Talk:Toyota Motor Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on November 13, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks or consult the project page for further information.

Article requests: FIA Senate, Haas Lola Copyedit: Bahrain Grand Prix, History of Formula One Expand: Spyker F1, Mario Theissen, Franz Tost, Chinese Grand Prix, Sakon Yamamoto, Colin Kolles, Concorde Agreement, Formula One Constructors Association, McLaren MP4/1, Ove Andersson, Bob Bell, Korean International Circuit, Lewis Hamilton, Grand Prix Drivers' Association, F1 flops more Update: History of Formula One, Toyota, Robert Doornbos, Formula One regulations, 2006 Formula One season, Future of Formula One Review and comment: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2005 United States Grand Prix Images needed: Neel Jani, Ligier, Flavio Briatore, Lewis Hamilton more Current Portal Improvement Drive: History of Formula One other tasks | edit Help out with Portal:Formula One!

Toyota Motor Corporation is part of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

Japan To-do: edit purge Improve to Featured status Japan Improve ASIMO Burakumin and Buraku Liberation League Takako Doi Chikamatsu Monzaemon Education in Japan Japanese architecture Japanese art Japanese robotics Japanese strategic planning for the Pacific (1905-1940) List of Emperors of Japan (transl. from ja) Emperor Yozei of Japan List of Japanese artists Namioka, Aomori Nihonjinron Sadako Ogata Oishi Yoshio Politics of Japan Yagyu Shinkage-ryu Center Shiken (大学入試センター試験) More... Review First Sino-Japanese War Hinduism in Japan Inland Sea Kigo Narihira Santosen Temple Sazae-san Stroke order Heizo Takenaka Giovanni Battista Sidotti Requests See Requested articles Listed for deletion See this page, this page, and this page for lists. Grammar corrections Gaijin Takefuji Need images Every prefecture, see Subdivisions of Japan Sendai - Add demographic images More... Translate from Japanese Wikipedia Iemoto (家元) Blue Ribbon Award (Film) (ブルーリボン賞 (映画)) Otsu Scandal (ja:大津事件 (see also:Tsar Nicholas II) Gesaku (ja:戯作) More... Transliterations missing for Military ranks and insignia of the Japan Self-Defense Forces Wikify Ibaraki University Ikawa, Shizuoka Ima, Ai ni Yukimasu Japanese sculpture Mori Goro Organization of the Imperial Japanese Central China Army Organization of the Imperial Japanese North China Army Pre-Modern Japanese Studies Mailing List Sangaria Shaken Takefuji Vote: Talk:Dokdo#Rename vote Watch this list — Edit this list

Contents 1 Opening comments 2 Production facilities 3 Moving Toyota 4 Toyota Truck 5 Malaysian race? 6 Difference 7 2nd biggest in world? 8 huh? 9 Toyota in India 10 Western-Centric Wikipedia 11 Cars That Brake When You Don't 12 Probably a tangent, and I shouldn't be editing on WP at this late hour, but... 13 /atoyot in EverQuest, Asheron's Call, or both? 14 External Links 15 Rally? 16 Japanese not genearlly better 17 Toyoda?? 18 Rewrite 19 NPOV and Vandalism 20 "Most Well Engineered" 21 Auto Racing 22 Water 23 Toyota Coaster 24 Stake in Daihatsu? 25 Sections that shouldn't be here 26 AfD and neutrality notices 27 Requested move 27.1 Survey 27.2 Discussion

[edit] Opening comments

This page really needs to be rewritten from scratch. The first five paragraphs do a poor job of summing up the company and only talk about estimated success. I'm also a little concerned with the vague changes people are making against and for Toyota. I think the page title may be slightly confusing. Toyota refers to the Toyota industry group, inclusing Toyota Motor, Toyota Auto Body, Toyoda Automatic loom, etc... Maybe its better to create sub pages for all the individual companies and one main page for the industry conglomerate.

Chris_73

There are more such cases (especially in Japan: Mitsubishi, Kawasaki,...). But if one says Toyota the majority thinks of the carmaker.

anobo 15:21, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)

There's more that could be said about the Landcruiser, an iconic vehicle in much of the developing world. Mark Richards 18:03, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The Formula 1 constructor needs a page too. Rdsmith4 23:25, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Production facilities

Just a note, Toyota also has manufacturing facilities in Poland :)

Toyota is opening another plant in Ontario, Canada. They may be building some Scions there too.

[edit] Moving Toyota

I just made a comment here but it was wiped by the page moves. I think it's a bad idea to make Toyota be a disambig page when most links there are expecting Toyota Motor Corporation. We just went through the reverse of this at Ford and are now working on Cadillac. Even though it's not technically correct, we should not move the Toyota motor vehicle page away from Toyota. Instead, we should create Toyota (disambiguation) and have it linked at the top of the TMC page. Please hold off on this activity until there is some discussion. Thoughts? --SFoskett 18:48, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

I appreciate the comment. I want to point to you that in Japan, the brand names (Toyota, Mitsubishi, Sumitomo, etc) are shared by independent companies, under the keiretsu model. There is no western equivalent to that. Toyota is a brand name associated primarily with cars, but not exclusive to 1 company. In america, carmakers do not share their brand name with their "group" companies, but in Japan, they do. I have been involved in Japanese banking, manufacturing, and other businesses editing on wikipedia, and am very familiar with the situation. Christopher Mahan 18:59, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is all true. However, we are writing an encyclopedia. It is more important to be useful than 100% correct. If 99% of the people who enter "Toyota" are expecting Toyota Motor Corporation, then that is where that link should go. A brief look at the "what links here" certainly looks like this is the case.

Therefore, I request that Toyota be a redirect to Toyota Motor Corporation, and that Toyota (disambiguation) or maybe even Toyota Group be linked at the head of the article.

Further, before making huge moves like this, please consider bringing up the subject in the talk pages for a few weeks so people can have a say. --SFoskett 19:12, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Is there a talk page somewhere that discusses the policy for dealing with specifically this problem? Both methods have their ups and downs and there needs to be some reference we can discuss and fall back on. I suspect this is going to become a larger problem in the future. --Milkmandan 15:02, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

This has been in the talk pages for close to two years! Sneakers55 19:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Your point being...? All discussions are kept for the purposes of archiving and backtracking. Every detail recorded is part of Wikipedia's history, and may be referred back to in the future. Ariedartin JECJY ^Talk 14:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

My point was we're getting caught in analysis paralysis! Sneakers55 22:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota Truck

User:Gregkar is creating a whole bunch of articles relating to Toyota trucks, and I'm not sure what to do about it... they seem rather unnecessary, but I'm hesitant to list them on VfD right off the bat. Thoughts? Madame Sosostris 22:45, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to recommend that the page be merged immediately with the Toyota Hi-Lux page. Because the truck was known most commonly as the Hi-Lux in its native Japanese market, anything that's essentially a copy of the vehicle (e.g., Toyota Truck, Toyota Tacoma) needs to redirect there. The Toyota Truck Service Data and Toyota Truck Maintenance pages are nothing more than stubs-with-headers, and should probably be axed immediately—the right place for these would be under Toyota Hi-Lux/service, although I'm having a hard time coming up with what would go in there in the first place. The capitalization on those pages needs to be fixed, in any event.

That being said, however, this looks like a good start from a new user. I think the last thing we want to do is scare this guy away—it looks like he has a lot of good edits to offer! --Milkmandan 16:08, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to answer your question. I'd say no VfD for now, just because I'm dead-certain that this needs to be merged into the Hi-Lux page. --Milkmandan 16:11, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)

Thanks -- I don't know much about Toyota, but I figured there was probably something that this needed to redirect to. Madame Sosostris 02:45, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Tacoma is a separately designed truck and is not a mere Hi-Lux spinoff.

[edit] Malaysian race?

Toyota look to have an very promsing 2005 season after starting on the front row in the 1st race and taking the teams 1st ever podium finish the next race in Malaysia.

An anonymous user posted the above under Formula one team. In order to return to its original position, two things need to happen. The grammar and spelling need to undergo serious corrections, and two more information is needed. What race is this person talking about? And this next race in Malaysia, what race is it? Also, is there any citation to confirm this? oo64eva (AJ) 01:50, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

I think this person was writing about the first race of the 2005 Formula One season, the 2005 Australian Grand Prix. The second race of the 2005 Formula One season was the 2005 Malaysian Grand Prix. But I don't think anyone will miss that sentence. --Boivie 20:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Difference

Hi, in History it says that the first model was the A1 (built in 1935) and later in 1936 the production of model AA was started. but the caption of the image says "...the Toyota Model AA, the first production model of Toyota in 1933". Which is the correct date and model?--Jcw69 08:02, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

According to http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/about_toyota/history/1867.html, the AA production started in 1936. I changed the image caption. -- Chris 73 Talk 09:20, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd biggest in world?

The Fortune Global 500 has DaimlerChrysler as a larger company than Toyota - GM, DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota Motor come in 5, 6, and 7 on their list. john k 22:15, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

As with all rankings, it depends on how you calculate. Remember that the highest mountain on planet earth is in the Andes, if you measure from the Earth's center. To measure car companies, you can base the ranking on number of cars sold (equal to world market share), market capitalization, number of employees, net profit, total value of brand names, ... or mix ten different measures. It doesn't really matter which one we use for Wikipedia, as long as we have a foot note what we base the ranking on. -- Mkill 22:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, what is the one in this article based on? I believe the Fortune lists are based on gross revenues. But this includes revenues from things other than car sales (assuming these companies have other revenues). john k 23:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Toyota fell back into third place on sales. November 1, 2006

Instead of showing relevant and neutral information about the company and the products it produces, the Toyota article seems more like a showcase to see how successful some claim it to be.

[edit] huh?

"In 2004, US Goverment remove the Japanese Toyota to be American Toyota, American Toyota first showed that it had made its Toyota Highlander into the world's first mass-market seven-passenger hybrid SUV."

What does this mean? I've read it 3 or 4 times and still can't figure out where it's going.

[edit] Toyota in India

Toyota in India stub mainly contains info related to strike. Seems like an attempt to show Toyota in poor light. If the goal of this Sub-Stub was to detail Toyota's activities in India, historical and current then I could have understood. Or, if a separate stub titled "History of Strikes at Toyota Plants" had this information, it would have made sense.

[edit] Western-Centric Wikipedia

Wikipedia is becoming more and more Western-Centric with every passing day. Some people who edit and write have either very poor ethics and/or a hidden agenda to show the East in negative light. It almost looks like some christian club participating in an information war. For example in Lexus Articles ex: Lexus LS someone doesnt accept that Lexus Cars are one of the most Well Engineered, they are "merely" more reliable. Samstayton 01:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean to portait Lexus in a bad light! I test drove a Lexus LS before buying my TC and before I used to drive an Infiniti. The sentence: "Most well engineered" it simply gramatically wrong. Nobody (at least not me) is trying to portrait the "East" (Asia) in a negative way. Signature^brendel 19:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cars That Brake When You Don't

Toyota has developed some silly steering wheel mounted digital camera that *indirectly* checkes that the driver is alert and "on the job." Why did they have to go this way, why not a tradtional railway style failsafe device, afterall, the (much simpler) technology for directly monitering driver vigilance has been around since the late 1960s, in the form of a button pushed periodicaly to ensure that the driver is alert, the timer can also be reset by major control function (traction/braking/warning). Did Toyota decide that such a system would impractical in a road vehicle. Why do there have to be so many inconsistancies between road and rail vehicle design choises, particularly on the grounds of safety, which should driver conveniance matter more on a road vehicle than a rail vehicle? It it (partly) becuase a much higher percentage of females drive domestic road vehicles than drive rail vehicles and on average conveniance/user friendliness matters more to them? Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)(talk)

[edit] Probably a tangent, and I shouldn't be editing on WP at this late hour, but...

Just wondering...does anyone think the Toy Yoda lawsuit is worth mentioning? That would be the one where the Hooters waitress got a toy Yoda instead of a Toyota, sued, and then got a Toyota as part of the settlement. Just an example of how the original family name could be confused with a little green guy from Star Wars. --Coolcaesar 07:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

dear sirs/i want to know the deallers in used toyota forklift in japan i want to know the address ,tel,fax

Sorry, this is an encyclopedia, not a phone book. We don't know where you can get used forklifts. Try your local Yellow Pages or similar thing in your country. -- Chris 73 | Talk 08:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

    The Toy Yoda lawsuit is as irrelevant to this article as the lawsuit was itself.

[edit] /atoyot in EverQuest, Asheron's Call, or both?

The article states that using the /atoyot command in EverQuest will make your character do a special action. While I've admittedly never played EverQuest, I know that Asheron's Call does/did exactly that. Does EverQuest do this as well, or is it a mistake in the article? eXonyte 04:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

What does that have to do with Toyota?

• Sorry* didn't notice the "Popular Culture" section at the bottom.

[edit] External Links

Instead of listing the European countries (Ireland, UK,..) replace them with http://www.toyota-europe.com, which has links to each of these websites.

[edit] Rally?

Since when have Celica and Corolla been successful in WRC? CJ DUB 19:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Toyota was the Japanese manufacturer to watch in the 1980s and 1990s, and the Corolla WRC was campaigned into the 2000s. The Toyota Celica All-Trac (GT4) was intended as a homologation model. Toyota took home WRC championships in 1993 and 1994. [1] — AKADriver ☎ 19:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Long time ago...Peugeot, Subaru and Ford have dominated since. I made a change to the mothership page. CJ DUB 21:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese not genearlly better

Toyota might be the most sucessfull massmarket producer, but the smaller Japanese car makers got massive problems. At least the german and french producers are doing much better. And even Ford and Chrysler are doing better then the some Japanese producer.

