Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Ahunt (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I mean much more than the Sichuan Tengden article; the problem with your edits has turned out to be bigger than that. I'm talking about poorly explained removal of sourced content on Shenyang J-11 (most of the articles on Soviet/Russian/Chinese aircraft have NATO codes, so no reason to remove it on one specific article), addition of unsourced content on CASC Rainbow and CAIG Wing Loong II, and changes to sourced content on Sichuan Tengden. If you want to change content in an article, then change the sources too. By the way, none of this is intended to be "threatening" or "smearing". Please assume good faith in your exchanges with other editors. Thanks in advance. BilletsMauves€50009:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you for your kindly instruction.
Maybe I will re-edit them with sources added and I'm looking forward your instruction with assumed good faith.
Plus I have a question, if you think Soviet/Russian/Chinese aircraft have NATO codes is a tradition or convention and no reason to remove it on one specific article, then why the article about Chinese aircraft like Wing Loong series use manufacturer name instead of the military designation as title particularly? Isn't it a convention too? Or you think it is better to make Wing Loong an exceptional case in the category of Chinese military aircraft? We have to settle this out or it will become a very bad and confusing precedent in the future when new Chinese drone articles added. Infinty 0 (talk) 10:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is that we have to use or at least mention the commonly used names for the aircraft we are talking about in the articles. Western sources often use NATO codes to name Soviet/Russian/Chinese military equipment, sometimes without giving the actual designation used by its manufacturer or its users. Hence, mentioning these NATO codes at least once is useful for the reader's orientation, even though these code names are often meaningless for the people who design, manufacture and operate this equipment.
Regarding the Wing Loong article titles, as I said before and per the WP:Article titles policy, for the article titles we have to use the names most commonly found in independent, reliable English-language sources. Now, this criteria still leaves room for personal bias: people prefer to read and use some sources over others, and this influences their perception of which name is used more than the others. Moreover, the use of a name over another can vary over time, especially for subjects that are in the news. This is the case for Chinese-made drones: right now, I would say that the name "Wing Loong" is more widespread than the name "GJ-1", but maybe in five years it will be different.
What differentiates Wing Loong and Wing Loong II from some of the other Chinese drones is that they are quite popular on the export market, and they have been intensively used in combat by some of the export users (notably by the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia). Obviously, export users use the export name, not the one used by the PLA. So a lot of the reporting on these models also uses the export name. This is the reason why I think we should keep the designations "Wing Loong" and "Wing Loong II" for the article's names (but we should also mention the GJ-1 and GJ-2 designations in the main text, especially in the paragraphs dealing with the drones' use with the PLA).
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Xian Y-7 into List of aircraft produced by China. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, I don't know how to add attribution because I don't understand Wiki editing language(I'm using the visual editing). But I will study it, thank you. Infinty 0 (talk) 01:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Thank you for your contribution of Chinese car industry in English Wikipedia. However, since I noticed that you are also from China and your first language is Chinese as well, why not consider to contribute in Chinese Wikipedia as well? There are currently seriously lack of articles and updates about Chinese car models and brands in Chinese Wikipedia and even Ukrainian Wikipedia and Polish Wikipedia have more Chinese car articles than Chinese Wikipedia. So why not consider to contribute Chinese car articles in Chinese Wikipedia as well? It is so tragic to see that even other minor foreign language have more articles about Chinese car stuff than Chinese Wikipedia and Chinese car don't seem to have much attention in their "native language". I am currently uploading more HD Chinese car photos and creating some articles for Chinese Wikipedia in order to change this situation and I hope you could consider to contribute as well. Yours sincerely, User3204 (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Shanghai Maple Automobile Logo and Maple Automobile Logo.jpeg
Thank you for uploading File:Shanghai Maple Automobile Logo and Maple Automobile Logo.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Orphaned non-free image File:The logo of GAC Aion brand.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The logo of GAC Aion brand.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Regarding the Jaecoo 7: if a car uses one name in all English-speaking markets, then that is the correct title for the WP entry. See WP:CARNAMES. While en.wp has a mostly global perspective, English is still the main language and English-speaking markets have primacy.
