Talk:International Loadstar

Requested move 5 February 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 section. 

 Moved per general agreement below. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover)  PI Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 15:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

– All commercial trucks, busses, and chassis built by the International Harvester Company ("IHC") have had the brand name "International" without the word "Harvester" since 1914. Any 1914 and newer truck article that uses the word "Harvester" in the name should be moved to "International" only. This excludes the International Harvester Auto-Buggy. Sammy D III (talk) 16:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * International Harvester Loadstar → International Loadstar
 * International Harvester A series → International A series
 * International Harvester C series → International C series
 * International Harvester Fleetstar → International Fleetstar
 * International Harvester K and KB series → International K and KB series
 * International Harvester L series → International L series
 * International Harvester Light Line pickup → International Light Line pickup
 * International Harvester R series → International R series
 * International Harvester Metro Van → International Metro Van

Background on corporate name change: In 1985 "International Harvester" sold its money-losing farm equipment division to a different company. They also sold their name and the "IH" logo. The core company renamed itself "Navistar" and continues to build "International®" brand trucks today. "International" brand trucks and the "IHC" name have had no connection since 1986.

The "International" brand name has been used continuously for 106 years and is currently active. The "IHC" name, associated with farm equipment, was changed 34 years ago.

These International Harvester/Navistar documents support "International" brand:

These published secondary sources support "International" brand:

This Ngram supports "International trucks" with an upper-case "I".

This has been discussed at length (parts 2 thru 9)and at Commons before that. The main disagreement is that a minority of editors feel that "International Harvester", the name of the manufacturer, is WP:COMMONNAME for "International", the name of the brand. The only support for this has been WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT.

Brand name or manufacturer's past (historic) name? Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 16:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Contrary to your claims, the opposition has never been WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT. The name of the brand was "International Harvester" (often abbreviated as "International") until 1986 when they were bought by Navistar, and then used only "International" as the brand name. They still held on to this name after selling their tractor division to Case. Also, the nom insisted that I shouldn't reply. Evidently Sammy seems determined to silence any opposition. -User:DanTD (talk) 21:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I specifically notified DanTD of this move request "because you have opposed this move in the past." DanTD says exactly the opposite.
 * DanTD has been asked before to provide a WP:RS for the name of the brand ever being "International Harvester". So far he has not. I address the name changes in my second paragraph, which is strongly sourced. Sammy D III (talk) 22:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I am pinging you to ask you a direct question: do you have any WP:RS that supports the name of the brand ever being "International Harvester"? Sammy D III (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The very items that you insist aren't proof of the brand being "International Harvester." -User:DanTD (talk) 12:55, 9 February 2020 (UTC
 * That answer means nothing. You show no example. Again, "do you have any WP:RS that supports the name of the brand ever being "International Harvester"?" Sammy D III (talk) 13:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Nothing new: same request as the last time, no new arguments, and, sadly, still the same misunderstanding of the real problem. This latter is about people expectations, about how people try to find the articles about these trucks in WP. International Harvester trucks is what a lot of people seek for, when searching for pre-Navistar vehicles, and as such, WP should certainly follow the Principle of least astonishment. -- BarnCas (talk) 21:33, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Google searches for "international harvester truck name" also show "international (without harvester) same truck name". Search engines will work for articles without "harvester": Sammy D III (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * - do I read this as your acknowledging that "International Loadstar" is in fact the correct name, but that the naming is about expectations? If so, that is a step towards an actual conversation that could possibly help clear this up.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  05:03, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I always wonder how people can still trust Google, knowing that this search engine gives different results depending on who is using it... Anyways, search engines and other websites show also that "International Harvester" is still used by a lot of people: 25,000 results just for "International Harvester A Series" (as said by Pinchme123 below), that's the opposite of an insignificant use, for me. And this includes people involved professionally or during their spare time in trucks and other automotive stuff:
 * This list could of course be a lot longer... These persons can't be wiped out by just a "dumb persons, unable to understand the Truth" assertion or any harassment like done here or in previous demands. For me, as a significant proportion of people still use it, WP should keep the "Harvester" part and explain clearly why this might not be the real name.
 * My opinion about the brand being "just International" or "IH" is not the point. As said just above, what is really important is how the information is transmitted and how people receive it. If thousands of persons/pages/sites still use "Harvester", then that's something that we, WP contributors, should consider. As long as it's not taken into account, I can't agree with that change. -- BarnCas (talk) 22:50, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I clicked about half of those links, and if you look closely you will notice that none of them suggest that the vehicles were sold as "International Harvester Scout" (or whichever). They all either refer to the corporation or are trying to get clearer and easier page hits by adding Harvester, a natural decision when writing an eBay ad, for instance. We do not need that. Redirects will take care of sweeping up searches which use "IH" while also allowing us to have correctly named pages and while also ending the spread of a misconception. The blame is really on IH for using a trade name that doesn't work very well on the internet. The only one I think should remain is "Category:International Harvester trucks" in Commons, because changing it may actually become a source of confusion and cause miscategorization. So, in your eyes, does the title given by an eBay seller trump the actual text of the ad they are offering?  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  04:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Your only published source is my fourth "Support" in my published source collapse box. It is about the IH Corporation and does not support "International Harvester" brand in any way. I own the book and can quote it. It does not support your position, which is:
 * Your only published source is my fourth "Support" in my published source collapse box. It is about the IH Corporation and does not support "International Harvester" brand in any way. I own the book and can quote it. It does not support your position, which is:


 * If a person does not know the correct name of a truck the article should have the incorrect name so the person thinks their mistake is correct? Instead of informing them of the correct name Wikipedia should support their ignorance?
 * If you had checked my two links you should know that Google searches including "Harvester" will work for articles without "Harvester":
 * The article should be mis-named to accommodate, instead of inform, the ignorant, at the expense of the majority of readers? That can't be your intent, I am missing something. Why can't the articles have the corrrect name of the brand? Sammy D III (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll assume the lack of a ping was an oversight. You've conveniently ignored that the search results absent "Harvester" are ~34 times those with it. Given that incredible disparity, I'd expect solid RS defending the continued inclusion of "Harvester." Care to provide any? Because so far the first few in your list don't hold up. See Sammy D III's refutation above for one; for YouTube, its search engine allow for exact phrase results, nor does it give a number. I don't think it's appropriate to point, metaphorically shout 'MUCH VIDEOS,' and expect those who are evaluating sources to uncritically accept that. Given this misunderstanding about how YouTube's search engine works, I'm quite skeptical of all the other so-called sources you've provided that rely on search results, such as those from Ebay. And even without these issues, it's pretty hard to take "personal blogs" seriously as RS. --Pinchme123 (talk) 01:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Love you all, but we obviously speak different languages although using seemingly similar words. Please read carefully what I wrote above: no "Google battle" nor RS challenge about the actual name of the brand, for me and, yes, "dubious" because human sources: I just say that some people believe that IH is the real name or prefer using that name. God Google can say that they're ±34 times less numerous than people "who know the truth that can be sourced", this won't change the fact that these persons exist. How are you going to handle them, when they will come to read WP articles? Just call them "stupid and ignorant"? Or try to find a way to help them understand why they don't find what they expected?
 * By the way, I don't understand why you focus on my reaction: it's giving a lot of consideration to a single person's opinion, and ignoring me would be certainly more productive for your "cause" -- BarnCas (talk) 05:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * a) You are the only opposer who seems to read anything I write.
 * b) Redirects will allow the misinformed to easily find the articles. No one is arguing for scrubbing "International Harvester" from the pages; they are after all the guys who built International trucks.
 * c) I do not believe that the majority of those who write "International Harvester" do it because they think that's the name - they do it because the name "International" by itself is entirely meaningless to someone trying to be found on the internet. Wikipedia, however, does not have the same problem as an eBay seller. And even the sources you have provided do not support your point, many of them refer to the brand as International while referring to the manufacturer as IH.
 * d) It is simply and obviously factually incorrect. Since the only reason that remains is that people supposedly expect these articles to have incorrect names, the Google battle obviously gains in importance. Also, see the trademark notices listed below.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  06:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * a) As long as we have a real discussion and as long we do not repeat endlessly the same arguments, I have no reason not to read what you write
 * b & c) Maybe not a majority, but some people really believe that IH is the brand name. You just have to read the arguments of some "opponents" in this page. And I know several persons in at least 2 of the sites I linked that do too. I think that for these people, a mere redirection won't be enough.
 * I don't know how a "smooth" redirection can be done, but as already said, I maintain my opposition to a "brute" one. Keeping in mind that I represent only my personal opinion
 * d) See just above why the reference about a search engine is kind of off-topic, for me: my concern is the minority, not the mainstream -- BarnCas (talk) 21:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The articles will have to have a name (one or the other). Even you state that there is only a minority who believe that the trucks were sold under the non-existent IH brand. Even a majority wouldn't suffice, it would have to be a dominant opinion in order for WP to support having factually incorrect titles. There is no such dominance, as evidenced by everything posted already. If a misinformed reader types in "International Harvester Scout" and is sent to an article titled "International Scout" (and the first sentence reads that it was built by International Harvester), well, I don't think there will be any confusion whatsoever.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  00:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

, since I am nominator I am going answer you out here. After two years of this I do not want your support. I think it would be hypocritical of you.

I plan to show your position simply and clearly. No distractions. Crystal clear. I want anyone in this discussion to see your position and judge it on its merits.

Right now you want to mis-name all these articles and misinform every reader because you maintain that there is a search engine problem that has been shown to not exist. Is that correct?

Who has used the word "stupid"? I use the word "ignorant" to describe the uninformed. Sammy D III (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I can live comfortably even knowing that you don't want my support. Especially since I never wrote that I was giving it to you
 * If you want to understand what I say since the beginning, then please read what I wrote. I don't know how to explain it again without saying the same things again.
 * I apologize, you indeed never said "stupid". As you easily harassed, denigrated or insulted the persons that did not agree with you, I made the mistake of thinking that you were using the word "ignorant" in an offensive meaning. Next time, I'll try not to be misled by a behavior you maybe managed to mitigate since. Have a good day. -- BarnCas (talk) 21:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a good post. The "Support" line came from some corner "change" comment, the best I ever wanted was a strike-through. "If you want...again." is window-dressing, I've been reading you for a long time. Your "harassed" is good. I am doing it right now. I am demanding sources for inaccurate statements.
 * I invited you three here specifically because of your oppose in the past. You had time to read any one of a zillion links. You had a chance to prepare. You chose to come here. I read inaccurate statements with no support and you.
 * I completly missed "ignorant". Un-informed or mis-informed.
 * Yea, my advisor is screaming at me to shut up. You have a nice day/night too. Sammy D III (talk) 23:13, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - no one referred to these as "International Harvester Loadstars" until fairly recently (they have always been International Loadstars, manufactured by International Harvester). Wikipedia helping to cement this misunderstanding is a genuine problem that goes far beyond the name of this truck. I implore DanTD, BarnCas and other editors to please consider the impact WP has, especially when we promote misperceptions such as these, however minor.


 * Google searches are massively affected by Wikipedia and the fact that the internet is changing history does not mean we have to accelerate the process. Online sources are sort of forced to add the "Harvester" portion, as a search for "International truck" tends to provide rather vague results. Expectations cannot truly be more important than actual, verifiable, cited historical facts. I simply cannot comprehend how the list of period sources (and Sammy have provided an ample list of reliable sources from many decades) can simply be ignored. I, too, have an extensive library and will be happy to dig up more if it would make a difference.


 * As a side note, I originally named at least one of these articles "International Harvester Light Line pickup" and I admit that I originally thought this correct. In 2017 I was writing in opposition of the original move request but got to looking at old advertisements and realized that my supposition was indeed wrong. I changed my edit accordingly. It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  05:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose for same reasons as stated above. This is the same topic that was discussed previously. Do as you are by creating the redirects for the naming you feel is appropriate and then the Wiki World will have both. This is not a necessary change as the manufacturer name is historically still the same. Time to move on to another project I would say... Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * has been asked before to provide a WP:RS for the name of the brand ever being "International Harvester". So far he has not. I address the name changes in my second paragraph, which is strongly sourced. Sammy D III (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I am pinging you to ask you a direct question: do you have any WP:RS that supports the name of the brand ever being "International Harvester"? Sammy D III (talk) 12:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. The references Sammy provides give a clear indication that "International", sans Harvester, is the recognized and common name for the trucks as branded post-1914. On these trucks "International" alone is spelled out, with no indication of "Harvester" (apart from the H in the "IH" logo if present). Anecdotally and colloquially, I find most people saying/typing "International Loadstar" or "IH Loadstar". We would not title an article "Ford Motor Company F-Series" because of the full name of the manufacturer - it's titled "Ford F-Series" because "Ford" is the how the vehicle is branded. I agree with the points Mr. Choppers makes above as well. --Sable232 (talk) 00:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support for two reasons. First, I'm a big proponent of following naming conventions as provided by those that have invented/created/manufactured things, unless there's compelling evidence to ignore them. It's plainly obvious from the sources provided that International Harvester Company has been naming these things "International" without the word "Harvester" for more than a century, even after renaming the company itself. Second, with respect to Google search results, comparing exact phrase searches for "International A Series" and "International Harvester A Series", for example, returns 827,000 and 25,000 results, respectively. Repeating this for the others returns this similar disparity - with higher result numbers without "Harvester" - for all but the Fleetstar and the Light Line Pickup. It seems even Google results indicate that these are more commonly referred to without "Harvester" in the title. Absent RS showing these as having been referred to as "International Harvester"s with at least as much frequency as the currently-provided sources show for the absence of "Harvester," I don't see how we could come to any other conclusion. --Pinchme123 (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. While the IH LOGO continued to be used, the correct registered trademark for the truck brand since 1907 has been "International". (See USPTO Word Mark INTERNATIONAL Goods and Services IC 012. US 019. G & S: AUTOMOBILES AND MOTOR TRUCKS AND STRUCTURAL PARTS THEREOF. FIRST USE: 19070000. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19070000, Serial Number 71293807, Filing Date December 9, 1929) This can easily be confirmed by the vintage marketing materials available from collectors on Ebay. https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/CZ4AAOSwHWtb00qm/s-l1600.jpg The use of "Harvester" in the brand or model name for the trucks themselves is factually incorrect. Sedimentary (talk) 20:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * nice sleuthing; I ought to have thought of that long ago.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  04:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * For goodness sake. How can this be a discussion? The brand has ALWAYS been International Trucks. Since 1907 for goodness sake. As it remains today https://www.internationaltrucks.com/ With a (R). Anything else is just perpetuating an error. Using IH would be like using Chevy as the proper title for an article about Chevrolet. Sedimentary (talk) 04:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Neutral While the proponents for renaming/moving the articles have made a good case (I have no reason to disagree with it), there is a little something that still sticks in my head. Under WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, the renaming fits all five characteristics, but the current titles have an advantage in terms of disambiguation (WP:PRECISION); while admittedly longer, there is less room for interpretation (WP:NATURALDIS).  I do agree with the example of Ford articles not titled as Ford Motor Company xxx, but this stems from the word "International" having multiple meanings (some, wider in scope) besides a company brand name.  --SteveCof00 (talk) 05:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think disambiguation is indeed needed in a few cases and support it there, such as Commons:Category:International Harvester trucks for instance. BUT, I still believe that unless there is a compelling need for disambiguation then they should be named correctly.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  01:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that using a "®" symbol, "International® Loadstar", looks clearer, but I have never seen it done anywhere. Just throwing it out there if anyone cares.
 * Edit in: Ya' know, "Navistar" Internationals work, don't they? Sammy D III (talk) 15:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - omit Harvester from the name - obvious that it needs to be moved per Google Trend:, , . Atsme Talk 📧 21:02, 13 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.