Talk:Canopy express

Requested move 19 September 2020

 * 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  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Canopy express → Express body – At https://www.martin-parry.com/advertisements.html it is listed as a "canopy top express body". At http://www.mtfca.com/books/MParry.htm a similar vehicle is listed as a "Full Top Express Body"

It looks to me like there was never anything called a "canopy express" but instead there was an express body that also had a canopy top, and that modern blogs and people selling antique vehicles got the name wrong. Guy Macon (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. 2pou (talk) 17:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - The phrase "express body" can apply to any type of light or medium duty delivery truck, as the very link the OP has submitted indicates. At one time, many truck manufacturers offered 1.5 ton pickup trucks that they named "express bodies." The notion that there has "never been anything called a canopy express" is patently false, as others who opposed his previous effort to delete the page have pointed out. -User:DanTD (talk) 19:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * One example here. -User:DanTD (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * What distinguishes that from a pick-up? -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 20:31, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Very little, but it's the name that many truck manufacturers chose for heavier pickups. Here, you can see "express body" trucks named for both pickups and canopy express trucks. And here's another Open express truck. And just to show it's not strictly a GM thing, here's a Ford... and another Ford. Honestly, a Google Image search of the phrase "Express body" truck can give you all kinds of bodies. -User:DanTD (talk) 20:44, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * When asked for an example of a truck manufacturer calling their truck a "canopy express" you gave an example of a truck that was not called a canopy express. You could have just as easily said "here, you can see 'express body' trucks named for pickups and martian blue banana trucks". Where is the evidence establishing that any manufacturer used the name "canopy express" for any product? I cannot find an example. Also, your "open express" example is from 2015. Like I said. it looks like the term "canopy express" is a modern invention. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:34, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * What I gave Roxy, was an example of other types of trucks that were given the name "express body." -User:DanTD (talk) 13:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)


 * My problem is that I cannot find a single serious source that documents either as a subject. Lots of namechecks (more for express than for canopy express) but we appear to be the only reference work that treats this as a subject in and of itself. Guy (help! - typo?) 21:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, many that you dismiss as unreliable sources know it was a subject in an of itself. And there are books on trucks that have covered this in the past. I can't help it if you're not as familiar with such trucks. -User:DanTD (talk) 21:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Evidence, please. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Pretty much every ad and book that has ever covered them. I could start with some books by Tad Burness, but it's not really the only one, even if it's the only one I can think of at this moment. -User:DanTD (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I am not going to take your word for it, seeing as how you previously posted links to ads that did not use the name "canopy express" and claimed that they did. Per Verifiability you are required to to provide a source that other editors can check to back up your claims. "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up." --Guy Macon (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * On the contrary. They did show the names, and I just mentioned one author of books that frequently used those ads. The only people suggesting that the name was made up are you and JzG. This was around before I was born, and since JzG and I are both in our 50's that means it was around before he was born too. But that still doesn't mean it never existed. ---User:DanTD (talk) 13:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Evasion noted. Despite repeated requests, the above comment does not contain any actual sources, just an assertion that they exist. DanTD, please name the book and the page number, as required by Wikipedia's policies. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Youngsters. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 13:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Get off my lawn, you damn kids!! --Guy Macon (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

So, this just got relisted. We have exactly one person who opposes the move and that person cannot name any source from when these vehicles were made that calls them a "canopy express". Nothing here has challenged my original conclusion -- that there was never anything called a "canopy express" but instead there was an express body that also had a canopy top, and that modern blogs and people selling antique vehicles got the name wrong.

Last chance before I make the move: any sources? (not DanTD saying that sources exist and that we need to take his word for it, but actual sources) --Guy Macon (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The point of the relist was to give another seven days for input before someone uninvolved in the discussion comes across it on the WP:RM posting and closes it. (Which will no longer apply to me with this post.) -2pou (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Treatment as a subject in and of itself seems to be more relevant for WP:N deletion points than a move discussion. Although not super direct, my understanding of 's argument is that the proposed name is not appropriate because "express truck" would be a super-set category that could include "canopy express", but it would also include a standard "mid-weight pickup" (I'm no SME, and any terms I throw around could be entirely made up to illustrate the overall concept), no longer making it applicable to the current scope. Not to say the scope couldn't be widened, but I'm not sure that's the point of the current discussion. As to finding sources, "canopy express" seems to be a bad search term on its own.  Adding "truck" or "Tad Burness" as mentioned above will at least give definitions from Burness and the Army.  The best find I quickly came across, though, is probably this one which also treats it somewhat significantly as a subject.  -2pou (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment -- ' and ' seem to sticking to the same notion that I'm the only person that uses the phrase "Canopy Express" and are denying the fact that I showed of any sources for the names of these kinds of trucks. The very link that Guy is showing us contains other types of trucks that contain the name "express body" which includes "No. 224 Cab Top Express Body With High Sides," "No. 324 High Side Express Body," and "No. 426 Wide Platform Express Body." neither of which are the trucks defined as "canopy express" type trucks. If this weren't the case, I wouldn't bother opposing the rename so strongly. Two external links that I added to the site which also contain the phrase have been dismissed as little more than fansites, despite showing ads containing the exact types of trucks. Previously,  wanted to delete the whole article, because he didn't believe that this was a real name for a real type of truck. As for Burness himself (1933-2012), the phrase existed before he was even born. So the man may have used examples of them in some of his books, and possibly even his Auto Album comics, but it didn't necessarily start with him. -User:DanTD (talk)  18:34, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * ... that would be the deletion discussion where there were comments like "Keep. If it turns out there's a more popular or used name, then by all means rename the article." and "Keep per WP:SNOW, and rename as needed", right? --Guy Macon (talk) 22:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have never said that. What I said was that I cannot find any substantive sources outside of Wikipedia that treat this as a specific subject under that name, which makes this a synthesis from primary sources (in this case basically catalogues). It is hard to believe that any legitimate field of automobile incunabula is so obscure that there are not a dozen books on it. You have yet to cite one. Guy (help! - typo?) 10:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose clearly a Chevrolet Model name rather than a generic name for a type of pick-up. Disappointingly, REO Speed wagon isn't just an merkian rock band. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 11:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

The three actual sources
Ignoring all the blog posts and 21st century ads for vintage vehicles, it appears that we now have three actual sources. I am inclined to change my opinion and say that these three sources are enough to support an article, whereas I was previously unwilling to accept an article based only on assertions with no reliable sources. Comments welcome. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , so the move should be to Chevrolet Canopy Express, to reflect the fact that it seems to be a one-manufacturer designation that is applied retrospectively by a handful of individuals to one or two other makers, yes? Guy (help! - typo?) 10:42, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * As you can see from the gallery, as well as the ads posted in those websites you keep dismissing, Chevrolet was never the only manufacturer of such trucks, so that rules such a name out. The idea behind the article was a specific class of truck across the board, not just one brand name. If there is a better name for these types of trucks, "Express body" isn't it. The name "peddler's wagon" also comes to mind, but that could easily apply to anybody who pushed around fruit carts and other food carts before the invention of the automobile. ---User:DanTD (talk) 12:00, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * DanTD, The gallery doesn't contain what you say it contains. You need actual sources, not image captions written by Wikipedia editors (mostly you). I am going to ignore you from now on and I advise others to do the same. You keep claiming that things are true but you never reveal how you know that they are true and you never give us a source that others can check. It's annoying and useless when making decisions about what should be in an article. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually, the gallery does contain Canopy express trucks as of this moment. I may have wrote the captions for the article, but I didn't define the images of the vehicles as such. The people who uploaded them did, and anybody with any basic knowledge of automotive history can see it's clear that's what they are. -User:DanTD (talk)  02:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The people who uploaded the images are not reliable sources. See WP:RS. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * JzG, and Roxy, while the three citations currently in the article (from 1962, 2016 and 2019) only mention Chevrolet. covers a REO Speed Wagon (not to be confused with REO Speedwagon) from the REO Motor Car Company and the VIM Truck, a vehicle that has no page on the English Wikipedia but has one on the German Wikipedia.


 * doesn't mention any manufacturer, and once again specifies Chevrolet.


 * So, does any of this lead us to not pick Chevrolet Canopy Express as the move target? Perhaps with a mention of REO and VIM as possible precursors? --Guy Macon (talk) 16:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I am thinking that this is the best answer. If anyone (other than DanTD -- we don't need a 20th repetition of his "blogs and for-sale sites are reliable sources" argument) objects, now is the time to speak up.


 * One more non-Chevy Canopy Express here. And another Dodge. Yet another Dodge. On this search, I found roughly a few dozen images of them, and a few that aren't, so naturally, I've skipped those. -User:DanTD (talk) 02:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * More sources from 2009 and 2019. We already know that there are 21st century blogs and for-sale pages that use the phrase. Either show evidence of someone using the term back when the vehicles were made or go away and stop wasting our time with more 21st-century material. Continued WP:IDHT behavior may result in a WP:TOPICBAN. --Guy Macon (talk)
 * Just another couple instances of the term not being associated with Chevy: Congress used it in 1941 with Ford documenting congressional hearings and is shows up in Comercial Car Journal (1946). The latter preview doesn't provide the best context, but it looks like it is generic. -2pou (talk) 18:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC) Here's another one from Dover?, and although published in 2009, the same verbiage can be seen in the second result of this search's snippet view, which was published in 1931. -2pou (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It appears to me that the above puts the last nail in the "Only Chevy" theory. Good finds! --Guy Macon (talk) 23:21, 6 October 2020 (UTC)