Talk:Magna International

Fair use rationale for Image:Magnalogo.gif
Image:Magnalogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Canadian vs. Canadian-Austrian/Austrian-Canadian
I have reverted this portion of the article once again back to the language used before this very slow-moving edit war began. There is clear disagreement here whether the company is properly described as being Canadian or being Canadian-Austrian (or vice versa). This needs to be worked out here on the talk page before any further changes are made, and this portion of the article needs to be left alone until it's worked out. An open question to anyone who feels the description of the company is best changed to Canadian-Austrian — are you able to provide any reliable sources that refer to the company in this manner? Inferring it because controlling interest is held by Magna Holding AG, which is based in Austria, isn't good enough, not least of which because I'm not confident that's even true. We need actual reliable sources, per Wikipedia's policies on the subject, that refer to the company as other than Canadian. If you're able to identify those sources, please list them here so that everyone can review them and they can be used to help inform this discussion. Mlaffs (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, it hasn't been demonstrated that this is a Canadian-Austrian company rather than just a Canadian one. Whoever keeps changing it to say it is needs to provide reliable sources.  TastyCakes (talk) 17:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Many sources refer to Magna International as a Canadian-Austrian company: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbthedarb (talk • contribs) 09:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * http://ca.news.finance.yahoo.com/s/08052009/6/finance-magna-plans-euro-russian-car-giant-opel-paper.html
 * http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/may2009/gb20090529_582381.htm
 * http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,626662,00.html
 * http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/05/29/gm-to-get-a-bailout-from-magna/
 * http://www.mediargus.be/flanderstoday.admin.en/rss/22002587.html?via=rss&language=en


 * Those are all very interesting. Equally interesting is the fact that the Macleans piece is sourced to this New York Times article, which refers to the company as simply Canadian. I'll take a look and see what other sources say, and also see if these sources provided above have been consistent in how they refer to the company over time. Then we can try to come to a consensus as to what the balance of sourcing suggests would be appropriate here. Nice work! Mlaffs (talk) 14:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the article intro should refer to Magna as "an international company, with headquarters in Aurora, Canada" or "based in Aurora, Canada". I think using the terms Austrian or Canadian invokes a bit of nationalist pride. Simply stating the location of the headquarters might be a better option in the case of businesses, such as Magna, that have operations around the globe. --NormanEinstein (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm yes that would probable be best, this seems to be how it's dealt with in articles like McDonalds and IBM. TastyCakes (talk) 15:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

how does the opel 27.5 % stake affect magnas revenue
would it add a quarter of opels revenue to magnas ? will opel be listed as a separate company on fortune 2000 lists ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grmike (talk • contribs) 00:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

When this settles down, someone who can write should fix the whole opel thing :/ http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE5A25RL20091104 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.42.179 (talk) 15:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

what does 'Austrian born Stronach' have to do with anything
for research in motion does it say Turkish born Lazaridis ? does MGM associate itself with Russia because Louis B. Maher was from there ? the company isn't listed on any Austrian exchange stock market, it was started in Canada, headquartered in Canada the whole time since its inception until it made the fortune 2000 list. fortune 2000 list says it's Canadian. the people who are set to inherit the company are Canadian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grmike (talk • contribs) 17:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

You're doing it wrong, Magna
If you're going to edit your Wikipedia page, you might as well write it like an encyclopedia article, not a brochure.

"Magna is the most diversified global automotive supplier. We design, develop and manufacture technologically advanced automotive systems, assemblies, modules and components, and engineer and assemble complete vehicles, primarily for sale to original equipment manufacturers ("OEMs") of cars and light trucks. Our capabilities include the design, engineering, testing and manufacture of automotive interior systems; seating systems; closure systems; body and chassis systems; vision systems; electronic systems; exterior systems; powertrain systems; roof systems; hybrid and electric vehicles/systems; as well as complete vehicle engineering and assembly."

-A.Roz (talk) 03:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Or, it could be a novice user who thinks it's OK to copy from a company brochure. Unless you present some sort of proof that someone connected to Magna is adding the material when you make such accusations, it's better not to make those accusations at all. Just fix the problems. - BilCat (talk) 03:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose, but I'm a straight-shooter. Now, you can see what was really happening. A.Roz (talk) 02:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I assume you're referring User:Tfuerst13'edits in this diff with the edit summary "Changes have been made by Magna International to accurately communicate public corporate information". It's better to give such proof up front. I'm going to revert to the version of the article before that user made his/her changes, and we can try to improve it from that point on. Per this page on the company website, much of the added info is copyrighted, and thus cannont be used on WP without being rewritten, and the sources credited. - BilCat (talk) 03:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've attemptetd to reconcile the pre-User:Tfuerst13-version of the page with the most recent versions. I've removed some info better covered on Magna's cite, such as the Corproate governace section. None of those people have WP articles as far as I can tell, and so aren't really worth noting here.

I've restored the section on the attempted purchase of GM Europe, as this is hisotry, and should be mentioned. The section should be trimmed to a basic history of what happened, with relevant citations, but their's no valid reason to excise it completely. I can try to do that later, but I'm a bit tired now.

I've also restored the Political connections section that Tfuerst13 removed without comment - twice! This section appears to be the major reasons for Tfuerst13's edits. However, the section is uncited, but it should be given the usual 2-4 weeks for sources to be found. - BilCat (talk) 04:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Greetings -- Tfuerst13 and myself (Sworden413) work for Magna International, in fact we are the corporate communications department and are responsible for managing this Wikipedia page -- we are new to the process and are not familiar with all of the Wiki-nuances -- our primary objective is to present accurate, consistent information for those who come here to learn about Magna. I'm struggling right now to learn how to provide citations where they have been requested. In most cases (such as financial info, employee totals, # of facilities worldwide, etc.) we are drawing the information directly from company news releases, not Yahoo Finance or some other third-party source. Sworden413 (talk) 19:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)