Talk:Rover 400 / 45

message: I've suggested merging Rover 45 into the Rover 400 article, as the 45 was just a facelifted version of the 400. I've suggested an analogous move for Rover 25 and Rover 200
An alternative would be to have 2 articles:
*one Rover 400 (200 saloon) (or a better title) for the Honda Concerto/Rover 200 based 400
*one entitled Rover 400/45 for the Honda Domani/ Civic based model, incorporating the last 400 model as well as the 45.
- links at the top of each page to redirect people to the other article
What do people think? Spute 11:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: :Image:Roewe 450concept.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Roewe 450concept.jpg

message: Shouldn't the RD/X60 have its own article? It was anticipated that it would replace the Rover 45, but there was no certainty that it would have been launched under the same model name. Letdorf (talk) 23:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RD/X60 

message: Before I start, I would just like to mention that prior to this, I knew absolutely nothing about these cars (I am from Australia). Basically, when I tried to work out the history behind these two cars (200/25 and 400/45) based on the current three-page setup, I was totally confused. It was not clear which models correlated directly, and which models superseded what. I almost gave up, but then I went to the Internet Archive and had a look at the articles in the previous 200/25 and 400/45 format and the above was immediately clear to me.
There is another proposal to separate the articles into four based on platform. While it is certainly a better alternative to what we have currently, I personally prefer to have two pages: 200/25 and 400/45—and this is coming from someone who would usually be all for grouping cars by generation/platform rather than name.
The Australian Rover 416i information should be moved to the Honda Integra article as a subsection of the first generation. It has no relationship with the 200/25 and 400/45 except in name. The target audience (Australians) will associate it with the Honda Integra, not these Europe-only models that were never sold in Australia.
Lastly, can the articles just be titled "Rover 200" and "Rover 400"? It seems to go against convention to include the "/ 25" and "/ 45". The infobox has an "aka" field for a reason, and the facelift name can be bolded and mentioned in the lead. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your input. The 25 and 45 names were used for a significant proportion of the models' lifespans so it could be argued they should be in the article title, but if there is a precedent in WP for this kind of situation, then I guess we should follow it. Letdorf (talk) 12:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is hugely helpful input OSX - thanks! I think the structure you've outlined there (2x pages, "Rover 200" and "Rover 400" per precedent with the Integra/416 info moved elsewhere) is the clearest and best restructuring proposal so far, unless anyone has strong objections I'll have a crack at this next weekSplateagle (talk) 14:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've made a start on this - feel free to tidy things up more. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Missed most of this, was initially opposed but now I'm on board. Moving the 416i to Integra was almost too obvious, wasn't it?  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 15:07, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed, the way the 416i was handled before was really messy, haha. CyanIsland (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uninvolved party 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Rover 400 / 45. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110802043903/http://www.thatcham.org/nvsr/index.jsp?page=202&s=car to http://www.thatcham.org/nvsr/index.jsp?page=202&s=car
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716202451/http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/rover/45-hatchback-2004.aspx?page=7 to http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/rover/45-hatchback-2004.aspx?page=7
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified