Talk:Jeep Wagoneer (WS)

jeep?

Is the article title correct? It is quite noticeable in the advertising they don't use the Jeep name at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjxj (talk • contribs) 12:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, revised the article but keeping the title in accordance to WP:COMMONNAME. Andra Febrian (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Unsourced" is just a fancier way of censuring/censoring actual facts

The Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer are Stellantis' first full-size SUVs since the discontinuation of the second-generation Dodge Durango and the Chrysler Aspen in 2009.

This whole statement was a FACT. I was merely pointing out at the SECOND-generation Durango, THE ONLY full-size SUV made by Chrysler Corporation during the 2000s and not one full-sizer made in the 2010s. Meanwhile, you have had ridiculous edits that weren't modified for YEARS such as an Oldsmobile Sihoulette being the "successor" to a Custom Cruiser, which I already reverted, or some Lincoln vehicles that were stated as successors to Mercury vehicles.

Back at it with the "unsourced" BS claims. I removed Cadillac XTS as predecessor to CT5 and that edit was reverted even though XTS was a full-size sedan and CT5 was a midsize one. Wikipedia mods are straight up weirdo hypocrites. 24.180.55.100 (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, whether it is a full-size or a mid-size is not a straight "fact", I've seen some people calling mid-sizes as full-size vice versa. Also they belong to different brands. While that doesn't mean predecessors can't be from a different brand, but addition of it without any source became quite dubious because it's not directly obvious and possibly an original research unless you added a reference or source for your so-called "fact". Even then the source needs to be checked whether it's reliable or not, or is it some personal opinion.

By the way I'm not a mod. Just a normal user and never touched or cared about the article that you mentioned having "ridiculous edits" so don't pin that on me. And how is it hypocrite when the "Wikipedia mods" you're talking about are different people that may have never talked to each other? Andra Febrian (talk) 14:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Needs attention from someone with knowledge of North American motoring press

Currently large parts of this article are unreferenced and read to me more like a sales brochure than an encyclopaedia article. I'm not sure where to look to improve this article, but rather than uncritically repeating the options sheet it would be much better if the focus was on reliable independent sources have talked about in reviews of the product, noting what they may have praised or criticised along the way. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 10:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]