Hot Wheels Wiki
Hot Wheels Wiki

Page editor

Hi Danny, I've noticed some glitches with the page editor and was hoping you could fix them. First, users can not add images to the tables. I made many failed attempts to add an image to '63 Studebaker Champ page. The editor tools either moved the image up to the Header or it did not add the image at all. Second, when adding or modifing a text link, we can no longer highlight text and create a new link, or highlight text and modify an existing link. Both of these problems used to work fine and now both require source mode to do, which is beyond many new contributers. And help would be appreciated, Thanks! DavidSinnin  talk  Contributions 21:27, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

Hi David -- Hmm, I just tried editing that Studebaker Champ page in rich-text editor mode, and it seems to work okay for me. I can add a pic, and I can highlight text and create a link. Are you still seeing these problems? If you are, then actually the best thing to do is send a message through the Contact Wikia form. Give them as many details as you can, like what browser you're using, and exactly what steps you're doing that gets an error.
The community support folks will get back to you faster than I will :) -- so give them a shout, okay? -- Danny (talk) 23:16, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
Danny, Thank you for looking into this. I just re-tried the studebaker page and the add image was working, but if i highlighted text and tried to turn it into a link the opening link box was still blank, this also still occured with trying to edit an existing link. I Will forward my case to the community support. Thanks again! Sinnin  talk  Contributions 00:27, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Admin Nomination

Hi Danny, I'd like to nominate Sinnin as a new admin here at the Hot Wheels Wiki. He has been instrumental in helping new users and reverting the edits of inaccuracy, as has remained a top contributor. Thanks for your time! BigBadBrad01 17:13, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Hi Brad -- it's awesome to find new great people! You can give people admin rights yourself -- go to Special:Userrights, put in his name, and then you can assign him as an admin. -- Danny (talk) 19:09, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Danny! Glad I could learn something new today...haha. BigBadBrad01 17:35, September 28, 2010 (UTC)
I always wondered why I was never considered as someone who helps a lot to build this site. I was the highest number of edits for many months until I stopped for a almost a year. I check recently and I'm still at second top editor, but for some reason I'm never considered for an Administer position. I guess I don't need be, but it takes some fun away being overlooked all the time. Vista69 (talk) 06:39, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Coding Question

