Just a quick reminder, I am still opposed to the majority of the changes that are occurring with the VIN pages. However none of my suggestions or concerns were taken into consideration during this time. So seeing that another editor is already having an issue with the new layout/design (even though he does support the change of design) might be an important thing to consider. The new layout might not be as good as it was intended to be. Visually it is messy looking and not smooth to the eye compared to the old layout in my opinion. I have a few production lists offline that use a similar layout to the proposed layout, but the format is more of a Microsoft Word or Angelfire look instead of the wiki table look. I feel as if the MS Word text-style look suites serial based production lists much better, while the wiki table look is much more fitting for full VINs and extra information.
My biggest problem with these proposed changes would be the undoing/removal of years of hard work and research (a lot of my own work in particular on the Gillig, Neoplan, Ikarus, etc. VIN pages). I have gone out of my way to find the most accurate information around, and I even note when results could be subject to error, non-standard or incorrect from the source it was found. I wouldn't see a point to continue adding info to the wiki just to have it all deleted due to a change of visual formatting. I noticed @Articulated mentioned that VINs added onto the wiki without a known operator are considered useless. However, this is not the case, as information can be found at later dates just from having the VINs easily available. It is next to impossible to find production lists for certain bus builders like Neoplan. What would you gain from removing hundreds of VINs, that are confirmed in DMV & NMVTIS databases just because the original operator is currently unknown? Also, for notes being added to VIN pages: where else could they be put if there is no fleet page available and only the VIN is known? Also there are some fleets that cannot have pages created for them immediately due to missing information on fleet numbers, etc. I don't see any harm in temporarily placing information in the notes section on the VIN pages. I do it all of the time and have found it to be helpful when doing research. To have all of this deleted just to simplify things would be enough to make me want to resign from adding info. I feel as if the wiki can be the best source and the most detailed source of bus information on the web. Too much simplifying can turn things the other direction.
Another thing to note is that the majority of these changes were proposed in order to make editing easier for editors with less experience or time. However, I feel as if readers & users who aren't editors are being completely left out in this decision. I showed a couple of friends these new layouts and the discussions about the potential removal of the old layout and they were not pleased at all. I saw a mention from @Articulated about not approving of the black bars & white text for separating VINs that belong on other VIN pages. I came up with this format as a result of talking to other readers & editors, stating it should be shown where to find missing serials easily. At first I saw similar methods pop up, but they included "M VINs" on an "L VINs" page, which did not sit right with me. I have found this method to smooth out any potential confusion with skipped/missing serials on VIN pages.
Sometimes ideas/layouts/solutions that may seem less complex end up not being as good as what was originally available. We learned this when user Useddenim tried to change the standard into that VINdet formatting earlier this year. Sure editing VIN pages isn't the easiest thing in the world for editors, but methods could be shown on how to make the process easier, instead of just doing away with it all together. It may even be a good thing that the VIN pages are not so simple to edit, that way we don't have editors adding in all kinds of incorrect info or removing info. I was just like everyone else when I started adding VINs back in early 2015. It was tedious at first, but I got used to the system and at some point added thousands of VINs, many that were extremely hard to find. I would be willing to teach editors methods that I learned in order to speed up the process, because once I got the formula down, it became a fairly simple process, even to the point of being fun at times.
My final concern is the fact that what if we make all of these changes involving tons of deletion of hard work and info, just to make things easier for editors to work with, only to find out that editors still have issues or are just generally not even working with VIN pages at all? Over the years, I have noticed very few bus fans ever work with VINs. Many people come directly to me for VIN questions rather than doing their own research or just using Google at times. I am thinking all of this change may occur, but then we will still have the same few editors adding VINs often, which would completely defeat the purpose of the change at all in my opinion.
Thanks for reading my two cents. This is where I stand on everything.