Talk:Honda Pilot

message: "It has a vacuum leak in the most." was trailing the end of the "Specifications" section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.139.223 (talk) 15:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed ambiguous sentence fragment

message: There should be a 2009 model spy pic on this page. It won't work for me. If someone could put one on that would be great. Thanks--24.63.18.184 (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 Spy Pics

message: I think this should be removed entirely. The only source cited is weak and other than the one or two facts the entire section is based on opinion. Plus, 19" deep water is not very impressive, and I wouldn't necessarily consider grade control and brake assist to be "Off-Road" features since they are primarily used on dry flat pavement. The most off-road capability a Honda Pilot has is about 6" of snow over pavement or hard flat dirt.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.255.19 (talk) 02:32, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct - this vehicle was not designed, intended, nor marketed for serious off-road performance. The features described are best for an "expedition" to the regional shopping center! This section had been removed. Thank you, CZmarlin (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Off Road Capability???

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Honda Pilot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150708093450/http://www.fueleconomy.gov/ to http://fueleconomy.gov/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Googling Honda Pilot Body Style results in numerous Honda dealers listings as an SUV as well as Yahoo Autos. 
  Body Style:AWD SUV (4 Door)
[www.yahoo.com/autos/research/honda/pilot/2016] Body Style Sport Utility
I'm not finding body style listed as a crossover.Cleanupmdx (talk) 04:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Encyclopedia articles need to go beyond the manufacturer's marketing promotional materials and dealer advertising listings. For example: the NADA guide describes it as "Constructed on the same platform used for the Honda Accord and the Odyssey minivan, the Pilot was quickly accepted as a reliable family mid-size crossover vehicle." Other reliable sources also describe it as a crossover. The title of this review describes its design: 2016 Honda Pilot: Honda's All-New, Fully Evolved Family Crossover I hope this helps! CZmarlin (talk) 16:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Both Consumer Reports and Yahoo Autos list the Honda Pilot as an SUV under body style.  However neither the sources you provided Nada Guides or Forbes list the body style as a crossover they simply refer to vehicle as an SUV and crossover.  Secondly the article has for years used SUV as body style so why the need for change? Cleanupmdx (talk) 03:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

text: Looking closer at the NADA Guides source provided the Pilot is referred to as "mid-size SUV" six times and "crossover SUV" five times yet you insist on removing SUV.Cleanupmdx (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at original researchCleanupmdx (talk) 04:24, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

text: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Honda_Pilot&type=revision&diff=718604065&oldid=718543022 Noticed SUV was stealthily replaced with crossover without any proper documentation.Cleanupmdx (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly you did not bother to note the other numerous improvements to the article within this edit. The summary box does not provide for listing every change and its reason. For example, the first sentence of the introduction was improved with a direct link to the "Sport utility vehicle" (rather than through a redirect by using only the "SUV" acronym). You state that SUV was "stalely removed" ... This term was listed under two parameters next to each other in the inforbox! That is not stealth removal, when the fact is that there is no need to putting the SUV term in both the "body style" and "class" parameters within the inbox. Why do you insist on keeping a redundancy? More importantly, no matter how many times and promotional sources you can cite, this vehicle is built on a passenger car platform and is therefore classified by the the industry as a Crossover (automobile). Please read the definitions of this term: "a vehicle built on a car platform and combining, in highly variable degrees, features of a sport utility vehicle (SUV) with features from a passenger vehicle." It is also interesting that you have deleted a vetted reference from the most important industry publication, Automotive News, and replaced it with a spam-type auto sales generating website. The authors and editors of a subscription-based trade magazine are knowledgeable about the auto industry and marketing, compared to the advertising-supported websites designed to generate sales for auto dealerships. You seem to have a specific agenda to promote within these articles, as well as not willing to work with your fellow WP editors. Cheers! CZmarlin (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no agenda, performing original research for the definition of crossover resulting in the removal and minimization of the term SUV from the Acura MDX and Honda Pilot pages is not appropriate. To do this you have provided NADA Guides which repeatedly refers to the MDX as an "SUV" and "crossover SUV". The other source Automotive News as a single publication which does not solely determine whether the MDX is an SUV or not on Wikipedia. Honda refers to the vehicle as SUV. I have provided sources specifically for the "body style" infobox row and have found no other source referring to it as a "4-door crossover" which constitutes original research.  I am willing to work with other editors after I initiated a discussion on the talk page, it is you who reverted my edit on the MDX page restoring the edit of an anonymous editor 112.217.108.227 with zero discussion and dismissing the Consumer Reports source I provided.  I would say removing a reputable source like Consumer Reports because you don't like what's contained in it and providing no other source material is not working with other editors.  Also removing the term SUV from the article which multiple established editors have added throughout the years is not either.Cleanupmdx (talk) 11:51, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Body Style

message: unnecessary and excess clutter to disambiguate all the auto pages that are named after something else. then might as well disambiguate the Honda Civic/Civic, Honda Accord/Accord, Honda Odyssey/Odyssey (disambiguation), Honda Insight/Insight (disambiguation), Honda Ridgeline/Ridge (disambiguation) etc. and a million other pages as well.Catmandoe (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: as do most non-luxury vehicles, Chevrolet Suburban/suburban, Chevrolet Tahoe/tahoe or Chevrolet Silverado/silverado, GMC Sierra/sierra, Ford Explorer/explorer (disambiguation), Ford Expedition/expedition, Ford Ranger/ranger, Lincoln Navigator/navigator_(disambiguation) no point in disambiguating hundreds of vehicle pages because of they are named after something.Catmandoe (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: same applies to competing vehicles such as the Nissan Pathfinder/pathfinder, Toyota Highlander/highlander, Jeep Grand Cherokee/Cherokee (disambiguation), GMC Acadia/Acadia, Buick Enclave/Enclave (disambiguation), etc. Catmandoe (talk) 22:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: can make list of 100+ vehicles.Catmandoe (talk) 22:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  disambiugation 

message: as far as I can tell the  templates are not needed for navigation as the name of the section is automatically a valid anchor, as can be seen by clicking on one from the contents box. If there's some special purpose for which they're being used here then I missed it, sorry. CharredShorthand (talk) 08:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: changing the section titles, I think it's best to add an anchor pointing to the old name after the change if there is one rather than preemptively, but I suppose it doesn't matter very much. I wasn't aware existing links pointed to the anchors; error on my part. Thanks; will leave them alone. CharredShorthand (talk) 10:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Anchor templates 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion