Talk:Chrysler

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chrysler article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 90 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Chrysler. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Chrysler at the Reference desk.

This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Automobiles Top‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trucks Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trucks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of trucks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TrucksWikipedia:WikiProject TrucksTemplate:WikiProject TrucksTrucks articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Michigan: Detroit High‑importance

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Detroit task force.

United States Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 7 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Stellantis North America. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Requested move 7 August 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chrysler → Stellantis North America – chrysler is currently only an automobile brand, not a company Michael H (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose For basically the exact same reasons as the 2016 and 2018 move requests [1] [2]. The article is about Chrysler the topic and the organization from it's inception nearly 100 years ago and "Chrysler" is the common name. This article includes the time as an independent company as well as the DC and Chrysler-Cerberus time, basically all the pre-FIAT/pre-Stellantis time which was the majority of the history of the organization. Chrysler is the common name and the name people are most likely to search for. Chrysler, not Stellantis is the name of the defense contractor that designed the M1 Abrams tank and the prime contractor for the Saturn IB rocket. Stellantis NA should be reserved for discussions that are specific to the the parent of the Chrysler brand. Springee (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move per Springee. The common name remains Chrysler. O.N.R. ^(talk) 22:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME 2601:204:C901:B740:5C88:7DD8:3C75:575A (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and previous discussions listed above. Perhaps there should be a hatnote on this talk page to dissuade people from filing these requests? Mr.choppers | ✎ 16:14, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - this article covers the entire history of Chrysler going back over a century, and Chrysler is overwhelmingly the common name. --Sable232 (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Splitting proposal

I'd like to propose two page splits...

First, I'll start with the less controversial one: I'd like to propose that the § Chrysler brand section be split into a page called Chrysler (automotive brand), separate from the parent company. It's no different than say the GMC brand being split from the GM parent company article. At 133k, this article is well past the point of a WP:SIZESPLIT, and this seems like a logical place to make the split.

Support as nom -- RickyCourtney (talk) 01:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure. I don't think a combined proposal like this is going to work very well though; it will be confusing. Mr.choppers | ✎ 03:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support but I would like a clear definition of what goes in each article before the split so gray area items (automotive technologies as an example) have a clear home in one or the other. My feeling is the technologies (Hemi engines as an example) should go in this article while brand should focus on name plates, sales, Chrysler specific marketing etc. Springee (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I like @User:Springee's logic above, so I'd therefore further propose that the page be further split into both a Chrysler Corporation page (covering the history of the company from 1925–1998) and a Stellantis North America page (covering the history of the company from 1998 to the present). It's a somewhat arbitrary date, but in my reading, it's the start of a period of the company being passed between international partners.

Support as nom -- RickyCourtney (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - no point breaking up the history just because it currently belongs to someone else. See WP:RECENTISM aside from the WP:COMMONNAME arguments already listed. Additionally, 1998 is not just arbitrary, but wholly illogical since Stellantis the company was only formed in 2021. Mr.choppers | ✎ 03:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of splits

Before I !vote, RickyCourtney could you outline what the splits will look like? I think I'm misunderstanding but are you proposing splitting this article into three? Springee (talk) 20:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, but I'm also open to splitting into only two articles [just a spin-off of Chrysler (automotive brand)]. RickyCourtney (talk) 20:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given the length I generally support the the idea of splitting the brand from the company but I think we should have a clear definition of what goes where before doing so. So rockets and tanks stay with the company. Where would discussion of the Hemi engines go? I'm asking as a point of discussion. Given the length I do think some type of split makes sense. I would prefer as few splits as possible. Springee (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I'll retract my proposal to split the Corporation page into two. I would propose a pretty cut and dry spin-off of the Chrysler brand section. You can see my proposed post split pages at Draft:Chrysler and Draft:Chrysler (automotive brand). -- RickyCourtney (talk) 21:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Post split discussion

I have completed the spin-off of Chrysler (automotive brand). Please feel free to discuss any further issues here. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 00:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 July 2024

It has been proposed in this section that Chrysler be renamed and moved to Stellantis North America.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Chrysler → Stellantis North America – Now that the page for the Chrysler brand has been split into Chrysler (brand) it would make sense to rename the page to Stellantis North America. Professional Adriazeri (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom; matches the COMMONNAME I’ve come across in most recent articles, I think it is clear that its usage has been adaopted. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Automobiles has been notified of this discussion. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - this article covers the entire history of Chrysler going back over a century, and Chrysler is overwhelmingly the common name. --Sable232 (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chrysler is the common name for the marque, hence why it’s used on Chrysler (brand). I wouldn’t say it’s the common name for Stellantis North America anymore though. Adriazeri (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - might support if the proposal is about spinning off post-merger(s) history from Chrysler. Stellantis North America is not only not a common name, but covers a quite different context as well. Chrysler (not the brand) in my mind is an automaker that is/was one of the Big Three, while Stellantis North America in my mind is a Stellantis branch / regional office.

(On an unrelated note it's quite confusing to have an article called "Chrysler", that starts with "FCA US, LLC, doing business as Stellantis North America". That's three different-sounding corporate names.) Andra Febrian (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find it particularly astonishing that you complain about the three different corporate names in the article while rejecting the solution to bring that down to two (two being the minimum that would be appropriate for this article)

I think your point about splitting the article into pre-DaimlerChrysler and then everything else is valid on paper, but it would appear quite confusing to have Chrysler (1925–1998), Chrysler (brand), DaimlerChrysler era (don’t know how this would fit in any of the post-split articles), and then Stellantis North America as well. Adriazeri (talk) 20:38, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You realize it's not the only solution right? The proposal calls for renaming Chrysler to Stellantis North America, so the former would redirect to the latter - I reject this. I wouldn't mind if the proposal is to make a separate article, therefore in the Chrysler article there's no need to mention FCA/Stellantis as the scope would change. But this is something else that should be proposed separately. Andra Febrian (talk) 08:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support split and rename The company hasn’t been Chrysler in over 25 years, continuing to call it so is untenable as seen by the word salad that is the first sentence. The article is called "Chrysler" (because of heavy prior opposition to changing the article name) that starts with "FCA US, LLC, doing business as Stellantis North America" (because while the company has consistently used the Stellantis brand, they never bothered to change their legal name which remains FCA US, LLC.)

If we are to split the article apart, in my opinion, the cleanest point would be the exit from bankruptcy. The company that exited bankruptcy would technically not be the same Chrysler that was established in 1925. RickyCourtney (talk) 04:09, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have another bold suggestion. We could essentially rewind this page to 2009. The history post-2008 can live on the Stellantis page.

I can find no evidence that Stellantis uses the name Stellantis North America in any official capacity. We don’t have a Stellantis Europe page. RickyCourtney (talk) 04:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stellantis Europe. Adriazeri (talk) 16:50, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need to break the Stellantis North America and Stellantis Europe divisions apart? RickyCourtney (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I understand why editors are pushing for a move. What we might do instead would be handle this as many of the articles about aerospace companies have been handled. We could simply state that Chrysler as a company stopped existing in 1998. Consider the example of Lockheed Corporation. People still commonly refer to "Lockheed" even though they are actually speaking about Lockheed Martin. A flaw in my example is that Lockheed Martin is a direct successor vs Stellantis which is a few legal organizations past Chrysler but we might be able to plaster over that. Still, I think that makes more sense vs listing Chrysler's work on the space program and as the prime contractor for the M1 tank as a Stellantis project. Basically, I think a move can work but I don't think this is the right one. Springee (talk) 11:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]