This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm guessing this is because of sites like 8thcivic.com, but people keep bungling the generation numbers, and it's getting pretty frustrating. For example, the 8th-generation Civic has the 6th generation Si. There's no such thing as an 8th-generation Si. Please stop changing the numbers, because they're wrong. Sugaki ( talk) 19:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
[1] There is no stock honda with a 0-60 of 6 seconds. Did you even see the torque and hp ratings of the new si? Lets try more 7.2 seconds tested by edmunds and 6.7 claimed by honda.-- Nytemunkey 16:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"The new car comes with a 2.0 liter i-VTEC engine that produces 700 hp (520 kW) and 139 ft·lbf (188 N·m) of torque, while also including a 6-speed manual transmission (an automatic option is unavailable) with a helical limited slip differential."
I really really think that's a mistake, 700hp in a 2.0 liter engine is like a Honda F1 engine. Someone please correct that statement, i don't think it's right. --
MakE
shout! 17:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
"The 2007 model changes for the Civic Si ... a deck lid spoiler" The 2006 Si has a deck lid spoiler. Perhaps they changed the design, but it's not a new feature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.169.77 ( talk) 01:57, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
If the article is going to list 0-60 times for some si civics, then it should list the 0-60 time for all generations of si civics. And 0-60 in 6.3 seconds for a factory honda si or not seems to be stretching the truth. Also, the gauges are black/red, not red/white.-- Nytemunkey 20:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
also, it was black numbering on a red background for 06, this time around it's red numbering on a black background. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ErichPryde ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 14 November 2006
the pic of the 99-00 Si(the black pic) isnt actually an Si. Also the Canadian models of that year got ABS and heated mirrors. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
74.104.28.142 (
talk •
contribs) 08:10, 5 March 2007
I am not clear why the most recent model should not be the lead image. Almost every other page has the most recent model at the top. Why is the 1999 model more representative? -- Daniel J. Leivick 23:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
All models have pictures except the best model! The 92-95 doesnt have one. Please, someone upload one. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Felliph3 ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
whats the hold up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.198.84 ( talk) 05:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The fastes 99-00 si in the world is owned by Max Ferreira go's 0-60 in 2 sec!! also the Creater of civic !!
This is down right disgraceful. Not only is the spelling TERRIBLE, but (warning: spelling alert) "creater of civic !!"? For that matter, NO Civic can go from naught to 60 in under 3, not even the RWD converted monster that uses the engine/transmission from an NSX. Someone delete this, or I will.
-- Bohemian Funk ( talk) 23:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I will admit a little bias here as it is my image that is in question, but it is consensus at WP:CAR that the highest quality image available should be used in the lead info box (regardless of model year or specification). I don't think there is much comparison (in terms of technical quality) between the old image of the red coupe and the image I added of the grey sedan and feel the current image selection should remain. -- Leivick ( talk) 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
The image selected for an article's top (lead) infobox does not need to show any particular version or generation of the vehicle, such as the latest, the last, the first, the best-selling, or any other... Regardless of the ages of the vehicle shown, pick a clear, high-quality image according to the image quality guidelines... Such an image is always to be preferred over a lower-quality image, such as one that shows photoflash glare or a distracting background.
5. ...Regardless of the ages of the vehicle shown, pick a clear, high-quality image according to the image quality guidelines; one that clearly shows a vehicle relevant to the article without photoflash glare or other photographic faults, against a simple and contrasting background.
Crop out distracting elements like parking lots, objects, or other cars.
Can the image for the eighth generation be used as the lead picture? It is very similar as far as picture quality and following the guidlines. Also it is an image of the newest edition, whereas the current lead picture is of the 2009 civic Si, you can tell by the rims most obviously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.188.247.240 ( talk) 21:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Where did the 1st 2nd and 3rd gen go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.33.112 ( talk) 07:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
When viewing this page, it would be really great to have curb weight (numbers from the factory) shown for the various years or "generations" of this car. I can see some of this in the Edit page, but only one mention of curb weight in the main article. I'm a novice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.121.121 ( talk) 21:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I see no reason for the Civic Si (a mere equipment level) to receive a standalone article. This content should (in my eyes) be split and merged into the appropriate Civic generation sections. I started a conversation here, please feel free to join in. I am also nominating the Honda Civic Type R for a merger together with this, and welcome all input from interested editors. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 06:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Honda Civic Si. 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) 09:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
So it appears that a car forum community (civicx.com) was interested in contributing to the 8th gen (2017-Present) section of the Si page.
However it seems that a couple of wiki contributors did not believe the information, format and overall presentation were appropriate for the page.
I've been doing my best to follow the guidelines listed under /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles but it appears the section was flagged.
Not quite sure what to do to improve the section, but I do believe all of the facts concerning the vehicle are pertinent to the wiki page.
I understand the argument against having the section look like a sales brochure or advertisement. I'd love to continue working on the section to improve it and make it more valuable.
This content simply does not belong on this page, copy it to the correct articles. Trying to use this page as a place to store it is not the correct way of doing things, you seem ambitious and the Si sections of many Civic pages are very lacking, doing this properly will mean that this info can be found, because if you keep going about things by adding it back to the wrong page it will be reverted. Toasted Meter ( talk) 02:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm guessing this is because of sites like 8thcivic.com, but people keep bungling the generation numbers, and it's getting pretty frustrating. For example, the 8th-generation Civic has the 6th generation Si. There's no such thing as an 8th-generation Si. Please stop changing the numbers, because they're wrong. Sugaki ( talk) 19:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
[1] There is no stock honda with a 0-60 of 6 seconds. Did you even see the torque and hp ratings of the new si? Lets try more 7.2 seconds tested by edmunds and 6.7 claimed by honda.-- Nytemunkey 16:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
"The new car comes with a 2.0 liter i-VTEC engine that produces 700 hp (520 kW) and 139 ft·lbf (188 N·m) of torque, while also including a 6-speed manual transmission (an automatic option is unavailable) with a helical limited slip differential."
I really really think that's a mistake, 700hp in a 2.0 liter engine is like a Honda F1 engine. Someone please correct that statement, i don't think it's right. --
MakE
shout! 17:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
"The 2007 model changes for the Civic Si ... a deck lid spoiler" The 2006 Si has a deck lid spoiler. Perhaps they changed the design, but it's not a new feature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.169.77 ( talk) 01:57, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
If the article is going to list 0-60 times for some si civics, then it should list the 0-60 time for all generations of si civics. And 0-60 in 6.3 seconds for a factory honda si or not seems to be stretching the truth. Also, the gauges are black/red, not red/white.-- Nytemunkey 20:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
also, it was black numbering on a red background for 06, this time around it's red numbering on a black background. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ErichPryde ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 14 November 2006
the pic of the 99-00 Si(the black pic) isnt actually an Si. Also the Canadian models of that year got ABS and heated mirrors. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
74.104.28.142 (
talk •
contribs) 08:10, 5 March 2007
I am not clear why the most recent model should not be the lead image. Almost every other page has the most recent model at the top. Why is the 1999 model more representative? -- Daniel J. Leivick 23:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
All models have pictures except the best model! The 92-95 doesnt have one. Please, someone upload one. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Felliph3 ( talk • contribs) 15:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
whats the hold up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.198.84 ( talk) 05:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The fastes 99-00 si in the world is owned by Max Ferreira go's 0-60 in 2 sec!! also the Creater of civic !!
This is down right disgraceful. Not only is the spelling TERRIBLE, but (warning: spelling alert) "creater of civic !!"? For that matter, NO Civic can go from naught to 60 in under 3, not even the RWD converted monster that uses the engine/transmission from an NSX. Someone delete this, or I will.
-- Bohemian Funk ( talk) 23:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I will admit a little bias here as it is my image that is in question, but it is consensus at WP:CAR that the highest quality image available should be used in the lead info box (regardless of model year or specification). I don't think there is much comparison (in terms of technical quality) between the old image of the red coupe and the image I added of the grey sedan and feel the current image selection should remain. -- Leivick ( talk) 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
The image selected for an article's top (lead) infobox does not need to show any particular version or generation of the vehicle, such as the latest, the last, the first, the best-selling, or any other... Regardless of the ages of the vehicle shown, pick a clear, high-quality image according to the image quality guidelines... Such an image is always to be preferred over a lower-quality image, such as one that shows photoflash glare or a distracting background.
5. ...Regardless of the ages of the vehicle shown, pick a clear, high-quality image according to the image quality guidelines; one that clearly shows a vehicle relevant to the article without photoflash glare or other photographic faults, against a simple and contrasting background.
Crop out distracting elements like parking lots, objects, or other cars.
Can the image for the eighth generation be used as the lead picture? It is very similar as far as picture quality and following the guidlines. Also it is an image of the newest edition, whereas the current lead picture is of the 2009 civic Si, you can tell by the rims most obviously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.188.247.240 ( talk) 21:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Where did the 1st 2nd and 3rd gen go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.33.112 ( talk) 07:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
When viewing this page, it would be really great to have curb weight (numbers from the factory) shown for the various years or "generations" of this car. I can see some of this in the Edit page, but only one mention of curb weight in the main article. I'm a novice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.121.121 ( talk) 21:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I see no reason for the Civic Si (a mere equipment level) to receive a standalone article. This content should (in my eyes) be split and merged into the appropriate Civic generation sections. I started a conversation here, please feel free to join in. I am also nominating the Honda Civic Type R for a merger together with this, and welcome all input from interested editors. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 06:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Honda Civic Si. 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) 09:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
So it appears that a car forum community (civicx.com) was interested in contributing to the 8th gen (2017-Present) section of the Si page.
However it seems that a couple of wiki contributors did not believe the information, format and overall presentation were appropriate for the page.
I've been doing my best to follow the guidelines listed under /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Automobiles but it appears the section was flagged.
Not quite sure what to do to improve the section, but I do believe all of the facts concerning the vehicle are pertinent to the wiki page.
I understand the argument against having the section look like a sales brochure or advertisement. I'd love to continue working on the section to improve it and make it more valuable.
This content simply does not belong on this page, copy it to the correct articles. Trying to use this page as a place to store it is not the correct way of doing things, you seem ambitious and the Si sections of many Civic pages are very lacking, doing this properly will mean that this info can be found, because if you keep going about things by adding it back to the wrong page it will be reverted. Toasted Meter ( talk) 02:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)