Talk:Nash Metropolitan

message: The article said, "(It is unlikely that a Metropolitan could have been purchased without Heater & Radio, as all vehicles left the factory with both items fitted)." This was obviously written by someone who's never heard of a "delete option", by which it was perfectly possible to order a car without either, or both. This was very common until "option packages" (which don't permit deleting any 1 part) became standard.  Trekphiler (talk) 14:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete option

message: The Nash Metropolitan was not the first American-designed car to be made entirely in Europe. The Model T was made extensively in the UK. Take a look at Ford of Britain. At first, it was made using imported parts, but after 1914 the British eventually created the entire car in Britain for their own consumption. The Nash is probably the first American-designed car made in Europe for American consumption, however. However, I am removing this statement from both this article and Captive import. Chaparral2J (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the first 

message: I've awarded the Polly dual classification---"economy car" and "subcompact car". I think it's correct, in light of the  citations.  But if there are strong arguments against ambiclassification, and signs of indignant fury among its opponents, the Polly can just as easily be reduced to the ranks of one or other category and given a good spanking. — Writegeist (talk) 03:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dual classification 

message: Someone might care to copy here the discussion re the Collectibility section on Davidjohnaustin's talk page. (I don't know how to.) 
I have made what I believe is an overwhelming case for its inclusion, and have reinstated it for the fourth or fifth time--following Dja's repeated deletions on the grounds that the quoted and clearly attributed views are "subjective" etc. On his talk page I have drawn his attention to numerous WP guidelines that support and encourage inclusion of properly attributed views such as those referenced in the Collectibility section.
My only real concern about the information in the section is that some of it, e.g. performance figures, might be more useful if placed elsewhere in the article. Perhaps a separate "Performance" section?  I dunno.  — Writegeist (talk) 07:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I've relocated some of the info, added some more; also a new section. — Writegeist (talk) 02:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on Davidjohnaustin's Talk page 

message: Is this  section trivia? If so, shouldn't it be removed? Writegeist (talk) 01:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This section has been removed. Thank you! CZmarlin (talk) 03:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Nash Metropolitan. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.rmauctions.com/PressRelease.cfm?PressID=587
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can hear no action Elviserin (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starter