Talk:ZAP (motor company)

Comments

The second link was deleted because it referred to a Zap motors that was not the one the article was about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZAPWORLD (talk • contribs) 22:13, 3 November 2006

this seems like a perfectly useful page. it should remain. Minitrue 19:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

Looks like I added the article link just as the Controversy was being added. --tranquileye (talk) 13:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No citatons are given for many of the ZAP features and target dates on their new vehicle lines, I suspect someone is working from within the company to post misleading information. Much more on the controversy page needs to be added, given the companies malicious and fradulant claims of the past, as exposed by the Wired and Forbes articles. Please update this article entirely!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.29.239 (talk) 04:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems that ZAP is being onesided attacked. Why isn't their a controversy section for Ford, GM, etc. The have lost billions. It even seems the name of the Company is incorrect. Since ZAP is public, their a plenty of reputable sources, such as SEC reports, and not non-reputable magazines like Wired, or why not use the National Star? Why isnt their more about their history? How many vehicles they have shipped? the types of vehicles they ship? Why not invite Zap's management to contribute?Gbms (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

There is probably more material that can be added that would already be supported by the existing refs. Inviting Zap's management, though, is a poor idea. E_dog95' ^{Hi '} 20:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Court documents

An anonymous editor has added some very poorly formatted rebuttals of the controversy section, in particular http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/trialCourt.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=528947&doc_no=S162223

I am unable to find anything on that website that does more than show that ZAP and DC had some sort of legal biffo. Is there any actual information there, or is it just B/S? Greglocock (talk) 05:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Impartiality

218.247.31.132 (talk) 00:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)I don't agree with such claim of impartiality of this article, without updates there is not real value to use wikipedia for real time information.(218.247.31.132 (talk) 00:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC))

I do not understand what you are trying to say. Please clarify. Ebikeguy (talk) 03:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

However, if you feel that this article needs updating, please update it and be bold! Just make sure not to delete important content without getting editor consensus before you do, back up any claims you make with credible references, and follow Wikipedia's editing rules in general. Ebikeguy (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Insider Edits

Many recent edits appear to have been made by company insiders who do not appear to be editing from a neutral point of view. This requires other editors to spend a great deal of time fixing the non-neutral language. I strongly encourage all editors to post suggestions for major changes to the article on this talk page before making the changes to the article. Also, please take more time editing your posts for proper grammar and spelling. Thank you very much. Ebikeguy (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Controversy */ language tweak

Have noticed a extreme biased writting style on this section, looks like the author/s did a serious review effort to add the worst word combinations on Mr. Sullivan's article as the only truth to describe this company. I want to propose this link for a reading before try to edit with more details the D/C lawsuit: 1.- http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2006-03-21-smart-car-usat_x.htm 2.- http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060627_211456.htm

Please advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.118.80.74 (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Mr. Sullivan's article is an entirely appropriate and reliable source for this article. Your links also appear appropriate. If you insert them into the article, please make sure to add NPOV language explaining their significance. Ebikeguy (talk) 03:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Image

Not sure if it is of any relevance, but the Xebra vehicle seems from its own article at Zap Xebra, that it has been phased out since 2009. Maybe a new representative image for the artice would be the logo, the Zap Alias roadster from the Automotive X Prize, or Zap Truck, Zap Van, Zap Dude. Any views on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.243.125.139 (talk) 03:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Franklin, Kentucky

Greetings, Please review this details that I have researched and referenced. I must add that this information is not planned to substitute the "Franklin, Kentucky" category of the article, but to add a NPOV to the data already in the article.

News and Tribune reported in 2008 how Franklin - Ky., with the help of 48 millions in state incentives and 160 acres of prepared land, planned to attract an electric car assembly company in order to join the cutting edge vehicle manufacture industry. By finally issuing an executive order making slower-moving electric battery-powered cars legal to drive in the state with speed limits of 45 miles per hour or less, ZAP agreed to assemble their electric vehicles in Kentucky, at a panned $84 million plant at the Wilkey Industrial Park area. Multiple reports point Integrity Automotive, a division of Integrity Manufacturing, to be the venture majority owner, with a production contract with ZAP, project very much welcomed after the announced 4,000 full-time jobs that were expected to bring to the Simpson County, Kentucky.

Please, advices and suggestions will be welcome and much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.243.123.108 (talk) 10:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

It reads like a press release, but as an employee of ZAP that's what I would expect. Why don't you go read WP:COI and quit fiddling with this article and the other ZAP related articles? --Biker Biker (talk) 11:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how to put this, but if the references do not reach Wiki's policy then you already have your answer. Me I'm not qualifyed to do so, yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.204.64.13 (talk) 03:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

References

Attempting Clean-up

I am attempting to clean up this article up by adding information from reputable sources such as the Wired article and news articles collected here: http://green.autoblog.com/category/zap/ Saillwhite (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. This one fell off my radar screen a few months back, but it does need help. Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 00:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please try and use direct links to WP:RS, I don't think green.autoblog qualifies (I could be wrong). Greglocock (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Despite it's unfortunate name, Autoblog.com is not a "blog" in the classical sense of the word. It uses a staff of professional writers and is used very frequently as a source for Wikipedia citations. Consensus seems to indicate that it should be considered an RS. Ebikeguy (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Board Coup?

In http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20130222/BUSINESS/130229813/0/search?p=all&tc=pgall there is discussion of an attempted board coup on Dec 31, 2012. Would that be worthy of inclusion here? Kevink707 (talk) 16:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on ZAP (motor company). 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/20110629103220/http://www.memagazine.org/supparch/mepower00/inout/inout.html to http://www.memagazine.org/supparch/mepower00/inout/inout.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ca.us.biz.yahoo.com/iw/091216/0569596.html?.v=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718023331/http://www.zapworld.com/electric-vehicles to http://www.zapworld.com/electric-vehicles
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120905040356/http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/izap_battery_works_with_the_iphone to http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/izap_battery_works_with_the_iphone
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307175312/http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100728/BUSINESS/7281045/1036?tc=ar to http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100728/BUSINESS/7281045/1036?tc=ar
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120904042748/http://www.news-tribune.net/statenews/kentuckystatehouse_story_238160447.html to http://www.news-tribune.net/statenews/kentuckystatehouse_story_238160447.html

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) 22:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)