almost 77, and not everything works as it used to -- very contrite, but...  Let's hope you never get old and enfeebled, and make no typos, much less mistakes, huh?  It was NOT a sexist statement, as I am sure you know; '...shoot from the hip, hip, hip'.  I built my first kits in second grade, which was 1952 (again, no typo!], an Aurora 'Famous Fighters' Curtiss P-40 (F-series, if I'm not mistaken), followed by the Revell 'Highway Pioneers' kits -- which my dad and I pretended were for him -- and which you may have missed?  Fasten the wheels with a screwdriver blade heated in a candle flame, etc.?

In 30-years of my Z-Car restoration book, no one has ever written me or the publisher re: any errors.  I am proud of that.  Also, that it is coming out, hopefully this year, in a revised edition, thus will be in print constantly since 1991.  I DO type with eight fingers, even yet, not two thumbs!  

Sorry to be so long-winderd but that's another penalty of living so long; I don't have many pals left with which to talk models.  Thank goodness for MCM forums! 

Well, I hope that ends this strand!  WICK

[Ace-Garageguy]

3 hours ago, W Humble said:

...As a former teacher with some experience of the upper grades, I know about that to which you refer...but we know better! 

While we're lamenting the demise of factual accuracy in print, take a listen sometime to what passes for "documentaries" on YouTube.

Many of the copy writers have little comprehension of what they're writing about, the voiceover talent has even less, and they don't know words.

American "education" has fallen into the toilet, and it's not unusual to see even degreed "journalists" confusing things like materiel and material, ordnance and ordinance, copy writing and copyrighting, and even there, their, and they're.

I know a lot of folks think stuff like this doesn't matter, and that only a grammar-Nazi would care, but a person is often judged by how well he communicates. 

An older and wiser fella once chided a woefully ignorant young hot-rodder with "You want to build a car? You can't even build a sentence."

The point being that sloppy use of one's native language often goes hand and hand with sloppy use of other tools, and incompetence in general.

Edited July 2, 2022 by Ace-Garageguy

[Michael Bentt]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

While we're lamenting the demise of factual accuracy in print, take a listen sometime to what passes for "documentaries" on YouTube.

Many of the copy writers have little comprehension of what they're writing about, the voiceover talent has even less, and they don't know words.

American "education" has fallen into the toilet, and it's not unusual to see even degreed "journalists" confusing things like materiel and material, ordnance and ordinance, copy writing and copyrighting, and even there, their, and they're.

I know a lot of folks think stuff like this doesn't matter, and that only a grammar-Nazi would care, but a person is often judged by how well he communicates. 

An older and wiser fella once chided a woefully ignorant young hot-rodder with "You want to build a car? You can't even build a sentence."

The point being that sloppy use of one's native language often goes hand and hand with sloppy use of other tools, and incompetence in general.

William Corning, did you know that many YouTube videos utilize vocalization software for narration? I would think not as technology seems to be a bit troubling for you. This is a boon to people from non-native English countries to create content to be consumed globally. I know the world of technology seems to bother you, but it is something you should be aware of, if only to not appear foolish. These communication tools are no more flaw-free as a human typing or speaking. Think how often you must have to retract a word and self-correct in a conversation with your dizzying intellect and knowledge of, from what I see here, literally every topic having to do with cars, or models, or life in general. What did you have for dinner? 

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Michael Bentt said:

William Corning, did you know that many YouTube videos utilize vocalization software for narration?    Yeah, I know that. But thanks for checking. I would think not as technology seems to be a bit troubling for you.   No, not really. Stupid is troubling though.  This is a boon to people from non-native English countries to create content to be consumed globally. I know the world of technology seems to bother you, but it is something you should be aware of, if only to not appear foolish.  Thanks again for your gracious concern.  These communication tools are no more flaw-free as a human typing or speaking. Think how often you must have to retract a word and self-correct in a conversation with your dizzying intellect and knowledge of, from what I see here, literally every topic having to do with cars, or models, or life in general.  Are you in a club? Must be something like that, 'cause there sure are a lot of y'all who say exactly the same thing.   What did you have for dinner?  Ribeye on the grill, asparagus in Hollandaise, and a California Pinot Noir. Yes, and I cook well too.   

 

[Plowboy]

No one is perfect. People make mistakes. Life goes on. No one's world is going to end over a mistake in a model car magazine. If it is, you seriously need to get a life. 

[Michael Bentt]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

 

Billiam Corning:

I typically don't post 9 times/day (that was you today total) much less belong to a club. The world of model car building is not exactly a raging cauldron of activity here in Europe. It seems people have much more leisure time in Georgia USA.  I do appreciate you putting "y'all" in there. It made my translations software do loops. Good to see you are literal perfection in all your exploits, cooking included! Bravo! The rest of us strive to reach that state of level of mastery.