Talk:Land Rover/Archive 1

Archive 1

Opening paragraph?

The opening sentence lists Land Rover as an 'all-terrain vehicle and Multi Purpose Vehicle (MPV) manufacturer'. Surely an MPV is an on-road people carrier-type vehicle such as a Renault Scenic or a Vauxhall Meriva? Certainly the Wikipedia article on MPVs makes no mention of 4x4/SUV/cross-over vehicles. Would it make more sense to reduce the sentence to just 'all-terrain vehicle manufacturer'? This would encompass all the LR products, as not all are SUVs (under some definitions of that term, only the Freelander would be an SUV, but the Defender certainly isn't an SUV by any realistic definition) and not all are 'off-road vehicles'. In the UK they could all be called '4x4s' or '4-wheel drives' but I'm not sure on how widespread these terms are for these sorts of vehicles. I was going to edit this out, but wanted to check my understanding of an MPV wasn't wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jozg44 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

What kind of Land Rovers are the armoured ones used by the police in Northern Ireland? How many do they have? How long have they used the land rovers?

zoney ♣ talk 00:37, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

They were often Shorlands, made by Shorts Brothers of Belfast. RUC got them from 1965. In 1990 approx. 1000 had been made, not all for RUC, mind. There's a bit about it in the no: military Land Rovers article. In Norwegian, though. That's all I've got... Harald Hansen 13:55, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

See the Shorland article for info and links to websites. GraemeLeggett 14:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Clubs

Why have the links to the Land Rover clubs been removed? Talskiddy 21:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is not a link repository. See the links to avoid in the external links guideline. The deleted links invariably fall under unverified (original research) sites and forums, all of which are to be avoided. JonHarder 00:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

where does it say no links to auto clubs? Talskiddy 19:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

There are several reasons that "external links should be used sparingly and kept to a minimum." Editors of a good article will include only the most valuable links for the reader. This prevents Wikipedia from becoming a web directory. Links should supplement and enhance the content of the article. This article had links to twenty-five clubs and forums, yet they are apparently of no particular importance in presenting the reader with balanced information on the Land Rover because no mention is made of the siginficance of clubs or forums in the article text itself. Clubs are analogous to fansites; both fansites and forum links are discouraged in an article, unless the article text demands it. If the editors of this article feel club links are essential to understanding the topic, then I suggest the solution used in other articles. Add a link to an open directory such as:

*{{dmoz|Recreation/Autos/Makes_and_Models/Land_Rover/Clubs/|Land Rover Clubs}}

which contains dozens of links and avoids having the article become a spam magnet, as often happens when indiscriminant lists are permitted to grow. I hope this helps! JonHarder 22:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added the link as suggested but I have visited other auto entries and there are many that have lists of forums and clubs. I expect they will be edited out also?, but it won't be by me! : ) Talskiddy

Despite being in a club, and being enthusiastic about Land Rovers, I'd agree that a list of clubs is perhaps not appropriate in the article. Mention of the fact that Land Rovers have an enthusiastic following, and that there are many local, regional, national and international clubs would be relevant and worthy of inclusion, though. AndrewH 11:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

LAND ROVER PROFITS

The most profitable part of PAG is Volvo,not Land Rover according to the Automotive News newspaper,the best of its kind, and Reuters...So I would like the phrase claiming that "In 2005 it was the most profitable part of Ford's Premier Automotive Group (PAG) brand portfolio." being deleted or please show me a reference... My references:[http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2007-01- 08T174815Z_01_N08377221_RTRIDST_0_FORD-VOLVO-UPDATE-1.XML&src=GLOBALCOVERAGE_auto]and [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.202.25.203 (talk) 16:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

Caption for logo

There is no need for a caption stating that the image of the logo is a logo. This is according to the WIKI caption policy. Showing the logo of the brand or the company is not an attempt at advertising. The notion of putting a caption stating that the logo is a logo will somehow reduce the effect of "advertising" is false. Showing the logo as part of a Wikipedia article is not advertising according to the definition of advertising --

"Advertising is paid and/or sometimes free communication through a medium in which the sponsor is identified and the message is controlled..."

Therefore, including an image of the logo in a Wikipedia article about the item or organization identified with that particular logo does NOT make it advertising. Wikipedia guidelines clearly state that no caption needed for company or product logos, where the logo is current, and the article is about the company or product. -- Thank you -- CZmarlin 13:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

UPDATE JUNE 2007

Land-Rover is now up for sale (a "fire sale"?) together with the associated Jaguar business.

84.68.81.11 15:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Quality problems ? environmental ?

I am not sure the mention of 'environmental' problems should go under the Quality problems.

Maybe a new section for environmental issues should be started? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.27.14 (talk) 20:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

British Aerospace?

The introduction claims that one of Land Rover's past owners was British Aerospace, is this accurate? My understanding is that before Ford bought Land Rover, the company had always been part of Rover and that Rover was owned by British Leyland, Honda and then BMW, but certainly never British Aerospace. Joe 1987 00:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

1988 British Aerospace buys Rover Group from British Government for (pounds)150,000,000. justfred

Rover were never owned by Honda. they had a cross holding deal and worked together on vehicles. Honda no more owned Rover than the other way round. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morcus (talk • contribs) 03:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Freelander 1/2 'move'

Corrected to read: Production of the "Freelander" (2) was moved to the Jaguar car factory at Halewood near Liverpool, as - technically - Freelander '1' was built at Solihull, while the new Freelander '2' started its production at Halewood - but where to next? [India?] A precedent for this move was the Rover SD1 moved from Solihull to Cowley, Oxford or more recently the Rover 75 build was moved from Cowley, Oxford to Longbridge, Birmingham.

91.108.12.237 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Introductory paragraph: improvement

"with two UK production plants at Solihull, West Midlands and Halewood, Merseyside" has been added!

As far as the TATA takeover is concerned, it's now a DONE deal- whatever you may think of it!!

IF anyone has any doubts about the deal, just read what Ford themselves had to say about it:

FORD MOTOR COMPANY ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT TO SELL JAGUAR LAND ROVER TO TATA MOTORS

DEARBORN, Mich., March 26, 2008 – Ford Motor Company [NYSE: F] announced today that it has entered into a definitive agreement to sell its Jaguar Land Rover operations to Tata Motors.

The transaction is the culmination of Ford’s decision last August to explore strategic options for the Jaguar Land Rover business, as the company accelerates its focus on its core Ford brand and “One Ford” global transformation.

The sale is expected to close by the end of the next quarter and is subject to customary closing conditions, including receipt of applicable regulatory approvals.

The total amount to be paid in cash by Tata Motors for Jaguar Land Rover upon closing will be approximately US $2.3 billion. At closing, Ford will then contribute up to approximately US $600 million to the Jaguar Land Rover pension plans.

"Jaguar and Land Rover are terrific brands," said Alan Mulally, president and CEO, Ford Motor Company. "We are confident that they are leaving our fold with the products, plan and team to continue to thrive under Tata’s stewardship. Now, it is time for Ford to concentrate on integrating the Ford brand globally, as we implement our plan to create a strong Ford Motor Company that delivers profitable growth for all."

"This is a good agreement. It provides the Jaguar Land Rover management team and employees with the assurances needed to maintain their focus on delivering the best results for the business," said Lewis Booth, executive vice president, Ford Motor Company, who has responsibility for Ford of Europe, Volvo and Jaguar Land Rover. "I am confident that, under its new owner, Jaguar Land Rover will continue to build upon the significant improvements and product successes it has achieved in recent years."

As part of the transaction, Ford will continue to supply Jaguar Land Rover for differing periods with powertrains, stampings and other vehicle components, in addition to a variety of technologies, such as environmental and platform technologies. Ford also has committed to provide engineering support, including research and development, plus information technology, accounting and other services.

In addition, Ford Motor Credit Company will provide financing for Jaguar and Land Rover dealers and customers during a transitional period, which can vary by market, of up to 12 months.

The parties believe these arrangements will support Jaguar Land Rover’s current product plans, while providing Jaguar Land Rover freedom to develop its own stand-alone capabilities in the future that will best serve its premium manufacturer requirements.

The parties do not anticipate any significant changes to Jaguar Land Rover employees’ terms of employment on completion.

Speaking about today’s agreement, Mr. Ratan N. Tata, Chairman of Tata Sons and Tata Motors, commented: "We are very pleased at the prospect of Jaguar and Land Rover being a significant part of our automotive business. We have enormous respect for the two brands and will endeavor to preserve and build on their heritage and competitiveness, keeping their identities intact. We aim to support their growth, while holding true to our principles of allowing the management and employees to bring their experience and expertise to bear on the growth of the business."

Jaguar Land Rover’s employees, trade unions and the UK Government have been kept informed of developments as the sale process progressed and have indicated their support for the agreement.

Speaking on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover, Geoff Polites, chief executive officer, said: "Jaguar Land Rover’s management team is very pleased that Ford and Tata Motors have come to an agreement today. Our team has been consulted extensively on the deal content and feels confident that it provides for the business needs of both our brands going forward.

"We have also had the opportunity to meet senior executives from Tata Motors and the Tata group," Polites continued. "They have expressed confidence in the team that has delivered significant improvements in Jaguar Land Rover’s business performance. We feel confident that we can forge a strong working relationship with our new parent company, and we look forward to a bright and successful future for Jaguar Land Rover."

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=27953

91.108.50.27 (talk) 12:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Not Tata yet! It is Tata, Indian Company

The deal has been announced but not consummated. The infobox has been prematurely changed. See Talk:Jaguar Cars#Not Tata yet! 66.92.132.155 (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The following paragraph has been added to the introduction to reflect the size of the sale:

"It is understood that Ford Motor Company Ltd. will not retain any shareholding in either the Jaguar or Land-Rover companies, unlike Aston Martin where on its sale a small shareholding was retained; the total sum to be paid in cash by Tata Motors is approximately US $ 2.3 billion, Ford will then contribute up to US $600 million to the Jaguar Land Rover pension plans."

91.108.50.27 (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Indian or British? - 100% Indian

I contend that the company is certainly British. It is registered in Britain. It manufactures its product in Britain and always has done. It's (now) parent company is Indian but that doesn't and cannot re-write history. My mother is from Venus, my father from Mars but my place of birth, upbringing and residence is Earth, therefore I'm an Earthling.

I contend equally that the marque is and always will be British, for much the same historical reasons. It's a question of where it was created, not to whom rights over it were subsequently sold. Did anyone seriously claim that Land Rover was an American marque (or company) under Ford's ownership? -- Timberframe (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

To 202.54.220.196 and various other IP editors who change the article's category from "British brands" to "Indian brands" on the basis that "parent is Tata, thus it cant be British", would you apply the same logic to say that in the days of the British Empire Mumbai was a British city? Sorry if that's a bit close to the bone, but I feel that it's a valid comparison with what you're claiming for a brand which is and always has been intimately associated with Britain. The financial ownership of a brand doesn't re-write history or the reality of geography. Since when was Chelsea a Russian football club? --Timberframe (talk) 12:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Safety?

The Land Rover page says that according to a study into fatalities by vehicle make, the Land Rover Defender is about the safest vehicle on UK roads, yet the Land Rover Defender page says the Defender doesn't meet the safety standards to be sold in the US. Why is this? I've been looking for Euro-NCAP data on the Defender but can't find anything except pages supposedly about the Defender's safety rating but which give an "N/A" or Not Available rating next to the NCAP heading.

Does anyone have a link to any studies into the probability of roll-over crashes in Defenders?

Sciamachy 09:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It has probably more to do with what kind of driving Defender owners do rather than the technical safety features of the vehicle. Harald Hansen 09:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Here is the reason ... Land Rover (Series/Defender)#The Defender in the USA - it had to do with the inability to install air bags in the interior. --T-dot 17:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

--In addition, is there proof of the report that "Land Rovers are 3x safer than Volvos" I find that very hard to believe.

According to published statistics by the UK government; in a two vehicle collision the incidence of death for the drivers and passengers sit at 1% for a Defender, the safest volvo (statistically) the incidence of death is 3%. I cannot find links at the moment but I will. This doesn't mean a Defender is 3 times safer than a Volvo, it just means that death is less likely than in any other car for the driver and passengers in a two vehicle collision. I will find the link within the next couple of days.(82.25.108.241 (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC))

That's because the incredible strength of the LR chassis means that it has very little front end crumple capability and in a head on collision relies heavily on the other vehicle absorbing the impact energy. The risk of death is simply transferred to the occupants of the other vehicle, who are likely to be crushed by their engine and steering wheel. -- Timberframe (talk) 12:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't get what your point here is. At no point did I say that across the board the Defender is the safest, I quite clearly stated that purely the 'incidence of death to the driver and passenger in a two vehicle collision' the Land Rover Defender is 3 times safer than the safest Volvo. Luridhue (talk) 11:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

camel trophy

why you don't say anything about the camel trophy ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.213.226.113 (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

because you haven't written it yet? If you feel an inclusion is necessary, please feel free to research and write it!--Justfred (talk) 21:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

First Paragraph revert war

We appear to have a battle between two editors over the opening paragraph.

version 1:

Land Rover is an all-terrain vehicle and Multi Purpose Vehicle (MPV) manufacturer, based in Solihull, England, now operated as part of the Jaguar Land Rover business owned by Tata Motors.

Originally the term Land Rover referred to one specific vehicle (see Land Rover Series), a pioneering civilian all-terrain utility vehicle launched on April 30, 1948, at the Amsterdam Motor Show, but was later used as a brand for several distinct models, all capable of four-wheel drive.

Starting out as a model in the Rover Company's product range, the Land Rover brand developed, first as a marque, then as a separate company, developing a range of four-wheel drive capable vehicles under a succession of owners, including British Leyland, British Aerospace and BMW. In 2000, the company was sold by BMW to the Ford Motor Company, becoming part of their Premier Automotive Group. In June 2008 Ford sold its Jaguar Land Rover operations to Tata Motors.

Land Rover is one of the longest lived Four-wheel drive (4WD) brands, second only to Jeep and is not a truck.

Version 2:

Land Rover is a British automobile manufacturer of all-terrain vehicles. Founded in 1948 as part of the Rover Company, it is the second-oldest manufacturer of off-road vehicles after Jeep. The term 'Land Rover' originally referred to a specific vehicle - a pioneering civilian all-terrain utility vehicle launched on April 30, 1948 - but was later used as the brand name for all 4x4 models.

Starting out as a model in the Rover Company's product range, the Land Rover brand developed, first as a marque then as a separate company. It continued developing a range of off-road vehicles under a succession of owners including British Leyland, British Aerospace and BMW. In 2000, the company was sold by BMW to the Ford Motor Company, becoming part of their Premier Automotive Group.

In June 2008 Ford sold its Jaguar and Land Rover operations to Tata Motors, and they are now part of the Jaguar Land Rover division.

Can we get a concensus version from the two versions as thers not a lot of difference ! - Please discuse the differences and reason why it more correct before reverting again. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 02:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The difference is that a bunch of patriotic citizens of India would rather subdue any mention of Land Rover being a British marque, which I contend that it is; the company is based in UK, its employees are British and furthermore, the vehicles are designed and manufactured in Britain. Tata's ownership is purely fiscal and even Tata's CEO said that he aims to keep the brand British. I think my paragraph highlights the essence of Land Rover and consolidates the information in a much clearer fashion than the alternative.

For example:

"Land Rover is one of the longest lived Four-wheel drive (4WD) brands, second only to Jeep and is not a truck."

1, the term 'longest-lived' is wrong as Land Rover is not alive. 2, What does "and is not a truck" mean and how does it relate to the sentence? The whole paragraph is badly constructed.

-Yosh (Talk) 20:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC) (edited Yosh's sig to link to talk page Bulldozer (talk))

Thank you for your reply Yosh, but I note you have again reverted it, which may be interpreted as engaging in an Edit War as you were asked to discus the issue here after the last round of reverts.

1) Agree the term Longest lived is poor.

2) The use of MPV has been discused before and is not technicaly correct, as its a van based on road vehicle, capable of carrying more than a cars normal 'load' of driver + 4 passengers.

I await AJ-India's comments, and any other editors comments, then we can reach a WP:concensus version for a new lead section. - Thankyou - BulldozerD11 (talk) 00:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

User: Bulldozer: I have been discussing this on jaguar Cars page, since the two have a similar change, and are both being reverted by user Yosh, in his patriotic zeal, while forgetting facts.

I would just copy my response there:

"::To begin with, "blind Patriotism" is being exhibited by user Yosh, not me. Did I mention it is "Indian" anywhere in my edit?

Instead it is he who is doing so, by over enphasizing its Britishness, which spoils the article. As has been amply debated above, its Britishness is covered in its being based in Britain. I have never heard or seen a sentence like "It is British & based in Britain"!! Its pure redundancy.

As we had all agreed (above) these things are less facts and more about brand positioning. I gave the example of Tetley Tea, again (incidentally) owned by Tata.

If being made in Britain is the criteria alone, what about the iphone? or for that matter any phone that Nokia makes? Bulk of them are made by Chinese guys. Obviously there is no set "rule" for deciding all this. And hence it (being British) isnt a fact.

What is a fact, instead is: Its made in Britain, by a labour which is British, and designed by guys, who must be British, with Money coming from Tata Motors.

Last but not least, Tata Motor's ownership is anything but fiscal. Just because they intend to keep its brand identity doesnt mean it is just a financial take over. Read This BBC Article The clear intent of the company is to grow worldwide, and for that, it is going to be in the driver's seat. Again see Tetley Tea. It is fully integrated into Tata Tea, globally. Have a look at the pack of Tetley tea, you would find "A Tata Enterprise" on it. This process took a number of years. Do read this Ratan Tata's statement.

Therefore, I feel the opening line sums up the way it is today. Regarding the rest, (ie Land Rover being the oldest, or second oldest), I have no issues. feel free to correct if any of that is wrong. My only appeal is, please keep patriotism out of this, in the interest of a good encyclopedic article"AJ-India (talk) 09:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• See articles: BMW, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, Peugeot, SEAT (which is owned by German VW), etc. Motoring articles open with "[name] is a [country] automobile manufacturer".
• Country of origin is a notable field in the automotive industry, as cars are often clumped together when similarities arise between manufacturers from a particular country. Land Rover is still a British company, invested in by an Indian one.
• One mention of the marque being British is not "over-emphasizing" as AJ_India claims. There is no redundancy.
• In my edit, I have removed mention of where the company is based from the opening paragraph. That is already stated in the infobox, therefore we can leave the word British in the article.
• This is an automotive article. This is not about Tetley Tea, which is run in a completely different way. The original Tetley company has been dissolved and integrated completely into Tata. This is not the case for Land Rover/ Jaguar.
• iPhone is in fact American because it is designed in USA by an American company and made in China by factories with exclusive contracts with Apple. Similarly, Land Rover is British with the manufacturing process remaining in the UK.
• Was Land Rover considered American under Ford ownership?
• Tata Chairman: "We have enormous respect for the two brands and will endeavour to preserve and build on their heritage and competitiveness, keeping their identities intact." = British
• I'll say it again, AJ-India's opening paragraph is poorly worded and badly constructed, which is unacceptable. I have reorganized the information to make it more coherent overall.
• This article has always opened with Land Rover being British, but as soon as the Tata deal was completed, some zealot Indians removed the word in a fit of ignorance. Same is true for the UK flagicon in the infobox. This exhibits a complete disregard for the standard set by other automotive articles on wikipedia.
• User:AJ-India is attempting to further his own nonsensical agenda. Taking a look at his talk page, you can clearly see repeated violations of the three revert rule and a general bias against the United Kingdom. He has been caught removing factual content from articles pertaining to the British Empire. I contend that he is trying to alter articles on Wikipedia to falsely improve the way India is portrayed.
• User:AJ-India would rather revert to a poorer article just to remove mention of it being British. Same goes for the Jaguar article, which I have vastly improved but said user still reverts it to remove a single fact.
• I am correct, there are no 2 sides about this. Why are we even having this discussion, just to humour ignorance?

Sorry about the last revert --Yosh (Talk 17:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Look at Toyota , Nissan , Honda or General Motors Where is the "Norm", to mention the country? By removing any mention of Land Rover being a part of Tata Motors in the first line, it is clear who is "biased" here, and trying to hide facts.

And by even refusing to discuss, it he who is trying to push his view.

Do any of the three automakers mentioned above have "Japanese Automaker" or "American Automaker" mentioned? Despite the fact that they are anything but Japanese (or American), by any of your yardsticks. (Yes, Renault is a big stake holder in Nissan). The simple reason is: such terms are subjective, giving the reader little clarity. Iphone is designed in USA, so it is American, Does that include the phone's hardware as well? The LCD? The chips? We know the Motorola Razr uses LCD screens designed by Toshiba & Sharp. Yet both Iphone, and Motorola are called American. Why? And you yourself mention this! Iphones are made in CHina by plants commisioned by Apple. So? Ownership weighs in doesnt it? So, why is Tata Motors' ownership so insigificant?

Thus, by being objective, not subjective, we make the article better.

Lastly, i give the example of Sony Ericsson. Based in UK, owned by Japanese & Swedish firms, where is the mention of any the countries in the opening line? Instead it mentions the countries of the owners, something we dont even have here. You want to even remove mentioning Tata Motors!

I understand this will require some British patriots like User Yosh to change their "view", but I am sure, in the interest of a good article, it can be acheived.

And needless to say, by bringing unrelated (and untrue) issues into this, user Yong is only trying to divert attention. But for the interest of those who wish to know what he is talking about, I welcome them to my talk page. If you require we can talk about that there:) My only appeal is to disist from patriotic jingoism, and stick to objectivity.AJ-India (talk) 04:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Guys, there are two unrelated issues here and for the sake of making progress it would be useful to consider each on its own merits.

1. Putting aside the "national identity" issue, the other changes that Yosh made were to my mind a welcome and overdue cleansing of of article which was beginning to suffer from piece-wise and unstructured growth. I say let those changes stand; AJ-India's reversion of the changes en masse threw out the baby with the bath water.

2. The question of national identity was debated at length both here and in the Jaguar article. After changes were made which appeared to some editors (myself included) to be unduly emphasising the newly acquired Indian nationality of what was and is an iconically British marque, constructive dialogue here led not only to consensus but to a better article. I say let Yosh respect the outcome of that debate; contribute to it by all means here but don't change the article unless consesus supports the change.

-- Timberframe (talk) 08:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree with Timberframe. I have agreed (and even mentioned that earlier) to the changes besides the opening line.AJ-India (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

References

Quality problems

Someone outright deleted the "Quality Problems" section. Personally I'm not sure it's appropriate - this is an encyclopedia, not consumer reports. But they should probably explain their reasons. I do notice a distinct anti-Land Rover bias here. mainly by a few individuals, as well as a personal, Africa-centric, anti-LR view. Rovers _are_ used as extensively as military vehicles; and I know they're used by the UN, I've seen pictures. Authors writing stories about the wilderness don't put their characters in a Nissan Patrol, or a Mitsubiushi Pajero, or a Toyota Land Cruiser, even though all three probably do outsell Rovers I think that the sections on Rhinos and so forth added character to the article and could have been re-stated and kept for flavor. Land Rovers do have a style, history, and charm that's recognizable; that's been used for advertising gimmics in the past but it does have a basis in reality. While you may have a grudge against LR, please try to keep it NPOV. --User:Justfred

Re Quality Problems: I agree, and don't believe Wikipedia is the platform for consumer feedback regarding Land Rovers. It's fair enough to mention the problems briefly, but the size of the section as a proportion of the enire article is way over the top. Many other car manufacturers have quality problems, but there is no other article on Wikipedia about a car manufacturer that devotes as much space to this issue. I feel that maybe just one disgruntled customer is responsible for this section, and I think it is certainly not NPOV and should be deleted.

Can someone get hold of the sample sizes of these JD Power surveys? JD Power do have a cut-off. What is it? This section should also make clear which countries JD Power surveys are being reported as Land-Rover may score pporly in the UK and USA but it does rather better in S. Africa, beating the industry average.

See JD Power Survey Results 2007 for S. Africa. 213.48.150.168 (talk) 09:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Safety

The safety section needs info on pedestrian safety. 78.86.18.55 (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The Defender is best known for its all-round off-road capabilities...

When this paragraph appeared anonimously simultaneously here and in Land Rover Defender a couple of days ago I deleted it as spam. My concerns with this paragraph are:

• Its claims are unreferenced,
• It reads like an advertisement,
• If it is indeed a reproduction of commercially produced promotional material it is likely to be a copyright violation.

I'll leave it here for a few days to allow the author to address these concerns. -- Timberframe (talk) 08:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

New reference

I found an interesting book on Land Rovers, that might be worthwhile as a reference - "The Land Rover(1948-1988): A Collector's Guide," by James Taylor(http://www.amazon.com/Land-Rover-1948-1988-collectors-guide/dp/094798125X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268088688&sr=1-1). Page 56, has an interesting tip on why Australian outdoorsman hated the Series III plastic grille. ----DanTD (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Land Rover 109 lwb 1980.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Land Rover 109 lwb 1980.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 25 February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Land Rover 109 lwb 1980.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:17, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Criticism?

I am having a hard time seeing and article in the See Also section criticising SUVs while there isn't an article there supporting them. This isn't fair. I could not find an article supporting them in the SUV category, so the existence of this article seems against the fair and balanced wiki policy. Either we make a Pro-SUV article, or we remove this one from the Land Rover page. Any thoughts? Stratocaster27 19:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stratocaster27 (talk • contribs)

Out of date information

The UK-based car design and manufacturing business of the Land Rover, the unlimited company, was transferred to Jaguar Cars Limited, and that company was renamed to Jaguar Land Rover Limited at the very end of 2012. At the same time, Jaguar Land Rover PLC (the holding company) was renamed to Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLC. Then, in October 2013, Land Rover (the unlimited company) was renamed to Jaguar Land Rover Holdings Limited to be used for other purposes. Evidence of these changes can be seen on the Companies House website at: wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk. TwoWayStreet (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Land Rover (the private unlimited company) no longer exists. Jaguar Land Rover Limited (company no. 01672070) is the only JLR UK car manufacturing company now - it designs, manufactures and sells cars under both the Land Rover and Jaguar Cars brands. This article is about Land Rover, now not a registered company at all, but, since December 2012 a brand manufactured by Jaguar Land Rover Limited, with its headquarters not in Gaydon, but in Whitley, Coventry. JLR's 2012/13 annual report makes the names clear (http://www.jaguarlandrover.com/pdf/Jaguar_Land_Rover_Automotive_plc_Annual_Report_2012-2013.pdf). The "Legal structure" paragraph on page 91 describes the 2012 company name changes, and states "As a result, Jaguar Land Rover Limited is now the primary operating company in the UK for the design, manufacture and sale of all our products." Note that the company called "Land Rover" in the report was renamed to "Jaguar Land Rover Holdings Limited" (company no. 04019301) in October 2013. TwoWayStreet (talk) 19:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where you got the info about Jaguar Cars Ltd being dormant etc from, because a minute ago when I checked Companies House on the Web Jaguar Cars Ltd (Co.No.01672067) was still listed as active, with Nature of Business listed as "70100 - Activities of head offices", while both Jaguar Land Rover Ltd (Co.No.01672070) and Jaguar Land Rover Holdings Ltd (Co.No.04019301) were listed as active with Nature of Business listed as "29100 - Manufacture of motor vehicles". Meaning one head office and two companies that manufacture motor vehicles. So the information available from Companies House on the web does not in any way support what you write. So unless you can present reliable secondary sources supporting your claims Land Rover is still a separate company. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 20:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

See my reply on Talk:Jaguar Cars for the two places I got it all from. Shall we discuss it all there now, to save repetition? TwoWayStreet (talk) 20:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

And I have replied there too. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 20:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Land Rover Indian Company updates

Hello I am from the Land Rover social team; I just wanted to be completely transparent (and see if I could share in your enthusiasm for the brand) and update you with some new source material for updates on the LR Wiki page (our material and third party material) Let me know if you are happy for me to share these links with you and the points that I had spotted + I can also release some better quality images for you! Best wishes LRTeam Wiki (talk) 08:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for declaring your association with the subject. You can freely add links etc. to the talk page for others to use and make any suggestions for changes and corrections here. You could change the article, but if you do then be aware of the Conflict of Interest guidelines, and do so with care. It would be good to have some better images if you can release them under an appropriate license and load them on to Commons so they can be used on other wikis it would be great. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Grateful for your swift response Keith. I will have a close look at the guidelines and get any relevant info together and post the links then also share the imagery in Commons for the community to use as you see fit. Kind regards LRTeam Wiki (talk) 17:22, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a platform for marketers. Attempts, such as this Land Rover social media campaign, will cause major problems. Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias. As such, all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published sources. A common problem is being perceived negatively as a marketer. This is typically through the repetition of Boastful Superlatives (BS) so commonly used by automakers. This most often encompasses various performance claims about the products or the company, as well as press-release style writing and non-notable activities, such as this Land Rover recognises sailing excellence and sportsmanship award. A key principle to follow is to only add information to articles that is encyclopedic. Wikipedia articles are not for shopping or making purchase decisions. In the case of automobiles, they are to provide information about the automakers and their products. Press releases about the number of units produced in a year are noteworthy, but not about claiming to offer the first automobile on earth to have a "stealth" finished gadget, nor announcing a marketing tie-in with a travel agency. Except for rabid enthusiasts of particular automobiles, most readers and contributors tend to be well educated and desensitized to marketing techniques. In contrast to marketing in the social media, Wikipedia requires dispassionate reporting of facts. Encyclopedia articles simply report on existing facts and third-party verifiable knowledge. Rather than emotional appeals, they should have an objective tone and be written in the third-person. Hope this helps! CZmarlin (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

May also be worth looking at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials if the images are not taken by yourself but are images from the company. Keith D (talk) 21:38, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Excellent observation, Keith D. It is one thing to take pictures of vehicles yourself that are in public view such as at parking lots, cruise ins, race courses, car shows, and so on; but a completely different situation if the images are prepared or staged by the company or various subcontractors. Encyclopedia articles are not illustrated sales brochures, nor anything written by the automotive press that is often filled with boastful superlatives to describe vehicles and thus they earn credits from the automakers that feed them with test cars and hospitality. In short, Wikipedia and the Commons are not an effective arm for promoting products nor images of products. There are vastly better repositories of images available, as well as other social media for corporate marketing communications. It is notable that Wikipedia is not even mentioned in the article about social media marketing. Cheers! CZmarlin (talk) 02:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Land Rover. 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/20071223113125/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com:80/Tata_set_to_clinch_Jaguar-Land_Rover_deal_Report/articleshow/2637533.cms to http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Tata_set_to_clinch_Jaguar-Land_Rover_deal_Report/articleshow/2637533.cms
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121211145315/http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://www.geocities.com/guide2landrover/ckd.html&date=2009-10-25+23:35:45 to http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://www.geocities.com/guide2landrover/ckd.html&date=2009-10-25+23:35:45

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

70% of Land Rovers ever built still in use...

There has been a lot of contention over this information. The figure sits between two-thirds and 70% of all land rovers (all built since 1948, not just Defenders.) The first source for this figure is from a Top Gear program titled as 'The Greatest Cars of All Time' (first aired 8th June 2003)the clip hosted by Richard Hammond makes a point of there being 70% of all Land Rovers produced still in use and links it to the idea of 'what if' 70% of all VW Beetles ever made were still in use (this was in 2003). Secondly the then Managing Director (Matthew Taylor) said that two thirds of all Land Rovers were still in use ( http://archive.southwalesargus.co.uk/2003/8/1/66402.html ). Are we able to put on the article that in 2003 between two-thirds and 70% of all Land Rover produced before then were still in use? This is quite an important figure on the lastability of the Land Rover marque and also indicative of the passion of Land Rover enthusiasts in keeping the vehicles running. I have not got the experience with Wikipedia to feel confident in amending the article and wouldn't know where to put it. Any views any one else? (82.25.108.241 (talk) 11:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)) Land Rover

Sounds a bit optimistic to me. I live in N. Qld, Australia. This place was landrover central until the 1990s, as large numbers of ex-Army machines were cheaply available in car yards and auctions. As at 2015 any land rover on the road is a rare sight. The unreliable clutch and t'fer case (front axle) means most of them now reside in dumps.27.33.22.68 (talk) 01:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Add Velar to top section please

Land Rover is a car brand that specialises in four-wheel-drive vehicles, owned by British multinational car manufacturer Jaguar Land Rover, which has been owned by India's Tata Motors since 2008.[2] The Land Rover is regarded as a British icon, and was granted a Royal Warrant by King George VI in 1951.[3][4] The Land Rover name was originally used by the Rover Company for the Land Rover Series, launched in 1948. It developed into a brand encompassing a range of four-wheel-drive models, including the Defender, Discovery, Freelander, Range Rover, Range Rover Sport, Range Rover Evoque and Range Rover Velar. Land Rovers are currently assembled in the company's Halewood and Solihull plants, with research and development taking place at the Gaydon and Whitley engineering centres. Land Rover sold 194,000 vehicles worldwide in 2009.[5] In September 2013, Jaguar Land Rover announced plans to open a £100 million (US$160 million) research and development centre in the University of Warwick, Coventry to create a next generation of vehicle technologies. The carmaker said around 1,000 academics and engineers would work there and that construction would start in 2014.[6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.0.50.10 (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Add to the timeline

Timeline 1947: Rover's chief designer Maurice Wilks and his associates create a prototype using Jeep chassis and components[17] 1948: The first Land Rover was officially launched 30 April 1948, at the Amsterdam Motor Show 1958: Series II launched 1961: Series IIA began production 1967: Rover becomes part of Leyland Motors Ltd, later British Leyland (BL) as Rover Triumph 1970: Introduction of the Range Rover 1971: Series III launched 1974: Land Rover abandons US market, facing competitive pressure from Japanese 4x4 brands [18] 1975: BL collapses and is nationalised, publication of the Ryder Report recommends that Land Rover be split from Rover and be treated as a separate company within BL and becomes part of the new commercial vehicle division called the Land Rover Leyland Group 1976: One-millionth Land Rover leaves the production line 1978: Land Rover Limited formed as a separate subsidiary of British Leyland[19] 1980: Rover car production ends at Solihull with the transfer of SD1 production to Cowley, Oxford; Solihull is now exclusively for Land Rover manufacture. 5-door Range Rover introduced. 1983: Land Rover 90 (Ninety)/110 (One-Ten)/127 (renamed Defender in 1990) introduced 1986: BL plc becomes Rover Group plc; Project Llama started 1987: Range Rover is finally introduced to the US market, following many years of demand being filled by grey market sales [20][21] 1988: Rover Group is privatised and becomes part of British Aerospace, and is now known simply as Rover 1989: Introduction of Discovery 1994: Rover Group is taken over by BMW. Introduction of second-generation Range Rover. (The original Range Rover was continued under the name 'Range Rover Classic' until 1995) 1997: Land Rover introduces the Special Edition Discovery XD with AA yellow paint, subdued wheels, SD type roof racks, and a few other off-road upgrades directly from the factory. Produced only for the North American market, the Special Vehicles Division of Land Rover created only 250 of these bright yellow SUVs. 1997: Introduction of Freelander 1998: Introduction of second generation of Discovery 2000: BMW breaks up the Rover Group and sells Land Rover to Ford for £1.8 billion[22] 2002: Introduction of third-generation Range Rover 2004: Introduction of third-generation Discovery/LR3 2005: Introduction of Range Rover Sport 2005: Adoption of Jaguar AJ-V8 engine to replace the BMW M62 V8 in the Range Rover 2005: Land Rover 'founder' Rover, collapses under the ownership of MG Rover Group 2006: Announcement of a new 2.4-litre diesel engine, 6-speed gearbox, dash and forward-facing rear seats for Defender. Introduction of second generation of Freelander (Freelander 2). Ford acquires the Rover trademark from BMW, who previously licensed its use to MG Rover Group 8 May 2007: 4,000,000th Land Rover rolls off the production line, a Discovery 3 (LR3), donated to The Born Free Foundation 12 June 2007: Announcement from the Ford Motor Company that it plans to sell Land Rover and also Jaguar Cars August 2007: Tata Motors and Mahindra and Mahindra as well as financial sponsors Cerberus Capital Management, TPG Capital and Apollo Global Management expressed their interest in purchasing Jaguar Cars and Land Rover from the Ford Motor Company.[23] 26 March 2008: Ford agreed to sell their Jaguar Land Rover operations to Tata Motors.[11] 2 June 2008: Tata Motors finalised their purchase of Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford.[13] 2010: Introduction of fourth-generation Discovery/LR4 2011: The Range Rover Evoque introduced 2012: Fourth-generation Range Rover was exhibited at the 2012 Paris Motor Show 2014: The New Discovery Range was unveiled at the 2014 New York Motor Show [24] 2016: Last Defender rolls of the production line {https://www.landrover.co.uk/explore-land-rover/news/celebrating-the-legend.html] 2016: The New Discovery was introduced formally to the range. [2] 2017: The New Range Rover Valar introduced [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigjohnuk (talk • contribs) 12:43, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Owner of Land Rover brand

@CZmarlin: sure Tata Motors indirectly owns the Land Rover brand, because they own the Jaguar Land Rover company. We could similarly argue though that as the Tata Group owns Tata Motors then it is the owner of the brand or even that Tata Sons owns it because they own the Tata Group.

However, I believe that the owner field in the Land Rover brand infobox here should contain the direct owner of the brand - the entity that actually manufactures the products under that brand. And today the name on the manufacturer's plate for Land Rover branded vehicles is Jaguar Land Rover. -- de Facto (talk). 06:56, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello @DeFacto: there are numerous corporate entities within each car manufacturer that are established for a variety of business reasons and even more entities within each of their global supply chains. Nevertheless, it is not arguable that both the "Land Rover" (as well as "Jaguar") brands are owned by Tata, the parent company of all the various entities. There are abundant references for this fact, including the official listing of all the brands that are owned by Tata on their main corporate website. Please note that the Jaguar Land Rover website also notes to the fact that it is part of Tata Motors. Corporate parent ownership of brand names such as "Chevrolet" or even individual model names such as "Impala" are not held by the Chevrolet Motor Division or their sales, marketing, or manufacturing entities, but directly by the General Motors Corporation. Likewise, the Jeep brand and trademarks passed through several corporate entities and is now held by a wholly owned subsidiary of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. Another example are the Volvo cars that since 2010 the brand is directly owned by the Geely Holding Group, a Chinese company. In other words, the car brands are not "owned" independently by one of their wholly owned companies. One more example of a list of who owns which car brands is by Consumer Reports link here. Once again, Tata is identified the owner of the Land Rover and Jaguar brands. Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

@CZmarlin:, so which level of owner should we choose? The ultimate owner of JLR is Tata Sons, so shouldn't we put them in the box rather than Tata Motors? If not, why not? I still believe that Jaguar Land Rover as the limited company which has sole use of the brands should be used as owner, and indeed they do state that Jaguar and Land Rover are their brands on their website. Sure JLR is owned by Tata Motors, but that is not relevant at this level of abstraction.

There are indeed a variety of relationship types between car brands and companies. The example you give of Chevrolet is exactly the same as the JLR brands - GM is the operating company that manufacture the cars and badges them as Chevrolet (so Chevrolet is a GM brand), as JLR is the operating company that manufactures Jaguar and Land Rover branded cars (hence Jaguar and Land Rover are their brands). Similarly with MINI, that is a brand used on a series of cars manufactured by the BMW company (MINI is a BMW brand). I'd say the brand owner in these contexts is the legal entity that manufactures the cars. Perhaps we should wait to hear if anyone else has an opinion on this. -- de Facto (talk). 19:49, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Land Rover. 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/20120205002225/http://www.tatamotors.com/know-us/associates.php to http://www.tatamotors.com/know-us/associates.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/guide2landrover/ckd.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714212924/http://www.morattab.ir/en/Service/item/Product/34/HEROUR to http://www.morattab.ir/en/Service/item/Product/34/HEROUR

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 14:47, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Land Rover. 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/20120213003538/http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=27953 to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=27953
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528134440/http://uk.medialandrover.com/uploads/pdf/sixty_year_anniversary_timeline_4cd8.doc to http://uk.medialandrover.com/uploads/pdf/sixty_year_anniversary_timeline_4cd8.doc
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120818093503/http://www.landrover.com/me/en/lr/about-land-rover/corporate-news/new-plant-in-pune/ to http://www.landrover.com/me/en/lr/about-land-rover/corporate-news/new-plant-in-pune/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708212642/http://www.cubiccapacity.com/land-rover-working-diesel-erad-hybrid-and-e_terrain-technologies/ to http://www.cubiccapacity.com/land-rover-working-diesel-erad-hybrid-and-e_terrain-technologies/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716153118/http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/content/view/full/20388/resources to http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/content/view/full/20388/resources
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130527102524/http://www.landrover.com/au/en/lr/about-land-rover/news-overview/electric-defender/ to https://www.landrover.com/au/en/lr/about-land-rover/news-overview/electric-defender/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130305103857/http://www.salon-auto.ch/en/premieres/land-rover-defender-110-sw-se-land-rover-0-29478 to http://www.salon-auto.ch/en/premieres/land-rover-defender-110-sw-se-land-rover-0-29478
• Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20080218181606/http://www.landroverg4challenge.com/ to http://www.landroverg4challenge.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303232510/http://www.fourfold.org/RoverWeb/lro/Year-1990/9005.03 to http://www.fourfold.org/RoverWeb/lro/Year-1990/9005.03
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100521044806/http://landroversclub.org/ to http://www.landroversclub.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426052753/http://www.landrovercoffee.com/about/today.html to http://www.landrovercoffee.com/about/today.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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 18:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Categories

As with the Jaguar Cars article, I've tried to rationalise the categories applied to this article. Because this company no longer trades as a car producer (that role has been transferred to Jaguar Land Rover), I moved all the categories used for car producing companies to Category:Land Rover (this article is in that category, so it still inherits all of those categories) and kept only the categories applicable to a car brand (which this article is now about). Please discuss if you disagree with this approach, as I am not completely confident that my reasoning is sound! -- DeFacto (talk). 23:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Brand ownership

As with the Jaguar Cars article, I've tried to align the brand ownership content (prose and infobox) with what I have been able to glean from the UK trademark registry. The records are not complete, so some interpolation might have crept in, but that website is surely the most reliable source available for this information. Any ideas about how this information might be improved upon and made more accurate or reflective of the reality would be appreciated. -- DeFacto (talk). 23:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of See Also: Austin Gipsy

Editor "De Facto" has twice deleted my See Also: Austin Gipsy. Any person interested in the LandRover (which one is obliged now to call the Defender, much to LJK Setright's disgust) might also be interested to learn about the 1958 lookalike which in some ways was a better vehicle than the LandRover that inspired it. So I think it is boorish to delete it. Arrivisto (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

As this article is about the whole Land Rover brand and company history covering 70 years and several vehicle models and lines, and not specifically about the first Land Rover vehicle, this is not the right article to compare with the Austin Gipsy. That comparison belongs, if anywhere, in the Land Rover Series article about the early Land Rover vehicle - and indeed it is in the 'See also' there. -- DeFacto (talk). 20:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2018

In 2018, a new world record for the largest parade of Land Rover and Range Rover vehicles has been confirmed. Out of a convoy of 908 vehicles completing a course near Northampton, 640 vehicles qualified according to the Guinness World Record's adjudicators. Among the key participants were Richard and Sarah Arrowsmith, Stephen Platt, and many other people whose cars have made this accomplishment possible.

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-44957970 Fayseb (talk) 21:41, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:37, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2021

Hello - I suggest an edit to the introductory text for the Land Rover brand to make it factually correct and reflect the brand as it is now. The suggested edit is:

REPLACE: Land Rover is a British brand of predominantly four-wheel drive, off-road capable vehicles, owned by multinational car manufacturer Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), since 2008 a subsidiary of India's Tata Motors.[4] JLR currently builds Land Rovers in Brazil, China, India, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom. The Land Rover name was created in 1948 by the Rover Company for a utilitarian 4WD off-roader; yet today Land Rover vehicles comprise solely upmarket and luxury sport utility cars.

WITH NEW COPY: Land Rover is a British luxury brand of SUVs with all-terrain capability. Land Rover comprises three families of vehicles: Defender, Discovery and Range Rover. Based in the UK since it was created in 1948, Land Rover also builds vehicles in Slovakia, China, India and Brazil and exports its products to more than 100 countries.

EDITOR NOTE: I have links to the Land Rover brand. This request is for consideration by the Wikipedia community of authors. Hannahrhoad (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: @Hannahrhoad: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I thank you for offering contributions! I have decided to decline this request as the language you wish to replace current text with comes off as promotional in nature. While I do not wish to be presumptuous, I get the feeling that you may possibly be related to this subject in some way. If this is the case, this would be classified as a conflict of interest, which is something you are required to disclose if you wish to contribute to an article in which you may be related. Cheers! —Sirdog (talk) 18:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2021

Update request to provide the correct logo for the Land Rover brand. REPLACE: Current Land rover logo featured on the Land Rover brand page. WITH: Correct and up-to-date Land Rover logo supplied. New logo file provided with full usage rights. File rejected - could someone assist me in making the change? EDITOR NOTE: I have links to the Land Rover brand. Hannahrhoad (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Hannahhrhoad, can you please tell me what file the "correct and up-to-date Land Rover logo" is? Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 15:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

User tried to upload an image and got help at c:Commons_talk:Abuse_filter#Report_by_Hannahrhoad. Hannahhrhoad, file another request when you have that sorted out. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 01:58, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2022

CHANGE THIS: "Land Rover is a British brand of predominantly four-wheel drive, off-road capable vehicles, owned by multinational car manufacturer Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), since 2008 a subsidiary of India's Tata Motors.[4] JLR currently builds Land Rovers in Brazil, China, India, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom. The Land Rover name was created in 1948 by the Rover Company for a utilitarian 4WD off-roader; yet today Land Rover vehicles comprise solely upmarket and luxury sport utility cars."

TO THIS: "Land Rover is a British luxury brand of SUVs with all-terrain capability. Land Rover comprises three families of vehicles: Defender, Discovery and Range Rover.Based in the UK since it was created in 1948, Land Rover also builds vehicles in Slovakia, China, India and Brazil and exports its products to more than 100 countries."

ALSO CHANGE LAND ROVER LOGO TO THIS FILE:

"File:LR LOGO RGB.png" which can be found on this URL: "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LR_LOGO_RGB.png" Mmsamper (talk) 07:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ––FormalDude talk 22:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Land Rover

Moved from Talk:DeFacto

Hello DeFacto, I am puzzled by your wholesale reversion of my contributions to the Land Rover article which included corrections to grammar, citation formats, and citations to the corporate ownership of the vehicle brand. Your edit summary included "misleading info in the company infobox". I have no issue if you want to continue with poor grammar in this article (for example, "Land Rover has also introduced is better than "Land Rover have also introduced") nor retaining improper citation information (for example "website=CoventryLive" is not correct when it should be "website=coventrytelegraph.net"). However, I have a question concerning what you describe as the removal of updated sources about corporate ownership. The citations that I provided to this article include the Tata corporate website indicating that Land Rover is its subsidiary as well as an unrelated automobile publication (MotorBiscuit) to its article entitled "This Corporation Owns Jaguar and Land Rover". Curious why you think these sources are misleading. I would appreciate you enlightening me! Many thanks. - CZmarlin (talk) 00:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@CZmarlin, I'm sorry you are puzzled. I thought my edit summary was quite clear though. The summary you gave for your edit was: Regardless of the shell corporate games and names used for marketing purposes, the actual owner or parent is Tata Motors and it lists as one of its subsidiaries: Jaguar Land Rover, yet when I looked at your edit I saw you had introduced mistakes into the parameters of multiple cites and had added misleading/incorrect information into the company infobox. So I felt it was best reverted, and gave my reasons as: Series of unexplained changes resulting in bad parameter values in several cites and misleading info in the company infobox. And of course, but regrettably, any undescribed copy-edits that you may also have buried in that single edit would have been reverted too. I would recommend that you restrict each edit to a single change, or to a small number of similar changes (e.g. all copy-edits) and that you give appropriate edit summaries to each. That way following editors would see your reasoning and be less likely to undo uncontroversial changes.

The erroneous changes you made to cite parameters, per the cite template doc, included:

• Using the 'webpage=' parameter for things other that the webpage name as seen on the webpage (the url is not the name)
• Using the 'publisher=' parameter for things other than the publisher name where it differed significantly from the 'work' or 'webpage' name

The misleading info you added to the company infobox was to imply that the Land Rover company was still in business as a producer of Land Rover vehicles. Perhaps you are conflating the marque with the company as they both have the same name? The vehicles with the Land Rover marque have, since 2013, been produced exclusively by Jaguar Land Rover. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)