Danny, do you know if Wiki has rewritten the code for Galleries once again? The only reason I ask is that when they first changed it so that it would display 6 images wide for people with wider monitors, that was all right. Even though it only showed 3 wide on my monitor, when it used to have room for 4 images - I could deal with that and in fact, dealt with it. But now, every Gallery that I look at displays the pictures in columns of 1 image wide. All Galleries turn out to be long lines of pictures one below the next. On, where I am also a member, they recently changed all their coding and some of the features I had paid for in my pro account stopped working for me. I was told by Flickr staff that those features would never work on my current browser because the features were literally not compatible with my older browser. Then, the very next day, they put some coding back (or removed some coding that blocked my browser from working - they would never confirm or deny this), in where the features that weren't supposed to be able to work with my browser, worked perfectly again. To boil it all down, I felt they had intentionally added code that prevented my browser from being functional instead of just updating their site with features that physically would not work on an older browser. The fact that my outdated browsed worked perfectly again the next day led me to believe they didn't have to make my browser unfuntional, but they chose to anyway. Is there anything like this going on with Wiki staff, and can some of the original funtionality I used to have be allowed back into the coding? I keep hearing everybody tell me that my browser is old and therefore won't work with the new internet. Then I come across instances that prove it will work if only they would stop making it intentionally non-compatible. Just curious. Because some Galleries are big and it just makes the pages much too long to have to scroll through. Kenny HaarFager 04:28, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the recent change was, but it's not surprising to me if the galleries are looking strange to you. You and I talked about this in March -- we're not supporting IE6 as a browser anymore. That doesn't mean that we're intentionally breaking things so that they don't work in IE6. It just means that we're intentionally not fixing things if they happen to break.
It's true that we could spend time fixing IE6 bugs; it's not impossible for us to do. We've officially chosen to not spend time on that. A very small number of our visitors use IE6, and that number is declining as people upgrade. So we don't want to spend extra time optimizing our code to work on a buggy browser that was retired in 2006. We're not trying to break IE6 -- we're just not spending time not breaking it. This isn't just us -- Google, YouTube and Amazon have also dropped support for IE6. I'm not sure if Flickr has dropped support or not, but it sounds like they're heading in that direction.
So like I said in March, it's basically your choice whether you want to see galleries this way or try upgrading again. You can download IE8 for Windows XP, or try downloading FireFox -- it's free, and it works great. If you stick with IE6, then over time you're going to have more and more problems on the internet -- not just here, but everywhere. -- Danny (talk) 17:37, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
Danny, so what you're saying is that there was a change in coding in March, when I first reported it and now there's another change? That makes it where possibly even the people whose browsers were compatible in March might have to upgrade as well. To me, it doesn't make sense to make people have to upgrade twice a year. We both know the only reason why things like this are done by the ones that create the software - greed. So, if more people would spend less time reiterating over and over that I need to update my browser, (as well as most everybody else that uses browsers), and stop buying into these forced changes done in the sake of greed, maybe these companies would get the message and stop making every new product non-backwards compatible so that it automatically makes anything before it obsolete. You do see, Danny, that I'm not complaining about you or the Wiki staff for making simple updates? It's the companies creating the browsers and forcing change on us simply because they want more money. That is plain and simple to see - if only more people would see it, stand up for themselves and say they're not going to continue taking it anymore. I think the motion picture "Network" comes to mind.
That is my complaint, and it is a valid complaint. But, if people aren't reminded of this until they get it, this behaviour will continue. Kenny HaarFager 23:47, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
There are code updates all the time. The site keeps changing and adding more features. When that happens, we make sure that the new code works on all the browsers that we support. IE6 is not one of the browsers that we support anymore.
Your theory about why people make new things is interesting, but it's just not true. We don't update our site because we want to break things. We update the site because the new features make things better. The same is true for browsers. IE6 is a bad browser that doesn't work with the modern web. It has major security issues that make it vulnerable to viruses. It doesn't support CSS2 or transparency in png images. These are real problems that make it hard to design good-looking web pages that work in IE6.
Microsoft has upgraded its browser to fix these issues. The upgrade is free. You can also use Firefox, which is free. I'm not sure why you're stubbornly clinging to a badly-designed browser when you can get a free upgrade that solves your problems. Nobody is asking you to spend money. -- Danny (talk) 00:06, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
Yo Kenny, just download Firefox...It's FREE. I gave up that POS Internet Explorer a long time ago. Just try it...I guarantee you'll like it better. Don't forget to save your bookmarks. BigBadBrad01 17:35, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
I Understand what kenny is talking about here, it is not a repeat of the previous gallery discussion. The new default sizing of the gallery has just about doubled. it is currently 200px our previous sizing default was 120px (Doubling the width on a square equals 4x the area) So i agree with kenny that they are huge. It is not a browser issue this time but rather a screen resolution. I personally dislike this change. However It is an easy fix, just select a new gallery size of 120px and everything returns to normal. Sinnin  talk  Contributions 21:21, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe A Glitch, I Don't Know

Danny, I posted this question over on the Community Portal, but it has gotten no response. I'm sure because we users wouldn't know anyway. But, I thought somebody connected with the Wiki might, so I direct it to you. It concerns an e-mail alert I got for a file that was uploaded. I'll just copy the question from there in it's entirety and let you read it. "I just got an e-mail alert that said "A file you are watching on Hot Wheels Wiki has been uploaded." Read that again and let it soak in. A file I was watching was just uploaded. How can you watch a file before it's uploaded? How come I'm getting strange alerts like this? If it hadn't been uploaded until August 4th, 2010, which, it's still August 3rd where I am, how could I have marked it as being a file that I wanted to watch? It hadn't yet been uploaded to do anything to it." It must be a glitch because, before a file is uploaded, how can it be watched? I even checked the history of the file and it had none other than being uploaded at that particular time. Is this something that needs to be looked into? Because it has happened to me before and it's time consuming to go and see pictures or edits you didn't actually mark as being something you wanted to follow. I thought the Wiki staff might want to look into this. Thanks! Kenny HaarFager 07:13, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

That is very weird, yeah! I haven't heard about that so far. Can you use Special:Contact to file a report? Tell them the name of the file page -- and if you can, copy and paste the entire contents of the e-mail that you got. -- Danny (talk) 22:11, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
Danny, I just got back into town, so this is the first chance I've had to let you know. One of the Wiki staff members named Angela also looked into and figured out what had happened. I had deleted an old file with the same name and "watch this file" was automatically checked. Unbeknownst to a new user, he uploaded a file with the very same name of an old file I happened to be watching. Just random, harmless chance was all it turned out to be. I also figure that, even though I wouldn't have wanted to see or follow the new file, there's probably no realistic solution to prevent this from happening again. It's just pure chance that it happens at all and since there's no harm done, I'll know what's up if it ever happens again. Thanks! Kenny HaarFager 06:00, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, good! I'm glad it worked out. Thanks for letting me know! -- Danny (talk) 16:45, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome! Kenny HaarFager 17:33, August 6, 2010 (UTC)


please check out this link: this guy seems to be getting out of hand. you need to look into taking care of him. thanks.

Hey, sorry I'm coming to this late. It looks like you guys are handling it right now -- Kenny's blocked him here, and ignoring him when he's pestering Kenny on other wikis. That's absolutely the right thing to do -- if he feels like he can get a rise out of you, then he'll still keep bothering you, but if you ignore him, he'll lose interest and drift away.
If he continues to bother people on other wikis, then Kenny should use the community support contact page and ask the community team to look into it. They'll talk to the guy, and if they can't get a good response, then they have the option to ban him sitewide. -- Danny (talk) 18:08, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Danny. I'm sure Kenny will have read this by now and will heed your excellent advice! Magnum-pi 23:41, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Hot Wheels Wiki Gallery Coding Question

Danny, just a quick question to see if you know the answer. It's just something I noticed and was wondering about. The coding for a photo Gallery at the bottom of any casting page used to be four pictures wide. This made the Gallery fit to the usual width of the table above it. Now, recently it seems, the Galleries are only 3 images wide. How did this change? I don't see anything different in the coding for a Gallery, so is it the master code for Galleries that got re-written? I was curious because it doesn't seem to work as well on the Hot Wheels Wiki only being three images wide. HaarFager 05:00, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, there was a change to the gallery, but it shouldn't be working the way you described... The gallery now displays the correct number of photos in a row to fit your browser screen. So I'm looking at Deora II and Custom Camaro, and on my screen, I see the galleries as five pictures wide. When I shrink my browser window, the gallery resizes automatically, so I can make it go down to four and three. So are you seeing something different? -- Danny (talk) 18:19, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
Very cool update! Mine shows 9 images across. Less scrolling for me! BigBadBrad01 01:46, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Well, I only get three. Thanks for filling me in on this, Danny - you know I appreciate everything you do. The tables fit the width of my screen, the Galleries do not. Over and out. HaarFager 06:09, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
I thought this might help to show exactly how I see it. As you can see, there is still plenty of room for the rows to each have four images in them. They used to, but not any longer. My computer hasn't changed, so I don't know why it looks different:
'40's Woodie Gallery.JPG
HaarFager 07:51, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
I know that you guys dont need my 2cents, but the gallery on the woodie page works fine for me, all 6 images across and room for about 3 more. im using win Vista. I did notice that in Kenny's screenshot, the gallery section only spans about 75% under the version table, where as i get a 100% span.
Woodie screenshot.jpg
-David- Sinnin 11:14, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Kenny, I'm sorry that's showing up weird for you! Maybe there's a bug in the new gallery feature that only shows up on a certain browser? I'll report it to the folks working on the gallery. What kind of computer do you have, and what browser do you use? (For example: Windows Vista, using Internet Explorer 7.) If you can give me that info, then I'll share it with the gallery folks.
For Brad and David -- I'm glad you're enjoying it! Thanks for verifying how it looks for you. -- Danny (talk) 18:44, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
I'm using Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6.0. And don't tell me I need to upgrade my browser. I tried and it didn't work with my version of Windows. I'm stuck with it! Ha! HaarFager 22:22, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
40s woodie MAC OSX.png
Mine's fine Kenny, maybe its a browser setting. I'm running MAC OSX 10.4 and Mozilla Firefox. BigBadBrad01 22:30, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Mine used to be fine as well, Brad. Although I didn't change any settings on my end, things changed. I'm guessing it's a place other than on my end. Just a wild guess, though. HaarFager 23:29, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, this might be an IE6 problem, then, which means we can't fix it. Basically -- IE6 was made in 2001, and it doesn't support a lot of things that make modern web pages work. In order to make anything new on the web, engineers have to first build the feature, and then go and build a second version that works for IE6. A lot of development and bug-fixing resources get put into making a feature work for a browser that was officially retired when IE7 came out in 2006.

So a lot of companies are "dropping support" for IE6, which means that you release your product and if it doesn't work on IE6, then that means people should upgrade. Google and YouTube have both dropped support for IE6 in the last few months; other major sites are considering it. I'm not sure when we officially dropped IE6 support, but I know it's happened by now. So if the photo gallery doesn't work exactly right in IE6, then it's basically your choice to see it this way or try upgrading again.

I'm not sure why it didn't work for you before -- you can definitely download IE8 for Windows XP. Maybe when you tried it before, you tried downloading for the wrong operating system? You can also try downloading FireFox -- it's free, and it works great.

Sorry to tell you "we don't like your computer" :) -- I know that's a pain to hear. But it's not just us, it's also Google and YouTube, and within the next year it'll be Amazon and Ebay and eventually everybody. -- Danny (talk) 00:04, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

If you don't know it, here are the facts. Engineers of new software and programs can make things backwards compatible. It is very possible to do this. But, do they do this? No, they do not. Because if what you spent good money on continued to work like it did when you bought it, there would be no need for you to ever have to buy it again. So, the engineers make pointedly sure that each new version is not backwards compatible and that it doesn't work with what you bought. Which, in my case, was a little over a year ago when I had to get a new computer due to my old one being struck by lightning. It's just slightly over a year old and already it's obsolete. Therein lies the root of the problem. Now, my other computer, the one I make pointedly sure that goes nowhere near the internet and all it's problems, still works fine. It is faster than my new computer with all it's "enhancements and improvements," and has the advantage of running all the old programs which I use the most. Now, the fact that it runs on Windows 98 and is 12 years old and continues to outperform new computers surely must be related to the fact that it has nothing to do with all those so-called "enhancements and improvements" related to the internet. If nobody wants to speak to me anymore, so be it. It's their loss, not mine. Class dismissed. HaarFager 00:37, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sorry to give you news that you don't like. It happens that IE6 actually has bugs and problems that have been fixed by later versions. Just after I wrote the above message yesterday, Amazon announced they were dropping support for IE6. I totally understand that upgrades are frustrating. But, really, FireFox works great, and over time it'll actually work when IE6 doesn't. It's up to you whether you want to try it or not. I hope you give it a try, it's a pain to start seeing features not working properly anymore! -- Danny (talk) 18:48, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Code For Hot Wheels Wiki

Danny, that code trick you gave me the other day seems to have a glitch in it or something. Another user reported it and asked me to ask you about it. You can find out the particulars about it toward the bottom of the discussion on this page: If you could look into it and see what's happening, we'd all be grateful! HaarFager 15:12, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Kenny! Okay, the concern about the Rich Text Editor makes sense. There might be a way around that -- I'm going to ask one of the engineers. I'll get back to you in a little bit with an answer! -- Danny (talk) 15:35, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for being so prompt! I'll relay it along on the Hot Wheels Wiki.HaarFager 22:10, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

Request For Deletion

Danny, I was wondering if you could do me a favor. I have two things on the Beatles Wiki that I would like to be deleted. One is this page: and the other is this picture: If you can, I would like both to be removed without a trace. Thanks! HaarFager 00:10, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry to see that you ran into a problem over there. I'm not sure it's actually as bad as you think -- possibly just a misunderstanding that can get worked out.
You created a page. Hailey didn't like the page, and put a delete tag on it. Now, what Hailey should have done was talk to you -- I'm sure that's what you do here when you see somebody creating a page that you don't think fits on the wiki.
For example, on this wiki, there's a page for each casting, and then all the variants are listed on that page. If a new person came along and didn't realize that, and created a separate page for one of the variants, you'd probably delete that page. But then you'd leave that person a message, explaining how the wiki works, and showing them how to contribute on the appropriate page. That's how you build your community, and bring new people into the project.
So Hailey put a delete tag on the page, but didn't leave you a message, which was rude and thoughtless. But -- Hailey isn't an admin on that wiki. Hailey's done a lot on the Beatles wiki, but only in the last few weeks. The most active admin is Marvelcarlos. So it's not like the whole wiki is rude, just one person who happens to be on it.
So, if it's okay to give you a little advice -- I don't think one person being rude should chase you off a wiki that you're interested in contributing to. I think you could treat this like any wiki discussion -- post on the talk page of the article that you created, and ask why Hailey thinks it should be deleted. Maybe it'll turn out that you really did accidentally violate a guideline, like the person who created a casting variant page and didn't know that was wrong. You could also reach out to Marvelcarlos to help you figure out the situation better.
You've been on this wiki for a while; you know how complicated it can be sometimes when you're working on a project with a bunch of people you don't know. I bet you can figure out how to talk to the right people at Beatles Wiki. -- Danny (talk) 02:12, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Danny! Always good advice. HaarFager 04:45, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Formating and Alignment

Hey,'s Brian over at Hot Wheels. Quick question for you. I was going to start adding information for the new Battle Force 5 TV show into the Hot Wheels Wiki. I was borrowing some of the coding from the Star Wars wiki to jumpstart the template, however, it doesn't look the same on the HW Wiki as it does for SW. Any thoughts? HW: [1] SW: [2] --HWC Mongrel 19:07, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know... Star Wars has a lot of weird stuff in their css that affects how things look there. I try not to borrow code from there.... -- Danny (talk) 00:40, December 5, 2009 (UTC)



Hello, I have been looking for a checklist of all hot wheel cars ever made. I need to be able to check off the cars that I currently have, and the print it! By any chance do you know where I may be able to find such a list??????

Thank You, Renee


Was just browsing your uploads. Very impressive! ! Strong 73  and Flying Colors.. very nice.. You just might be ok for a Muppet guy.. ..Flyin colors (talk) 02:40, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks! It's been a while since I've contributed here, but I've always loved this wiki. :) -- Danny 18:11, January 9, 2013 (UTC)
I'm guessing the pictures you're referring to are Mattel's copyrighted pictures. Some of them appear to be the same photos that were used for this Hot Wheels desk calender Vista69 (talk) 06:22, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Opps my bad, Well they are darn nice cars !... there is still hope for The muppet guy.. We could get him to bring back PIGS in Space !!!! loved that skitFlyin colors (talk) 07:55, January 10, 2013 (UTC)


Hi Danny,

I was wondering how to change the name on a category pages?  I am getting better at understanding the codes here but not sure about this one. [[3]] . It should have been The Heroes. Anyway just trying to learn. ThanksFlyin colors (talk) 22:41, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

and while I am asking, how to make a category page?Flyin colors (talk) 22:43, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, I answered my own questions. thanks LaffsFlyin colors (talk) 22:57, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, back again. How do I create a link to a category page?Flyin colors (talk) 01:00, February 10, 2013 (UTC)


Hello. I am confused. It says you blocked someone...but you aren't an admin here. This makes no sense to me... ℸℎℯℎℴℸωℎℯℯℓşℊμϒ99 (ℸαℓķ!) 21:16, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

I used to be a staff member at Wikia, and I was also one of the early admins here. I'm not either one anymore. :) -- Danny 04:17, September 12, 2015 (UTC)
Really? Why? ℸℎℯℎℴℸωℎℯℯℓşℊμϒ99 (ℸαℓķ!) 21:44, September 13, 2015 (UTC)
I work at the Wikimedia Foundation now, on features for Wikipedia. -- Danny 22:25, September 14, 2015 (UTC)
But...why are you not an admin any more? ℸℎℯℎℴℸωℎℯℯℓşℊμϒ99 (ℸαℓķ!) 00:24, September 15, 2015 (UTC)
Hello... ᵗʰᵉʰºᵗʷʰᵉᵉˡˢᵍᵘʸ₉₉ (ᵗᵃˡᵏ!) (ͨºⁿᵗʳ'ᵇˢ) 22:45, September 20, 2015 (UTC)
Hello... ᵗʰᵉʰºᵗʷʰᵉᵉˡˢᵍᵘʸ₉₉ (ᵗᵃˡᵏ!) (ͨºⁿᵗʳ'ᵇˢ) 18:37, September 26, 2015 (UTC)
? ᵗʰᵉʰºᵗʷʰᵉᵉˡˢᵍᵘʸ₉₉ (ᵗᵃˡᵏ!) • (ͨºⁿᵗʳ'ᵇˢ) • ([[Special:Editcount/Thehotwheelsguy99|Special:Editcount/Thehotwheelsguy99 + ᵉᵈ'ᵗˢ!]]) 22:38, October 13, 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't active here anymore, so I asked to be de-admin'd. -- Danny 17:50, October 18, 2015 (UTC)
Ah, ok. Sorry if I bothered you. ᵗʰᵉʰºᵗʷʰᵉᵉˡˢᵍᵘʸ₉₉ (ᵗᵃˡᵏ!) • (ͨºⁿᵗʳ'ᵇˢ) • ([[Special:Editcount/Thehotwheelsguy99|Special:Editcount/Thehotwheelsguy99 + ᵉᵈ'ᵗˢ!]]) 23:17, October 18, 2015 (UTC)

Your assistance is requested

I hope you still care about the Hot Wheels wiki, you haven't been around in awhile. If you are the founder, like I believe, could you please reconsider the status of Kevin, AKA Haarfager, considering there are now a number of users who consider him abusive with his powers?WikiWoman62 (talk) 21:39, August 31, 2017 (UTC)