Talk:Lexus: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:01, 16 March 2020 editStepho-wrs (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers48,657 edits →Foundation date: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:47, 11 February 2021 edit undoBattyBot (talk \| contribs)Bots1,932,705 edits →top: Added Template:WikiProject banner shell and other General fixes Tag: AWB Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~talk~~ header}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{Article history
	{{ArticleHistory
	\|action1=GAN		\|action1=GAN
	\|action1date=2007-03-17		\|action1date=2007-03-17
Line 12:		Line 12:
	\|action2oldid=295269197		\|action2oldid=295269197
	\|currentstatus=GA\|topic=Engtech}}		\|currentstatus=GA\|topic=Engtech}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|1=

	{{WikiProject Automobiles \|class=GA \|importance=high \|portal=yes}}		{{WikiProject Automobiles\|class=GA \|importance=high \|portal=yes}}
	{{WikiProject Brands \|class=GA \|importance=high}}		{{WikiProject Brands\|class=GA \|importance=high}}
	{{WikiProject Japan \|class=GA \|importance=High}}		{{WikiProject Japan\|class=GA \|importance=High}}
			}}

	== Long article? ==		== Long article? ==

Revision as of 14:47, 11 February 2021

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lexus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Lexus has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 17, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
June 8, 2009	Good article reassessment	Listed

Current status: Good article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Automobiles High‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is a selected article at the Cars Portal.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Brands High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Japan High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 19:32, December 26, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Misplaced Pages into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Long article?

Isn't this article way too long? It seems like some new pages should be split off from it. I realise it would be some work. Don't know if there are official guidelines for this. --81.179.93.205 (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe some sections could be split off... Octave8 (talk) 19:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oceanea ...

...is noit a part of Asia. Slrubenstein | Talk 23:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Lexus/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will be doing the GA Reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps project.

There are some dead links that need to be repaired: 95, 96, 125, 126, 131, 165, 193, and 203. I fixed some overlinking issues. The writing is fine, the images are good with Fair use rationale where necessary, the lead is solid. Overall the article is great! If it weren't for all the deadlinks I would pass it without hesitation. I will hold the article for a week pending work on the references. If you need to contact me please do so at my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 17:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your review and suggestions; the links have been fixed or replaced. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 23:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Everything looks good, the article is GA. H1nkles (talk) 04:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Current quality issues

The current issue on the accelerating and brakes of Certain models has been more that reported. there has been a nation wide recall on certain Es and GX models for Lexus. Many people are panicking, they need to realize that it is not all Lexus models being recalled. However, it is a very serious issue. if your vehicle is one of the models that has been recalled your dealer will be sending you a notice, you will need to take your vehicle in for repairs. If you have any further questions you can call (800) 255-3987. Do you think current safety and quality issues, the car accelerating out of control, should be reported? http://my.is/forums/f104/stuck-accelerator-lexus-kills-family-398078/ http://www.justicenewsflash.com/2009/09/01/runaway-lexus-kills-4_200909012035.html http://kansascity.injuryboard.com/automobile-accidents/toyota-denied-customer-complaints-on-sudden-acceleration-problem-for-more-than-5-years.aspx?googleid=274028 http://www.autosafety.org/again-nhtsa-probes-sudden-acceleration

--Aizuku (talk) 07:21, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Very sad accident, the wrong floor mat was used (added to the ES article). SynergyStar (talk) 15:06, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to IP 134.154.170.210 for your information, aside from the floor mat fix, the ES has not been further involved. Also help phone #s and dealer service info probably would be more helpful elsewhere, because this page is not intended for general discussion. Thanks SynergyStar (talk) 08:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Listing of awards and slogan in lead

I notice there's a listing of awards in the intro paragraph. Is there reason to include them, and if there is, why are they included in the introduction? Would it be more appropriate to have the list of notable awards included in the Marketing or other section? Toyota marked cars, and many other makes have received many similar recognitions yet do not have them included in their article intro. Seems like an NPOV issue that so much weight is given to them in the intro.--Retran (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Also why is there a little orphan sentence regarding the "motto". That should definitely be included in the Marketing section!--Retran (talk) 11:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions, the awards and slogan have been there for quite a long time, and if you look at a number of company articles, the slogan is included (e.g. Volkswagen, Gillette, Continental Airlines). However, the slogan has been removed from other articles, so I don't see a problem with removing it here. As for the awards, the reliability awards stand as a U.S. record which no other auto brand has come close to achieving (14x), but it is not a major part of the article body anyhow, per WP:LEAD so makes sense to integrate them into body. It would be helpful if the guidelines on slogan integration were more specific too. Assuming good faith, thanks.SynergyStar (talk) 18:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks SynergyStar for the work on updating the discussion ideas into the article; but now you have me convinced that there is something notable enough about the awards to include a mention in some way in the intro. I would agree its notable to achieve a reliability record that none other has achieved, and that fact is beyond marketing hyperbole. Perhaps integrating that fact as a sentence in one of the intro paragraphs, then relying on it being expounded upon (as it already is) further in the body would do the would keep a mention of the reliability record consistent with WP:LEAD. Retran (talk) 06:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Retran for your suggestions, it's possible a sentence could be added, however readers can now find the reliability references in the production section, and the slogan in the marketing section, as suggested (incidentally, it used to be that Template:Infobox company had a slogan field, but no longer--also showing the lead section details can change). With the lead having the basic summary points, some details can be saved for the body. Thanks again for your comments, SynergyStar (talk) 06:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Flagship_car#Automotive or Flagship#Automobiles?

Possible WP:COI. Please check recent history. Thanks. M aurice Carbonaro 06:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Presumably you mean my reversion. I dont' understand some things about your reversion of my reversion "Undid revision 561670080 by Stepho-wrs (talk) I read User:Stepho-wrs presentation page: possible wp:COI. Please consider wp:3rr & opening comment on talk page as wp:AGF. Thanks.)":

What conflict of interest do I supposedly have? I have neither increased nor decreased any point of view and the link appears and works exactly the same to the readers.
Who are you saying is supposed to be assuming good faith? My edit summary said "REvert good faith edit. Fixed ] instead." I.e. I explicitly said yours was a good faith edit but that I found another way to fix the problem (which naturally I think is better, see below).
Which talk page has the relevant 'Opening comment'? Neither yours nor mine seem to say anything relevant to this topic.
Why did you mention the 3RR rule? I reverted only a single time because I fixed the problem through a different (arguably better) method than yours.
Where did Flagship_car#Automotive come from? The contention is over whether ]<nowiki/> or <nowiki>]<nowiki/> is the better link. I contend that 'flagship car' is better because if we ever get a separate article about flagship cars/automobiles then 'flagship car' can either be the article or a redirect to the new article - simple, easy and very hard to have hidden problems. Whereas 'Flagship#Automobiles' requires us to find every article that uses it (winnowing out the other articles that link to plain 'Flagship' or its other sections) and change them one by one - tedious, error prone and very easy to miss some. Note: 'flagship car' originally pointed to plain old 'flagship', my fix was to make 'flagship cars' point to 'Flagship#Automotive'. ~~~~

Hallo there Stepho talk ,

thanks for writing me back and being open to discussion.

First of all it should be clear that both links mentioned above take to same article/section. Once made this statement I will try to answer to your points:

I found written on my talk page that "(...) Since the use of Flagship#Automobiles is under contention, it might be worthwhile to hold off for a little while on using that link on articles such as Toyota Cressida. (...)". Fine then, could we please both try to provide a citation for this claim? Maybe adding the "Citation needed template first of all? Regarding the possible wp:coi if you maintain a website with lots of Toyota info as you stated in your user page probably editing Misplaced Pages on Toyota could lead to a Conflict of Interest... Or not? It's a bit like a physician married with a pharmaceutical sales representative... what kind of healing is this going to provide to someone that is ill? Huh?
I am supposing that we are both assuming each other good faith
I guess this talk page has the relevant 'Opening comment' ... and I hope it will have the closing comment as well leaving everyone happy :D
Both links take to "same place" i.e. the same "article/section". Please check yourself: Flagship_car#Automotive and/or Flagship#Automobiles
AFAIC Flagship#Automobiles will be automatically redirected to the same "place" as mentioned above even "if we ever get a separate article about flagship cars/automobiles". Please note that both links take exactly to same article/section... and there are bots that will take care of changing all the redirects in case.

