Talk:Volkswagen

Volkswagen name

Can someone source the quote for a prior name "Wolkswagen" ? There is no occurence of it on the german page.

I cannot figure out how the word "Volkswagen" translates into "People's car". 173.86.41.249 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

This isn't an article on the German language. It is broken down at Wiktionary. --Dennis Bratland (talk)

"Volkswagen" literally means "folk's wagon," which, in simple terms, means "people's car." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:1003:6346:B4D5:50AF:4EC:7564 (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Is 'Beetle' a wrong nickname?

After a recent visit to Germany, I realized that what they know as: 'Käfer', the local name for VW People's Car, is: Ladybug, and not: Beetle. I'd say this is important, as feelings elicited by both types of insect are not same. Patent GB570814A -of open and free download in Espacenet, applied in Sept 1943 by Roy Fedden, most known from his research in Sleeve valve, draws a Car exactly with the same arrangement and look as VW's: 'Ladybug'. ??? Salut +

I'm not sure the matter is worth pursuing, but as an alternative to getting on with what I'm meant to be doing ..... I do remember back in the 1960s being told that "Beetle" is British English and "Bug" is US English. But these days I think "Beetle" works just fine in pink-skin-majority countries where English is the first language. But of course if you go to Germany - and especially if you get away from the hotels and restaurants and by doing that manage to find someone who doesn't insist on conversing in embarassingly good English - the word is "Käfer". "Kever" in Dutch, "Coccinelle" in Italian and French. I would have thought the German word "Marienkäfer" would normally be translated into English as "Ladybird" and into American as "Ladybug". And vice-versa in both cases. I've not heard "Marienkäfer" used for a Volkswagen Typ(e) 1. Maybe you encountered a regional dialect? Maybe I don't know as much about the names they give Volkswagens as I'd thought I did. Happy day Charles01 (talk) 13:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

It's like those other languages have a different word for everything. The German word käfer doesn't even appear in this article. It's mentioned over in Volkswagen Beetle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Even on the German language version of VW's website, the car is currently referred to as the English word "Beetle". (source) -- Scjessey (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Volkswagen new logo of 2019

I’ve heard from Logopedia on Wikia that on June 5th of 2019, Volkswagen changed their logo. The logo isn’t mentioned everywhere right now, though it is appearing on the newest Volkswagen commercials. Here’s the proof: https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Volkswagen#2019.E2.80.93present

Now I know this feels a little bit idiotic, but you may think that it looks like a printed version of a Volkswagen logo, well it is, but it’s their official logo. They went back to a 2D logo again, and this is also for their new line of electrical cars.

I think that one of the experts here on Wikipedia should upload and update this article with the new Volkswagen logo. I don’t want to do it myself, because of Wikipedia’s (not-so-good) Copyright Images Rights. I’ve tried to do it one time with updating a different logo, but that failed, so I just wanted to make a quick reminder. REALAreesh101 (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring about the new logo

There's a bit of an edit war about the logo used on the page. The new logo was unveiled last summer so it's been a while. I believe the disagreement on which logo to use in the article is in large part due to the fact that the 3D logo is prettier than the new 2D logo and that people are accustomed to the old logo. These are two pretty bad reasons for not using the new logo. If you believe that we need to keep the old logo, please make your case here rather than reverting to it so that we can get a consensus about it. Pichpich (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Volkswagen Tupka86 (talk) 20:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

That comment does not explain why you're fighting for the old logo and recruiting other Wikipedians to do it for you. Pichpich (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Volkswagen Tupka86 (talk) 12:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Finally this edit-war is history. Tupka86 (and the IP) got blocked: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Tupka86_reported_by_User:Koreanovsky_(Result:_Warned). --Koreanovsky (talk) 19:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Group or brand?

This article purports to be about the Volkswagen brand, and not about the Volkswagen Group which has a separate article. Nevertheless, this article in large parts conflates the group with the brand, down to sales numbers, which, instead of being Volkswagen brand numbers, are Volkswagen Group stats, i.e. the sum of sales of the 10+ brands of the group. For another instance, the diesel issue was a group issue, and not just one of the brand. The depicted “former Volkswagen AG CEO Martin Winterkorn” was CEO of the Group, not of the brand. The “Environment-friendly vehicles” chapter is in large parts about the Group, not the brand. I know it’s hard, but it needs to be fixed and cleaned up.BsBsBs (talk) 17:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Information on the 'Controversies' section of the article should be put into chronological order

In my opinion, the information on the 'Controversies' section of the article should be put into chronological order as the order in one part goes from 2011 to 2015 then back to 2013, which in my opinion makes the section unprofessional. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 09:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Name change

Looks like Volkswagen has announced that, at least in the US, they've changed their name to "Voltswagen", to something something reflect their commitment to electric vehicles. There are some questions to be asked about how to handle this—it should definitely get at least a lede mention, but as long as the international name remains unchanged, a move might be unwarranted. In any case, @Materialscientist: your revert without a comment seems quite heavy-handed—the IP user appeared to be acting in good faith, at least initially, and (admittedly, in an edit message that was otherwise very inappropriate) attempted to provide a source.

