Talk:Landaulet (car)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Landaulet (car) 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

Phantom VI Landaulette[edit]

snapshot of a certain car showing astoundingly clear rear i.e. non-existent roof

This car also in the disputed image has been in recent use 2011 - see the disputed image which is clearly the correct type when the image is enlarged. Sincerely, Eddaido (talk) 08:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

someone got to the cupboard first. Sincerely Eddaido (talk) 09:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the issue can come up shows that the picture is confusing, which is the last thing an illustration of an article should be. If you can find a photo that clearly shows the top down and that can be used in the article, please use that.

Then a solution to your problem might be a link to the first photo above? Eddaido (talk) 22:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way; I haven't removed the picture again. You just didn't put it back. Instead, you reverted the wrong edit and changed the links to the correct Russian and Ukranian articles back to their disambiguation pages. I have undone that since.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 13:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, you went hard to get a couple of weeks ago. I realised I was making the mistake about your Russian links and then decided that in the absence of your responses to discussion page correspondence this might be the best way to get your attention. Is it not better to discuss these things before I stop suppressing my bold edit tendencies? Hence my ref to (your) chosen channel of communication.

You have brought this (particular image) issue up (I've no complaint about that) doesn't mean anyone else would, does it?

Reasons for including that picture. Its famous, OK newsworthy and now as distinct from the first half of the 20th century and when the picture is enlarged any reader can see why it is in that gallery (if they have mistakenly guessed there is a white floodlight on her). I do in fact spend a lot of time hunting up suitable pictures, oh that owners would not feel they are somehow embarrassed by their vehicle's photo going into Commons. Another factor perhaps, if it is good enough to go into Wikipedia then perhaps someone might pay them for the use of it? I don't know their real reasons but it is very hard to find and legitimately upload good quality pictures to illustrate things.

My last comment is that it is nearly as difficult to get any worthwhile discussion in the erm rarefied atmosphere inhabited by WP's editors, you know you are not alone in hoping for more attention from that happy band.

Can we go on with the rest of our discussions? Sincerely, Eddaido (talk) 22:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re Castagna vehicle. I suspect it is no more than a mock-up (no engine or mechanicals) and an outcome of a design exercise for BMW? for a small sporty Rolls? Have you noticed one side of the roof seems to be a different shape from the other? Landaulet because the whole roof transparent? All Original Guesswork. Sincerely, Eddaido (talk) 09:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

convertibility 1912[edit]

Primer: limousine to sedanca de ville to true convertible Eddaido (talk) 10:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This video, since de-linked, showed two men working on a limousine made in 1912, winding down the side-windows and folding in the frames for those side-windows, winding down the glazed division passengers/driver, removing the roof over the chauffeur (to sedanca de ville) and then removing the roof over the passengers to leave the car a full true convertible. Eddaido (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen the video at the site since your claim that it was de-linked, but I wasn't able to see it earlier at work where they use Internet Explorer and have firewalls that block video streaming.

It is a truly stunning example of the coachbuilder's craft before the First World War, but since it never actually transforms into a landaulet, I don't understand why it is being discussed on the discussion page of the "Landaulet" article.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tetchy!? On here because we were in discussion and of a vehicle with a lift-off section where you would prefer it to have a flexible folding roof. Not the reason but how would you classify that Lanchester? Convertible / Sedanca de ville / Limousine. I left the video running when I came back and noted it was de-linked. Went back to the video and discovered to my delight that below it were links to famous accurate and well-written articles by Wikipedia editors about the manufacturers and the most famous brother. Went to the bottom of the manufacturer's article where I had added the self-same video as a link, for some reason clicked on the link and ! ! it all worked again. I am truly delighted that a car enthusiast has chosen to reference WP articles - let it be a sign of great things to come. Have always been concerned how they all seem to stay away in whole droves (otherwise how could such Daft mistakes remain in WP?). Sincerely happy Eddaido (talk) 07:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about this classification for that Lanchester: a convertible with three-position manually removable hardtops. What do you think? Eddaido (talk) 12:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the subject of this thread has nothing to do with improvement of the article on landaulets and that further discussion of this topic on this page is contrary to the guidelines of Wikipedia. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 13:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exposed drivers[edit]

The article currently states that many early landaulet cars have an exposed driver. Can someone please provide supporting examples? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 12:27, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on landaulet carriage and car[edit]

@1292simon: Talk page discussion is necessary before we proceed to dispute resolution. Why do you think landaulet does not mean landaulet? Eddaido (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddaido. Could you please drop the condescending tone? I think the article's distinction between the carriage and car is confusing to readers. Ideally, I think the articles should be separated as per Landau (car) and Landau (carriage); however there is currently not enough content on the landaulet carriage for a separate article, so I put it as a section of the landau carriage article. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simon, condescending? then please try not to make careless mistakes. First Landau (car) is the invention of a US advertising agency (and in fact refers to the landaulet but I suppose someone thought landau sounded better? I don't know.) Back to the true landaulet. There is no confusion, I can't see how you manage to find it. The body style continues, the motive power changes. The name's the same. If you are quite determined about your desired change please take this matter to dispute resolution. Eddaido (talk) 23:54, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have three articles:

The different scope between these is only too clear, although the current articles are poorly structured and some do not follow reality:

Landau (carriage): A horse-drawn four-wheeled carriage, developed as a means for its occupants to display themselves to the public. It has two folding canvas hoods. They are driven by a driver other than the passengers, either a coachman on an uncovered seat, or a riding postillion.
Landaulet (carriage): A horse-drawn four-wheeled carriage, smaller than a landau. It has one hood.
Landaulet (car), for which Landaulette (car) is a synonym.: An early car, driven by a chauffeur. Like the landau, this opens over the passenger space and is covered by a hood. As this is a single hood, they were named landaulet, rather than landau. By this time, compared to carriages, they were more commonly driven at night or in bad weather - and thus there is a roof over the driver, fixed as there is no reason to display the driver, as for the passengers. This also involves a partition between driver and passengers. Later versions of these cars become closer to a saloon or sedan with a convertible roof added to the bodywork, but the notion of the covered and partition driver remains.
Landau (automobile): A later, US, marketing term for a convertible. Usually without chauffeur, later often not a convertible at all, merely a skeumorph.

We have restructuring to do. The carriages and powered cars should be separated, with disambiguation where needed. The totally false idea of the carriage covering the driver has to go altogether. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:57, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can live with that, specially if it settles the current dispute. Sorry, have been distracted for 24 hours. Eddaido (talk) 07:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that is a good solution. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I came across Landaulet (carriage) while stub-sorting, and have done some tidying up before finding and skimming the above discussion:

Landaulet was still a redirect to the car, so I've converted it into a dab page
Lots of incoming links to Landaulet, most of which seem to be aimed at the car and coming from {{Automobile configuration}}, so I've updated that template.
hatnotes on the two articles aren't needed, have removed
done some general cleanup, as well as stub-sorting, on Landaulet (carriage) - it could do with more refs than just a dictionary entry

PamD 12:43, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PamD for your work on these articles. I think the hatnotes are still useful, but am happy to go with whatever others think. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]