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, 58Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
Automobiles Project‑class | |||||||
|
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. |
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)
As some may have noticed I boldly moved numerous "marque" articles, replacing that word with "car brand". I know what I was doing, thought the move will fulfill all three WP:BOLDMOVE points, but no. Huge backslash ensues, editors telling me to "be careful"... let me explain.
The word marque always strikes me as weird and too-fancy. As a non-native English speaker I also thought many other non-native would not be familiar to the word - this falls in the WP:COMMONNAME guideline. "Car brand" is no less precise or unambiguous than "Marque" so it's also not quite a downgrade. What triggers me to remember of this issue is this edit by @ Mr.choppers which has not met any objection, replacing "marque" to "brand" due to "a bit of a WP:PEACOCK issue".
The suspicion of the word being too fancy is apparent in dictionaries. These are the definition of "marque" by several dictionaries:
Clearly a sentence that sounds like "Dacia is a budget marque of Renault..." wouldn't sound right based on these definitions, let alone in an encyclopedia.
To sum it up, "car brand" is concise enough while being neutral and not risking using a WP:PEACOCK term (which may also apply to the word "luxury", but that's for another time).
Pinging @ DeFacto @ Infinty 0 @ Urbanoc to this discussion. Andra Febrian ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
I find it very pompous sounding, although I don't live in the UK. In Swedish or German or many other languages, märke or merk is the normal term, but at least in America it's something pretentious that you'd see in
Robb Report or hear from a real estate agent. I'd say use brand for American entries, marque for British entries, and let the rest fall where they may. If I said that Dacia was a brand of car in the UK, would anyone think it strange sounding? Here is a blurb from
Dacia UK's page about who they are:
DACIA, A BRAND REBORN
Dacia was founded in Romania in 1966, with a clear objective: to provide modern, reliable and affordable cars to all Romanians. Its name was taken from Dacia, the former name given by the Romans to the region now known as Romania.
But it was in 1999, when Renault acquired Dacia, that the brand began a strategic shift, without straying far from its roots. Logan marked its first success.
Sounds like brand is a natural and commonly used word on both sides of the Atlantic. Mr.choppers | ✎ 00:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
The example would be just as valid if it said "If you are not so worried about having a premium brand car you could buy a brand new one with a budget marque".From my location, ye olde Google search for "budget marque" (in quotation marks) returns 100% French-language results, not relating to cars, "budget brand" millions but again not generally car related.
"Budget marque" carhas 4,870 results and
"Budget brand" car155,000. "Luxury marque" has 190,000 results, in large parts thanks to crossword puzzle clues with ACURA and LEXUS as the answers. "budget car marque" has 7 results, whereas "budget car brand" has 118,000 results. My east-coast US version of Google clearly shows that "marque" has aspirational connotations, but I am curious to see the results others get. Mr.choppers | ✎ 01:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
The Cambridge, Wikitionary and Merriam-Webster entries show the typical usage for this word, and it's really not a coincidence when three of them use the word luxury and fancy in itseems like a valid point, and might bear additional investigation. If there is any non-neutral implication given by this word, it should probably be avoided. I really don't know where "car brand" came from, though. That doesn't seem to be a common term in either AmEng or BrEng. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 10:45, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Holden Commodore 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Given the rise of unconventional door handles being seen on EVs for drag reduction purposes, does this warrant an article being made? For example, the 2023 Cadillac Lyriq had a button that would unlatch the door and pop it out, and the door is opened the rest of the way by pulling on a fin or edge of the door. Several other EVs have flush handles that are only accessible when stopped and unlocked. Though I was mainly focusing on exterior handles, some Lexuses have an electronic interior door latch button, and some special edition exotics have a pull-strap to save weight. Finally, it is a recent trend for high end limousine style luxury cars to have power closing doors, sometimes operated by the brake pedal.
Is this subject worthy of its own article under Wikipedia guidelines? Needlesballoon ( talk) 15:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
In articles such as the this section on the Mazda CX-5, multiple fuel economy numbers are listed. However, the long unit names and conversions make them difficult to read multiple in a row such as when listing EPA numbers for city/highway/combined.
For example, something that may be written as short as "26 mpg city, 31 mpg highway, and 28 mpg combined" in US article is written as the following in Wikipedia:
26 mpg‑US (9.0 L/100 km; 31 mpg‑imp) city, 31 mpg‑US (7.6 L/100 km; 37 mpg‑imp) highway and 28 mpg‑US (8.4 L/100 km; 34 mpg‑imp) combined
In my opinion, the long unit abbreviations make the sentence snippet hard to follow, especially in context of more sentences with similar unit conversions. Is there some correct way to format this in a manner that is less confusing on the eyes? Perhaps tabulating the numbers could help, but they feel suboptimal for this purpose. Needlesballoon ( talk) 15:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
convert}}
and {{
cvt}}
should always be the units used in the reference but we use |order=out
to change the order to match the rest of the article.I think Vossanova's suggestion for a tooltip is the most reasonable way to handle this. Fuel economy figures probably aren't that interesting to most readers (unless they're trying to use Wikipedia as a buyer's guide, which it is not) except in relation to how the figures changed with passing years and generations. So, if the figures appear in the home-market units but a tooltip is available for those who are interested, that would be the most helpful to the largest number of readers without making it unreadable.
I don't like the idea of putting together tables (option 6). Inclusion of fuel economy already has the potential to get out of hand - for any given vehicle, there would need to be a figure for every powertrain of every year. In some cases, this would basically take over the entire article. For example, the 1975 AMC Matador has twelve different configurations that would need to be listed; the 1981 Ford F-Series has twenty-two. (I consider it fortunate that fuel economy isn't listed in most articles.)
The lack of subscript in the tooltip probably isn't a big problem, since the difference between rendering as "mpg‑US" and "mpg-us" or the imperial equivalents is minimal in practical terms. -- Sable232 ( talk) 15:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Fuel economy was {{cvt|9|L/100km|mpgimp L/100km mpgus|disp=out|0}} city cycle, {{fuel economy|14|metric|first=uk}} country cycle and {{fuel economy|11|metric|first=uk}} combined.
{{
fuel economy}}
- it can accept a metric/uk/us number as input and display it with any of them first and the other two as a tooltip. Thoughts? Suggestions for improvement?
Stepho
talk 08:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Comment - I like the "tooltip" idea floated above. For me, fuel consumption is an extremely imprecise measure - not only does everyone measure it differently (those pesky Swedes measure it in litres per Swedish Mile, which is 10km), but the methodology varies wildly across time, countries, and whoever does the measuring. Not to mention the city/country/combined divide. To me, fuel consumption numbers are nearly entirely meaningless; they skate close to being subjective. I almost never add fuel consumption figures for this reason, and I will just stick to that and not have to worry about making sense of something with no useful answer. Mr.choppers | ✎ 02:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
fuel economy}}
template, the {{
convert}}
template has some interesting |,
and |and
options. Eg:{{cvt|31|,|20|,|26|mpgimp|L/100km mpgus mpgimp|order=out}}
→ Fuel economy is 9.1, 14.1, 10.9 L/100 km (26, 17, 22 mpg‑US; 31, 20, 26 mpg‑imp) for city, country and combined cycles.{{cvt|31|,|20|and|26|mpgimp|L/100km mpgus mpgimp|order=out}}
→ Fuel economy is 9.1, 14.1 and 10.9 L/100 km (26, 17 and 22 mpg‑US; 31, 20 and 26 mpg‑imp) for city, country and combined cycles.I won't argue my rationale here again as I have with my argument in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#XX Programmes. Looking through the sources, I can determine that they all look like they have been written from the same press release, thus WP:SIGCOV are very lacking. Being a trackday toy doesn't help either as these events are not newsworthy. This explains why I am merging Maserati MCXtrema into Maserati MC20. Editors needs to think before they create another unnecessary article. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm sure this has probably been discussed before, but can someone point me to the convention or guideline about discussing modified versions of a car in articles (both individually modified cars and ones modified by 3rd party tuners). I'm also interested in any guidelines around the motorsports section and the inclusion of factory backed vs non factory backed racing efforts. TKOIII ( talk) 06:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
There are two topics on Talk:China Car of the Year that edotors here might be interested in participating in:
Thanks. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello contributors of the WikiProject Automobiles project. The Aston Martin DB9 article is at the featured article candidacy stage with the hope of it becoming a featured article in the near future. If you have any criticisms, add them to the page. Best, 750h+ | Talk 15:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
The question of whether it is reasonable to try to assign a nationality to individual car models is being discussed at Talk:China Car of the Year#Validity of "Winner by country origins" table, if you are interested. Thanks. -- DeFacto ( talk). 16:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello contributors of the WikiProject Automobiles project. The Aston Martin Rapide article is at the good article nomination stage with the hope of it becoming a good article in the near future. If you would like to review, and you've reviewed a few successful GANs in the past, please feel free to review the article. Best, 750h+ | Talk 12:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Apple (automobile)#Requested move 17 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 17:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
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, 58Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
Automobiles Project‑class | |||||||
|
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. |
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)
As some may have noticed I boldly moved numerous "marque" articles, replacing that word with "car brand". I know what I was doing, thought the move will fulfill all three WP:BOLDMOVE points, but no. Huge backslash ensues, editors telling me to "be careful"... let me explain.
The word marque always strikes me as weird and too-fancy. As a non-native English speaker I also thought many other non-native would not be familiar to the word - this falls in the WP:COMMONNAME guideline. "Car brand" is no less precise or unambiguous than "Marque" so it's also not quite a downgrade. What triggers me to remember of this issue is this edit by @ Mr.choppers which has not met any objection, replacing "marque" to "brand" due to "a bit of a WP:PEACOCK issue".
The suspicion of the word being too fancy is apparent in dictionaries. These are the definition of "marque" by several dictionaries:
Clearly a sentence that sounds like "Dacia is a budget marque of Renault..." wouldn't sound right based on these definitions, let alone in an encyclopedia.
To sum it up, "car brand" is concise enough while being neutral and not risking using a WP:PEACOCK term (which may also apply to the word "luxury", but that's for another time).
Pinging @ DeFacto @ Infinty 0 @ Urbanoc to this discussion. Andra Febrian ( talk) 16:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
I find it very pompous sounding, although I don't live in the UK. In Swedish or German or many other languages, märke or merk is the normal term, but at least in America it's something pretentious that you'd see in
Robb Report or hear from a real estate agent. I'd say use brand for American entries, marque for British entries, and let the rest fall where they may. If I said that Dacia was a brand of car in the UK, would anyone think it strange sounding? Here is a blurb from
Dacia UK's page about who they are:
DACIA, A BRAND REBORN
Dacia was founded in Romania in 1966, with a clear objective: to provide modern, reliable and affordable cars to all Romanians. Its name was taken from Dacia, the former name given by the Romans to the region now known as Romania.
But it was in 1999, when Renault acquired Dacia, that the brand began a strategic shift, without straying far from its roots. Logan marked its first success.
Sounds like brand is a natural and commonly used word on both sides of the Atlantic. Mr.choppers | ✎ 00:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
The example would be just as valid if it said "If you are not so worried about having a premium brand car you could buy a brand new one with a budget marque".From my location, ye olde Google search for "budget marque" (in quotation marks) returns 100% French-language results, not relating to cars, "budget brand" millions but again not generally car related.
"Budget marque" carhas 4,870 results and
"Budget brand" car155,000. "Luxury marque" has 190,000 results, in large parts thanks to crossword puzzle clues with ACURA and LEXUS as the answers. "budget car marque" has 7 results, whereas "budget car brand" has 118,000 results. My east-coast US version of Google clearly shows that "marque" has aspirational connotations, but I am curious to see the results others get. Mr.choppers | ✎ 01:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
The Cambridge, Wikitionary and Merriam-Webster entries show the typical usage for this word, and it's really not a coincidence when three of them use the word luxury and fancy in itseems like a valid point, and might bear additional investigation. If there is any non-neutral implication given by this word, it should probably be avoided. I really don't know where "car brand" came from, though. That doesn't seem to be a common term in either AmEng or BrEng. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 10:45, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Holden Commodore 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Given the rise of unconventional door handles being seen on EVs for drag reduction purposes, does this warrant an article being made? For example, the 2023 Cadillac Lyriq had a button that would unlatch the door and pop it out, and the door is opened the rest of the way by pulling on a fin or edge of the door. Several other EVs have flush handles that are only accessible when stopped and unlocked. Though I was mainly focusing on exterior handles, some Lexuses have an electronic interior door latch button, and some special edition exotics have a pull-strap to save weight. Finally, it is a recent trend for high end limousine style luxury cars to have power closing doors, sometimes operated by the brake pedal.
Is this subject worthy of its own article under Wikipedia guidelines? Needlesballoon ( talk) 15:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
In articles such as the this section on the Mazda CX-5, multiple fuel economy numbers are listed. However, the long unit names and conversions make them difficult to read multiple in a row such as when listing EPA numbers for city/highway/combined.
For example, something that may be written as short as "26 mpg city, 31 mpg highway, and 28 mpg combined" in US article is written as the following in Wikipedia:
26 mpg‑US (9.0 L/100 km; 31 mpg‑imp) city, 31 mpg‑US (7.6 L/100 km; 37 mpg‑imp) highway and 28 mpg‑US (8.4 L/100 km; 34 mpg‑imp) combined
In my opinion, the long unit abbreviations make the sentence snippet hard to follow, especially in context of more sentences with similar unit conversions. Is there some correct way to format this in a manner that is less confusing on the eyes? Perhaps tabulating the numbers could help, but they feel suboptimal for this purpose. Needlesballoon ( talk) 15:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
convert}}
and {{
cvt}}
should always be the units used in the reference but we use |order=out
to change the order to match the rest of the article.I think Vossanova's suggestion for a tooltip is the most reasonable way to handle this. Fuel economy figures probably aren't that interesting to most readers (unless they're trying to use Wikipedia as a buyer's guide, which it is not) except in relation to how the figures changed with passing years and generations. So, if the figures appear in the home-market units but a tooltip is available for those who are interested, that would be the most helpful to the largest number of readers without making it unreadable.
I don't like the idea of putting together tables (option 6). Inclusion of fuel economy already has the potential to get out of hand - for any given vehicle, there would need to be a figure for every powertrain of every year. In some cases, this would basically take over the entire article. For example, the 1975 AMC Matador has twelve different configurations that would need to be listed; the 1981 Ford F-Series has twenty-two. (I consider it fortunate that fuel economy isn't listed in most articles.)
The lack of subscript in the tooltip probably isn't a big problem, since the difference between rendering as "mpg‑US" and "mpg-us" or the imperial equivalents is minimal in practical terms. -- Sable232 ( talk) 15:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Fuel economy was {{cvt|9|L/100km|mpgimp L/100km mpgus|disp=out|0}} city cycle, {{fuel economy|14|metric|first=uk}} country cycle and {{fuel economy|11|metric|first=uk}} combined.
{{
fuel economy}}
- it can accept a metric/uk/us number as input and display it with any of them first and the other two as a tooltip. Thoughts? Suggestions for improvement?
Stepho
talk 08:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Comment - I like the "tooltip" idea floated above. For me, fuel consumption is an extremely imprecise measure - not only does everyone measure it differently (those pesky Swedes measure it in litres per Swedish Mile, which is 10km), but the methodology varies wildly across time, countries, and whoever does the measuring. Not to mention the city/country/combined divide. To me, fuel consumption numbers are nearly entirely meaningless; they skate close to being subjective. I almost never add fuel consumption figures for this reason, and I will just stick to that and not have to worry about making sense of something with no useful answer. Mr.choppers | ✎ 02:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
fuel economy}}
template, the {{
convert}}
template has some interesting |,
and |and
options. Eg:{{cvt|31|,|20|,|26|mpgimp|L/100km mpgus mpgimp|order=out}}
→ Fuel economy is 9.1, 14.1, 10.9 L/100 km (26, 17, 22 mpg‑US; 31, 20, 26 mpg‑imp) for city, country and combined cycles.{{cvt|31|,|20|and|26|mpgimp|L/100km mpgus mpgimp|order=out}}
→ Fuel economy is 9.1, 14.1 and 10.9 L/100 km (26, 17 and 22 mpg‑US; 31, 20 and 26 mpg‑imp) for city, country and combined cycles.I won't argue my rationale here again as I have with my argument in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#XX Programmes. Looking through the sources, I can determine that they all look like they have been written from the same press release, thus WP:SIGCOV are very lacking. Being a trackday toy doesn't help either as these events are not newsworthy. This explains why I am merging Maserati MCXtrema into Maserati MC20. Editors needs to think before they create another unnecessary article. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm sure this has probably been discussed before, but can someone point me to the convention or guideline about discussing modified versions of a car in articles (both individually modified cars and ones modified by 3rd party tuners). I'm also interested in any guidelines around the motorsports section and the inclusion of factory backed vs non factory backed racing efforts. TKOIII ( talk) 06:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
There are two topics on Talk:China Car of the Year that edotors here might be interested in participating in:
Thanks. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello contributors of the WikiProject Automobiles project. The Aston Martin DB9 article is at the featured article candidacy stage with the hope of it becoming a featured article in the near future. If you have any criticisms, add them to the page. Best, 750h+ | Talk 15:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
The question of whether it is reasonable to try to assign a nationality to individual car models is being discussed at Talk:China Car of the Year#Validity of "Winner by country origins" table, if you are interested. Thanks. -- DeFacto ( talk). 16:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello contributors of the WikiProject Automobiles project. The Aston Martin Rapide article is at the good article nomination stage with the hope of it becoming a good article in the near future. If you would like to review, and you've reviewed a few successful GANs in the past, please feel free to review the article. Best, 750h+ | Talk 12:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Apple (automobile)#Requested move 17 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 17:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)