Also, it's worth noting this proximity to April 1st—this doesn't seem like a prank, but it's worth keeping in mind. Gaelan 💬✏️ 19:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I would imagine that if we give it a couple of days, better sources - as in better-informed sources - will become available. But the proximity to April 1 does indeed beg a few questions. I read somewhere that they weren't planning to announce it for another month or two, but there was a leak so they had to rush out a quick press statement. Or felt that they had to. Hmmmm. Charles01 (talk) 19:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I actually was planning on checking if there was a move request here due to the "leak" and failed to remember. [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-name-idUSKBN2BM2YJ Reuters just published an article saying, "Volkswagen AG’s U.S. unit will not change its name even after the German automaker issued a statement on Tuesday saying it would..." which leads me to believe that this has a better chance of being an April 1st stunt. You have the leak, an anonymous statement that the leak is true (with some mention that it 'is not a joke', then confirmation that it is happening, and now that it isn't happening. At this moment, the only thing that will convince me this isn't a joke is if "Vol?swagen" continues this into or beyond April 3rd as it is hard to separate the news articles from how close we are to the 1st. --Super Goku V (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)And even at that, official or legal names are not the main criterion for what we name articles. We exclude Inc or AG in article titles except in special circumstances, and we rarely name a biography with a person's full legal name. Even if the company, even all of Volkswagen not just Volkswagen America, officially renamed itself, the only guideline would remain what they're commonly called. It takes some time for a new name to become commonly used, and often people stick to the traditional name and never warm to new names. And even then, Wikipedia is written from a broad historical perspective with no special preference for the present. We have an article at the topic of Volkswagen, spanning eight decades across many countries, and the name of that topic construed broadly doesn't change because in a single one of those 84 years they rebranded.

We may or may not also have a separate article named specifically for a legal corporate entity, a specific subdivision, if that topic merits an article. Often it doesn't. One example is Kawasaki motorcycles, which is a topic that exists independently of the various divisions of Kawasaki that made motorcycles at different points in history. We have an article on the current subsidiary making motorcycles, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Motorcycle & Engine, but it's previous incarnation, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Consumer Products and Machinery Company is only a redirect and the one before that I don't think we even make note of. Chrysler is a topic that is under constant threat of being renamed to whatever they're called this year, when we should remain aware that the topic spans 95 years, apart from formal name changes and corporate acquisitions.

We really don't have to jump every time a company rebrands something. We're looking at the big picture and the entire timeline, not only the last five minutes.

See WP:COMMONNAME, WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

NPR has confirmed that it was an April fools prank. [1] Gaelan 💬✏️ 23:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

How is it an April Fools prank if it was published on March 30th? 71.94.157.155 (talk) 23:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

There is always the possibility that it was a joke gone wrong with someone not knowing about it and spoiling it. Speculation aside, they claim it was, so the matter is moot unless someone wants to add this to one of the April Fools articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Considering the number of articles talking about this prank gone wrong and in the climate of misinformation (they told AP multiple times it wasn't a joke) I think we should include a section about this in the article, under Controversies: https://apnews.com/article/volkswagen-us-name-change-prank-voltswagen-f600024d7e80549539dc90831b41ba3d Stéphane Rangaya (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't need a whole section, but one sentence somewhere, perhaps in 2017–present: Focus on electric vehicles, would be appropriate. Reywas92^Talk 17:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

"Voltswagen" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Voltswagen. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 12#Voltswagen until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Volkswagen Amarok

There seems no mention in this article of the Volkswagen Amarok, or am I missing it somehow? Andrewa (talk) 01:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

See Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles. BilCat (talk) 01:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it is mentioned there. So is this article scoped to only passenger vehicles?

If so I think it is mistitled and the lead also needs tweaking. Both the Amarok and the type 2 Volkswagen should be included in the undisambiguated term Volkswagen. Andrewa (talk) 10:36, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the scope of the article is passenger cars, and that's been the primary topic for as long as I can remember. There's a clear hatnote at the top of the article for Volkswagen Group and Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles. I don't see the point of an RM just because a pick-up isn't listed, but that's your choice. Yes, the lead does need tweaking, but I'm not the person to do it. BilCat (talk) 13:22, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

The point of a possible RM is that the scope of the article does not match its title.

If you are correct that the primary topic of Volkswagen is their passenger vehicles, then there is no problem. But I think that it would be generally agreed that the Amarok is a Volkswagen as the term Volkswagen is used in English.

It seems a no-brainer to me that the term has a wider meaning. It may not include their heavy vehicles, but it certainly includes the type 2 Volkswagen for example, and the article already mentions these. Andrewa (talk) 21:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not trying to argue with you. If you want to make a concrete proposal.for an RM, go ahead and do it. BilCat (talk) 22:57, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not wanting to argue either, I want to build consensus. This discussion has been helpful to me. But perhaps we now need to involve others, and an RM is an obvious way of doing this.

It seems to me that the article does cover some VW commercials already (the type 2). And the Amarok in Australia is seen as an SUV rather than a commercial vehicle, which is part of the reason I raised the question despite the hatnote This article is about Volkswagen Passenger Cars. For the parent group, see Volkswagen Group. For Volkswagen vans, trucks and buses, see Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles. I took the vans there not to include the T2, and so didn't imagine that vans, trucks and buses would include the Amarok.

So I still think there is work to do, and I think we're making progress in identifying exactly what. Andrewa (talk) 23:56, 30 December 2022 (UTC)