I have mentioned the wp:3RR because I was interested in commenting the change on the talk page as we are doing right now. But if you are still unsatisfied with my explanations we could always kindly ask for a third opinion about it. Please have a nice day. M aurice Carbonaro 09:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

If anyone is concerned about the above claims, please review this permalink which shows User talk:Maurice Carbonaro at 07:24, 10 April 2013. Searching that page for "11:40, 23 March 2013" shows comments similar to those on this talk page—comments which were mentioned in the "Blocked" section. Further discussion is unlikely to be productive. The explanation by Stepho above is correct—it is standard procedure to use a precisely named link despite it currently being a redirect to a section in another article. I have restored this article to how it has been for some time. Johnuniq (talk) 09:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

To Whom it May Concern, after taking time in visiting and reading the above permalink kindly suggested by Johnuniq (talk) please consider also visiting this other "permalink" that shows confidential comments regarding the admin that blocked me at the time have been sent directly to Arbcom emailing arbcom-en-c

lists.wikimedia.org. IMHO there is "nothing similar" in my comments. Thanks. M aurice Carbonaro 10:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't show that the "confidential comments" had any justification. (I think I'd say that even if you were a generally helpful editor.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 11:03, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Most of this is just side issues. I will simply state that I deny all accusations of deliberate wrong doing on my part and that I assumed edits to the article were done in good faith by both parties. If you feel I have done an injustice then please call up an administrator.

The real issue is whether flagship car or flagship#Automobiles is better. As both Maurice and myself have stated, both links look the same and go to the same place - at the moment. On the face of it, there would little to choose between them. flagship#Automobiles has the minor advantage that it goes directly to where we want without a redirection but the typical reader won't care about that. The real difference comes in the future if we decide to rename the flagship#Automobiles section (say, to 'Vehicles'), or perhaps shift that section to another article (say, Halo product) or even to its own article. In that case we would need to either construct a bot or manually edit every use of flagship#Automobiles. Constructing bots is still not a trivial issue. And even just finding the links manually requires looking through a few thousand pages (6 pages in groups of 500) to separate out the plain flagship links. Whereas flagship car does exactly the same job now but it is so much easier to change where it points to - just change the redirection and we're done. The maintenance is so much easier and can be done by almost anybody. Simple solution. Why do things the hard way? Stepho talk 14:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

AFAIC the (hopefully) constructive dialogue has come to an end. And BTW let's consider the interesting side of the whole comments section: we got to know each other. FYI Arthur Rubin (talk), which has participated to the comments above on this very same talk page, IS an Admin (account created on 16 August 2005 at 00:35). XOXO - M aurice Carbonaro 09:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Your 'constructive dialogue' consisted of slander and avoiding the main issue. I think I was happier before I got to know you. Time to stop feeding the troll. Stepho talk 14:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I do apologize to everyone. Sorry. I believe you are honest in saying that "you were happier before you got to know me." Maybe I am in torment and causing distress to everyone else. I do apologize again. M aurice Carbonaro

Probably denial, rather than torment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

LFA?

If the LFA is out of production then what was the sportscar (read: supercar) in the background of several different Lexus commercials in 2014? --RThompson82 (talk) 01:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Weight of J.D. Power awards

I removed mentions of the J.D. Power awards which lacked any secondary sources. Most of them were sourced to press releases. The only exception was this one, from What Car? which looks like it should be a redirect to this page which is a fairly brief mention of the Lexus IS, and is doesn't seem like a terribly strong reflection of the company as a whole.

Stepho-wrs restored the awards, with the rationale that they are factually supported as having been given to the company. This is true, but that is not why I removed them. If they are not demonstrated by reliable sources as being worthy, why are they mentioned? The Platinum award for worldwide plant quality on the Tahara plant for the fourth consecutive year, for example, seems like the kind of thing that needs more substantial sources to be included here. Sounds impressive, but what is a "Platinum Award for Worldwide Plant Quality"? How would one find out? J.D. Power is widely mentioned in advertisements, but it's much, much less commonly cited in more reliable sources, and even less commonly in ones of any substance. Without this context, it's very flattering, but it's not clear how informative these awards are. If they are flattering but not informative, then they are not neutral.

While I'm absolutely not saying that anything nefarious is going on at this article, the reason I am removing press-release-cited J.D. Power awards from articles is that I noticed them being inserted by some of the Orangemoody accounts. This underscores their popularity as PR tools, but Misplaced Pages should use independent sources to avoid this kind of manipulation, and for WP:NPOV in general. Grayfell (talk) 20:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Using Press Releases as primary sources is not enough for encyclopedia articles. According to WP:NOT, "Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, ..." This is particularly true given the major shift to use press releases as promotion and advertising tools. There is a symbiotic relationship corporations have with organizations such as J.D. Power. For example, there is no significance to the "Platinum award for worldwide plant quality". This "award" does not represent a comprehensive study of every factory, in every nation, and in every industry. There is a basic problem of defining quality in this "award" which J.D. Powers seems to only define as "fewest defects" (which is subject to different interpretations) while also neglecting to inform the reader that only selected automobile assembly plants were evaluated by them. Unless these "claims" are also collaborated by truly independent sources (not simply reposts of the press releases) such as academic-based research, then they should be removed from WP articles. Moreover, the Press Release cited sections in this article are written in a WP:PEACOCK way that contribute to making the article read like an advertisement, which is also contrary to the WP:PROMOTION guidelines. Thanks - CZmarlin (talk) 21:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Since there seems to be agreement that the J.D. Power awards do not belong, for a variety of reasons, I am again removing them from the article. Grayfell (talk) 05:51, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Grayfell! This article still needs much work to reduce boastful superlatives (BS) and make it a worthy encyclopedia entry. Thanks, CZmarlin (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Lexus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lexus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120306021314/http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=57554 to http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=57554

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120602104143/http://ww2.supergt.net/gtcgi/prg/NList02.dll/Code?No=NS014459&List=13 to http://ww2.supergt.net/gtcgi/prg/NList02.dll/Code?No=NS014459&List=13

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Lexus. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lexus. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId%3D115368
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070503195249/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3012/is_11_183/ai_110404995 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3012/is_11_183/ai_110404995
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nihoncar.com/en/review-292-Lexus%2BIS250%2BTest%2BDrive%2C%2BHDTV.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112164957/http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/100502.html to http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/100502.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/News/0%2C%2C1369-1372_1939381%2C00.html

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

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) 00:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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) 03:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lexus. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.latercera.com/contenido/665_120257_9.shtml
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.toyota-global.com/company/profile/figures/production_en.html
Added archive https://archive.is/20120803044610/http://www.greencardesign.co.uk/site/item.php?id=1209596679&category=city_watch&subcat= to http://www.greencardesign.co.uk/site/item.php?id=1209596679&category=city_watch&subcat=

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

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) 12:36, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lexus. 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:

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

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) 21:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=69033&FS=GRANDAM*
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=106126&FS=GRANDAM*
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930024207/http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=231504&FS=GRANDAM-GRANDCUP to http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=231504&FS=GRANDAM-GRANDCUP

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

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) 08:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Local production in India

Lexus local assembly in India. Is India became the fourth country that assembled Lexus vehicles other than Japan, USA and Canada? 182.30.204.161 (talk) 12:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Foundation date

Not sure which date should be used for the foundation date. The reference https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1989/08/14/72355/index.htm says that the name was chosen circa October 1986. I have no doubt that a department within Toyota was created around the same time but I don't have any source that says this. It was unleashed onto the public in 1989. I don't know when it was formally incorporated in either Japan or the US. Company histories (Lexus/Toyota websites and third party books) are also vague about it. Which means that the founding date is not clear at all. Stepho talk 22:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Categories: