Talk:Eurovans

Concern over name

I'm concerned about this. The naming of the article should be in line with previous discussions - to wit, it should not be a generic name but rather one specific model. It should also not be plural... Therefore, I suggest "Fiat Ulysse" since that name has remained constant, or "Sevel van" or "Sevel minivan" since that's acceptably specific. I'm especially against calling the article "Eurovan" or anything similar since there is an unrelated specific model called this (the VW). I suggest a disambiguation page at "Eurovan" pointing to this and that. I see no problem using the word Eurovan in the article however, and calling it out as an "aka" in the infobox... --SFoskett 21:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Steve, first of all thanks for adding the Systran link to the Chair HKDRT :D I hope you find this as much as I do - if you want more fun, to the Systran thing with the Japanese Toyota Camry :D

As concerns the naming of the article, it is "eurovans" rather than "Eurovan", it does create some confusion, but it's like Pontiac Astre and Opel Astra. I think it is a specific name, the eurovans are most often referred to like this, and I have never came across them being referred to as "Sevel minivans" (the "Sevel vans" referred to the LCVs in my experience), and individual vans are referred to as "an eurovan" only when the talk is of eurovans in general, and then one of them has to be mentioned, just like in the article.

As stated on every edit page on this site, "Content must ... be verifiable." The title on this article "Eurovan" is wrong. While it makes sense to combine articles on these cars into one article (since they have more in common than differences), there is no publicly-known collective name for them. I have owned these vehicles continuously since 1998, first in France, then Norway, now in the UK. I have never heard them referred to as Eurovans. Do a Google search. I just did, and 99 per cent of the references are to Volkswagen sites, the sole exception being a site called eurovan2.com. cornellier 19 July 2006

What you are really saying is that there is no collective name for them that YOU know.

Thanks for you speedy reply, Bravada. I don't take the above remark personally. I say quite clearly that Google shows that Eurovan is not a known collective name for these cars. (I'm using Google from the UK, maybe that shows different results from what you get, but this the en.wiki).

I have experienced them being referred to that way so many times that it was only natural for me to name the article on them that way. If there is no other common name for them, I guess we have no other choice but to go by that. Oh, I just realized - by "common" I mean "a name for all of them" not "a name used commonly". My English is rather poor, so if you can help find a better way to express that, I would be grateful.

But the name *isn't* used commonly; perhaps you could point me to what is considered a valid source, but I don't think Autobild is valid source for a question regarding English language terminology. If you want to call it Eurovan in de.wiki go for it.

You are right that the VW Eurovan is a more popular hit due to (still) American-slanteness of the WWW, and the fact that this is not (I admit) that popular name (after all, are Jag S-Type and Lincoln LS often referred to as "DEW98s" and are they referred to as a whole too often at all?) doesn't help here. So, the Eurovan redirects to the Transporter (there isn't actually even a disambig notice there, I forgot about that), but people looking for those particular vehicles get redirected here, and they can still go to the VW thanks to the disambig link.

As concerns the statements you have marked as needing references, I will try to rectify that, but I also encourage you to be bold and help improve this article yourself - it clearly needs it, as 99% of the content here was authored by one person :D Thanks in advance, Bravada, talk - 01:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. Incidentally I'd add that the merging your started still needs a little work -- there is some redundancy with the other Sevel articles. cornellier 20 July 2006

OK, the bottom line is - people looking for the Eurovan will type in Eurovan and go straight to the VW article. Those looking for specific eurovans will type in their names and come to this article. On the rear occasions that people would like to find out what the term "Eurovan" or "eurovans" they came accross means, they will be directed to either article depending on whether they use singular or plural, and then the disambiguation notices will let them establish whether they are in the right place. Does that make sense? Bravada Talk to me! 15:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

PS. After some Google searches I have established that in the US and to some extent UK, "eurovans" denote all kinds of vans made in continental Europe (apart from being the plural of the American EuroVan), so perhaps a dismabiguation page for "Eurovans" listing all vans made in Europe that could fall under the category, the eurovans here in particular, and the EuroVan would do the trick? Do note that I see it as be used for "Eurovans" and not the "Eurovan" article. This article might then be renamed to "Eurovan (PSA/Fiat Auto)". How about that?

I think "Eurovan (PSA/Fiat Auto)" is entirely correct considering that people call these things "Eurovans" in Europe. But yes, over here I have read "Eurovan" as referring to the Ford Galaxy, Opel Sintra, VW Eurovan, and lots of other European-designed (read, too small for the US) vans. --SFoskett 14:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Um, except people don't call these things "Eurovans in Europe.

Hey, did you know about the Sevel Van article? --SFoskett 01:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure I did, its existence is what prompted me to write this one, I thought it was more or less clear :D The "Sevel vans" is usually how the commercial vans are referred to, I've never heard the eurovans being referred to as "Sevel vans". I believe we need one general "Sevel" article, and one article for each van series (initially I asked about that at the Wikiproject talk page, but now I came to this conclusion). Given that both "Experts" and "Scudos" can be called "Sevel vans", I have no idea how to call the other two articles. Perhaps, given that the amount of information might not be that large, we might have one "Sevel van" article for all commercials vans for the time being? Bravada Talk to me! 11:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

PS. I understand that this article is ok with you provided it is introduced under the name "Eurovan (PSA/Fiat)" and it will be OK to supersede all the individual articles with it. Now, do individual articles have to be simply wiped out clean and replaced with redirects or is there a more formal procedure?

The article looks good. Go ahead and copy this content to Eurovan (PSA/Fiat) and redirect the other names to it. Check for double redirs, and you're set. No formal process needed. Good work! --SFoskett 19:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Response to Cornellier

This page became a nightmare to edit now, so let me reply by starting a new section. I will deal with the major issue below, but as concerns realigning the Sevel articles, I have asked Steve about that sometime ago, but we didn't pursue that topic any further. As I see you are the main author of one of those articles, and perhaps know more of the Sevel operations and the commercial vans than I do, I believe you can expand and realign those articles better. Or would you prefer me to try to do it first?

Eurovans or not

First of all, let me express my belief that the English Wikipedia is not the "Wikipedia for people from countries where English is the official language", but "Wikipedia in English" - and, as English is the lingua franca of today, a general Wikipedia. As such, it adopts English as the language the articles are written in, but does not, and should not, adopt the POV of the British, Americans, Australians or whoever else.

As concerns Google search, I am using the standard version of Google (www.google.com, English interface) - try searching for "Eurovan PSA" to filter out the omnipresent Volkswagen. Out of the results I got that way, I have chosen AutoBild Lexikon because it seemed the most "formal" source. The name is used in many European countries and languages, therefore it didn't seem that important to me that this particular one isn't in English. As concerns "commonly used" - I know it is NOT commonly used, as the vehicles aren't often referred to as a group. But we need a name for the article, so if there is a name used at least sometimes, it's better than nothing. I wanted to avoid a naming disaster like the French article.

As concerns "Eurovan" as a generic name for a van from Europe, this is an out-of-Europe POV, but disambiguation notices are to help people of different backgrounds and accustomed to different naming help find what they are looking for. If an American user, who heard somebody speak of "Eurovans", comes to this article, he or she might find out that this is what was meant. I guess I could have put it better, but I hope you get what I mean.

Regards, Bravada, talk - 22:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Eurovan 1 engines

I know that the 806 was also sold in the last year of production fitted with the DW10ATED4 HDI engine. This is the 110bhp 2.0 16 valve common rail engine. This engine was basically the bottom of the DW10 engine fitted with the 16 valve head off of the 2.2 HDI from the 406. It didn't have ethe balancer shafts in the sump or the particulate filter like the 2.2 though. Regards dieselnutjob

Great! It would be great if you would go bold and insert that info into the article, perhaps even finding and citing some sources - given your extensive knowledge of the topic I believe this would not be a problem for you. Thanks! Bravada, talk - 23:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Ulysse redirects here

why does a search for "ulysse" redirects here? shouldn't it redirect to a disambiguation page instead? 74.56.152.155 (talk) 04:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Citroen C8???

Although i freely admit i don't like these massively grouped pages of 4 or 5 cars i'll point out an obvious problem with them when they're as short as this one - they create very little information on some models and favour others over the rest. In this case the Citroen C8 redirects here yet gets no mention at all while all other models get their own paragraph. I'm not sure if that's through popularity or not but it's unfair even for a rebadged van to get no mention among others that did. I might add whatever info i can find myself. Thanks Jenova20 13:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I see own paragraph only for 807 GT in second generation.... yeah but thats the problem here when grouped like this nobody is intrested editing this article. -->Typ932 ^T·C 15:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, maybe this should be mentioned to the automobile community here on Wikipedia to look into?

It's obviously a bad side effect of making stubs into slightly bigger messes/articles.

Thanks Jenova20 15:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the Citroen c8 is awsome Pugani (talk) 19:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Demerger

I guess the rationale for merging Citroën Evasion, Peugeot 806, Fiat Ulysse, and Lancia Zeta was that they are rebadged vehicles from the same assembly line. However the merger creates more problems than it solves:

• The term "Eurovan" is not notable. It is a nickname used to a limited extent in a few countries. It was never used by the manufacturers, is unknown in most of Europe, and it is easily confused the the VW Eurovan.
• A very large number of similar pairs of vehicles do not have their pages merged in Wikipedia, for example the Volkswagen Sharan / Ford Galaxy.

What would be helpful to readers and consistent with Wikipedia practices would be to separate the pages for the Peugeot 806, Fiat Ulysse, and Lancia Zeta, with Citroën Evasion and Citroën C8 combined. --Cornellier (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I certainly agree that the name of this article is problematic as it doesn't meet any of WP's naming policies. However, I am not sure there is much benefit to a full demerger, and the problem seems to be what article name would take precedence, though I note a similar problem with the C1/107/Aygo has decided to remain individual articles. Happy to agree to a consensus if one was to emerge. Warren (talk) 15:59, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

OK so the merger is debatable, and the title is problematic. Demerging would kill two birds with one stone -- the title and the redirects. The merger guidelines give these reasons for merging (abridged, with my comments in parentheses):

• Duplicate / overlap: (there's not that much duplication/overlap, indeed a good bit of the text is describing the differences.)
• Text: If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. (each article would be long enough to stand alone)
• Context: If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it. (the merged article does not provide this benefit, e.g. the rationale for the joint venture.)

So having considered these further, I propose these be demerged, but with the 806 redirecting to the 807, and the Evasion/Synergie redirecting to C8.--Cornellier (talk) 17:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Just did a quick mock-up of how a stand alone page would look: Talk:Eurovans/sandbox --Cornellier (talk) 17:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I completely disagree that the article should be broken up. These vehicles are identical except for the most superficial changes unique to each. The other Sevel vehicles are merged into one: Citroën Jumpy, Fiat Ducato, and Fiat Fiorino. Choosing these names was easy because they are the primary titles. For the Eurovans, they were made in France, suggesting that the French models are primary (Citroën Evasion and Peugeot 806 for the first generation). Taking a look at de:Société Européenne de Véhicules Légers#Zeitleiste shows a handy timeline. However, while the "Eurovan" name is not ideal, it certainly seems to be a better solution than splitting this article into 7 different pages—far too many. Because the related commercial vans use the Citroën Jumpy title (the Jumpy was released first), I'd prefer to keep the two related models under the same brand. Thus, having the title as Citroën Evasion would be an agreeable solution from my end. It may be good to possibly split the second generation models as Citroën C8, with the Citroën title again taking precedence because it was made in France, the Italian version ended production in 2010 and 2011, and according to de:Eurovan (PSA/Fiat) the C8 was produced for the the longest time period (until July 2014). OSX (talk • contributions) 07:20, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Added indentation to your comment. Hello OSX. OK A little background here, I was actually the editor who started these articles in 2004 when I put all products in one article called Sevel van. As far as I'm concerned that's good enough. After a lot of chopping and changing the minivans ended up under "Eurovans" and the light commercial vehicles under the Citroen product. So seven vehicles on two pages. I think we can agree that this article cannot remain with the title Eurovans. That's just incorrect. See discussion above on this page. So I think some options are:

• Put everything under Sevel.
• Redirect all to one brand. I think this is potentially confusing for readers. And which brand? You talk about giving the Citroen title precedence, but the Peugeot minivan sold more units overall and as of today is still for sale. Please keep in mind that while the BRZ and 86 are in one article they were advertised as a joint venture from day one. Many many other models which come off the same assembly line have their own articles e.g. Pontiac G8.
• Redirect to a composite page as on the French wikipedia
• Have seven articles for example this mock up of the Peugeot 807. OK there is some repetition, but surprisingly little. E.g. there's only sales figure for the French brands. Much the text is Peugeot-only. Looking at other European wikipedias it seems like a lot give separate pages. --Cornellier (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

I've argued that the status quo is better than 7 separate pages. However, I concede that the current name is not a good one and has been applied for reasons of convenience only (due to lack of a better title). Renaming the article "Sevel vans" or similar could work—however, this title isn't much better to my eyes. I did see German sources referring to the vans as Eurovans though, suggesting some external use of the name.

As for a rename to reflect just one of the available badges, I'm sure we can both agree that these Sevel Nord vehicles have a primary PSA Peugeot Citroën origin (with Fiat being the beneficiary—in the same way that PSA are the beneficiaries for the Sevel Sud Fiat Ducato). So, then it comes down to whether we pick Peugeot or Citroën as the primary title. I've argued for Citroën because the heavily related Sevel Nord panel vans (which share bodywork, etc) use the Citroën Jumpy title based on the Citroën being the first to the market by around a year. I've also stated that for the minivans, the Citroën had the longest production run—but not by much—until July 2014 for the C8 as opposed to June 2014 for the Peugeot 807. This came from the German Wikipedia, but I was unable to verify this date discrepancy with very brief Googling.

You claim that the Peugeot sold more of its model and I have no reason to doubt this claim (especially for the second generation because it is stated at fr.wiki). However, what about the first generation? One could argue that Peugeot is the predominant brand in the PSA structure and that we should use the more prominent brand.

Either way, picking one or the other doesn't really matter—they both have pros and cons. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:14, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll move Eurovans to Peugeot 807. --Cornellier (talk) 14:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

One more thing... what is your opinion on merging the the first generation commercial vans (i.e. Citroën Jumpy) with the passenger models? The bodywork is pretty much identical. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I think it's better to leave the 1st gen light commercial vehicle with the 2nd gen versions. --Cornellier (talk) 14:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I've declined to move it, as I see no such consensus. It does not seem obvious to move an article discussing multiple models and marques into an article for a single one of them, however representative. It might make sense to have this a general article in WP:Summary style, however; I have no opinion on what the right name would be for it. I suggest a formal RfA. DGG ( talk ) 19:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

This article can't remain called Eurovans. I split it up into its component parts, which I still think is a good idea. OSX undid my work. OSX agrees to randomly ("doesn't really matter") lump them under one brand, and DGG refuses to facilitate that. The only option left is to put the info under Sevel Nord. Does anyone have a better suggestion? --Cornellier (talk) 05:51, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I declined not because I think it unwise, (which I do), but because it did not seem to me that there was consensus, which is all I was entitled to judge. You still need consensus for Seval Noge, but an admin is not involved, because you would presumably be adding to the existing material there, not moving the page. DGG ( talk ) 18:49, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Cheers DGG, I get that, sorry if my above comment makes it sound otherwise. Note that the older discussion on this page is very old, and that no-one still active on WP is advocating that the nickname "Eurovan" be used. What would you suggest be done here? I still think the best option is individual articles, but there isn't consensus with OSX. --Cornellier (talk) 19:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Nor me - even though I've been silent up until now, and content to watch how things play out. I think it's egotistical to want a name change because you think the term will "be easily confused" with a vehicle that was only marketed as such in North America, and did not go by that name anywhere else in the world, whereas the Eurovan term is a good catch-all name for the generic badge-engineered vehicle. I see no reason to change what we have now. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:07, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd much rather retain the status quo than have 7 pages. I would prefer to have an individual model title chosen, but it has shown to be unworkable as there is no clear primary model. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:13, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Chaheel Riens: the Eurovan term is not "a good catch-all name for the generic badge-engineered vehicle" because the term is not notable and hence does not comply with WP policy. There is no such thing as "the generic badge-engineered vehicle". Can you show notability? --Cornellier (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Having taken prima facie the assertion that "Eurovan" is a non-notable term thus far, today I've spent the afternoon checking the internet to verify for myself. Based on this I have come to the conclusion that "Eurovan" is a notable term for these vehicles. While I agree that in isolation the vehicles are commonly referred to by their individual names, e.g. Peugeot 806, Fiat Ulysse, et cetera; when discussed as a group I found many references to the "Eurovan" alias.

These references are skewed towards non-English sources, but the Eurovans are themselves skewed to non-English speaking markets. The UK is the only notable English-speaking market for these cars, and I get the impression that they were never very popular there. As of today, a search of the 2002–2014 Peugeot 807 at autotrader.co.uk gave just 88 results. The 2004–2010 Peugeot 407 large sedan provided 684 results, the 2010–present Peugeot 508 provided 478 results (so 1,162 large sedans vs. 88 vans over a time period in favour of the vans). The 2001–2007 Peugeot 307 small car provided 2,135 results, and the 2007–present Peugeot 308 small car provided 3,083 results (so 5,218 small cars vs. 88 vans over roughly the same time period).

Here is a fairly long list of 37 articles or companies (not forums) using the term "Eurovan" in the context of the vehicles of interest:

• peugeot.co.uk
• autoevolution.com
• autoevolution.com
• motorstown.com
• totalcarmagazine.com
• citroencarclub.com
• c8centre.co.uk
• auto-motor-und-sport.de
• autobild.de
• autoplenum.de
• blick.ch
• autoplenum.de
• motormobiles.de

• automobilrevue.de
• totalcar.hu
• autohaus.de
• adac.de
• auto-swiat.pl
• focus.de
• autoteile-teufel.de
• stbseguros.com
• cars.cz
• heise.de
• milliyet.com.tr
• auto-und-motors.de

• motoforum.pl
• auto-und-motors.de
• auto-news.de
• trcitroen.com
• autokiste.de
• oeamtc.at
• pkw.de
• oeamtc.at
• autotest.de
• familien-autos.de
• lancialifestyle.pl
• auto-und-motors.de

There would be more, but I stopped after page 10 on Google search results. This is a web-only analysis for vehicles that in the first generation launched (1994) when car news was rarely reported on the internet, and for the second generation (2002), when such reporting was in its infancy only. I'd wager that contemporary books, magazines, and newspapers would provide further documentation. Unless there is overwhelming evidence that makes either the Citroën or Peugeot significantly more notable than the other, I think the "Eurovan" title should remain in place. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

OSX you assert that "Eurovan is a notable term for these vehicles", however it is much more notable in association with Volkswagen Eurovan both officially and in common use.

• Eurovan was never officially used as a term for the PSA/FIAT vehicles. The first link above points to Peugeot UK and contains the text "Labelled as a first generation 'Eurovan'," Their single quotation marks.
• The term Eurovan was officially used as the name for a VW model.
• Search Google for eurovan. The first few dozen results are all related to VW. I didn't look further. Same for google.de and google.fr. The common meaning of the word "eurovan" is the VW vehicle. and while the term seems to have some usage relating to the subject at hand in Central Europe, even there the term commonly refers to the VW product. Like I said, check google.de.
• The domain eurovans.net is registered to a UK company selling commercial vans of any marque. eurovan.com is registered to a trucking company.
• It looks like about 80 per cent of the sites listed above are not English language. In the sites above the word "eurovan" is often spelt in lower case. One of sites mentions "der so genannte Eurovan" translation: "the so-called Eurovan".

The above points present overwhelming evidence that this article is misnamed. Quite apart from whether it should be one article or many, Eurovans is the wrong title. --Cornellier (talk) 03:13, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I disagree, Volkswagen Eurovan deals with one usage of the term "Eurovan", this page is another example. The VW example is better known as the "Volkswagen Eurovan", not "Eurovan" or "Eurovans", so that frees up those titles for this page. By your reasoning there can only be one "Eurovan" and this ignores the work-around of having disambiguation. "Eurovan" is clearly not a unique term, hence it has other uses—just like polo (disambiguation), golf (disambiguation), passat, and sirocco (disambiguation).

As for never being an official name, I cannot verify or debunk; however, we go by WP:Common name usage which does not necessarily have to follow official naming conventions by the manufacturer(s). Based on my research in December 2014, these vans are most commonly referred to by their individual names, but "Eurovan" is the common name when referring to these vehicles as a single model. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Are you arguing that "eurovan" and "eurovans" are not the same word? Eurovans is obviously the plural of eurovan and not a separate term.

WP:Common name does not necessarily trump the official name. As stated on WP:Common name "Wikipedia prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources) as such names will be the most recognizable and the most natural." What is meant by that is most recognizable and the most natural to the reader of WP.

Bottom line, any anglophone who owns a Peugeot 807 or Citroen C8 and comes to WP to look up information about the car is going to be confused by the fact that the article title is "eurovan", because, as you wrote above "these vans are most commonly referred to by their individual names". --Cornellier (talk) 04:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

"Are you arguing that "eurovan" and "eurovans" are not the same word?" — Nope, not sure where you got this impression from.

If a Peugeot 807 or Citroen C8 owner gets confused initially, that is something I can live with considering the article makes it immediately clear that it is a term that refers to a group of cars. Otherwise we can have a combined title with 7 different model names in it which is arguably worse. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:00, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Then it should be made immediately clear what the origin of the term "Eurovan" is. This is the English-language wikipedia, but nearly all of the "press clippings" used to back up the validity of the term are based in German, Poland, Austria, etc. Appropriately, my spellchecker keeps changing Eurovan to European because it doesn't know the former. --Cornellier (talk) 18:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

The origin of the term is not important. The meaning of the term is, and is explained in the very first sentence: "The Eurovans are a family of large MPVs from the Citroën, Peugeot, Fiat and Lancia marques that were produced at the jointly-owned Sevel Nord factory in France." Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

But the term has no meaning outside this page and some German, Polish, Czech etc. motoring websites cited above. Take a look at WP:TITLE. Show us where this term is used in English. --Cornellier (talk) 20:47, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Notability has been demonstrated above with 37 sources. This is not a car with a huge online presence. It was also never a big seller in English-speaking markets, being sold only in the UK and selling poorly there. From what I can tell, the Eurovans sold much better in mainland Europe, hence the predominance of mainland language sources. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

"English-speaking markets, being sold only in the UK" == untrue. Please check your facts and then reply again. Let's try to keep this fact-based. --Cornellier (talk) 03:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Is there a need for this rudeness? OSX (talk • contributions) 03:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

If that seemed harsh, I apologize. I'm sorry but I feel that saying that it was only sold in the UK doesn't help the discussion. At least some of them were sold in Ireland, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. Just a personal note here: I owned one of these cars for several years when I lived in France. Ditto when I lived in Norway. Ditto for England. I knew lots of people who owned them. Never heard this term once. Bottom line, yes the term may be used in some geos but overall it's confusing. Furthermore there's no best practice in WP that says these "badge-engineered" cars have to be merged. On the contrary, the normal practice seems to be to give them separate pages. Examples can be provided. --Cornellier (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok I was under the impression that the UK was the only English speaking market where these were sold. However, these definitely were not sold in Australia, and AFAIK the only examples in NZ are grey imports from other RHD markets. You having owned the vehicle does not change the fact that 37 sources demonstrate usage of the term. Best practice would suggest that these vans should be merged—take a look at almost any similar discussion at WP:CARS. The convention is to merge rebadged cars in almost all cases. Normal practise is certainly not to give them separate pages. Rebadged car articles that remain separate are mainly limited to those that we have not gotten around to merging at WP:CARS. OSX (talk • contributions) 15:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I had looked at WP:CARS for guidelines on this but didn't see any. Can you point to where a policy is defined on WP:CARS please? --Cornellier (talk) 16:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

To answer your two points above OSX, there clearly is no such convention or best practice to merge these articles. I can cite any number of examples to show that the opposite is true: Peugeot 108, Toyota Aygo and Citroen C1 are all made in the same factory. There are dozens of examples on this page about car Rebadging. As far as "37 sources demonstrate usage of the term" only six of the websites listed are in the English language. --Cornellier (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

A long look through the vast troves of WT:CARS will show otherwise. The Toyota Aygo, et al. is one example that was left unmerged because a name could not be decided. Only a minority of rebadged cars have their own articles, and more and more are getting merged all the time. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eurovans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206165618/http://www.psa-peugeot-citroen.com/en/fonctionnelle/automobiles.php to http://www.psa-peugeot-citroen.com/en/fonctionnelle/automobiles.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Cars

Eurovans Pugani (talk) 19:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)