Talk:Mercedes-Benz Viano

since this is the only vehicle to recieve a 5 star rating in australasia and since the vehicle has been upgraded to euro 5using blue motion technology ,all that mercedes should do is to use the extensive roof space to install a solarphotovoltaic charger ,whichwould cut down on airconditioning costs and utilise the extensive sunshine available in australia and thus mercedes would have created a truly global vehicle the solar diesel electric hybrid camper van which would be a boon for specialist /consultant physicians practising at senior cosultant level who have to travel all over australasia,as the vehicle would not only provide an efficient means of transport but also a fully furnished mobile home/office/hospital though their permanent base could be in sydney,melbourne brisbane or perthwith kindest regards,thanking you ,yours affly ,prof dr T M SARATCHANDRAPRASAD PANICKER SENIOR CONSULTANT PHYSICIAN/CARDIOLOGIST S M MEMORIAL GLOBAL VENTURES — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.97.44.68 (talk) 22:47, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Should this page be amalgamated with the Mercedes-Benz Vito page?Belmonter (talk) 18:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Merge to V-Class

This page and the Mercedes-Benz Vito page ought to be merged to Mercedes-Benz V-Class. This is the original name and has been used throughout in many markets. Since the Viano nameplate seems to be getting retired in favor of the original V-Class name, I don't see why there should be several pages with slightly misleading names any longer. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  18:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support: consolidation of both pages to V-Class makes the most sense to me. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support - You do realize V Class is a redirect to Viano? , Anyway per above pointless having misleading/confusing articles. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 19:33, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: move. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:23, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

---

Mercedes-Benz V-Class → Mercedes-Benz Vito – I believe the above change in name was a poor move, and Mercedes-Benz Vito should again become the primary title. I supported the above change because I believed the entire third-generation range was now called V-Class. However, it has later become apparent that the Vito name remains for the commercial versions, with V-Class for passenger models. Therefore, I believe Vito would still be the most common variant, and the title should reflect that. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:42, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

• Support: as nominator. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

• Dunno Support - my main concern before was to merge otherwise unnecessarily divided pages. What do the naming guidelines say, to use most common or first name? I believe that the V-class badge has been in use longer According to the article, this seems to be the best move, but I don't particularly care which one wins out except as far as title stability is concerned. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Vito has always been the name for the cargo van (since the 1996 original). V-Class was used the for the first generation passenger model and also the latest third generation. The second series used the Viano badge for the passenger model, except in Japan, which used V-Class from 2011 onwards. "Vito" is therefore the only continuously used name. It is also the most common, as the cargo vans sell in far greater numbers than the people carrier versions. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

• Support - Why the bloody hell cant Mercedes stick to one poxy name like any other vehicle manufacturer? ... Anyway it's all confusing so may aswell be moved back. –Davey2010 • (talk) 03:33, 30 August 2014 (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.