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.
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.
It was proposed by Regushee that Mazda 626 should be merged into the Capella article. I agree in full, maybe while maintaining a brief potted history of the "626" name in various markets within the Capella page. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 05:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I disagree wholeheartedly. While merging may make sense, there is FAR too much information to just post under a "brief history". While some people may think of this as an April Fool's day joke. I do not. Why don't we merge the "Hammer" with the "Screwdriver" saying that the screwdriver derived from the hammer as new tool? Have you ever seen a Capella marketed fully in the US? I think not. Capella's are Capella's, 626's are 626's and MX-6's are MX-6's. Needless to say, I changed them back to they way they were and kept the discuss at the top. At least let 6 months of discussion before moving an article Regushee. Chieftain20 (talk) 00:38, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree that it shouldn't have been merged before there is some discussion, but "Capella" and "626" are just different labels for the exact same car. Since the car has been sold under a range of different names in its export markets over the years, (Montrose, first-gen MX-6) it would make sense to merge those two.
However, the current state of this article is complete and utter chaos. The MX-6 may have started out as a 626/Capella version, but the second generation is its own car. To merge the Credos/Cronos/Clef/Efini MS-8 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. This is a total disaster. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 04:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I have attempted to revert Regushee's changes until the merger can be discussed a bit closer. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 04:40, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I've merged the 626 article into this one. This article needs a lot of work, and it may be worth pinching more bits from the pre-redirect version of the 626 article to improve this one further. The 626 and Capella are exactly the same car, with a different badge; the previous comment about screwdrivers/hammers makes no sense. Lukeno94(tell Luke off here) 20:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I disagree as well with this, and this should be reverted. The Capella is NOT the same car as the 626. Some models and years were related, but they are vastly different. Secondly, if you want to argue that being the same family of vehicle, they should be on the same page, then it should at LEAST be organized correctly and include correct information. Currently it includes almost nothing relevant to the Mazda 626 as it is A DIFFERENT CAR, and the information from the 626 page was NOT brought over to the Capella page. PLEASE REVERT OR COMBINE, do not just redirect an article that was useful to an article that is irrelevant. If you would like to find out more information, there are many users on Mazda626.net who can help you research this. aelfwyne (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
How is the 626 a different car in any way, shape, or form? The cars have the same body, the same chassis, and, usually, the same engines as well. The 626 information was merged, albeit imperfectly - if you actually look at the histories of the pages, you'll see that for yourself. By all means, improve it - but there is no evidence the 626 is not the same car as the Capella. I agree that the Cronos article should be merged into this one, as per OSX's proposal - but you've come in here to rant, without any sources, and without attempting to improve the article. Lukeno94(tell Luke off here) 17:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)