Talk:Chrysler

message: :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===
This article has not had a legitimate claim to sport a B-classficication since 2012. Among the criteria is: #1)- , and #2)-   --  Otr500 (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article issues. 

message: This article has not had a legitimate claim to sport a B-classficication since 2012. Among the criteria is: #1)- , and #2)-   --  Otr500 (talk) 13:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Conclusion

message: :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)
replies: text: Chrysler →  – chrysler is currently only an automobile brand, not a company Michael H (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 7 August 2023 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Splitting proposal  

message: *Before I !vote,  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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Discussion of splits

message: 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)
thread_title:  Post split discussion