![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Borgward was copied or moved into Borgward Group with this edit on 1 March 2018. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Borgward article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
We read that the new company was founded in 2008 and that this new company went on to start work on the new product three years earlier. Er, what? -- Hoary ( talk) 02:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
I found this while doing a quick search - http://www.atlantic-times.com/archive_detail.php?recordID=205 VoVillia 07:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vovillia ( talk • contribs)
It's nonsense to have a single article covering two entirely different companies that share only a name. The article about the historical (20th century) company should be something like Borgward (1905-1961) with the new company just being Borgward. There should, of course, be cross-references between the two articles. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:31, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Consider this series of legitimate users of the same brand name (and, for most of the history, the same logo):
This isn't optimal: there's a lot of overlap between (1) and (2), and the material about Triumph Motorcycles (Meriden) is a little uncomfortable within (2). But here we have articles fairly clearly separating companies that themselves were separated by months or a few years. By contrast, somebody born when the last Borgward was manufactured by the first company would be in late middle age by the time the first Borgward was manufactured by the second. I too think that this material should be separated into two articles (though I'm not sure of the best names for them). Fru1tbat and John Broughton, you expressed reservations about splitting, but that was over two years ago. What do you think now? -- Hoary ( talk) 01:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
A few minutes ago, I carried out the split: Borgward for the old, Borgward Group for the new. -- Hoary ( talk) 00:12, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Borgward. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Borgward. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Let's hear about this new company named Borgward, IFF we can do so from reliable sources and in a non-promotional way. Moreover, much of what's said is unremarkable: "the company aspires to become one of the leading electric-vehicle manufacturers in the next decade": Does any car company not aspire to become this? Should we start an article with a company's aspirations? Etc etc. -- Hoary ( talk) 07:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
The language is positive neutral. It is by far not the PR lingo, which you objected to initially. Evidence is given on some aspects, and there will be more. To seperate the old and new company, the article does not indicate a direct link between the new company and the manufacturing company that ceased operations in 1961, other than brand ownership and the fact that it was built by Carl F.W. Borgward's grandson. Considering your objections, I also refrained from stating that the design of the modern cars is inspired, to some extent, by old design lines of the 1950s. Borgward's Chief Designer Anders Warming has publicly stated this. (There are some links on youtube) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.231.153.178 ( talk) 11:15, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
New docudrama about the "Borgward affair" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VZJkEaU3sk https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Aff%C3%A4re_Borgward — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B40:2258:40BD:DA03:F458:EF6B ( talk) 23:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
The section controversial company bankruptcy is written like a book or documentary rather than an encyclopedia article chapter because of the following reasons:
Puffery words are used throughout the section.
There are subsections written like they are from a book about this situation. For instance, Cui bono? does not sound like the name of a chapter in a proper and informative encyclopedia chapter.
Very few references and many "citation needed" marks appear throughout the section. I personally think that either;
1. More references be added in where they're needed
2. The section be shortened down to where there are references
3. The entire section be removed to clean up this mess
This is just what I think should be done and I'd like more people to agree with me before any sort of action is done this section.
- WaddlesJP13 ( talk) 00:19 UTC, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:23, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Borgward was copied or moved into Borgward Group with this edit on 1 March 2018. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Borgward article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
We read that the new company was founded in 2008 and that this new company went on to start work on the new product three years earlier. Er, what? -- Hoary ( talk) 02:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
I found this while doing a quick search - http://www.atlantic-times.com/archive_detail.php?recordID=205 VoVillia 07:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vovillia ( talk • contribs)
It's nonsense to have a single article covering two entirely different companies that share only a name. The article about the historical (20th century) company should be something like Borgward (1905-1961) with the new company just being Borgward. There should, of course, be cross-references between the two articles. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:31, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Consider this series of legitimate users of the same brand name (and, for most of the history, the same logo):
This isn't optimal: there's a lot of overlap between (1) and (2), and the material about Triumph Motorcycles (Meriden) is a little uncomfortable within (2). But here we have articles fairly clearly separating companies that themselves were separated by months or a few years. By contrast, somebody born when the last Borgward was manufactured by the first company would be in late middle age by the time the first Borgward was manufactured by the second. I too think that this material should be separated into two articles (though I'm not sure of the best names for them). Fru1tbat and John Broughton, you expressed reservations about splitting, but that was over two years ago. What do you think now? -- Hoary ( talk) 01:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
A few minutes ago, I carried out the split: Borgward for the old, Borgward Group for the new. -- Hoary ( talk) 00:12, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Borgward. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Borgward. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Let's hear about this new company named Borgward, IFF we can do so from reliable sources and in a non-promotional way. Moreover, much of what's said is unremarkable: "the company aspires to become one of the leading electric-vehicle manufacturers in the next decade": Does any car company not aspire to become this? Should we start an article with a company's aspirations? Etc etc. -- Hoary ( talk) 07:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
The language is positive neutral. It is by far not the PR lingo, which you objected to initially. Evidence is given on some aspects, and there will be more. To seperate the old and new company, the article does not indicate a direct link between the new company and the manufacturing company that ceased operations in 1961, other than brand ownership and the fact that it was built by Carl F.W. Borgward's grandson. Considering your objections, I also refrained from stating that the design of the modern cars is inspired, to some extent, by old design lines of the 1950s. Borgward's Chief Designer Anders Warming has publicly stated this. (There are some links on youtube) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.231.153.178 ( talk) 11:15, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
New docudrama about the "Borgward affair" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VZJkEaU3sk https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Aff%C3%A4re_Borgward — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B40:2258:40BD:DA03:F458:EF6B ( talk) 23:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
The section controversial company bankruptcy is written like a book or documentary rather than an encyclopedia article chapter because of the following reasons:
Puffery words are used throughout the section.
There are subsections written like they are from a book about this situation. For instance, Cui bono? does not sound like the name of a chapter in a proper and informative encyclopedia chapter.
Very few references and many "citation needed" marks appear throughout the section. I personally think that either;
1. More references be added in where they're needed
2. The section be shortened down to where there are references
3. The entire section be removed to clean up this mess
This is just what I think should be done and I'd like more people to agree with me before any sort of action is done this section.
- WaddlesJP13 ( talk) 00:19 UTC, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:23, 17 February 2023 (UTC)