Talk:Chrysler Pacifica (minivan)

American vs British spelling

I saw the word "petrol" and believe it should be using the American word "gasoline". No im not going on a "USA! USA!" thing. I believe the page should use American English spelling and wording due it being a car produced by an American marque. The Winter of Steppes (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Naming

Shouldn't this article be titled something like "Chrysler Pacifica (minivan)" instead of "Chrysler Pacifica (2017)" as the vehicle will presumably be offered beyond just 2017. EvoSLR (talk) 16:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

yesThe Winter of Steppes (talk) 23:21, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

See WP:AUTOCONV#Nomenclature. When there are two models with the same name, the preferred disambiguation is by, in order, location (not applicable here), model code, generation (N/A, they're not connected other than by name), and year. I see they've just been renamed by model code. I'd actually prefer naming by year, since model code also suggests they're somewhat related. "(2017)" would be valid as it is the launch year of the car (or model year at least), while (2003) or (2004) would be added to the original Pacifica. See, for example, Fiat 500 (2007). --Vossanova ^o< 16:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 30 December 2018

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved per consensus below. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 08:25, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

---

• Chrysler Pacifica (RU) → Chrysler Pacifica (minivan)
• Chrysler Pacifica (CS) → Chrysler Pacifica (crossover)

– These parentheticals are much more accessible to the average reader than technical jargon currently used. WikiRedactor (talk) 02:57, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support – at least it sounds right per nom. The current disambiguators do not help recognizability. Dicklyon (talk) 04:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - as mentioned earlier, automotive disambiguation is subject to WP:AUTOCONV#Nomenclature, and this is not considered a valid practice. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:04, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

  Thanks for pointing out that essay. But there's nothing there, nor in the article, to indicate what RU or CS means. Are you saying the convention is to disambiguate with cryptic codes, even when unfamiliar and not even explained, or am I missing something? Dicklyon (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

• Support per Dick. The above oppose is referencing an essay, which is trumped by WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. Calidum 17:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
• Support per WP:AT (and WP:NCDAB). Policy supersedes the essay, even though the essay has contained that wording for several years. In order for the project instructions to gain greater standing, there could be a proposal to turn WP:AUTOCONV into a guideline. At that juncture I assume that editors unassociated with the WikiProject would raise the recognizability issue and the contradiction would be resolved. Dekimasuよ! 06:42, 6 January 2019 (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.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chrysler Pacifica (crossover) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)