Talk:Volvo Halifax Assembly

Just updated some information on produced models and trade legislation. Nfjb (talk) 04:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Article improvement & reversion

Nfjb, it is not acceptable to revert edits, wholesale, that brought the article considerably closer to compliance with Wikipedia policy and principles related to NPOV, style and structure, and fixed basic errors of spelling, grammar, and syntax. It is especially unacceptable to do so without any discussion here on the article talk page, and without so much as an edit summary. Please take whatever effort you require to understand that this is a coöperative venture, not a competitive one, and you may not undo valid work simply because you would rather see "your" text displayed. If you really feel that "your" version is better, you will need to please explain that position here on the talk page and attain consensus before reverting. That is how it works here.—Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C05:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Added in all the necessary changes and citations. Just looking through my old press releases for the ones I added in the other day. Could you please redo the picture pixel levels they looked better the way they were. Nfjb (talk) 07:38, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Model Section

Do not edit 120 model section under the operations heading. The specific 122 models built at the facility are important to note (DO NOT EDIT) as they were not all generic Amazons. If they were I would have tagged them as that. Nfjb (talk) 07:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Unilateral language such as "DO NOT EDIT" and "If (n) was the case I would have written it that way" is not acceptable here. See WP:OWN. This is not "your" article; no editor gets to decide on his own what text stays and what text goes. We work by consensus here, and—again—the standard for inclusion of a statement in a Wikipedia article is not what we know (or think we know) but what we can prove with citations of reliable sources.

Furthermore, please stop at once making your edits one little tiny bit at a time. It is rude and makes life unnecessarily difficult for your fellow editors. There is a preview button you can and should use to see how your edit will look before committing to it. Make your edits in batches, not in long sequences of onesie-twosie.

You will find that courteous, polite, coöperative behaviour pays off bigtime here. Selfish, rude, competitive behaviour, in contrast, tends to cost bigtime. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C08:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

References

Nfjb, I'm glad to see you taking a more productive approach to editing Volvo Halifax Assembly, and I'm particularly glad to see you beginning to understand that assertions must be supported, but you need to do it properly. Just using a few words to describe where you read something does not even begin to get the job done. These are examples of "references" you added to Volvo Halifax Assembly this evening:

1. http://www.volvoamazonpictures.se/production/production.html
2. Hargrove, Buzz. Laying It on the Line: Driving a Hard Bargain in Challenging Times. Toronto: HarperCollins, 2009. Print.
3. Chadwick, Kathleen. 40 Years: The Story of Volvo's First Forty Years in America. Rockleigh, NJ: Olle Alexson/Volvo Cars of North America, 1995. Print.
4. Volvo Canada Ltd. North York - Annual Report: New Halifax Operation Boosts Performance, 1967
5. Keenan, Greg. "Volvo to Close Halifax Plant." Globe and Mail [Toronto] 1998. Print.
6. Volvo of North America - Press Release: Northern Operations, 1973
7. Canadian Auto Workers. Press Department. Volvo Settles. 5 Nov. 1998. Print.
8. Government of Nova Scotia - Hansard of Legislative Proceedings (September 9, 1998)
9. Canadian Auto Workers. Press Department. Volvo Settles. 5 Nov. 1998. Print.
10. http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/halifax/DVD/fig80-eng.php
11. Sowerby, Garry. "A Thirty-year Take on Odyssey 77." Vancouver Sun, 2010
12. Canadian Auto Workers. Press Department. Volvo Settles. 5 Nov. 1998. Video.

Of these, only #3 and #4 are close to being adequate refs. The others aren't. The idea is to give the reader enough information to be able to go to the source and look at it without additional work to try to find it. "Globe and Mail, 1998" doesn't get that job done. "Canadian Auto Workers. Press Department." doesn't get the job done. Bare URLs without plain-English descriptions don't get the job done. Book titles with no page number don't get the job done. Please read up on how it's done, and begin doing it correctly, or you will come to be viewed as a lazy editor who leaves messes for others to clean up. That's not a reputation you want to get. There are tools to make this easy. Here is my favourite reference text generator. You just click the type of source, enter the relevant info, click "Get text", and you get properly-formatted reference text to paste into the article you're working on. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C08:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Memorize!

Ya no worries i will get on that as soon as i have a chance. Unlike other articles this one might be more of a challange. The info is all valid only prob is the citations. The Halifax plant was important no doubt but there arn't any scholarly souces regarding Volvo plants. Most of the information was from offical Volvo press releases and the such so they are there but might not be totally accesable in a few seconds you know. My objective was to let people know that this place really did exist so I created the page a while ago. In terms of finding more informtion thats about it for now. While there can been books written about say Torslanda or Skovde there might be 3 lines written bout Halifax and well it's pretty sad becasue without it who knows what might have happened to Volvo in North America. I just tried to compile and post all the stuff I had. Sorry bout that. So far finding direct URLs is like literally harder than trying to pan for gold. I will post everything I can from books I have but thats about it. For now I figure we just leave that infroamtion in. I check it fairly regualry so if I come across any more internet stuff I'll but it in. Deal? Nfjb (talk) 21:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Nfjb, could you please actually read what other editors are trying to tell you before responding? Scheinwerfermann clearly stated that nos 3 and 4 are close to OK, and they do not include URLs. Linkable URLs are not the problem, not properly referencing is the problem. Also, a quick proofreading before you hit "save page" would make at least me very happy - and it would be polite.

Could you also please remove all the copyvio photos? I think that would be all of them, am I right? There is currently a backlog for deleting photos in the Commons, but that doesn't mean it is a good idea to leave them here. I have provided a useful cartoon with which you should please familiarize yourself. Thanks.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 07:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

First plant?

The text says: "first assembly plant Volvo opened outside of Sweden", but this is - depending on the interpretation of this sentence - a contradiction to what you might read at the DiVolvo article about an assembly plant opened some years befire. The link #2 provided does not work, even not with the WayBack Machine. Can anybody please verify this? --Roxedl (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, DiVolvo seems to have been an independent operation. I have the Lindh book and it states the same. Thanks for your help in removing AutoJunkie's nonsense.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)