For example, Scions are junk right now. That's a toyota brand. CJ DUB 20:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Funny, most Americans seem to be voting with their money right now for Toyotas and Hondas. Perhaps it has something to do with the superior styling and quality. The funniest thing is that both of them now build a lot of their cars in the United States with American workers and a large number of American parts and they simply don't have the huge quality issues that the Big Three have. So the difference is really just a matter of corporate culture---that is, a corporate culture that truly cares about quality versus giving lip service to it. Plus there's the fact that the state of Michigan has a pathetic educational system.--Coolcaesar 00:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong... well sort of. First, Toyota cars aren't exactly manufactured in the US; they are simply assembled with parts made mostly in China. Second, all of the jobs Toyota claims to have provided the US are in lower wage states where a Toyota Factory job would not be desirable. This is more of a marketing ploy to make Americans believe that Toyota is some domestic brand name with their country's interest in mind; Toyota has shown us just how careful they would like to be about who they allow to profit from their cars. Third, Michigan education ranks 9th in the US for funding and first in science, especially in the western areas where they are known for their ability in national youth science tournaments.

CJ you seem to be misinformed and highly personal POV. And smaller branches of Toyota are even unheard and unimportant. Ford is doing bad, but (mind you, its "Daimler" Chrysler) is doing well, despite Asian auto companies. And the influence of European car makers are weaker than Asian autos. Most of them only ship within themselves, while Toyota and like ship overseas. Oyo321 23:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Toyoda??

In the Origins section there is something about Toyoda Automatic Loom. Is Toyoda a spelling mistake/typo or is it correct?

is correct. toyoda ts the family name, was changed for the company for easier international pronounciation -- Chris 73 | Talk 14:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Chris is right. I've seen that same story in many different magazine articles about the company. They changed it because the soft D is hard to pronounce and the harder T sounds nicer anyway.--Coolcaesar 15:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who knows Japanese knows Toyota and Toyoda are interchangeable. In Japanese, it is completely indistingushable when written in kanji, and both are often interchanged and used...

[edit] Rewrite

This entry needs to be reviewed. The article is poorly written, with an obvious bias against TMC. I am new to Wikipedia editing, but a quick skim of the paragraphs will show a distate towards the automaker. (by User:161.253.53.126)

Could you point out which sections? Some of them are quite in favour of Toyota. I occasionally revert some anonymous Anti-Toyota POV on this article -- Chris 73 | Talk 06:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV and Vandalism

Read the Toyota article carefully. Now compare this to the Honda and General Motors article. It seems to be that somebody has been updating the GM page with pro-gm things and editing the Toyota page to have negative POV.

Most of the other automotive related articles are just fine. However, I'm concerned because someone on the GM talk page did a backtrace and said that an ip trace led to the conclusion that GM was editing the articles.

In any case, the article stinks of anti-Toyota bias. For example, the Toyota page lists the recent recall problems but GM and other automakers have had recall problems too. For comparison, the GM page has had its GM financial crisis section deleted and the Ford page has no mention of the Firestone rollover problems. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.5.190.140 (talk • contribs) .

• Here I removed a claim, as it is stuffed on the end of an irrelevant paragraph, and duplicated content from further down in the article. Also, reading the sources that are provided, the article makes no mention of Toyota being the most recalled car, rather they have just had a recall in July. Furthermore, the article doesn't take in to consideration the number of recalls as a percentage of total vehicle sales, but rather, as a straight number, which is an inherent bias. --Porqin 12:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Most Well Engineered"

Someone once again tried to stake the claim that "Lexus is one of the most well engineered cars in the world."

Let me back up that statement by reminding our Wikipedians that claiming anything that cannot be backed up with fact or data is known as a fallacy. As true as one might think, it is still an opinion and should be treated like all opinions in our articles - removed.

I deleted that from both this and the Lexus article. This is not "pro-western" to do, its the rules of wikipedia that we can not make partial or prejudiced statements.

Here at Wikipedia all content must be non-subjective, "most well engineered" qualifies as a statement that is POV and not abstracted.

This does not mean that Wikipedia shows pro-west bias. Look at the Lexus Article, it says that two highly regarded institutions, both Consumer Reports and JD Power & Associates ranks Lexus as the most reliable brand out there for some time now. Stating that it is the "most reliable" is not a "mere" thing. However, "most well engineered" is very subjective.

I am sorry if your own prejudices or your inferiority complex prevents you from remaining impartial here one wikipedia, but there are rules to this and making "claims" is not allowed, wikipedia only deals in facts.

On a side note, I feel sorry for you ('you' being the person who was offended earlier by the removal of a similar claim), you are so biased that you believe remaining impartial is pro-west.

[edit] Auto Racing

"While most racing victories go to General Motors and Ford..." Is this a case of 'citation needed' or is it a POV statement which should be re-written? As far as I'm aware, GM and Ford don't share the bulk of racing victories (however those are classed - it may be true in NASCAR, but what about Brazilian F3, Japanese GT racing, DTM etc?) and, even if they did, I'd feel a lot happier if someone could provide evidence. Jimwalrus 11:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water

"It has been reported that Toyota has created a car that runs on water, but will not sell it to the public, because they wish to support the oil trade that keeps terrorism alive."

Is this correct? I find it hard to believe that a multinational corporation with record number sales in the US would publicly admit to supporting the oil trade because it "keeps terrorism alive".

I do believe the statement on 'keeping terrorism alive' will certainly affect a lot of people fanatics to toyota. It is better to use "It has been reported that Toyota has created a car that runs on water..." and elaborate technological marvel achievements.

It is obvious that none of you are aware of the you are aware the anti-american Japanesse plot. Still bitter about the two atomic bombs, Japan has been planning the US' economic downfall for decades. learn the facts...

What kind of bullshit is this? Everyone knows Japan exports to the US, as is so dependent on the US economy. The whole world is intertwined now...so one goes down, we all go down, the US is too big to fall. Japan is such a small island nation, with its hands tied constitutionally, why is the US so scared of it? I would be watching China.

Toyota is just one of Japan's many pawns. They would like you to think they're here to 'move forward', but Japan's intention is to take out the American auto-industry and then attack the US when they're weak. Revenge for Hiroshima I suppose. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.186.131.66 (talk • contribs) 08:42 2006-10-05.

The American auto-industry is doing a good enough job taking itself out. Too much union bs to compete, simple as that. amicuss^Talk 15:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Come now, paranoia and conspiracy theories get us nowhere. There are countless thousands of conspiracy theories in the world, and so far, few have ever come true. And none as outworldly as yours. And furthermore, this is no place for original research. We are here to contribute facts, not speculations and airy statements. Consider this case closed. Ariedartin JECJY ^Talk 15:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota Coaster

The Toyota Coaster article didn't exist until now. Can someone please expand the stub? —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-10-21 08:12Z

[edit] Stake in Daihatsu?

The article says, "Toyota also owns majority stakes in Daihatsu and Hino..." and then, later, "...Toyota combined with its half-owned subsidiary Daihatsu Motor Company..."

How much of Daihatsu does Toyota own? "majority" and "half" seem mutually exclusive.

[edit] Sections that shouldn't be here

Having a quick look through the article, can someone please explain to me to purpose of the following sections: - Rugby Team: The section leads to an article about a Japanese Rugby team - Does the team have any direct links to the Corperation? - Names: This section, IMHO, is just this page written as a prose.

Anyway, sorry if I'm being picky - But can someone please explain to me the purpose of these sections. Thanks :-).--Skully Collins 09:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD and neutrality notices

I'm not sure that we really need the AfD notice on the top of this page, given that the AfD was filed in bad faith by a serial vandal. Also, does the "neutrality disputed" template on the article relate to a live dispute about a particular issue within the article, or was that vandalistic as well? Newyorkbrad 21:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Toyota Motor Corporation → Toyota — Legal names for companies only need to be added when there is ambiguity (for example, Nike, Inc.). In Toyota's case, there is no ambiguity - Toyota almost always refers to the company that makes the cars. It's why General Motors does not need "Corporation", but Ford Motor Company, given the ambiguity surrounding "Ford", does. There are over 1000 links to Toyota that all refer to the company. "Motor Corporation" in Toyota's case is just unnecessary. Bssc81 05:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

• Support - per above. Bssc81 05:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - When X redirects to Y, and X is the more common name, then Y should be moved to X. --Serge 08:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - see Category:Motor vehicle manufacturers of Japan, where most companies follow this protocol. Nissan and Daihatsu could maybe be nominated for renaming as well. --DeLarge 20:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 06:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:

• What is the most common usage here? I would think that this is the car brand and not the company. There are articles for the Lexus brand and for the Scion brand but the Toyota brand is folded into the main company article. I think that the Toyota brand should be split out into an article at Toyota and this article should be left here. Vegaswikian 19:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• I am attracted by this argument. It seems clear that this move will be made but the article split should then be discussed as a new issue. TerriersFan 03:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)