As for Livan, I replied on my talk page - one article for Maple and one for Livan is plenty and there is no need to list all of the unrelated old Maple products on the Livan page - only include things that overlap both names. Question: what is the IP editor trying to prove? Do they mean to say that Maple is still a separate brand from Livan? Is there any evidence to support their viewpoint or are they just being disruptive? Thank you, Mr.choppers | ✎ 18:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Jaecoo is merely brands that Chery used in selected oversea markets, mostly mid-east countries and Russia (the same as Omoda brand). Jaecoo is far from a global brand and in some English-speaking countries like Australia and NZ, it still uses the Chery brand.
For Livan, and I don't really understand what the IP editor try to express. I'm a native Chinese and as far as I can find on the Chinese language sources, from the capital structure, SMA and Livan can be considered as the same company. The SMA ceased to be an independent brand since 2010 but exists as a subsidiary company that continued to produce Geely vehicles. In 2020, the Maple brand was revived as the Geely launched an joint-venture between SMA and Kandi while Geely further acquired its stake in the joint-venture and invite another new player Lifan (which was also acquired by Geely) to the JV and changed its name to Livan (Maple is not a separate brand anymore). Thus how it is comes to today. SMA never ceased to operate, the name "Shanghai Maple" ,"Maple" and "Livan" are different brand names that SMA used in past decades. This is why I try to prove that it is not necessary to set different articles for them, and the vehicle models that SMA produced should be showed together. They are just the SMA's legacies. Infinty 0 (talk) 22:27, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That mostly makes sense. But Maple/Shanghai Maple are still distinct brands from Livan, just as how Simca became Talbot but remains a separate nameplate with a separate history and its own Wikipedia article; we do not include earlier Simca products at the Talbot page - only those cars which were also sold with Talbot badging. This is why the Livan article should not list anything before the Maple 30X (shouldn't it be "Maple 30x", by the way?). For some very shortlived brand like Dearcc, it might make more sense to move all content to Enovate, but Maple had significant history before being subsumed.
As for the Jaecoo 7 article, please start a discussion on the talk page. Provide a link to Australian market Geely-branded product and I will support restoring your title. Mr.choppers | ✎ 03:18, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Infinty 0! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Jaecoo 7 several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
If someone reverts your edit or page move, you don't revert them back, you start a discussion on the article talk page. Please do that in the future instead of move-warring. Doing that persistently can lead to a loss of editing privileges. LizRead!Talk!05:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Seres SF5, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leapmotor C01, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Executive. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Automotive industry in China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BWM.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Great job fixing the article List of SAIC vehicles. Seeing you have fixed the errors that are needed for a standard Wikipedia page. The encyclopedia article is now closed for deletion. The page issue tags and {{subst:List of SAIC vehicle's|prod}} have been removed. Well done 😎 MrFlyingPies23 (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Wuling Motors, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Thanks for uploading File:AITO brand logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Automotive industry in China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of GAC vehicles with joint venture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Automotive industry in China, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Amigao (talk) 04:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Logo of Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Xiaomi Auto.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Logo of Xiaomi Auto.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Please explain what do you mean by "Not a U.S. based manufacturer" Its headquarters is in the U.S., therefore, that makes it a U.S. based manufacturer. Even if a company moved its headquarters from one country to another, it still gets the templates and categories of that country it moved to. Like for example, Sega was originally based in the U.S. (Hawaii) but have since then moved their HQ to Japan. And it gets the templates and categories of Japan as well. 2600:6C5D:5CF0:8420:A408:4F:34ED:2438 (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The company you are talking about is SF Motors, a subsidiary of Seres Automobile.
There reasons I don't think it should be labeled as an U.S. manufacturer are simple and clear.
The SF Motors was an U.S. company acquired by Seres, and this article is about Seres not SF Motors
The SF Motors is an R&D company only, and never manufactured a single vehicle on the U.S. soil.
Thanks for uploading File:Livian Automotive Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thank you for your encouragement, this is truly heart-warming. I didn't expect that the article would attract certain editor who has specific political agenda against China, which made the article less informative and neutral. This is completely contrary to my original intention.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Tim Wu (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
November 2024
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Comac C909. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Your recent editing history at Automotive industry in China shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Amigao (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why I am banned? Please check the edit history and talk page again. The user Amigao made a substantial change first to the article without explanation or consensus. Even after the discussion was initialed, he kept editing it as he wish before any consensus is reached. What I did was just restoring the article to the point before all the conflict started, how it becomes my fault? @Daniel CaseInfinty 0 (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As it says quite clearly in the notice above, you made more than three reverts to an article within a 24-hour period. This is the brightest bright-line rule of Wikipedia. There aresome exceptions, but restoring a prior version you believe to be better is not one of them. And when there is ongoing discussion on the talk page, as there has been here, this rule is especially important.
You aren't "banned", just blocked temporarily. But it does not seem from the above that you are learning anything from this. I just gave you that opportunity. If you don't take it, and continue the same behavior, the next block will be longer. And if you keep doing that, it would be within an admin's discretion to block you indefinitely, effectively a ban. Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Response
Hycan was made by GAC and Nio, Nio left and now GAC has majority ownership, And according to carnewschina, Kaiyi is backed by chery. Thank you. JamAlBorey (talk) 11:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JamAlBorey Kaiyi is 82% owned by the government of Yibin and 18% by Chery. Hycan 68% owned by a private company Pearl River Investment and 25% by GAC and GAC Aion. You can double check it on their official website. Infinty 0 (talk) 11:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1.I've done some search for the Costin and Radten of Chery you have edited, but can not find any evidence that these two brands have ever come into operation.
2. Hozon Eureka is just a concept car of Neta Auto and it is not a manufacturer or marque.
The information on Carnewschina is often incorrect and outdated. Maybe you can check the Dcar or Yiche, which are the most popular and authoritative car website/application of China.
Letin and Weltmeister claimed to be under reorganization but such claims are mostly commercial propaganda, and it should be considered as bankrupt until further evidence is available (resuming operations or production).
Jiyue is experiencing an operational crisis, but I don't think it should be considered as "bankrupt" before Geely or Baidu makes an official statement. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Idk if the information from carnewschina is incorrect and outdated.. And I can't access Dcar and Yiche, And Jiyue, put it in Defunct as Geely and Baidu said they have removed all financial aid to the company, and they have stopped most operations, the same with Hycan, And supposedly, Letin started operations according to Catnewschina. JamAlBorey (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a high probability that Hycan and Jiyue would go bankrupt, but it is best to wait patiently for more accurate official news. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found information about Radten and Costen from Chinese sources. Costen is a local state-owned brand in Shandong, and Radten is a start-up company located in Hebei. Both brands are manufactured (OEM) by Chery, but news about their prototypes only appears in In 2021, and there is no information about the launch. It can be speculated that the two brands are already ceased(or they never start) operations. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IDK one dude said on china car forums that Radten was merged into exeed but I can't verify that, Anyway, Can you tell me what are the best websites to learn about Chinese Auto news, and provide links? JamAlBorey (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These three websites cooperate with most of China's automobile manufacturers, and the car model information on them is highly consistent and has high credibility.
No， EEZI is an independent company which is not under Zotye Auto or Jiangnan. They don't have any capital relation. If you read the article which you referred, the EEZI and Zotye just signed a strategic cooperation agreement which enable EEZI to source the vehicle from Zotye(Jiangnan). Infinty 0 (talk) 17:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1.Meizu has only released a concept car, and it is not clear whether the brand will be put into operation. According to the current trend of Geely Group's brand contraction and merger, it is highly likely that Meizu will not be put into operation. It is recommended to wait for more accurate news or announcement before adding it to the list.
1.There is no production car from Meizu currently. It is just a concept car which was made by Geely and a concept car only doesn't make it a manufacturer. We just need to be patient enough to see whether it could come true.
OK, But isn't Qiantu and LinkTour active? LinkTour has a 2024 car called the yue 1, And Qiantuntook a 2 year break from 2020 to 2022, But r3started operations in 2022.. JamAlBorey (talk) 18:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for some of my mistakes, A lot of car brands I don't have alot of info on them, So I do my best to find info on them, But alot of times, I find a little bit of unverified info, Do I do my best to try and come up with a conclusion, I wish their was a site in English that has the same amount of indo as Chinese ones.. JamAlBorey (talk) 18:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay. It is no one's fault. There is just not so much information about Chinese car brands and manufacturers in English. I'm a native Chinese so I can try best to verify those information which I hope you won't mind. Anyway, thank you for your contribution and if you have any question about my editing please feel free to ask me. Infinty 0 (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found that the Farnova has been renamed to Jiading International Group Holdings Ltd. But it seems a advertisement/media company? Infinty 0 (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1.JMEV is a joint venture which is invested by Renault which has already be mentioned in the joint venture section of Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi.
2.LeSee has not produced any production car, they only had a concept.
3. Again, Zinoro was a joint venture brand between BMW and Brilliance, but the BWM has already acquired majority stakes over Brilliance Auto. So technically It became a foreign brand then and has been mentioned in the foreign manufacturers/brands section.
A different logo doesn't make it an independent brand. You will find that it is still under the JMC brand if you check the JMC official website. Whether a brand has the characteristics of independent operation depends on its capital relation and sales channels. At present, it has not made the distinction. Infinty 0 (talk) 17:49, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on who you ask, Some say it is a Motor with wheels that runs on roads, some say it should have 4 wheels, but in general, Motorcycles are Automobiles.. JamAlBorey (talk) 18:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1.Chana is just a former name of Changan, not other brand.
2. I didn't delete Baoya
3. Jiangling Motor Holdings is under Ford (Ford 32%, JMCG 25%, Changan 25%), technically it is not a Chinese state owned brand. please check their website for ownership info or the article. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about XGjao?
Costin was rolled back to chery in 2022, Their only model (The EC1) was rebranded to Chery Wujie Pro, I think you can't search for it because it has a different name in Chinese.. JamAlBorey (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found information about Costin, which is called Qilu(奇鲁) in Chinese. It is a private enterprise located in Shandong Province. This Costin was originally produced by Chery, but later the two parties cancelled the cooperation for unknown reasons, which means that this brand called Costin did not exist in the first place and had nothing to do with Chery. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to Wkikproject: Chinese cars , Reech is still in operation and it is the restructured version of LVCHI, Nut I have absolutely nothing to verify that.. Do you have? JamAlBorey (talk) 11:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey man, Don't remove Costin and Radten, They may haven't mass produced any car, But they STILL produced some, Theirfor, They are a car manufacturer, And their are a lot of brands here that haven't produced a car, Like Polestones, Modern Auto and others because they are manufactured by BAW, So does that mean we should remove them? Definitely not, The same is true with Costin and Radten, who HAVE produced a car, If what you are saying is true, then why is Maextro here? They only unveiled a concept, so whatever you are saying doesn't make sense AT ALL. JamAlBorey (talk) 07:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is incorrect to say that Polestone(or Rox) and Modern Auto that they don't make production car. They actually did and Polestone sold quite a lot. As for Maxtero, this is a brand backed by Huawei and belongs to the Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance. It is one of the best-selling electric vehicle brands in China since 2022. I agree that Maxtero currently has no mass-produced cars, but I don’t agree with comparing it with some weak brands that have only released concept cars but not mass-produced cars. This is not a manufacturer of the same level and scale. If you have any objections, you can delete Maxtero. I will wait patiently for the production car to be released and add it to the list. But at the same time, I will also insist on deleting so-called manufacturers that do not have mass-produced cars. Infinty 0 (talk) 08:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you dare delete them, actually cos5in ec1 rolled of the production lines in 2022, So it IS a car manufacturer, The same with Ruitang, But ruitang only manufactured a few cars, so it is a car manufacturer, As long as a car was made, Then it is a car manufacturer. JamAlBorey (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's never about daring or not, it about verifiable facts. I won't oppose if you can provide any evidence that can prove Costin and Radtin had ever built any prodution cars. I'm not sure if you are aware that there are many similar investment frauds and failed projects in the Chinese automobile industry. They usually release a concept car and then disappear. It is difficult to compare this so-called brand with a manufacturer that actually has a production line and brings goods to the market. This would only compromise the credibility of this list. Infinty 0 (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Judging from all current information, Qilu didn't have any mass-produced models after releasing its first prototype in 2021, nor is there any information about the model being launched. However, according to reports, it was an enterprise invested by the Shandong Provincial Government (not a joint venture with Chery) and has stopped operating for some reasons. I think it can be put on the list. Infinty 0 (talk) 16:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. "Manufacturer/Brand" means a qualified manufacturer with a specific brand. It does not refer to a "brand" that does not make any cars. Those "brands" usually refer to investment scams. These are two completely different concepts. Don't play with words. Infinty 0 (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know what is going on with these brands? Henrey Automobile, Zhejiang Plante NEV, Eastone, Ziyou Motor, Ciwei Auto, Pocco (Pengke), Ltd. ZRD Auto, AOJ Auto, Chengdu Lemst Motors, Zhuhai Guangtong Auto (Yinlong), U power, Kissun Auto, Regal Automobile. JamAlBorey (talk) 09:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JamAlBorey can you provide any crediable evidence that Qiantu are still operating? Do you check Dcar or Yiche or Autohome? You've been keep making mistakes. Learn and try to double check facts before editing. Infinty 0 (talk) 07:36, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, this one I am 100% sure of, you once told me about jiyue when I said it is Defunct, you said that we should wait a bit till they declare bankruptcy or something, Qiantu is still operating, They expanded to my country in 2024, They are still selling cars, They didn't declare bankruptcy. JamAlBorey (talk) 09:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They announced that they will be expanding to Jordan and other Middle Eastern countries in 2023, And held an event in 2024, They featured a K50 (But it looked like a plastic model of the K50), But other than that, I think they were going to open a store in the UAE, But I Don't have any updates on that, And I also remember that they sold a caring UAE.
@JamAlBorey The news link you provided is from two years ago and merely states that Qiantu Motors plans to launch the K50 in the Middle East. There is no concrete evidence to suggest that they have actually even sold a single vehicle. Furthermore, Qiantu has been promoting the K20 for a long time, but it has yet to go into production. Don't you sense a hint of potential investment fraud in all of this? Infinty 0 (talk) 10:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dalian Huanghai and Polasun were acquired by WM Motor. Since WM Motor, the parent company, has declared bankruptcy, it would be more informative to list these subsidiaries under WM Motor. This would provide readers with a clearer picture of the corporate hierarchy. Infinty 0 (talk) 10:30, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I put them in Acquisition or defunct subsidiary is because wm Motor didn't intent on reviving them, Also they went bust before WM Motor did, And WM Motor will restart operations while they won't. JamAlBorey (talk) 12:44, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Put them, Anyway, How has it been? And since there are alot of chinese cars, Are you happy with your purchase, or do you think it was not? Your answer will help me as I am looking for the best hybrid car, Have you modified it? JamAlBorey (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty impressive, this is actually my first time purchasing a Chinese car, and it has exceeded my expectations. The 03+Racing comes pre-equipped with some performance parts straight from the factory, so I've only made some minor modifications. Infinty 0 (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also asked moderaters from China Car Forums about Qiantu, He told me that Qiantu might be in financial trouble, But they still didn't close operations, Nor did they declare bankruptcy, So Qiantu isn't Defunct. JamAlBorey (talk) 09:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Geely into Geely Auto. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
