Talk:General Motors ignition switch recalls
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
editLauren Christian is the monther of Amber Rose. Amber was killed in a chevy cobalt.
I would have added identifying language, but I cannot determine who Lauren Christian is. No Wikipedia page and odd references to pork chops and realtors on Google. Who is Lauren Christian, cited in first paragraph, as believing that there are more deaths related to the faulty switch than GM?Janetminnj (talk) 12:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Probably would have been a more fruitful search if I'd used the correct name - LauraJanetminnj (talk) 12:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2019 and 18 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Svila010. Peer reviewers: Jennifert02, Sofi rromero.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Article title
editShouldn't the title of this article reflect the whole topic? The recall of millions of cars was only one consequence of this scandal. The other were over 100 deaths and several hundreds of million dollars punishment. I think the article should be called: "General Motors ignition switch scandal". According to the article General Motors had known about the problem for over a decade before the first recall.
Many news articles use scandal as headline.
The current title would have been suitable if General Motors had reacted in time and not one decade after. Ich901 (talk) 21:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
- Good point. Yes that is a better titleGreglocock (talk) 03:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Ich901 and Greglocock: - I'm not going to revert the move b/c I don't feel too strongly about this topic, but frankly I think that WP:COMMONNAME would dictate against the move. Whereas the media most commonly reported the Volkswagen thing as a "scandal", the GM ignition switch got reported as a "defect" or "recall". Now frankly, I think the ignition switch thing was a little scandalous, so the name seems apt. That said, we look to sources to decide what to call things. We don't pick the names that we think are best. NickCT (talk) 16:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- It is frequently refered to as "ignition switch scandal", especially after it became known to the plublic that GM had known about the problem for a decade prior to the recall. (just google "Ignition switch scandal") Also GM was sued and found guilty and had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars. A company is not found guilty for such an issue if it was not guilty at all. I believe you that it was initially refered only as recall, because in contrast to VW scandal, GM didn't immediately admit that it had known about the problem when the public first took notice through the first wave of recalls. No wrongdoings were proven back then. Whereas in the VW case, the wrongdoings were clear shortly after the media took notice for the first time. Ich901 (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- "General Motors Ignition switch scandal" - 4,540
- "General Motors Ignition switch recall" - 230,000
- Clearly "scandal" ain't the common name. NickCT (talk) 21:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- You get different numbers withouth the " signs. I don't know what they are doing to the results exactly. In my opinion it should be relevant what was common AFTER General Motors was found guilty. Otherwise the quantities don't really say much. Of course alot of articles with "ignition switch recall" were published when the recalls started and there were no lawsuits against General Motors let alone a final judgement. Ich901 (talk) 22:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Ich901: - The " is a quotation mark. Surrounding a phrase with "'s in Google searches for an exact term, rather than individual words.
- re "started and there were no lawsuits against General Motors let alone a final judgement." - Ok. Fair enough. Redoing search limiting dates.
- "General Motors Ignition switch scandal" w/ filter from May, 2015 to Today - 40
- "General Motors Ignition switch recall" w/ filter from May, 2015 to Today - 120
- You're right! The results are a lot closer. "Recall" still looks like the winner though.
- Either way, if no one else objects, I'm not going to complain. ;-) NickCT (talk) 13:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
- You get different numbers withouth the " signs. I don't know what they are doing to the results exactly. In my opinion it should be relevant what was common AFTER General Motors was found guilty. Otherwise the quantities don't really say much. Of course alot of articles with "ignition switch recall" were published when the recalls started and there were no lawsuits against General Motors let alone a final judgement. Ich901 (talk) 22:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- It is frequently refered to as "ignition switch scandal", especially after it became known to the plublic that GM had known about the problem for a decade prior to the recall. (just google "Ignition switch scandal") Also GM was sued and found guilty and had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars. A company is not found guilty for such an issue if it was not guilty at all. I believe you that it was initially refered only as recall, because in contrast to VW scandal, GM didn't immediately admit that it had known about the problem when the public first took notice through the first wave of recalls. No wrongdoings were proven back then. Whereas in the VW case, the wrongdoings were clear shortly after the media took notice for the first time. Ich901 (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Ich901 and Greglocock: - I'm not going to revert the move b/c I don't feel too strongly about this topic, but frankly I think that WP:COMMONNAME would dictate against the move. Whereas the media most commonly reported the Volkswagen thing as a "scandal", the GM ignition switch got reported as a "defect" or "recall". Now frankly, I think the ignition switch thing was a little scandalous, so the name seems apt. That said, we look to sources to decide what to call things. We don't pick the names that we think are best. NickCT (talk) 16:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Requested move 22 March 2016
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed request. Hugh, you don't have to note your support, it's given that a nominator supports it unless otherwise stated. Cheers, Number 57 19:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
General Motors ignition switch scandal → General Motors ignition switch recalls – Article lede is "On February 6, 2014, General Motors (GM) recalled about 800,000 of its small cars..." The subject of this article is a recall campaign WP:COMMONNAME. Consistency with other recall article titles including 2009–11 Toyota vehicle recalls, Burger King Pokémon container recall, StarLink corn recall, 2007 pet food recalls, 2007 Chinese export recalls, 2010 Johnson & Johnson children's product recall, 2013 Fonterra recall, and 2012 peanut butter recall as per WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. "Scandal" is not used in article body. "Scandal" non-neutrally diminishes the historical event WP:POVTITLE. Google search results above in previous thread support move WP:SET. Add redirect from the singular General Motors ignition switch recall for convenience of search for readers unfamiliar with the plural nature. Hugh (talk) 17:06, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support as proposer. Hugh (talk) 17:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on General Motors ignition switch recalls. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140529084734/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/gm-recall-many-victims-were-young-drivers to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/gm-recall-many-victims-were-young-drivers
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150923060317/http://www.gmignitioncompensation.com/docs/Program_Statistics_8162015.pdf to http://www.gmignitioncompensation.com/docs/Program_Statistics_8162015.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407063359/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-06/gm-investors-unshaken-as-recall-cuts-3-billion-in-market-value to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-06/gm-investors-unshaken-as-recall-cuts-3-billion-in-market-value
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150925053209/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e1207eccc10c4f2a8ef550da95e121c0/gm-said-settle-criminal-case-over-ignition-switches to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e1207eccc10c4f2a8ef550da95e121c0/gm-said-settle-criminal-case-over-ignition-switches
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 03:13, 9 January 2017 (UTC)