Talk:Fiat S.p.A./Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Disambig

This article is about Fiat the automobile manufacturer. Fiat is also an English word meaning the exercise of authority. See : Fiat money, Military fiat. The Latin phrase "fiat lux" is the motto of the University of California and means "let there be light". This is when fiat (disambiguation) is created. - Jerryseinfeld 02:02, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Instead of listing "all" models, can't one just use the Fiat-template? --Marc NL 21:30, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

logo

recently fiats have a new logo; maybe sbdy can find it and replace the old one?

Added. --Orzetto 10:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Maserati not run by Ferrari?

Hi everyone,

Is Maserati still run by Ferrari? I read a profile of Fiat from Datamonitor written in May, 2005 that said that it was run by Ferrari. Has this changed and if so, where can I read about it?

Thanks,

Primetime 21:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi: Regarding Maserati/Alfa, Maserati was switched out of Ferrari control and into Alfa control in 2005. 'Alfa group' may not be the correct term, I agree, but it is under Alfa control. Some links [1] [2] [3] [4].Didsbury ryder 13:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

NOTE:

- GM no longer has anything to do with Subaru. They used to hold 20% - they sold 10% BACK to Subaru, and sold 10% to Toyota. Toyota is now the largest shareholder of Subaru.

- GM recently (i.e. 2 days ago) divested itself of all but a 3% stake in Suzuki. Please see: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060307/japan_suzuki_gm.html?.v=3 They are no longer Suzuki's biggest stakeholder (the article mentions that also).

My apologies. I have corrected it to read "until recently owned a controlling . . ."--Primetime 02:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Fiat has new logo

Press release: A new logo for the Fiat brand: it debuts on the Fiat Bravo --88.203.166.188 10:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

FIAT SELLS MORE THAN RENAULT IN EUROPE AND HAD ONE OF THE BEST GROW IN 2005/6

The new Fiat Grande Punto was the most sold car in 05/06,it's now second. Fiat had a record grow in 2006. Look, for those who understand italian.

Fiat: utile netto 1° trimestre 2007 a +149% Il primo trimestre 2007 chiuso con un balzo dell'utile netto in crescita di 225 milioni rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2006

TORINO - Ottimi risultati. Il gruppo Fiat ha chiuso il primo trimestre 2007 con un balzo dell'utile netto, salito a 376 milioni di euro, in crescita di 225 milioni rispetto allo stesso periodo del 2006 (+149%). Il risultato della gestione ordinaria del business del settore auto (che comprende tutti i marchi del gruppo Fiat) è salito a 222 milioni di euro, 173 milioni in più dell'analogo periodo del 2006. L'indebitamento netto industriale del gruppo è sceso al di sotto di 1,3 miliardi, con un miglioramento di circa 500 milioni rispetto a fine 2006. La previsione per fine anno è che cali al di sotto di un miliardo di euro. I ricavi netti complessivi sono stati pari a 13.676 milioni di euro, in progresso dell'8,9%. 23 aprile 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.240.212.26 (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Fiat Group and Fiat

Shouldn't there really be two pages? One for the Fiat Group (where the logo is really: [5]), and then a page for Fiat brand cars, which users the (new) logo we have on this page? The logo shown is not for the Fiat Group really. Taalo 05:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Should be two pages, one for Fiat S.p.A. (Fiat Group) and one for Fiat Automobiles S.p.A. (Fiat branded cars) there is already http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Fiat_models_since_1899 which could be base for new page for Fiat cars..--Typ932 16:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup, completely agreed. Right now it is confusing to have this Fiat Group page that is so mixed with the Fiat Automobiles. Good job on the sorting of the subsidiaries, by the way. What could the page locations be then? Fiat Group, Alfa Romeo, Fiat, and Lancia? Taalo 22:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs two changes > new page Fiat (car) or something ,and change that Fiat is disambiguation page where you can choose what page you are looking for, needs current Fiat page moving to new eg. Fiat Group page. Alfa Romeo and Lancia are ok no need to change anything.--Typ932 00:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking good! :_) How would you feel about moving Fiat to Fiat Group, having the car page at Fiat, and then have the Fiat (disambiguation) show both Fiat and Fiat Group? Somehow I'd rather not use Fiat (car), so that Alfa Romeo, Fiat, and Lancia, all come out consistent. cheers. Taalo 22:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we just leave it as its now, have to think more and wait other opinions, just fixing it more like whole Group page.--Typ932 22:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, hopefully some others can chime in with opinions; but yeah, no hurry. Taalo 22:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

My suggestion is to move this article to Fiat Group and move the Fiat (disambiguation) page to Fiat. This article doesn't go on disproportionately about their car business, and in fact links to specific articles for various car models, so there's not really a need for a separate article for their car business unless someone wants to expand that section, in which case the new article should be placed at Fiat Automobiles or Fiat (car). --Dachannien^Talk_Contrib 20:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with this idea. Or even move this page to Fiat Group and have a Fiat page that concentrates on automobiles and reflects Alfa Romeo, Lancia, etc. Icsunonove (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

FIAT vs Fiat

It should be "FIAT" as it's an acronym.

Well, as Alfa (Romeo) which used to be ALFA, FIAT became just Fiat. The acronyms became just the name. Taalo 05:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Going to bring this back up as it should still be FIAT. Its different than Alfa romeo, as their name changed from A.L.F.A. to Alfa Romeo when Nicola Romeo bought the company. FIAT though is still Fabbrica Italiana Automobili Torino, and the official company name is FIAT not Fiat.Onesti (talk) 12:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fiat photos

Hey everyone,

Let me know if you think the photos look funny at all. I can move them or delete them if they do.

Thanks,

Primetime 00:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

It would be great if someone could get a photo of the old Fiat Cinque Cento (500). When I lived in Italy people used to refer to them as belly buttons (ombelico) because they were small and everybody had one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisOMitchell (talk • contribs) 20:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Fiat in motorsport

In the early days of motor racing Fiat were one of the big names. The made cars with huge engines and even held land speed records for a while. I have loads of info on this (all can be reliable referenced) and would be prepared to start the article. However, do people think it would be better placed as a section in this article, or as a seperate article linked on this plage? Fork me (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it could be wise to start own page Fiat in motorsport, there is so much history that it can grow quite large --— Typ932^{T | C} 10:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK, Ferrari is owned by the Fiat groups, so yes, there is a lot of motoracing to say about it, specially Formula 1. --200.218.208.14 (talk) 21:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Fascist Italy

Maybe it's just because nothing's been put up yet, but the history section reads rather light - I would expect there to be quite a lot of interesting material on the company's support for the government at that time... Wik idea 11:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Recent events

recent events as part of the history subsection? kind of a contradiction in terms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.59.209 (talk) 12:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Fiat in Argentina

I've been trying to find out more about Fiat in Argentina. The English language entry - this one - has virtually nothing apart from a minimalist mention (slightly confusingly) which seems to conflate Argentina with Brazil. Um .... no. Slightly surprisingly, and as far as I can make out, there's nothing about Fiat's plant in Argentina in Spanish language wiki either. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places. But is someone able to add here a para in English language wiki on Fiat in Argentina, please? When was the plant in (I think) Cordoba set up? Who paid? Who owns it? What does it produce?

And thank you Charles01 (talk) 08:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I added new Argentina section --Typ932 ^T·C 14:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. From the link you give, there's quite a lot to know. (I have a couple more lines to add from an old motor magazine I've been going through.) Regards Charles01 (talk) 17:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

FIAT rather than Fiat

I think we should be using FIAT rather than Fiat, the official company name is FIAT, an acronym, rather than Fiat, the word. Whilst is has become common usage to use Fiat I think we should be trying to us the actual company name. Onesti (talk) 13:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Where do you find the actual company name?, even the company press releases speaks about Fiat --— Typ932^{T | C} 13:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually I could be talking rubbish here, I've had a look at what company registration info I can find and it looks to be registered in Italy as Fiat SpA not FIAT SpA. Oh well! Onesti (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems there is both used on their website but eg. company address details says:

Wrong map

I think that map is wrong since Serbia is not marked.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.60.107 (talk) 10:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

FIAT Brand content

This page contains to much info about the FIAT brand, but it is supposed to be about the group, I suggest to move that info to the brand's page. and it doesn't include the brands that are owned by FIAT Group, unlike the Volkswagen group, if somebody knows the brands, it would be a useful add. Niclond23 (talk) 19:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

It would be better to create a 'group' article than to overhaul this one or tack on some group related content. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for

—99.103.145.222 (talk) 01:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Declined — No specific fix requested, current coordinates point to street in front of corporate world headquarters. (I'm going to move them onto the building itself, but they're acceptable where they are now.) — TransporterMan (TALK) 14:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

FIAT and the USA

Fiat models imported into the USA were so infamous for poor reliability that the acronym FIAT was said to stand for "Fix it again, Tony". After Fiat ceased importing cars into the United States, however, they continued to be imported into Canada, as did Soviet versions of Fiat models

I think the reference to Fix it again, Tony is pretty unencyclopedic. There is a lot more to the FIAT/USA issue that could be said that is more important and more encyclopedic than a reference to an archaic joke, or jibes. About as appropriate as putting 'Dagenham Dustbin' on the Ford Fiesta entry, or Yank Tank on practically any US car produced between 1960 and 1992.

FIATs' exit from the US market had more to do with declining sales due to starving its main US seller, the 124, of a decent powerplant as a result of increasing emission control problems. Unable to further fund development of a product that had ended up US market only with sales from the European states they closed up operations. The troubles Alfa Romeo had with the US market and the disgraceful screwup the US concessionary made of the 124 Turbo product can't have helped either. I've dipped into a book of US car magazine reviews from the 60s, 70s and early 80s and reliability problems being a reason not to buy never cropped up once as a reason for the exit. I know I have a series of articles somewhere about the exits of both Alfa Romeo and FIAT which I should dig out at some point and dump bits of here to update the text, but I still think that reference to Fix It Again Tony is innappropriate even without alternative information.

I found this entry on a website here: http://www.spiderplace.de/geschien.html covering some of the Fiat exit:

Then the CS2 made its début with a 2 liter engine but only 81 HP in the 49-state-version (california version: 75 HP) and "big tits" on the hood. Following this one was the CS0, little more porwerful with 96 HP. But the spider already had its zenith and the production numbers went down from year to year, in 1982 Fiat produced only 2000 Spider. From then on Pininfarina took over and produced under its own label. The foreseries car DS0 was built 12 times in 1981. In march 1982 the DS1 was presented. Again the engine of the CS0 was used, with Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection it came to 105 HP (italian version: 122 HP). Pininfarina offered this car in the USA but sold only little more than 3000 in the years 1983-1985. The price was to high. The "Azzurra" costed over 12.000 $ in´83 and 16.000 $ in ´84.

Humour about Fiat definitely belongs in this article. This company is known for unreliable models, even if recent history shows some signs of improvement. I added the most common jokes I know of in a Humour section. Not sure why Fiat retired from the US exactly, but in Italy (and I am Italian) they do have a bad reputation for unreliability and low-tech. --Orzetto 10:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Whether or not you are italian or not does not give your opinion greater weight, and that is the point, opinion. Subjectivity and a reasonable amount of subjectivity is allowed in wikipedia articles so long as they are clearly identified and I think putting derisive comments in a humour section is more appropriate than lumping all the reasons FIAT exited the USA down to a jest. Thus the current layout doesn't meet with my objections, however I will be wandering around the other car manufacturers putting in a humour section with common derisive jokes about them just for sheer balance. ;-)

and to prove your point, I'm also from Italy, and what Orzetto says is just one person's point of view. I feel Fiat Group cars have good reliability and actually the technology of the Fiat Group is on par if not ahead of many other companies.

Even so, that IS what happened. The acronym WAS in wide use, and is part of the company's history. If the reputation is undeserved, that should be explained, but it still existed.

Who cares if it was widely used? Do you also add United States of Ammo in the article about the US because everyone calls the us like that? Do you add gooks to asian people article too? Come on dude, let's not fuck around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 01:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

It matters that it was widely used because its important to the story. This section of the article writes like revisionist history. Fiat's terrible image in America (whether it was deserved or not) played an obvious role in its decision to stop selling there. Omitting it makes the remainder of the section incomplete at best, and more-likely bordering on intentionally misleading. Regardless of whether the joke is included, scrubbing the article of any reference to the actual image problem the company had is bad history and a disservice to readers of a purported encyclopedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.31.3 (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

This is not about Fiat car company, there is own article for that -->Typ932 ^T·C 18:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Fiat coming back to US - and lack of negative remarks in article

The history section for Fiat is devoid of any mention of negative sentiment, stating "However, when gas prices fell again after 1981, Americans began purchasing sport utility vehicles, minivans, and pickup trucks in larger numbers (marking a departure from their past preference for large cars). Also, Japanese automakers had been taking an ever-larger share of the car market, increasing at more than half a percent a year. Consequently, in 1984, Fiat and Lancia withdrew from the United States market." It is valid to refer to the quality issue. Afterall, is it not the quality issue which has in the past led to high ratings for some cars and low ratings for others and served as part of the driver set for changes in sales figures? I am considering adding a passage which draws on http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20110328/BUSINESS/103280315/-1/NLETTER01/For-Fiat--the-time-is-right . . . and which includes the "Fix it again, Tony" disparagement. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

File:195095 0807-novi-model-fiat ff.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:195095 0807-novi-model-fiat ff.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Etymology of the company name

Based on feedback to this article, I wanted to note here that inclusion of information about the origin of "Fiat" as the company name would be useful if that is possible to uncover. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

There is information on the acronym F.I.A.T. in the first sentence of the article and information on the change from F.I.A.T. to Fiat in the first sentence of the "History" section. Is there additional information needed? 72Dino (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Credit and debt ratings

A recent edit war between an IP and Warren over a segment about debt has been reworded by me since the dates were not in order and the information was quite factually wrong in some parts, made up in others, and included a lot of Original Research. So i'm changing it now to my wording and encourage anyone wishing to change it to discuss first to avoid another war. Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 12:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I believe that this text here and the present rating is more appropriate TBD

In 2013, Fiat Debt Ratings Lowered by Moody’s and Fitch [8] on management concerns [9] [10] and questioned its ability to survive [11] with an accumulated debt of more than 20 Billion Euro making it one of the most indebted Zombie company in the Euro Zone. Credit ratings at Fiat are approching the Junk Bonds status.[12][13][14] [15]

I am an economist and the present ratings at Fiat is High Yield comonly called Junk Bond. I looked at Fiats balance sheet and rational and the company is in high danger of default. probably due to management problems !

--86.145.156.114 (talk) 12:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

We don't need every snippet of information as we can sum it up shorter without the window dressing and personal opinions of market traders. The source you persistently use for the Junk Bond status refer to 2008, which is not usable when we're talking about their 2013 debt. Thanks ツ Jenova 20 ^(email) 13:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles

I propose that this article should remain as Fiat SpA, and all new changes to the company post January 2014 are within the Fiat Chrysler Automobiles article. This will allow the history of both Fiat Group and Chrysler Group to retain their existing stories. Warren (talk) 00:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Given that the transaction which will fold Fiat SpA and Chrysler Group LLC into the newly-incorporated company to form a group called Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is not expected to complete until some time October to December 2014, I think considering this page dead is way too premature. Once the new group becomes a reality (even if strategically you could argue it already exists) and the new corporate identity enters use, I agree that it would be better freeze and preserve the existing Fiat and Chrysler articles. 151.88.22.9 (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The merger and everything has been completed. How would we go about "freezing" those articles? Also, how about sending the Fiat page to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles? Then put a line at the top exactly like is on this page (just FCA switched with Fiat S.p.A.)? I think this would help avoid confusion. Jaredclce (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

As the discussion has not progressed, and no-one seems to want a merge, I have removed the article tag. Warren (talk) 18:26, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Fiat as an industry (other than automobile)

I came here hoping to find more information about all the numerous aircraft, aircraft engines, tanks, weapons, and many other things that Fiat has produced throughout it's history, only to find there is nothing more than a sentence listing that it "also manufactured railway carriages, aircraft", etc, etc. Surely there is some importance to this aspect of Fiat S.p.A., and not just the fact that it built automobiles. At least a list of the aircraft and tanks it built with links to the ones that have wiki articles on them would be nice..45Colt 16:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Anti-personnel Mines

The article does not mention FIAT as a producer of anti-personnel mines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.60.229.164 (talk) 13:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, where is that story? FIAT owned a company (as late as the 1980's) that produced anti-personnel mines in Singapore which were used widely throughout the middle east. They obviously try to forget that dirty little piece of history and it seems Wikipedia is complicit too, seeing as even on the anti-personnel mines page Italian models are simply not present in the list. "Wikipedia, the place where editors can re-write history." (90.220.134.141 (talk) 06:04, 3 December 2012 (UTC))

Wikipedia is a place where anyone (read you) can be an editor. If you have sources for these statements and feel that information is relevant and ought to be be known by others be my guest and inform them, rather than complaining that Wikipedia editors "re-write history". For starters, neglecting to mention a little known fact (perhaps the people who wrote this article were not aware that Fiat also "owned a company" that made anti-personnel mines) is not "re-writing" history, it is leaving out information. "Re-writing" would involve an active claim the "Fiat has never owned a company that produced anti-personnel mines". Also, I'd like to note that Fiat owns a lot of smaller companies, as do most major corporations.

Second, I highly doubt that every single company that has ever produced anti-personnel mines is listed on that page you mention, let alone the company that owns the company that made them. This is because the extremely high number of companies that have done so. Fiat is one of many. Anti-personnel mines weren't considered an "evil" thing before the 1980's, when public awareness began to be raised. Before that, they were simply considered weapons of war, and there was a high demand for them. Fiat is in the business of making things for money, and buying companies that make things for money, so Fiat bought a company that produced AP mines (among other things), according to you. So what? They apparently stopped making them. They weren't the only ones making them. You blame them because they did it well and managed to sell a whole lot of them? Fiat didn't create any minefields. That was the users fault, that and not clearing the minefields afterwards. I personally think the people who bought the mines are a lot more culpable than Fiat or the company who actually manufactured them. You think that if Fiat hadn't sold them mines, they wouldn't have used them? There was a demand, and someone else would have sold them the mines instead. That is how industry works. But that's just my own personal view, and thus has no place on Wikipedia. We're supposed to edit, not editorialize.

Anyway, any time you'd like to "un-re-write history", go ahead and do so, as long as you can provide references for your statements. Yea, and thou canst becometh a part of the big conspiracy thineself. And if you feel that this is such important information, so potentially damaging to Fiat and that people really must know that they produced anti-personnel mines all the way up to 30 years ago (them and a lot of other companies), why wouldn't you do so? Why not indeed. But that is a lot harder than just complaining that Fiat is obviously in bed with every editor on Wikipedia and has intentionally caused their wicked past to be hidden from public view, isn't it?.45Colt 16:56, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Fiat S.p.A.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fiat S.p.A.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2008/04/30/afx4951532.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fiat S.p.A.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Fiat S.p.A.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:35, 30 September 2017 (UTC)