Talk:Mitsubishi Motors/Archive 1

message: OK, edited the article. More extensive "backstory" now added and restructured as well. I've also made four major removals which may or may not raise comment, listed below. Everything I removed was originally added by me, except the list of vehicles.
* Removed refs to multiple currencies in the infobox, as per WP:MOS#Currency
* Removed the Car Models section. As mentioned previously, we have a (category) page on WP which lists Mitsubishi's cars, and we already link to that. Most other auto manufacturer pages seemed to follow the style of linking to a separate page of vehicles elsewhere.
* I cut out a lot of citations, as some paragraphs (esp. DCX) were being a bit overwhelmed by them. Instead, before listing all the inline citations, I've made reference to my two primary info sources.
* I removed the chart showing MMC's sales/revenue/losses in the past five years. A couple of reasons, but mostly because I wasn't confident the numbers were spot on (even though all my cited sources are MMC press releases). MMC changed its accounting procedures when DCX came on board, and when they sold the Fuso division it threw things as well. Better to leave it out rather than throwing a half-assed chart up, I'd say.
-- DeLarge 11:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major edit, 30 May 2006

message: Two changes have been reverted;
:(i) the reference to DCX as a German-only (as opposed to US-German) conglomerate. DaimlerChrysler's Wikipedia entry gives a German and US location for the company, and the frontpage of its own website gives its share price in two of the many markets on which the stock is traded: NYSE (US) and Xetra (Germany).
:(ii) the removal of a double space between major paragraph sections, which is inconsistent with the rest of the article.
--DeLarge 19:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert, 19:44, 11 June 2006

message: There's been a few dilutions of the content I've added, specifically:
* Changing the section heading 'DaimlerChrysler debacle' to 'DaimlerChrysler relations'.
* Removing the comment that the vehicle recall issue was "possibly the biggest scandal to ever hit the Japanese auto industry".
* Changing "mass layoffs" to "layoffs" in the NedCar section.
Addressing these in order:
* Debacle. To be honest, I pondered this a lot when I originally drafted my edits of the article. However, web definitions of debacle are "a great disaster; a complete failure" (Merriam Webster), "a total, often ludicrous failure" (Dictionary.com), and "a complete failure, especially because of bad planning and organization" (Cambridge Dictionary). DCX paid $1.9bn for control of MMC in 2000, in an effort to become the 3rd largest car maker in the world. They spent billions more propping the company up, before selling it five years later for $800m - less than half what they'd paid previously. DCX boss Schrempp lost his job, and they'd fallen to 6th on the list of car manufacturers by the time it was all over. That looks like a total failure to me - I don't see any part of the deal that was a success in terms of motor vehicle manufacturing. Given that the issue is now done and dusted, I therefore think that "debacle", while harsh, is accurate and acceptable, and not POV.
::Withdrawn - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles.
* Scandal. Well, the BBC, AutoSafety.org, Automotive Digest, The Auto Channel, Sydney Morning Herald, MSNBC,  Pathfinder.com and  BusinessWeek all explicitly refer to the vehicle recall issue as "a scandal". Now, as the Wikipedia page was written, I accept it was an uncited comment, but I think to excise the word scandal from the section completely may not give the correct impression of how drastically it affected the company. Here's a BBC article where chairman Kawasoe is forced to bow before the Transport Minister over the issue, which demonstrates how massive the humiliation was for the company.
::Withdrawn - the word "scandal" still appears towards the end of the section, which should keep me happy. However, the deletions have left a couple of sentences reading a little abrupt, so I might try and tweak them a little.
* Mass layoffs. I flatly disagree with this change. A local news source (Expatica.com) explicitly referred to "mass layoffs" when commenting on the union's recent deal with the company in April this year. There is a difference between layoffs, which doesn't quantify how many employees or what proportion of the total workforce is being affected, and mass layoffs, which does.
Any comment? I'll maybe solicit opinions from Wikiproject:Autos as well... -- DeLarge 08:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: edits by user:68.40.61.196

message: Could /Mitsubishi_motors please redirect here? Mathtinder 01:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect request