Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trucks/Archive 1

Light trucks
Should the project include light trucks? To me, it looks like pickup trucks are already covered by Project Automobiles, but on the other hand there are a lot of other types of light trucks that won't fit under automobiles. Rotten Stone 15:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In Denmark (and most of Europe, I assume) anything legally exceeding 3500 kg total weight is a truck, but maybe it should be a job only getting attention when those over ?? 6 tonnes ?? 7,5 tonnes ?? are looking like a real systematic setup? Some degree of crosslinking might be OK to begin with, like "for XX models, please see XXautomobile article" or something? G®iffen 17:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think we need to be too rigid. The project is going to be a support resource to editors. Sometimes people ask questions at Project Autos and are told "sorry we can't help". This doesn't do any harm. If similar questions are asked here, we'll either be able to help, or not. I suspect the 3500kg point will in practice be pretty useful, but there are some anomalies out there (very light weight box vans or very heavy 4x4 off-roaders) and we'll have some vehicles whose ranges overlap. Perhaps "is it based on a car?" is a more useful test. – Kieran T  (' talk ') 17:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: The Iveco Turbo Daily comes in a 3,5 and a 4,6? Tonne version. The difference, I was told, is one extra layer of suspension springs.


 * Yeah, a lot of trucks have a basic chassis which supports lots of weights. 2.5 to 4.5 tonnes is not unusual, and I'd certainly want to support the lighter ones if they were true commercial vehicles. The debatable one for me are those which are just people-carriers or Land Rovers with the back windows blanked out. (Though I'd still tend to want to support those, on balance.) – Kieran T  (' talk ') 18:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. Generally speaking light trucks are in, but we focus on commercial vehicles? Rotten Stone 21:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd say so; I think it's how most people understand the term. – Kieran T  (' talk ') 21:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

In some languages (particularly Slavic), a "truck" (or, in some countries the French "camion" is used), generally refers to a commercial vehicle that has a chassis. An Iveco Daily 45C11 (I've been driving it for about a year) is rated for 4.5 tonnes which technically requires CDL according to European classification. However, it is in no way a truck, it's a van. Also, there's the Mercedes-Benz 811, which has a GVW of 8 tonnes, but is still a van. They're both self-carrying, so they are not accepted as trucks. BTW, there is a C1 category in the EU which is for vehicles between 3500 and 8000 kgs (light trucks or heavy vans). However, some countries only accept C category - that is, either you're a professional, or you're not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lasombra bg (talk • contribs) 20:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Superheavy trucks
How much attention should supersized, superheavy off-the-roads trucks have to begin with? G®iffen 17:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Layout and structure
I think it would be a good thing if we could write down some guidelines about what a decent article about a truck model or a truck manufacturer should look like. I'm just talking about some simple suggestions about what kind of information an article should include and how that information should be presented. Rotten Stone 19:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox
In my opinion template:Infobox Company should be used at company articles. Template:Infobox Automobile is not good enough for trucks, since fuel capacity, and measures vary from one vehicle to another. The box should also have a line for submodels, like Volvo FH has FH12 and FH16. G®iffen 14:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds OK to me. Infobox Company is good. But as you say, Infobox Automobile have to be modified. I think we also should add things like; type of cab, drivetrain, axles, brakes and so on. Rotten Stone 21:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Should suspension be at its own line? Or does it go with axles? G®iffen 16:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Does there have to be such things as drivetrain, suspension etc. on the in truck infobox? I'd say that they are in more appropriate place in the article covering that model as there is such vast amount of different chassis configurations for example that infobox would grow quite huge. It would also be very difficult to make it complete. In article Scania 4-series for example there would be at least 9 different cab options alone which sound way too much for an infobox. Tepoo 18:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with idea of giving some clue about different submodels like FH12 and FH16 on infoboxes, what about different revisions all sharing same name? I mean that as there in practice is three different series all carrying name Volvo FH should they be all be covered in same infobox or in three separate box in same article. Personally I'd prefer the latter. Tepoo 18:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Truck manufacturer
Here are my thoughts: Comments? Rotten Stone 19:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Short presentation (Name, Country, Owner, Size, Types of products, Fate)
 * History (Founded where and when by whom) (General development with merges and splits) (Milestone innovations and products)
 * Present models (List of models or families of models)
 * Historical models (List of models or families of models, decade by decade)
 * Subsidiaries (List of major subsidiaries including type of products)
 * Main production facilities (Location, Size, Type of products)


