| Revision as of 10:26, 29 August 2024 edit750h+ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers15,820 edits →Holden Commodore (VE)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:45, 9 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,438 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 59) (bot | ||
| (86 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Skip to talk}} | {{Skip to talk}} | ||
| {{talk header|wp=yes|search=yes |
{{talk header|wp=yes|search=yes}} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 90K | |maxarchivesize = 90K | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| I feel, one of the key article of this wikiproject, ] needs a good revision and copy edit. I would love to help in the process as much as viable. Being a civil engineering student I am unknown of some key terms. In addition, i see the need of forming a new article ] much famous in South asian countries including ] and ] to flourish the information regarding the subject and make the area of study open to fellow readers.] (]) | I feel, one of the key article of this wikiproject, ] needs a good revision and copy edit. I would love to help in the process as much as viable. Being a civil engineering student I am unknown of some key terms. In addition, i see the need of forming a new article ] much famous in South asian countries including ] and ] to flourish the information regarding the subject and make the area of study open to fellow readers.] (]) | ||
| == EV battery suppliers added to WikiProject? == | |||
| == ] of ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| Automotive suppliers such as ] and ] are part of the Automotive WikiProject, despite not producing cars themselves. Should battery companies like ], which are most prominent for their supply of automotive battery cells and technologies, also be added to this WikiProject? Additionally, should companies like ], ], and ], who are not primarily based in EV battery supply but are still major players in the space, also be added to the WikiProject? ] (]) 18:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| The article ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
| <blockquote>'''This page is linked by one article, ], it summarizes this article well. sometimes you need another device to connect the lights on the trailer to a car. I am not sure that there is much more that is encyclopedic to say about it'''</blockquote> | |||
| :In my opinion they should be added, does anyone have any objections? ] (]) 18:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
| ::Seems to be a no-brainer with no downside. ] (]) 16:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 22:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 18:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 03:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Two articles with the same scope == | |||
| :That article says nothing of substance and has no references. Change it to be a redirect to ]. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 00:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Just wondering, why do we have two articles about the list of automobile manufacturers in China: ] and ]? Should we merge it? Pinging {{ping|Infinty 0}} as the creator of the latter article. | |||
| ::{{done}} by ]. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 00:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| A little bit context by the way, ] is apparently a spin-off of ] after these sections were due to " citation and improper synthesis", can't see why it should be an own article if it was apparently not proper enough to be in an article. ] (]) 16:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Japan Mobility Show (former Tokyo Motor Show) needs rewrite == | |||
| :I think one can be deleted or merged. ]] 17:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] has changed format from biannual to something more complicated described in official press release. Article could do with an update/rewrite to accurately describe what the new format of the show, as it's a pretty significant change. ] (]) 23:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Agree, merge. ] (]) 18:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Oppose. | |||
| :The article of ] is more about the development of China's automobile industry at the macro perspective, focusing more on China's industry policies, development status and history in chronological order. | |||
| :The article of ] is more about the current situation of Chinese manufacturers at more micro perspective. China is different from most countries in the world which has the world's largest automobile industry and market (larger than the United States and Europe combined), and more than 10 major manufacturers and more than 140 automobile brands as numerous as the stars, which deserves the spotlight. The two articles have different perspectives, themes, and logic, so the spin-off is necessary. | |||
| :As for the problem of citations, it has been updated in the ]. It is welcome for anyone who disagrees to challenge it at the specific description. | |||
| :The article of ] is even more different. It is a list-type article, which is more about listing the facts as briefly and completely as possible. There should be an article to depict a more detailed and focused portrait of Chinese automobile manufacturers, like the general introductions, their positions in the landscape of automobile market, and conclusion of their different characteristics, which is exactly the purpose of the article of ]. ] (]) 00:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::If each of the manufacturers and/or brands are notable, they should have their own articles. ] (]) 13:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::Not each, but major ones. There are 12 major manufacturers in China, each with an annual production of more than 500,000 units, and four of them are above 2 million unit per year, and they do need a overview information to help readers understand the current layout and landscape of Chinese auto market. ] (]) 13:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::'''Merge''', no real difference in scope. <span style="background:#ff0000;font-family:Times New Roman;">]]</span> 16:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| :Press release says that it now runs every year, with alternating years focusing on business links or customer links. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 00:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 22:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Idea == | |||
| ==Datsun 510== | |||
| I was thinking of creating a list of what we'd consider "reliable" and "unreliable" sources on the WP Automobiles project. Pinging such editors as {{ping|Andra Febrian|Mr.choppers|Stepho-wrs}} to see their opinions on this. ]] 04:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| I nominated this ], on the clear grounds that the title doesn't meet the guidelines for cars sold internationally under a wide range of names. Calling it Datsun 510 is americentric and also leads to confusion since the "510" name was also used on the Violet/Stanza (A10) in North America. ] should be a disambiguation page like ] and ]. Please review ] and weigh in ]. Best, <span style="background:#ff0000;font-family:Times New Roman;">]]</span> 16:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Do you have any suggestions? I'm open for it but Misplaced Pages policy ] feels sufficient for now. ] (]) 15:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::I feel like ], ], and ] would be top-tier reliable, while Carsales and Autoblog might be on the concerning-spec, and blogspot and Best Selling Cars Blog would be unreliable. ]] 16:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::I think ] is largely sufficient, to be honest. If anything, I'd like to add a note regarding those spec compilation sites (, , and - in order of reliability IMHO) can be trusted for basic specifications but are considered to be of less weight than reliable, secondary sources. Same thing for manufacturers' publications - fine to verify specs, dates, etcetera, but not for anything contentious or any value statements. <span style="background:#ff0000;font-family:Times New Roman;">]]</span> 18:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Same, let's just follow ]. Most of the the well-known car magazines are very reliable sources. The compilation sites I don't trust much - some of them have merely scraped data/images from my own site and I'm reasonably sure they do no fact checking of their own. Non-car magazines (eg New York Times) are fine for very basic facts but are usually not written by or for car enthusiasts - more like telling rich readers which car makes this year's best image statement. Manufacturers are also fine for basic facts (eg wheelbase, engine size, release dates but not power, emission or fuel economy figures) - as always, if there is a buck to made for "enhancing" the truth then it will be stretched within an inch of its life. | |||
| ::::I'm not seeing a ''big'' problem with choosing reliable sources. Is this a major issue that you are seeing? <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 00:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I'm gonna go against the grain here and say I actually think this is a decent idea since i've found many larger general sources which are considered reliable by WP:RS such as the NYT to be less reliable and substantially less detailed than smaller and less established enthusiast run news sites and blogs, and certainly less reliable than established enthusiast sites and magazines. There are also a handful of semi well established car news sites which seem to have suspect reliability but are cited in many articles. Off the top of my head, HotCars comes to mind, as its basically a quantity over quality content farm. ] (]) 20:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I disagree. This discussion so far has been about magazines and newspapers which are not exactly scientific studies, they're chat at the end of the day and often based on or consisting of paid material even if the final text is written by the publication. A decidedly reliable source can repeat the same press release as a decidedly unreliable source, doesn't change anything about the quality of the information. Unreliable claims should be made on case basis, and if a source can be found that is questionable without a reliable one being found by the editor, than the substance of the article should be considered more than putting a list together somewhere else. ] (]) 22:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Engine Charts == | |||
| Hello! Remodeled The Engine Charts for the ] To make it slightly more compact and a bit easier to read. Please give your opinion on this: ] ] (]) 17:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| =={{noredirect|Pilot (automobile)}}== | |||
| {{la|Pilot (automobile)}} contains 3 different unrelated topics. That's a problem, since it is not a topic article, but a grabbag of independent topics that share a name. There are also other automobiles not in this article called Pilot listed at ]. | |||
| -- ] (]) 07:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{discussion-moved|Talk:Pilot (automobile)}} ] (]) 07:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :'''Update''': This has been split into 3 artricles -- ] (]) 03:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Before I start a massive RM == | |||
| I've been wondering for ages why articles about EVs in regions are all called "plug-in electric vehicle in X", for instance ]. I don't think that's the ] (anymore?), and people almost uniformly refer to these cars as EVs now. Before I open a RM with , I thought I would ask here. ] (]) 20:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :You may want to consider that an EV is technically any vehicle that is driven purely by electric motors and that the electricity may come from different sources. Sources may include purely batteries (PEV or battery EV), fuel cells (FCEV), a petrol engine (series hybrid or electric drivetrain), solar power and others. Add in petrol powered range extender options that can charge batteries but not fast enough to power the vehicle in motion. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 00:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Is that true? The as relying on batteries. Similarly, as a BEV + plug-in hybrids. The Misplaced Pages article on ] uses a 1996 source for its definition on the other hand. ] (]) 08:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::But that is a US only definition. Remember that Misplaced Pages is international. Australia defines 4 types of EV - BEV, PHEV, FCEV and regenerative hybrids. See https://arena.gov.au/renewable-energy/electric-vehicles . Other countries may differ again. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 09:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I agree with Stepho - the current titles are clearer and more understandable internationally. --] (]) 00:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 03:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == First == | |||
| After 20 years of this project being open, our ] has been promoted! It is ] for anyone who's interested. ]] 00:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] 17:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Question == | |||
| Hi people of the project, could i ask if you all consider '']'' a reliable source? ]] 11:24, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :It's pretty spotty. I think it was discussed at RSN a while back. They were big on Tesla a while back (sycophant level) but that enthusiasm may have waned. A large portion of their content comes from a single author. If they are the best source you have it's probably content that we should question. ] (]) 11:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::It's fine for basic facts. I generally trust Fred Lambert's articles. As with any magazine, take care when they give opinions. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 23:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks. Could i also get some opinions on ''Top Speed''? ]] 08:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::Top Speed the magazine is excellent. The TV show is utter crap presented by clowns for laugh value only. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 10:38, 14 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I think you're referring to ] and the ]. I'm talking about Top Speed. Are we referring to the same thing? ]] 10:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Oops, you're right. I was thinking of Top Gear. I have no opinion on Top Speed. <span style="border:1px solid blue;border-radius:4px;color:blue;box-shadow: 3px 3px 4px grey;">] <span style="font-size:xx-small; vertical-align:top">] </span></span> 11:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Tesla Model S == | |||
| Hello contributors of the project, the article ], one of the most important electric vehicles of the 21st century, has been put up ], if you would like to leave your comments, they'd be highly appreciated. Much thanks, ]] 13:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == RFC concerning an article which may be of interest to this project == | |||
| See ]. ] (]) 23:05, 26 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I'd like to insight from a variety of editors. Would we call GoAuto, drive.com.au, and carsales reliable sources? i plan to bring ] back to FA from which it ], and would like to make it one of the site's best articles. ]] 10:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:45, 9 January 2025
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Automobiles and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | WikiProject Automobiles was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 26 September 2011. |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about automobiles. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about automobiles at the Reference desk. |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Article improvement
I feel, one of the key article of this wikiproject, Automotive engineering needs a good revision and copy edit. I would love to help in the process as much as viable. Being a civil engineering student I am unknown of some key terms. In addition, i see the need of forming a new article Automobile engineering much famous in South asian countries including Nepal and India to flourish the information regarding the subject and make the area of study open to fellow readers.Franked2004 (talk)
EV battery suppliers added to WikiProject?
Automotive suppliers such as Denso and Bosch are part of the Automotive WikiProject, despite not producing cars themselves. Should battery companies like CATL, which are most prominent for their supply of automotive battery cells and technologies, also be added to this WikiProject? Additionally, should companies like Panasonic, Samsung SDI, and EVE Energy, who are not primarily based in EV battery supply but are still major players in the space, also be added to the WikiProject? Needlesballoon (talk) 18:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- In my opinion they should be added, does anyone have any objections? Needlesballoon (talk) 18:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Seems to be a no-brainer with no downside. Andra Febrian (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Trim level (automotive)#Requested move 28 November 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Trim level (automotive)#Requested move 28 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for American automobile industry in the 1950s
American automobile industry in the 1950s has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Two articles with the same scope
Just wondering, why do we have two articles about the list of automobile manufacturers in China: List of automobile manufacturers of China and Automobile manufacturers and brands of China? Should we merge it? Pinging @Infinty 0: as the creator of the latter article.
A little bit context by the way, Automobile manufacturers and brands of China is apparently a spin-off of Automotive industry in China after these sections were purged due to " citation and improper synthesis", can't see why it should be an own article if it was apparently not proper enough to be in an article. Andra Febrian (talk) 16:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think one can be deleted or merged. 750h+ 17:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agree, merge. Rally Wonk (talk) 18:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose.
- The article of Automotive industry in China is more about the development of China's automobile industry at the macro perspective, focusing more on China's industry policies, development status and history in chronological order.
- The article of Automobile manufacturers and brands of China is more about the current situation of Chinese manufacturers at more micro perspective. China is different from most countries in the world which has the world's largest automobile industry and market (larger than the United States and Europe combined), and more than 10 major manufacturers and more than 140 automobile brands as numerous as the stars, which deserves the spotlight. The two articles have different perspectives, themes, and logic, so the spin-off is necessary.
- As for the problem of citations, it has been updated in the Automobile manufacturers and brands of China. It is welcome for anyone who disagrees to challenge it at the specific description.
- The article of List of automobile manufacturers of China is even more different. It is a list-type article, which is more about listing the facts as briefly and completely as possible. There should be an article to depict a more detailed and focused portrait of Chinese automobile manufacturers, like the general introductions, their positions in the landscape of automobile market, and conclusion of their different characteristics, which is exactly the purpose of the article of Automobile manufacturers and brands of China. Infinty 0 (talk) 00:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- If each of the manufacturers and/or brands are notable, they should have their own articles. Rally Wonk (talk) 13:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not each, but major ones. There are 12 major manufacturers in China, each with an annual production of more than 500,000 units, and four of them are above 2 million unit per year, and they do need a overview information to help readers understand the current layout and landscape of Chinese auto market. Infinty 0 (talk) 13:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge, no real difference in scope. Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not each, but major ones. There are 12 major manufacturers in China, each with an annual production of more than 500,000 units, and four of them are above 2 million unit per year, and they do need a overview information to help readers understand the current layout and landscape of Chinese auto market. Infinty 0 (talk) 13:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- If each of the manufacturers and/or brands are notable, they should have their own articles. Rally Wonk (talk) 13:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Electric vehicle warning sounds
Electric vehicle warning sounds has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Datsun 510
I nominated this for a move, on the clear grounds that the title doesn't meet the guidelines for cars sold internationally under a wide range of names. Calling it Datsun 510 is americentric and also leads to confusion since the "510" name was also used on the Violet/Stanza (A10) in North America. Datsun 510 should be a disambiguation page like Datsun 810 and Datsun 210. Please review WP:CARNAMES and weigh in here. Best, Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: