Automobiles Portal‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles Portal This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Why are there no articles about Chevrolets pre-1950? There's no timeline or articles for specific cars whatsoever. On the German Wikipedia there are articles for various pre-1950 Chevrolets like the Master and Stylemaster. But there's absolutely nothing on the English Wikipedia. Strikes me as very odd, especially considering that Chevrolets are American cars, and pre-1950 Fords get plenty of attention. I mean, there were 2 million Chevrolet Masters sold and there's hardly even a mention of its existence here on the English Wikipedia. It's not in any lists of Chevrolet cars nor is it in any timelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.167.125.209 (talk) 11:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikipedia is written by volunteers. If no expert/enthusiast of these cars happens to come forward to work on them, then there will be a gap in our coverage. If you have an interest in them, then I strongly encourage you to write them. You have a good start in that you can presumably take images and some references and stats from the German Wiki to get you started. SteveBaker (talk) 22:59, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can some put the article HSV Senator Signature on the front page if it is possible?Senators 07:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the portal called Cars when the WikiProject is called Automobiles? Should we change it before it is too entrenched? --SFoskett 17:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Automobiles sounds better to me - as a newcomer to this portal I was looking for Automobiles. I think cars is just too casual for an encyclopedia. Spalding 15:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Automobile is an American English word - British and Australian English speakers never use it (although they understand what it means). Therefore there is a strong argument for doing the opposite and changing the Automobile article to Car. This is especially significant because so many people misunderstand what the word 'Automobile' means - most think it includes pickup trucks for example (it doesn't - it means exactly what 'car' means). Hence 'Car' would be less open to misunderstanding. It has been suggested that 'Motorcar' would be a more formal word to use - but that sounds archaic to quite a few English speakers. SteveBaker 17:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of users have been attempting to create an article for Car instead of allowing it to remain a redirect to Automobile. I am keeping an eye on it, and have reverted this change twice in the last couple of days. If I have to revert it again, I will put in an RfC for the issue. I'm not involved with the Cars portal, but I thought I would let you all know of the situation. --SquidSK ^(1MC•log) 11:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it all right if i put my article about the HSV Senator Signature on the front page of the cars portal?Senators 08:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No - your article has to reach either Good Article or Featured Article status before we put it on the portal. SteveBaker 17:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a lot of pictures of US cars I made as documentation for my drawings. Most of them are good all argentic photographies and some are numerical ones. I'll be glad to add them to wikipedia where needed. The only problem is that I don't the brand, built year of most of them. So if you (the cars portal guys) have some interest in seeing these pictures I can roughly scan them so you can check whether you need them or not. Lvr 11:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good pictures of cars are always interesting. Try uploading some of the best pictures to Commons, I think someone there will categorize them correctly. --Boivie 08:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

most pages don't list this in the body of the article, either. i'd like to know how many seatbelts a car has before i decide to rent/purchase. 128.83.68.58 22:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to second the point above. In fact I came here to make that same point: please include seats on right-hand vehicle model factual summary. Maybe the Wikipedia gods will hear this. 209.2.211.218 (talk) 06:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was reading stuff on campers/trailers and I couldn't find the article (even the name: I'm not a native speaker) of the cargo compartments placed over the roof (not the roof racks, but the closed containers). Any help is surely welcome. Cheers, Lwyx (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you said me your american opinion about it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.195.177.214 (talk) 11:11, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The European car classifications in English Wikipedia are mostly wrong, even though it's a bit complicate to change that. Most important the European classes don't care about "premium" - that comes automatically with the size in Europe. The EuroNCAP is not a good source for these classes, as it seams to be based on a special british system and only has 4 classes (only talking about the size based ones), but there are 6 used by other sources:

• A: comparable with Japanese K-Cars (several are such), but not that strict limitation. Names are "City Car" (in Germany sometimes only used for Smart and Toyota iQ), "Kleinstwagen" ("smallest car", DE) or "Mini" (NL)
• B: "Kleinwagen" ("small car", DE), "economy" (NL). Car comparable with a VW Polo. There you find the cheapest cars (some below 10k€) - carefull: some of these cheap ones are uncommon big for the class. Also has a premium subclass currently growing with BMW Mini, Alfa MiTo, Audi A1 and Citroën DS3.
• C: "compact class": VW Golf and comparable size. By far most european cars are sold in this class. the uncommon Sedans in this class are sometimes called "Untere Mittelklasse" in Germany.
• D: "middle class": the "typical european sedans". Some are 4.5m premium (BMW 3); some are 4.9m normals (VW Passat).
• E: "upper middle class": only slightly bigger than D, but (nearly) all premium. Normally a car is only placed here, if the car maker also has a model in D.
• F: "topclass", sometimes "luxus class": >5m and very premium; 100k€ are nothing in that class. They only make about 5% in Germany and even less in other European countries.

The british system adds A and B to one class and totally ignores F (no idea why, maybe they think a Rolls Royce is incomparable ;). --TheK (talk) 08:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The news section hasn't been updated since 2009 - time to delete if there is no content being provided? Warren (talk) 00:23, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Does anybody know which vehicle is shown on the photograph (right)? --High Contrast (talk) 00:26, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toyota Land Cruiser (Bantram)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.246.15.8 (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've created an article 1950s American automobile culture which is under GA review. It was brought up that it might be appropriate for this portal, but I felt it was better to drop off a note and let someone here decide. Adding it to the See also area would be great if you think it is within the scope. If there is a question, please ping my talk page. Thanks! Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Also started American automobile industry in the 1950s. The article above is now at GA status (thanks to help from Malleus). I expect to work this new article to the same. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Completed: American automobile industry in the 1950s
• Completed: 1950s American automobile culture
• Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

the Gaisbergrennen 2013 will start next week, probably I will have the opportunity to take pictures there. So if you need pictures of special typs leave me a message on my commons page [1]. The list of prticipants is here MatthiasKabel (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2013 (UTC) commons:Category:Gaisbergrennen[reply]

Here is the link at a sister wikia site, the image is from Chicago, Illinois: --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC) Help identify this car[reply]

Hello, Urbanoc, Vrac and Warren Whyte ask to remove the "awards" section ONLY from Renault. But the Volkswagen article has such a section, and they do not ask to remove it. Why some different treatments and arbitrary "rules" are applied to some companies like Renault, but not to VW ?

For consistency purpose among articles and for neutrality, if Volkswagen can have an "Award" section, why Renault cannot ? They behave as a lobby that harasses some companies, but not their favourite ones... ASKING TO REMOVE THE AWARDS ONLY FOR RENAULT (BUT NOT FOR VW) IS ALREADY A SCANDAL ITSELF. This request must be cancelled. It is unacceptable. Shame on these malevolent people. Urbanoc even asked that the awards are removed from the car models articles. But ONLY for Renault and the brands that he harrasses, not for Volkswagen....

There are many proofs that these 3 people vandalize the Renault article, some general articles and also these of a few other brands. Urbanoc especially harasses Renault and has the typical anti-Renault rhetoric : "proved unsuccessful" or "uncompetitive" and Renault is bad, because "100 years ago it built some tanks" like what he added here : [[2]]. Notice that his source is unverifiable (a book that nobody could find) and on the contrary there are some historical facts that the Renault plane engine won some races and beat some speed records, so how could it be "proved unsuccessful" ?

Urbanoc removes a Renault model from a list, because he says that it is too long, but why 20 models can be cited and not Renault ? He harasses Renault : [[3]]. Why does this guy have the power to "decide" arbitrarily and alone when a list is "too long", and why removing Renault and not one of the others ?

Urbanoc removed some photos from the Renault article, but in the VW article the photos are 5 times more numerous and it is not a problem for him, as he behaves as a VW fanatic or a VW employee : [[4]] Urbanoc states "Finally, The images you added were excessive, two images of relevant current products would be enough, Renault sells too many cars to include pictures from all.", but where this "rule" is written, and why does Urbanoc does not command that this "rule" is applied to the VW article where there are 5 times more photos ?!?! Urbanoc makes its own "rules" to harass some article, but don't apply them to some others, arbitrarily. Notice that Urbanoc harasses Renault, but also the persons who writes some true information that his malevolent arbitrary does not want to appear on Wikipedia. He removed some obvious informations about Renault, taking the excuse of "no source", but a good contributor would have searched and found a source to prove this information, not removed the corresponding text with no proof, especially because this obvious information is known as true by almost anybody : Urbanoc is a malevolent "account" and totally bad faith. On the contrary, arbitrarily, Urbanoc does not ask some sources for many statements that he likes, including the false ones, e.g. the ones saying that the Golf GTi is the first sportive C-segment car, whereas it is an historical fact that Alfa Romeo made one some years before and Renault made some 12 years before ! So the excuse of "no source" is used by Urbanoc to remove a true information that Urbanoc does not want to appear in some articles and to harass some editors. But the Wikipedia rule is to "tag" to ask a source, not to remove a whole paragraph, so Urbanoc does not respect the REAL Wikipedia rules, for his personal arbitrary purposes.

Later, I will add more links to prove all these unequal treatments, these harassments, these malevolent actions and these vandalized articles.

I am a journalist and if the Wikipedia community let do this unequal treatment, then I will write a serial of articles about the "Volkswagate" scandal on Wikipedia : the awards section is accepted in the Volkswagen article, but a band of arbitrary gangsters ask to remove the awards section only in the Renault article. It is an arbitrary request. This request must be cancelled. If the Wikipedia community can tolerates such unequal treatments among articles, then it means that it is controlled by a private interests lobby. These arbitrary people must be banished from Wikipedia, else it means that the whole Wikipedia community is "bribed".83.157.24.224 (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]