 * Just to be sure: "present models" I assume to be models still on sale from the factory?
 * "Subsidiaries" might be "Subsidiaries and joint ventures"? Like the former MAN AG / Volkswagen joint venture in Europe and the existing Scania / Hino in Asia. I think it fits beter here than under "Production facilities" G®iffen 10:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree! Rotten Stone 21:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Truck model
How about this? Rotten Stone 19:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Short presentation (Type, Segment, Year of introduction)
 * History (Development, Designed to meet what demand, Introduction)
 * Engine and powertrain
 * Usage (Who used it, How was it used)
 * Production (When, Where, How many)

Comments:

Much of the presentation could/would probably be included in an infobox in the side. My thoughts are that an intro should not be much more than XX47 was built by XX-Thai from 1967-1971 to meet the demands for medium weight trucks in Thailand. I hope this measurement is similar to yours? I'm not good at creating infoboxes, but would anyone like to give a suggestion? As Rotten and I discussed at my talk page#Trucks, I like the setup of Morris Motor Company and Morris Minor and would like to set those as what I call "basic minimum" for the design of the articles for producers and models. I agree that some headlines must be changed and extra added, but personally I'd say "it's not finished before it meets at least this standard". So far I haven't searched the truck models to see if any are described in a similar way to serve as better examples. G®iffen 10:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Trailers and construction for different transport types
At different takls of trailers, semi's, dollys etc. there are ongoing discussions about where to write what and how to redirect and so on. Would this also be included in this project? I assume most trailers are pulled by trucks or buses anyway... Also, trailers are built mostly the same way as trucks, so for a project branch about "how to build a truck", trucks and trailers would probably be similar. G®iffen 10:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * As far as I can see, we should be able to squeeze trailers, semi-trailers and such into the project. Rotten Stone 21:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Article test / test article
I've created Scania 4-series to see how right or wrong I am compared to your ideas. Since there is not yet an infobox for models, I didn't put any in the article. It's still a stub due to my lack of knowledge, but I thought maybe we should set this up as the "example to follow"? Let me hera your opinions... --G®iffen 17:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I made few additions to that article and as comments were asked I'll put some points here which I think should be covered in lorry articles.
 * There should be year of introduction and for consistency also year when production stopped unless still in production.
 * I'd think predecessor and successor should be mentioned somewhere in article definition until we see what will be on infoboxes.
 * Some kind of "What's new" section could be nice although not under that name. In this particular article some valid points would be totally renewed exterior cab design and bringing high cab (Topline) into production when comparing to 3-series.
 * Some basic info about different choices available. In engines and cabs for example there could be mentions about engine development, like increasing displacement volume of V8-engine by two litres, and three different basic cab types (P, R and T cabs).
 * I think that it's also important to prevent article from becoming just an list where every different engine choice is only mentioned without any smooth connection to other text in article. Example of this kind of article could be Volvo where are long listings of achievements and models but there's very little text keeping it all together. Tepoo 19:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Steam vehicles?
Greetings from 'nearly-project: Steam technology' (well, it's just me, really, at the moment. Most self-respecting steam-buffs are far too busy with the real stuff to spend time editing here!)

I notice that the content of Category:Steam road vehicles has been added to your project. Whilst I welcome any assistance with these articles, I cannot see how the bulk of them relate to your project. I leave it to you to decide whether any should be removed again!

On a related matter, any information regarding the history of steam wagons (steam lorries) in the US, and elsewhere outside the UK, would be useful, as my references are essentially British in scope. Currently such information is gathering in a section under traction engine, although I am hoping to expand it into an article in its own right later this year.

