Talk:Chrysler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article issues.[edit]

Grettings, I have briefly gone over aspects of the article specifically dealing with issues and classification.
  • There are several citation tags, "Citation needed" (Aug 2012), "Verification needed" (April 2014), "Citation needed" (July 2015), "Citation needed" (October 2017), "Citation needed" (multiple-- Sept 2022)
  • There are sentences, paragraphs, and entire subsections under the "Chrysler brand" section that are unsourced.
  • The "corporate governance" ("Management team" subsection), is unnecessary bloat.
  • There is far, far, (did I mention "far") too much-unsourced content.
  • Leaving the "Environmental initiatives" section, with the last mention of "model years 2012–2021", then going into a nostalgic time warp back to 1940 in the unsourced "Chrysler Defense" section is not evidence of being "well-written".
  • Eight entries in the "External links" section is link farmimg.

Conclusion[edit]

This article has not had a legitimate claim to sport a B-classficication since 2012. Among the criteria is: #1)- The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations., and #2)- The article is reasonably well-written. -- Otr500 (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 August 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chrysler → Stellantis North America – chrysler is currently only an automobile brand, not a company Michael H (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose For basically the exact same reasons as the 2016 and 2018 move requests [1] [2]. The article is about Chrysler the topic and the organization from it's inception nearly 100 years ago and "Chrysler" is the common name. This article includes the time as an independent company as well as the DC and Chrysler-Cerberus time, basically all the pre-FIAT/pre-Stellantis time which was the majority of the history of the organization. Chrysler is the common name and the name people are most likely to search for. Chrysler, not Stellantis is the name of the defense contractor that designed the M1 Abrams tank and the prime contractor for the Saturn IB rocket. Stellantis NA should be reserved for discussions that are specific to the the parent of the Chrysler brand. Springee (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move per Springee. The common name remains Chrysler. O.N.R. (talk) 22:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME 2601:204:C901:B740:5C88:7DD8:3C75:575A (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and previous discussions listed above. Perhaps there should be a hatnote on this talk page to dissuade people from filing these requests?  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:14, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - this article covers the entire history of Chrysler going back over a century, and Chrysler is overwhelmingly the common name. --Sable232 (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Splitting proposal[edit]

I'd like to propose two page splits...

First, I'll start with the less controversial one: I'd like to propose that the § Chrysler brand section be split into a page called Chrysler (automotive brand), separate from the parent company. It's no different than say the GMC brand being split from the GM parent company article. At 133k, this article is well past the point of a WP:SIZESPLIT, and this seems like a logical place to make the split.

  • Support as nom -- RickyCourtney (talk) 01:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sure. I don't think a combined proposal like this is going to work very well though; it will be confusing.  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but I would like a clear definition of what goes in each article before the split so gray area items (automotive technologies as an example) have a clear home in one or the other. My feeling is the technologies (Hemi engines as an example) should go in this article while brand should focus on name plates, sales, Chrysler specific marketing etc. Springee (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I like @User:Springee's logic above, so I'd therefore further propose that the page be further split into both a Chrysler Corporation page (covering the history of the company from 1925–1998) and a Stellantis North America page (covering the history of the company from 1998 to the present). It's a somewhat arbitrary date, but in my reading, it's the start of a period of the company being passed between international partners.

Discussion of splits[edit]

  • Before I !vote, RickyCourtney could you outline what the splits will look like? I think I'm misunderstanding but are you proposing splitting this article into three? Springee (talk) 20:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct, but I'm also open to splitting into only two articles [just a spin-off of Chrysler (automotive brand)]. RickyCourtney (talk) 20:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Given the length I generally support the the idea of splitting the brand from the company but I think we should have a clear definition of what goes where before doing so. So rockets and tanks stay with the company. Where would discussion of the Hemi engines go? I'm asking as a point of discussion. Given the length I do think some type of split makes sense. I would prefer as few splits as possible. Springee (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I'll retract my proposal to split the Corporation page into two. I would propose a pretty cut and dry spin-off of the Chrysler brand section. You can see my proposed post split pages at Draft:Chrysler and Draft:Chrysler (automotive brand). -- RickyCourtney (talk) 21:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Post split discussion[edit]

I have completed the spin-off of Chrysler (automotive brand). Please feel free to discuss any further issues here. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 00:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chrysler&oldid=1194086362"