Cheers! EdJogg (talk) 14:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Truck as moving art
Hi to every one out here.Today I stopped when i looked this on Community portal.I got an idea.In Pakistan and India ,I had seen the outer lay out of trucks which were aesthethically designed by some artists.Those trucks are considered as moving art there. I wanna write on that issue.But what the use of it on this project.cheers,-- Mike robert ,
 * Before doing anything else, make sure there's not already an article on WP about such trucks. After that, try to find some sources that relate to the phenomenon - searching for something like "art trucks" or similar on Google or your favorite search engine is step one. Making sure those sources are of good quality is step two. Writing the article - even if it's just a rough draft or a stub (as we call it) - is step three. If you have photos, be sure to upload them to Wikimedia Commons for use in the article if they're good quality. Other than that, good luck and let us know if there's anything else we can help out with. Duncan1800 (talk) 12:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response. Here is the article Trucks in Pakistan. It was a little effort rather a pinch of enjoyment, editing it. If I've done something really wrong , please do tell me. Any suggestions or comments will be welcomed.--Mike robert (talk) 17:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Australian equipment etc.
I feel that perhaps some page devoted to the nuances of trucking in australia should be created. I work in the Australian trucking industry currently, and the only place even close to here that I know of is South Africa. I work at a Western Star delaership and we sell a lot more models than those listed currently etc. Whitfan (talk) 00:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Trucks: Articles of unclear notability
Hello,

there are currently 55 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 2008-03-12 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Traction engine assessment
While I think that the link between Traction engines and the Trucks wikiproject is a little tenuous, I have no problem with this project tagging the article. However, someone has attempted to add some assessment comments to the Trucks project box on the article's talk page, and has got something wrong: the link displayed is inaccessible. The comment is as follows:
 * "This is a great article, but there are lots of spelling mistakes! This should go under trucks like proposed, because the traction engine probably were the first ancestors of big rigs!"

I was not aware of any spelling mistakes, although there may be some UK/US spelling differences (not the same thing!), and I do not understand what "This should go under trucks like proposed" is supposed to mean!

Could someone who understands such things please check the project banner and work out what's gone wrong please?

[Update] - I think it's a problem with the banner encoding. Other pages in Category:Trucks articles with comments have similar problems.

[Update 2] - Definitely an issue with the banner template - it cannot handle titles with spaces, and hence it is obviously not parsing article names into URLs correctly. This is evident from the fact that the comments section on Talk:Isuzu (mostly) works. With the assistance of that page and 'what links here' for Traction Engine, I have been able to apply a temporary link to the comments box until your banner issues are resolved. Incidentally, it might be good to include a 'hide' facility, because if users add lots of comments, the talk page will grow excessively long. Over to you! Cheers.

EdJogg (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Problem resolved, the link to the comments page works now... spaces and all. I will see what I can do about adding a "hide" function. I dunno what you did to the Traction Engine talk page but you can undo it now because it should work. Thanks! --ErgoSum88 (talk) 09:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * 'what I did' was simply to modify Talk:Traction engine/Comments to include an 'edit' link at the top. I've left it there for the moment...
 * The banner is certainly improved, it now shows the links 'edit - history - watch - refresh' correctly. However, the links themselves are still not working. I am seeing an error icon in the bottom left of my browser screen (IE7). Closer inspection of the generated URL shown in the 'tooltip' suggests that the URL is omitting '/wiki/' from the middle, and hence cannot be parsed correctly. The same problem exists on the Isuzu page. (Can't remember whether it actually worked before you did this most recent change, sorry.) I had a quick look at the template, but I do not use the template parser functions often enough to see what's wrong. Good luck!
 * EdJogg (talk) 13:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Whew, ok... NOW it works. I got a little ahead of myself last time I "fixed" it and didn't really check everything. This time, I checked the links and they should all work. Now if I can just figure out how to hide the comments. I'm actually learning this stuff as I go along, but it really isn't that complicated. Let me know if you find any more problems! --ErgoSum88 (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Update: Now the comments will be hidden inside a collapsible table whenever comments are added to articles so they wont take up half the page. Everything should be in working order, and as always.... if I screwed something up, let me know. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 02:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * All working now, and the 'hide' functionality is v. useful. Only comment: 'refresh' is not recognised by WP in the URL (ie that link does not work properly, however, the others do now.) - EdJogg (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah "refresh" should have been "purge", it seems whoever created this template wasn't very thorough... or, things have changed since it was created. Either way, its fixed now, and thanks to these errors I know a lot more about parser functions. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

New Featured Article
If I may take a moment to brag, Project Trucks has its second featured article, Hours of service. Also Trucking industry in the United States and Federal Bridge Gross Weight Formula recently passed GA review and I will be submitting them for FA review at a later time. So please, stop by and let me know what you think and point out any mistakes that might've slipped past all other editors. I am running out of subjects, so if anyone wants help with truck-related articles (preferably US-based but I'm willing to do what I can for world-wide topics) just let me know. Happy editing! --ErgoSum88 (talk) 03:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
 * The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
 * The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
 * A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot  ( Disable )  21:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: I have updated the project template to accept the new assessment class "C" parameter. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup
Currently, 632 articles are assigned to this project, of which 202, or 32.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 2008-07-14.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Trucks
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Leyland
I came across a Leyland truck at the Museum of the Riverina but I'm unsure what model it is and if it was indeed built in 1928 as I feel it's earlier then that (Around 1912 - 1920). A small information plaque said that this truck was constructed in 1928 but I feel that it's incorrect. Bidgee (talk) 02:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hopefully an expert will come along to give you a more definite answer, but I'd just point out two things: on the one hand, the sign does say "C 1928", presumably meaning "circa", and thus that they don't know for sure! On the other hand, trucks do sometimes lag a considerable way behind car design. If your doubts are because of the wheels and suspension, it may simply be that the hard work this truck was originally intended for didn't justify "modern" conveniences? – Kieran T  (' talk ') 02:29, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Problem is C. can mean two things (circa and constructed). Why I think it's earlier is that the older models didn't have the air vents like the 1912 version which seems to look almost like the one I photographed. Bidgee (talk) 03:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

English name for a Truck-Bus hybrid
How do you call in English a truck that carries a "passanger container"? The truck pictured is a Polish military "Osinobus" ( called after the Osiny company that made them) on a Star 29 truck chassis. Such vehicles used to be common in communist block countries and in developing countries now they are very rare. Mieciu K (talk) 16:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Were they used for fare-paying passengers? I'm not aware of such things being built/used in the UK, although British Rail used something similar for transporting track maintenance crews to work sites (in which case they might be called 'personnel carriers'.
 * If you look at steam bus, you will see a picture of a similar beast based on a steam wagon chassis. I'm not sure how common these were. Purpose-built buses were the norm in the UK pretty much from the beginning.
 * EdJogg (talk) 02:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think they have been used by fare-paying passangers (during the commnist times Poland produced Jelcz and Autosan buses), I have heard only of "Osinobuses" being used by the military, the Communist Police (or to be precise the anti-riot ZOMO), as school buses and by state owned companies on short routes for employees. A communist economy is said to be an ecconomy of permanent shortages, this was a means of countering the shortage of buses. Mieciu K (talk) 02:37, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

In canada and the US, These are called cutaway buses and they are used for fare-paying passengersin the US and Canada.Orsd (talk) 02:26, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Fatigue
There's discussion on here that may be of interest, in connection with trucking & driving. Comment is welcomed. TREKphiler  hit me ♠  21:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; Delievered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Hydraulic hooklift hoist
Hey all, I thought I might bring the article on hydraulic hooklift hoist to your attention. Just looking at it gives me a headache, and I'm so unfamiliar with the field that I really don't know how to help the article. Sorry if WP Trucks isn't the right place; I only came here because there's a trucks project banner on the talk page. Otherwise I'm not sure where to ask for help on this. Thanks! &mdash;/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the  parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:47, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

FAC candidate
I'm going to check out this article alerts thing and make sure we are signed up for it. Meanwhile, one of WP Trucks article's is up for Featured Article Candidate (nominated by me). Any comments would be welcome as there are very few reviewers so far. Just check out Featured article candidates/Federal Bridge Gross Weight Formula and as always, happy editing. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Ford
FYI, Ford Motor Company → Ford - a WP:RM rename request has been filed. The discussion is occuring at Talk:Ford Motor Company. As Ford is a company that is related to your wikiproject, this is an informative notice. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 06:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

FL nom
Glossary of trucking industry terms in the United States has been nominated for Featured list (discussion here). -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  23:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting-looking mystery vehicle
Anyone know what it is (or really anything about it)? If so, please add to its page on Commons. - Jmabel | Talk 20:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It looks like a gas (LPG) -powered fork-lift truck to me -- note the blue bottle of gas on the 'bonnet'. I would guess 1970s vintage, maybe, but I'm no expert on these things (so I haven't modified the Commons page).
 * EdJogg (talk) 12:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 04:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

When are there "enough" fields in the infobox
I casually happened on the Green Goddess article. (I had an 'affair' with one as a young army lieutenant 35 years ago :LoL:.) I noticed on the talk page that it has been flagged by an IP editor with the  caveat. Yes the infobox has missing fields but it also seems to me to be adequately complete for a vehicle where the notability is entirely historical. I was going to remove it, but I thought that I'd better just check here first just in case you've a clear project policy that I would be cutting across. -- TerryE (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Your gut feeling here is pretty good. The anon poster should have identified the fault rather than just apply a banner. I have added a thread indicating the main missing information (height, width, length, weight and wheelbase). -- EdJogg (talk) 01:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Tachograph
I've just read the Tachograph article and it needs a lot of improvement - more referencing, copyedting, expansion, globalising, etc. I don't know if the subject fits with your wikiproject or not (the article is currently unadopted by any project), but it might do. Thryduulf (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Engines
North American highway trucks get less and less fitted with third party engines. The only remaining independent and engine-only manufacturer is Cummins. Actually you can get every class 8 highway truck with a Cummins ISX15, Volvo included. CAT has closed down its North American on-highway engine business because of the EPA 2010 emissions regulations [9, 10] - and cleaned up the whole internet from the related press release. Detroit Diesel Company (DDC) is also a subsidiary of Daimler since 2000 [1] producing for Freightliner and Western Star [2,3] also the MBE 4000 engine. Sterling has been closed down meanwhile [8]. Volvo and its subsidiary Mack Trucks have 3 Volvo engines at their disposal (D16, D13, D11 = MP10, MP8, MP7 [4,5]). Navistar International founded its subsidiary Maxxforce, whose 10.5 L and 12.6 L blocks were licensed by MAN, the 15 L block, available since 2010, by CAT [6]. Since June 2010 also Paccar (Kenworth, Peterbilt and DAF) offers its own engine PACCAR MX 12.9 L [7] engineered by DAF.

[1] http://www.detroitdiesel.com/about/history.aspx [2] http://www.freightlinertrucks.com/trucks/featured-components/engines.aspx [3] http://www.westernstartrucks.com/Components/ [4] http://www.volvotrucks.com/trucks/na/en-us/products/engines/Pages/pt.aspx [5] http://www.macktrucks.com/default.aspx?pageid=1359 [6] http://maxxforce.com/Application/on-highway [7] http://www.paccar.com/NewsReleases/article_news.asp?file=2571 [8] http://www.sterlingtrucks.com/Letter.asp [9] http://www.ccjdigital.com/cats-out-of-the-bag/ [10]http://fleetowner.com/management/number_crunching_cat_deal_0613/ 87.172.105.201 (talk) 17:17, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

White Motor Cars vs. Stanley Steamers
I notice that the Wikipedia article on White Motor Cars claims that their steam car was the first vehicle ever to be made an official presidential limousine - as a steam powered car. But the article on Stanley Steamer also suggests that the Stanley Steamer was the first presidential vehicle. Both Vehicles were used by the National Park System during the same period, but I am not clear on which one was actually the official Presidential Vehicle. Is there a connection between the two companies? I have a few photos of the White Motor Vehicle beautifully restored and in operation at Yellowstone National Park - Beautiful Truck!! User: Thomas Knapp - thomas@trknapparchitects.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.60.85 (talk) 23:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Presidential State Car (United States) suggests that the very first car was a white Stanley, followed by a White. Plenty of scope for confusion there! That page, and the White's, both include references, but the Stanley page doesn't mention it (yet). -- EdJogg (talk) 12:26, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Portal ?
Hello, User:Kerem 233 is it new creation ; Portal:Trucks to be useful ? I have french version to page fr:Portail:Camion Is my creator. you welcome. --FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 08:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Trucks articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Trucks articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:45, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

how to program e the control board to the key
please i want to ask about how to program e the key to the control board on actros without machine  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.218.246.90 (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Tracked vehicle up for deletion
FYI, Tracked vehicle has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.202.72 (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Trucks
Portal:Trucks has been nominated for deletion. 65.94.47.63 (talk) 05:27, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I was hoping to see a consensus for a concept invented and started by the Fast4wrd team. The national campaign to make Fast4wrd a household name is started but I need all reviewing this article to promote and email everyone of my concept. Conveying through their Facebook and world wide web clients by acknowledging our name, Fast4wrd, Fast4wrd Towing & Recovery. This is something by emailing everyone I like to go Viral. By starting this campaign nationwide then internationally. The Fast4wrd concept is making money 24 hours a day instead of averaging 8 hour business day. The most basic start is simple, connecting Fast4rwd out there. Fast4wrd will allow all households to be covered for Towing very inexpensively. For only a few dollar fee per month Fast4wrd can provide with their Cable Company, three Hundred and Sixty Five Days a year. Imagine peace of mind allowing all household car owners to be covered. The distance 1 mile or 3000 miles. Spread the Word Fast4wrd starting now. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.101.111 (talk) 07:53, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Towing Vision for Fast4wrd
I was hoping to see a consensus for a concept invented and started by the Fast4wrd team. The national campaign to make Fast4wrd a household name is started but I need all reviewing this article to promote and email everyone of my concept. Conveying through their Facebook and world wide web clients by acknowledging our name, Fast4wrd, Fast4wrd Towing & Recovery. This is something by emailing everyone I like to go Viral. By starting this campaign nationwide then internationally. The Fast4wrd concept is making money 24 hours a day instead of averaging 8 hour business day. The most basic start is simple, connecting Fast4rwd out there. Fast4wrd will allow all households to be covered for Towing very inexpensively. For only a few dollar fee per month Fast4wrd can provide with their Cable Company, three Hundred and Sixty Five Days a year. Imagine peace of mind allowing all household car owners to be covered. The distance 1 mile or 3000 miles. Spread the Word Fast4wrd starting now. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.101.111 (talk) 08:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

An Award for the WikiProject
Hello everybody! You can see this award here



I hope you like it :)

See you next, --82.245.33.232 (talk) 09:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Clarification added to the main article June 2012, Why?
From the Artice page:

"The steer axle(s) and the drive axle(s)."

What exactly needs to be clarified? Seems self explanatory to me. Steer axle points the truck, drive axle provides the power.

Is someone really serious about this? Think of a car. In FWD the steer and drive axle is the same. In a RWD the front axle is a steer and the rear is a drive...

Duh...

Truck "bogies"
I made a question about the truck "bogies" here: Talk:Bogie. Maybe someone of you could help me at finding the correct term in English? --Gwafton (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Vanajan Autotehdas
Hi. I have built little by little an article about the former heavy vehicle producer Vanajan Autotehdas. It was a small company and I believe I have got the most relevant printed and usable sources about it. Any suggestions how to develop it further? --Gwafton (talk) 23:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That is very good. Most articles about small/old manufacturers are just a basic little list of products - but Vanajan Autotehdas is a genuinely nice article and it covers the topic from different angles (historical background, relationships with other manufacturers, &c). It would benefit from a little copyediting, but there's nothing significant missing, I think. It's difficult to suggest any improvements! bobrayner (talk) 02:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback and editing (as you can see, English is not my native language). I might add something about the factory (production facilities) and also the lifting tandem system if I find more info about it. The model nomenclature section seems to be incomplete - the system is very complex and I might not include all the details in the article.


 * Then I think there will be enough of text about a such small producer.


 * In the future I would like to write articles about the models as well if I had enough of reliable sources. I have tried to make one about | the first model (New link) but unfortunately some key info is missing. --Gwafton (talk) 07:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have developed the article a bit further. Now I really don't know any missing element. I have been writing for it for too long to be able to see if the text is understandable. Would someone, who knows about heavy vehicles, but has never heard about Vanajan Autotehdas, go the text through and tell me if there are unclear sections which need more (or better) explanation? Gwafton (talk) 22:06, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I will review it.
 * Is it possible to get different images? Obviously, photographers tend to focus on the complete finished product (a truck, a bus &c), and the photos of the production line are good too, but is it possible to find other kinds of images? Photos of parts, perhaps a poster/advert/brochure, maybe a diagram of their famous axles...? bobrayner (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi bobrayner and sorry about missing your reply. Maybe I can find some brochures. I have a book where is a schematic drawing of the lifting tandem mechanism but I should find out more info about the copyright. Unfortunately, there are no more photos about Vanaja's in vintage truck meetings - would be good to have some colour photos about restored vehicles.


 * How about the content and coverage of the article, is it sufficient? Is the language understandable? --Gwafton (talk) 12:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The content & coverage is excellent - far better than anything I could write, and it avoids many common problems of "business" articles. Very impressive.
 * The language is understandable, but there are a few minor problems with grammar & punctuation. I will fix some when I have spare time.
 * Thanks for all your hard work! bobrayner (talk) 18:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * My comment comes a bit late. Thank you for the grammatical help. By the way, the article is now in peer review, hope to get it onto the front page one day. --Gwafton (talk) 20:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

As some of you may have noted, Vanajan Autotehdas is now in FA review (link). It hasn't got any attention so far and I would appreciate your feedback and improvement ideas. --Gwafton (talk) 19:52, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Traffic Motor Truck Corporation
I am having difficulty getting an article about the Corporaiton passed the AFC stage. Can any of you assist? The issue seems to be that the editor wants verifiable sources. Apparently these do not include the New York Times. For the debate see User_talk:Techatology and the article link is Articles for creation/Traffic Motor Truck Corporation NealeFamily (talk) 03:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Issue was sorted - my thanks to who helped. NealeFamily (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Diesel exhaust
The scope of Diesel exhaust is under discussion, see talk:Diesel exhaust -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 05:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Sterling Trucks
It looks like the Sterling Trucks article really needs work, or we need a second article and a disambiguation. All it says about the historical truck company of this name is "The Sterling name was originally used by an independent truck manufacturer, bought by the White Motor Co. ca. 1953". Given that the company had a decades-long history, that's quite an understatement. Not my area, but someone here should probably pick this up. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 06:58, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think a disambiguation is necessary, but more of the pre-1953 history should be added to the article, including that image of the 1926 Sterling you've got there. -User:DanTD (talk) 22:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Category:Trucks by year
Hi, does it makes sence to start at commons with a Commons:Category:Trucks by year similar to Commons:Category:Automobiles by year?


 * For a reply please follow the talk under → Commons:Category talk:Trucks by year . Thx a lot. --W like wiki (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

The name of the article is under discussion, see Talk:Driver's license for the renaming request. -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 04:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Mystery military truck
In 2011 the State Library of Queensland donated 50,000 photos to Wikimedia Commons, including this one. There was a request to categorise them, but many have still not been properly categorised.

I have just categorised all the Blue Star Line ship photos I can find, including this one taken aboard MV Empire Star (1935) in the fall of Singapore in February 1942. Empire Star evacuated over 2,000 British and Empire personnel, plus a lot of RAF equipment. But despite searching many Commons images of 1930s and 40s trucks I have failed to indentify the truck whose front is in the foreground of this photo. Please will a contributor with a sharp eye for detail help to do so, so that the photo can be fully categorised?

Best wishes, Motacilla (talk) 13:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * That'll be a Ford from about 1940-1941 ish, although I wouldn't want to venture into the sea of model numbers. bobrayner (talk) 23:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * 1941 Ford One Ton. Check here. Eddaido (talk) 09:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Chrysler reception, rankings, ratings
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Chrysler. Should the following content be added to the article?"Since at least the late 1990s, Chrysler has performed poorly in independent rankings of reliability, quality, and customer satisfaction. In 2011, James B. Stewart said in The New York Times that Chrysler's quality in 2009 was 'abysmal,' and cited that all Chrysler brands were in the bottom quarter of J. D. Power and Associates' customer satisfaction survey. In 2015, Fiat Chrysler brands ranked at the bottom of J. D. Power and Associates' Initial Quality Study, and the five Fiat Chrysler brands were the five lowest ranked of 20 brands in their Customer Service Index, which surveyed customer satisfaction with dealer service. Chrysler has performed poorly in Consumer Reports annual reliability ratings. In 2009 and 2010, Chrysler brands were ranked lowest in the Consumer Reports Annual Auto Reliability Survey; in 2014 and 2015, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, and Fiat were ranked at or near the bottom; in 2015 five of the seven lowest rated brands were the five Fiat Chrysler brands. In 2016, all Fiat Chrysler brands (Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep, and Fiat; Ram was not included) finished in the bottom third of 30 brands evaluated in Consumer Reports' 2016 annual Automotive Brand Report Card; Consumer Reports cited 'poor reliability and sub-par performance in our testing.'  Chrysler has consistently ranked near the bottom in the American Customer Satisfaction Index survey."

Please comment at Talk:Chrysler. Thank you. Hugh (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge proposal
A merge has been proposed that would move material from Three-wheeled steam tank into Steam Wheel Tank. Discussion of this proposal appears at Talk:Steam Wheel Tank. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Request for comments in the article “Diesel engine”
Hello. I have opened a request for comments in the article Diesel engine regarding the contribution of George Brayton to the development of this type of engines. I am posting this to invite editors who are knowledgeable on the history of internal combustion engines to contribute to the discussion. Mario Castelán Castro (talk) 19:29, 29 August 2016 (UTC).

User making large unilateral changes to vehicle articles over short time period without discussion
Hi y'all, I've alerted admin at: User_talk:NeilN#Possible problem spanning multiple vehicle articles about some concerns with recent editing activity in vehicle articles as so: "[...] would you (or another [...]) please take a look at 's recent, 11 February 2017, edit history? In a relatively short period of time they've unilaterally made multiple large excisions and converts of established pages to redirects without merging data to new targets and without offering either proposals or explanations on talkpages; all taking place within vehicle articles.

I've reverted an instance which affects something I'm working on, but sorting out the remaining situation (which may require reverting a single user multiple times across multiple articles) en masse seems like more than I'm pragmatically empowered to deal with on my own."

I wanted to be sure to make folks here aware of the activity I've noted and offer y'all an opportunity to help sort things out. Thanks for your time and attention, --Kevjonesin (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Iveco 110 Diesel 1986 Boxtruck
I would like to obtain information as to where I might find a service manual on this vehicle. Any help would be appreciated. Engine No. GVE 0358 DAA 3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.231.209.20 (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

GAZ-2332 CityVan
I know light vans tend to fall uncomfortably down a gaping crack between trucks and automobiles. Nevertheless, if anyone is minded to improve the entry on the GAZ-2332 CityVan ... please do it. Regards Charles01 (talk) 09:50, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

First Customized Mini Truck
Mini truck Customizing started in the 80's but, "Left Hand" Dan, built a Modified Truck in the early 70's and it is believe to be the First Documented Example of a Customized Mini Truck available to date, it can be view on Google: First Documented Modified Mini Truck 1974. Source of information is from "Left Hand" Dan Garcia builder of the Truck.47.138.172.17 (talk) 17:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)