Talk:Lexus LS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lexus LS was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake. Date of review: 21 December 2006

This article is supported by Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of Automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion.

Lexus LS is a former selected article in Portal:Cars

Contents 1 Cleanup 2 Quality of references 3 Competitors 3.1 AAAAAA here we go again 3.2 New Compromise 4 Links proving that S-class is closest competitor 5 V12 6 Good article 7 Delisted as GA 8 Renom? 9 aka Celsior 10 Vehicle codes? 11 Detection of sleepiness 12 Failed GA 13 1994 pricing

[edit] Cleanup

I have attempted to clean up the article and rephrased many of the paragraphs to improve readability, text flow and grammar. Please discuss and objections here before reverting an hour's worth of effort. Thanks, DonIncognito 05:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Please don't delete any information regarding desing changes. While I appreciate your effort, please be careful as not to cause line wraps and keep the texts in each section long enough so the generation tables are only found in the approptriate section. Thanks. Regards, Signature^brendel 05:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Very well, arrange the line wraps as you see fit. But I'd rather you didn't delete well-written paragraphs, as some of the stuff I replaced was poorly written. I've taken the effort to improve this article and I believe that the improvements are positive. Thanks. DonIncognito 05:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I did not delete anything you wrote as it, indeed, was well written. But please leave the UF designations in the Generation heading as they are the correct designations for generations. UF20 stands for "Second Generation," UF20 I stands for "Second Generation - First Series," UF20 II stands for "Second Generation - Second Series." Thank you. Signature^brendel 05:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

You don't think having the "UF" codename in both the heading and subheading is redundant? DonIncognito 06:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is, but it makes it clear that UF20 mean Second generation. The more I think about it becomes a question of whether it is clear to the average user what the UF designation means. You see, I'm afraid that a reader will come along and read "Second Generation" than he or she will continue and read "UF 10." Then the user might be confused about the meaning of the UF designation. I though mentioning it twice would make it clearer, but I am probably underestimating the ability of some readers to put two and two together. So, if you think its clear enough with the UF designation being mentioned in the subtitiles, well then go ahead and delete the UF info from the main section headings. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Samstayton: I resent the fact that my long and arduous cleanup of this article is referred to as "vandalism" and "mess." I have corrected numerous grammatical and factual errors and rewrote large portions of the article to make it more readable. I suggest you be more careful before tossing arround such accusations.

No comments on this one. Samstayton 12:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

very well. Just so we know where we stand. DonIncognito 14:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the two sections because: The "Ultra luxury" section should go into the Lexus LF article. It's precisely why I did not delete it but rather commented it out. This is an article about the LS, not the LF-A. can delete the para on LF-A, but not on V12 lexus. There are several references including those from detroit news and autoweek and several other sources on this and it is not "my opinion", it is a published secondry opinion, which according to wikipedia policy can and ought to be included. Samstayton 12:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Link #3 contains one sentence regarding a V12 Lexus. Hardly a reputable source. Link 2 is a short blurb, which is fine, but it does not provide supporting information for most of the section in the Wikipedia article. As far as I'm concerned, this section is mostly rumor-mongering and speculation and belongs on a fan site, not in an encyclopedia. DonIncognito 14:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay you

Second, the comparison test does sound like an advertisement. The reference points to an article that does not talk about the comparison test, and the figures seem to be cherry-picked. If you want to reference this particular comparison test, it would be wise to report all results, not solely ones where the LS comes out on top. Then you'd have NPOV. As it stands now, the section is far from it. Don't get me wrong, I love Lexus, but that's precisely why I'm trying to make these articles seem professional. If not removed, I think this section can be re-written so that it has a semblance of NPOV.

The reference clearly talks about the comparison test and it is not an advertisement. This is a subjective view and your own opinion. Please read wikipedia's primary, secondary and tertiary source policy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

The reference for Award section is a secondary source and cannot be judged as an advertisement. Samstayton 12:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Link 4 is a LEXUS PRESS RELEASE. Are you really going to tell me that it's NPOV? Second, the text in the Wikipeda section is lifted directly from the press release. That is called plagiarism. This section needs to be removed or re-written.

If you want to compile a section on the awards that the LS has received over the course of its existence, it would make a great resource. But as it stands now, quoting a Lexus press release verbatim is not going to work. DonIncognito 14:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

DonIncognito, you should watch what you write very carefully.

Same to you, buddy.

Plagiarism means using others' work and passing it as your own. What I did was properly reference, the paragraph, and where I obtained from.

If you have ever done any research, you would know that simply referencing a work does not give you a license to copy text verbatim from said work unless you enclose it in quotation marks and make it clear that the text is quoted verbatim therefrom. THis was not done in this case.

Number two, I have seen so many other articles such as those of mercedes-benz, BMW, McLaren etc etc where there is a lot of POV and blatant biased praise. You are judging lexus articles much more harshly I believe.

Then those articles should be rewritten as well. Just because someone else does something incorrectly doesn't make it right.

When Lexus has won an award and it can be referenced, how does it become a POV? Just because it was taken from Lexus' website. Constantly changing the information, deleting large sections without any solid reason. Samstayton 22:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to be Captain Obvious for a moment here. The fact that Lexus won an award does not make it POV. What makes it POV is the wording. Especially if the wording is quoted verbatim from a Lexus press release. I've rewritten it with NPOV wording without changing any facts or copying exact quotations. DonIncognito 22:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Don, now this article sounds more okay. I look forward to working with you without wasting too much time. I have already pulled out from several other articles due to time constraints. The quality of these articles have rapidly fallen since then. Important charts and figures which were carefully researched and added by me were also deleted by juvenile vandals. Besides, I found that I wasnt getting any satisfaction out of the edits, because of intense verbal non-sense and silly edits from all sides. An example is this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Luxury-brands.gif. It took me more than three days to gather information for this chart, but it was removed by a vandal in one second. I am an auto-enthusiast, but I have decided I will instead put my energy outside wikipedia. After all, I am not getting any monetary benefit or fame by engaging in silly edit wars. However, the article on LS is a matter of principle and a case of taking a firm stand against those who are trivializing and deleting large sections with reputable references for this article. Again, I can only do so much. The vandals, racists, bigots, juveniles, political fanatics and social psychopaths are vigorously and relentlessly waging a war against truth and fact-based edits on wikipedia. Like a swarm of locusts they want to devour everything which comes in their way. They want to add senseless information and add most biased references, which is again a huge problem.

Wikipedia's policies and pillars too are putting a big question mark on the quality. The question is, when we use a secondary source which is highly biased and does not even source its information or support there of, how can rely on such a source? Have you thought about this? Samstayton 23:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Samstayton, glad to see we've reached an agreement on the article's content. Regarding the bias of the source: You've posed a good question, but I don't really have time to dwell on it right now. My main concern is that the Wikipedia article itself sounds as NPOV and as professionally written as possible. DonIncognito 00:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quality of references

Regarding references: I don't believe that listing or delisting a particular competitor should be that much of an issue. In fact, the LS's wide price range and all-around quality means that different people may be cross-shopping them with lots of models. I believe that the LS and the DTS can compete in terms of luxury, ride, isolation, acceleration, etc. The LS and 7-series or S-class likewise have areas where they can compete.

My point is: the LS is an all-around excellent car and is competitive with many luxury models, German, Japanese or American.

I have to make one more request of the other editors of this page:when adding/deleting references, please synchronize the references with the footnotes so that a reference superscript's number corresponds to the same footnote number. Thanks, DonIncognito 00:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, they should correpond with each other, but I'll double check. You're right about the competitors, the DTS, TC, Q45, S-Class and 7-Series are all compeititors. As Toyota intended the LS competes with a wide range of flagship luxo cars. Thanks for your input. Regards, Signature^brendel 00:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

This is a very important issue and should not be ignored. I have noticed how people are citing some very biased sources, or websites which are purely mercantile in outlook. This is very grave concern. It must be addressed at the earliest convenience. Samstayton 23:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

has again started putting DTS, town car and all sorts of vehicles as competitors for LS "without providing references". Gerd, please read the section on "UNDUE WEIGHT", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. LS is often compared with S-class and 7-series and not with DTS, town car and Q45. Please do not waste other peoples' time by introducing unsubstantiated edits. Also, I do not have time to continuously change your wrong edits. For heaven's sake can you please refrain from this. Samstayton 12:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

First spell my name right, Mr. Samuel Stayton. Yes they are competitors, just in case I added references from intellichoice. Also Sam, you added a lot more POV to this article than I did, in German we have saying: "Clean your own rug before you clean that of others. Okay? I'm not trying to be assertive but you know... Signature^brendel 18:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Gerd, I do not understand your hostility. You are taking just one weblink, from intellichoice and putting in so many competitors. You are also threatening me by telling me I am under police investigation, which is just plain silly. We are not robbing any bank here. Can you be more reasonable here. JESUS CHRIST, are we editing encyclopedia or establishing some illegal network here? Can you please tell me what is the POV here? Anyway, since you have tons of time to spend here and nit-picking any or all of my edits, you can have it. And make sure you thoroughly compare LEXUS LS with ford focus and may be FIAT 500 too. Then only I think you will gain full and complete satisfaction. Please see this link from mercedes, no one compares lincoln town car and STS and Q45 with Lexus. Its just plain wrong. http://www.mbusa.com/models/comparisons/competitive/index.do?modelCode=S550V&cl07_S

Samstayton 22:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is another important article from businessweek magazine. Businessweek magazine is considered one of the top three in terms of reputation along with wall-street journal and forbes. http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jan2006/bw20060109_789752.htm In this article only Lexus LS has been compared to mercedes S-class and 7-series. No town-car and no STS. If Lexus' main competitor was STS or TC it would have been mentioned. besides it is a very recent article. Approx. two months old. Samstayton 22:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Sam. first you said I am "wastin time." That's hostile okay. I didn't say "Police Investigation" I said you are under investigation by Wiki amins. You were reported because of the personal attacks you have resorted to lately. And yes the link to intellichoice is good enough to justify the mention of what are obviously competitors of the LS. Also I said DTS and not STS. The Q45, TC and DTS are mentioned by some as compeititors and not by others. So, is there any harm in including them? No. So since I have reputable sources backing me up on my assumption that the DTS, TC and Q45 are competitors why not include them? Yes, Business decided, well lets just compare it to the S-Class and 7-Seires, Intellichoice said well lets include five competitors insteads of just two, so they added the TC, DTS and Q45. There is no good reason not to inblude them. Regards, Signature^brendel 23:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

But intellichoice is a mercantile website, its not a news magazine with keen analytical sense. Businessweek is more reputable and so is Forbes. Can you please show where is it written in forbes or businessweek that DTS, STS, Q45 and TC are competitors. Websites like intellichoice and edmunds etc are purely mercantile and they are paid to make all these comparisons. Please read the wikipedia policy on using reputable sources. Samstayton 23:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

You're contradicting yourself, Sam. Emdums is one of the most trusted sites on the web. You youreself have used Edmunds in many of your edits. Also, I put in Lexus' own report in regards to competitors which yeah like mbusa is a mercantile site. I you like we can move the discussion on reputable sources to the Wiki Auto Project Discussion page where we can have other users help us decide whether or not Edmunds and Intellichoice are reputable sources. FYI" Forbes wants to sell magazines will make whatever comparision they beleive will appeal to their audience. Edmunds is reputable, you said so yourself because you know as well as I that they are. Regards, Signature^brendel 23:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Competitors

Hi, I know the LS as a lot of prestige. I also know how luxurious it is, I've driven one. But when you chose competitors you need to keep price in mind. Hey, every flagship of a luxury brand is a competitor. Like kbb or other major publications you need to use price over prestige. The Town Car and the DTS are closer in price, are mostly sold in the US only, and are Flagship sedans. That's three things they have in common. The S-Class and 7-Series are Flaghsips as well but are more expensive (that doesn't mean I think they're better) and are sold mostly outside the US. So, because the Town Car, the DTS, and the Infiniti Q45 have more in common with the LS they're the main competitors. It's the same procedure used in major automotive publications. FYI: I kept the S-Class in there because a few LS will be Ultra-luxury like the S600 etc... but usually you go by base MSRP. Thank you. Gerdbrendel 08:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

The town car a competitor of the LS? Not in size, that's for sure. --84.142.171.251 22:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's true. Gerdbrendel 02:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Edmunds lists the Audi A8, BMW 7-series, Mercedes-Benz S-class, and Jaguar XJ series as the competitors to the LS. [1]. The MSRP shown for the LS is 56k, while the MSRP for the others ranges from 61k to 77k. Oddly, if you select the top-of-the-line Town Car model in Edmunds, it lists the BMW 5-series (???), the LS and the Cadillac DTS as competitors. [2]. The Cadillac has a 41k MSRP. I don't think the 5-series makes sense....though it's priced similarly, isn't it considered to be a mid-size car while the rest are considered to be large cars? I agree with most of Gerdbrendel's logic, except for the part about what markets the cars are sold in. There are quite a few S-Class and 7-series sold in the U.S, so I think that it's perfectly valid to include them in a comparison. As for using auto publications as a basis, Edmunds did a comparison test several years ago with the LS, Jaguar XJ8, BMW 750, and Mercedes S500. [3]. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 23:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I just think becuase they are closer in price and both flagship sedans they are better fit as competitors to the LS. You're right the Town Car has been compared to the Lexus GS and 5-Series, which doesn't make much sense either. But the LS and TC / DTS have more in common with the LS than the 7-Series. Also, the LS is a soft-riding vehicle in which comfort is more important than preformance, bringing it closer to the TC and DTS- but that's probably to POV. Gerdbrendel 04:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Competitors revisited Why the deletion of similar cars? The Q45 without a doubt competes (price and segment). I think it's also easy to argue that the DTS/STS, Towncar, S-class, 7-series, A8, and XJ8 compete as well, though there is somewhat of a price spread. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 18:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, they are all competitors. Lexus inteltionally priced the LS in a manner so it would compete with all of them which it does. Thank you. Regards, Signature^brendel 20:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AAAAAA here we go again

Again, this is no Consumer Guide. We should not list all cars in the similar price bracket (which is also inconsistent throughout the world, some of those cars are priced quite differently in other markets or even unavailable). The role of this field is not to list "competitors" (as people often misunderstand it), but to provide the reader with links to articles on cars that are similar in this way or another and can be of further interest. So, those cars might not even be of the same class and sold in the same market or time period! How about cars similar to NSU Ro80 - IIRC, there wasn't any other Wankel-powered executive car sold in Europe at that time period. That said, I'd rather list Mazda Luce as similar then e.g. Opel Commodore, even if the latter was also a 60s/70s German executive like the Ro80.

I strongly suggest limiting the lists of "similar" cars to one to three cars that are really the most similar to the vehicle in question in this way or another - that way, we avoid this section getting bloated and quite useless to readers (if you want a competitors list, go to Consumer Guide). I know many articles fail to comply with that, but that's not a good excuse not to make THIS article a good example, especially given that it is so close to being a really good article. I'd say the most obvious candidate to being similar is the Infiniti, as it is not only a RWD full-size (by American standards) luxury sedan (btw. Audi and VW aren't RWD), but it was also conceived to serve as a "flagship" for a newly created luxury division of a Japanese market using a model sold in the home country under the "basic" brand. I'd say the Merc S-Klasse can be also said to be somewhat similar to the Lexus due to its focus on super-duper technology and stuff. The Town Car is a totally different breed of car, and when we start including Audi or Jaguar or BMW, then not why all the other full-size luxury cars etc. and then we are recreating Consumer Guide again. Bravada, talk - 01:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

PS. Seeing the ongoing edits while I'm writing that, I suggest leaving only the Infiniti on the list for the obvious reasons. If anybody can put forward a good argument why another car is also more similar to the Lexus then the others, then we can include it too. How about that?

The TC, Q45, XJ all are similar becuase they are:

1. Full-size
2. Rear-wheel drive
3. V8 powered
4. Have MSRPS within $20k of the $60k mark
5. Classified as being luxury cars by KBB in the US

These are the only somewhat objective measures. Being into "super-duper technology and stuff" is subjective. Until now the S-Class to LS is quite a stretch in terms of pricing. The LS is much closer in price to the DTS, TC, Q45, etc... If you look up the LS the DTS, TC, Q45, and the XJ might be of interest to you as you seem to be researching full-size rear wheel drive, luxury flagships that are not in the ultra-lux segment (Bentley, etc...). I do see your point of narrowing it down, but then we should actually limit the similar list to the Q45 period. If you include BMW and Audi, then yes why not inlude all full-size luxo cars. So should we limit the list to the Q45? Signature^brendel 03:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Nobody said the "similar" field is to be 100% objective and compiled using measurable criteria. Moreover, the encyclopedic article is not consumer guide, pricing and KBB will become irrelevant after 50 years, while other stuff in the article won't and that's why accents are on the latter in an encyclopedia. So, I absolutely dismiss pricing and KBB as criteria here - otherwise, here we go with Consumer Guide again. BTW, LS is absolutely in line with the S-Klasse concerning pricing in Europe, so this bares how misleading using pricing can be. If you are researching into full-size or luxury cars, use categories. The similar field, in my opinion, should be much more focused. Even if my propositions "subjective", we can discuss it, no problem, that's the way it should be. Do you believe Infiniti Q is not more similar than all the other cars mentioned than the LS? Secondly, do you think any other model from the list is more similar than the others? Bravada, talk - 04:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

"KBB will become irrelevant after 50 years"- yeah but so will the LS. You cannot dismiss pricing and KBB. You should stick with as much objective criteria as possible. In the US the LS is $29,000 cheaper than the S-Class. The cheapest S-Class is $86,000 (the S 550)[4], the LS starts at $57,000 [5]. So I see your point about pricing. Nonetheless if we do not have some measurable criteria this will reupt into a POV vanity fair. The Q45 is more like the LS than the S-Class without a doubt. Its mainly sold in the US, closer in price, full-size, rear-wheel drive, V8 powered, made a Japanese brand. The TC and DTS are non Japanese but nonethelss closer in price, mainly sold in the US, rear-wheel drive, full-size, V8 powered. Globaly I say the Q45 is more like the LS than the S-Class. The Q is followed by the XJ and TC, which are closer in price and are sold mainly in Anglophobe (by chance you've made a really cool typo :D ) (the US and England). Fact is the vast, vast, vast majority of LS sedans are sold in the US. Lexus isn't very successful in Europe and we're talking about a car whose main market is the American one. The following is my order of similar cars

1. Infiniti Q (Japan, flagship, V8, RWD, luxury, Full-size, mainly-US, $58k [6])
2. Jaguar XJ (V8, flagship, RWD, luxury, Full-size, mainly-Anglo, $62k[7])
3. Cadillac DTS (V8, flagship, luxury, Full-size, mainly-US, $41k [8])
4. Lincoln Town Car (V8, flagship, RWD, luxury, Full-size, mainly US, $42k [9])
5. Mercedes-Benz S-Class (V8, RWD, luxury, Full-size, $86k [10])
6. BMW 7-Seires (V8, RWD, luxury, Full-size, $71k [11])

So... the Q is by far the most similar, even if pricing is disregarded. Also in the US, the LS is said to be a soft-luxo car, not a preformance monster, making the 7-Series last in the list of similar cars. Now I am not saying we need to be 100% objective but lets try and stay away from a discussion of what we think is a good car and has more prestige. Also, I don't want to sound US-centric, but lets face it this is a car mainly intended for the US-market, making US-pricing relevant. I know in Germany an Escalade is inline with pricing with a S-Class (56,000 €) and the TC comes close beucase its costs about $8,000 to import one, so let's go with US pricing for cars mainly sold in the US. Besides, all RWD, main US sold, full-seize, V8, luxury, flagship sedans are similar to the LS (besdies there are only five of them, so... why not include all five. Signature^brendel 05:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Surprisingly for somebody not being born in the US, you are, perhaps indavertently pushing US-POV (or non-worldwide-view) to prove your point. I've come to a gridlock in some other discussion here and as we seem to be able to reach good consensus quite often, I would like to avoid it here. Still, I believe that if the LS would become irrelevant in 50 years, there would be no point in making the article about it. But it's KBB value today will become irrelevant. ANYWAY, how about a compromise and leaving out only the Infiniti Q, as it is by far the most similar, and the others are disputable in this way or another as we see in the last few edits to the article? Bravada, talk - 05:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Well I disagree about pricing. My 50 years comment meant that pricing today is important today, and beucase how irrelevant it may be in the far, far future it shouldn't be excluded. Anyways, I am all for compromise. All RWD, V8, full-size luxo flaships are similar but I can life with "leaving out only the Infiniti Q, as it is by far the most similar, and the others are disputable in this way or another" - So, lets just leave the Q for now- I agree. Regards, Signature^brendel 05:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, fellow Wikipedians! I would like to chime in. I have edited back to the 'usual 3' as I feel this is a reasonable compromise. I find the disparity between this article and every single other vehicle article I have examined on Wikipedia regarding flagship sedans in as follows -- all others have more 'similar' cars, whereas (at last edit) there was only 1. Even the Infiniti Q45 has more than 1 similarity. The least, the Volkswagon Phaeton, has 3 similar vehicles listed, compared to the 10+ the S-class has. This isn't Consumer Guide, but it isn't '1 choice only' situations either.

However your point is well-taken, that those articles are not necessarily well-written. But the very fact that there is a debate here suggests to me that there should be a compromise between voluminous listing (all inclusive) and just one (controversial). I suggest that a minimum of 2 or 3 be maintained (and probable maximum of 5), so as to provide a degree of comparability in terms of what is 'similar' to the LS.

With regards to the Q45, I agree that on a number of criteria, the LS is rather similar: Full-size, Rear-wheel drive, V8 powered, Have MSRPS within $20k of the $60k mark, Classified as being luxury cars by KBB in the US.

However, I would suggest that there are some differences, which you may or may not consider valid. Some key differences are emerging:

1. Standard and long wheelbase versions
2. Choice of engines/powertrains
3. Pricing brackets
4. Competitive markets
5. Media commentary

The 2007 LS joins the A8, S-Class, 7-Series, and XJ as having SWB and LWB. Furthermore, it now offers a 380 hp V8, and a 440+ hp V8 hybrid. Similarly, the 7-Series and S-class have offered multiple powerplant options.

Pricing information is expected to be released as early as tomorrow, but Lexus sources have unofficially indicated a sharp rise in MSRPs-particularly for the 460 L and 600h ($70,000-$100,000). These are more similar with the Audi A8 and upwards into BMW/Mercedes territory. In terms of competitive markets, the LS is going head-to-head with the Mercedes S-class in particular, in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Singapore, China, Europe, South Africa, etc. The similarities of those vehicles are absolutely there in the Asian markets, where often the LS, S-Class, and 7-Series are the only vehicles going head to head.

Now the Q45, while at the surface being quite similar to the LS, is not a Series or Class of vehicles, does not offer multiple powertrains, has fallen far behind on price (particularly in resale value historically, and now with the LS' upward movement), and does not compete in half as many markets as the LS does. Now it is fair to note that the LS is indeed mostly a US success, however with 8,000 preorders in Japan, and prominent sales in Asia, it nonetheless has far more of an international presence than the Q45 does. Which brings me to the final point--media coverage. It's telling that the first LS 400 was given its first press preview in Europe, and driven by Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson. And up to now--the LS 460 is previewed in Europe and covered by all the major motoring magazines and many news publications, the first article out of that event being by Auto Bild. The Q45 has merited none of that coverage, which illustrates the final point--the Q45 is not only a commercial failure, it is for all intents and purposes discontinued (to be revived at a later date, possibly). Go to any Infiniti dealership and at most there is 1, and usually 0, Q45s on the lot. It is quite difficult to compare a rare, virtually unheard of model, as 'similar.' Although in general terms there is some resemblance, when real world considerations are brought to bear, as are the current advancements of the LS Series, stark differences emerge. The LS is more similar in my view towards the S-Class, now more than ever.

In media comparisons, take Car and Driver for example, the 1989 comparo of "the new Lexus and Infiniti vs." used 'similar' vehicles: S-Class, Q45, Audi A8 (equivalent), Jaguar XJ, Cadillac STS, Lexus LS. By 1999, Edmunds' "$60,000 supersedan comparison" compared the A8, 7-Series, Jaguar XJ, S-class, Lexus LS. In 2005, Car and Driver's "$70,000 luxury sedan comparison" used the Audi A8, Jaguar XJ, Phaeton, S-Class, Lexus LS. Motor Trend did the same exact thing.

However, in one 2005 comparison (can't remember which of the major publications), the title "long wheelbase luxury sedans" was used, and thus only the Audi, BMW, and Benz vehicles were tested. That all changes now, with the 2007 LS having a LWB version.

Another media report before the S-class debut in 2006 claimed that the new S-class was shown to top DC execs with a 7-series and LS 430 present to compare. Another mark for similarity with the Germans. It is also relatively common that the LS' styling has been accused of copying the S-class. The strongest accusations of styling similarity for the latest model are the 7-Series. And for all intents and purposes, if you read any of the car enthusiast boards, the LS has traditionally gunned for the S-class. Note even how the LS 430 competes agains the '420 SEL' turned S 430...mimicking a similar vehicle designation.

Thus, I suggest that at minimum, the S-class be included as well as the Infiniti, and more realistically I suggest that the other vehicles be seriously considered. Brevity is welcomed, but exclusion to the point of scarceness, IMO robs the 'similar' list of its purpose--showcase similar vehicles. A limited choice of similar vehicles would be most appreciated. Thank you for your consideration.

Reviews are only opinions. Please this is for similar cars and not competitors. For my response see what I said above. The Q compromise makes sense. Or we can indlude all RWD, full-size luxo flagships, there are only five anyways. So its either include all five or tale the Q as it is the most similar IMHO. Aslo styling, handelins, and preformance are to subjective. Lets focus on objective attributed of the car as much as possible. You're right the LS does offer a long wheelbase version much like the S-Class or TC and unlike the Q. In the US the S-Class is still far more expensive and the styling is not near the same, the LS has been called quite plain, while the S-Class has caused some controversy (the W220). Besides the S-Class is German while the LS is Japanese and like the Q mainly sold in the US. Nonetheless I think its either mention all five or the Q alone, everything else seems to be somewhat vain. What is your basis for including the S-Class and not the XJ, TC, or DTS? Thanks. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:51, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe the most important things to consider are concept and technical aspects. For example, if Wikipedia existed in mid 1980s, I would list Espace as similar to Chrysler minivan even though they were sold in totally different markets, because they were based on very similar concepts (now we have a whole class of minivans, so the example grew irrelevant). Things such as being featured on TopGear or how much does a car cost in the US - again, mind you, that pricing relations between the models discussed are quite different in other countries, e.g. you are not mentioning Quattroporte at all and it is more or less in the same price bracket on this side of the pond, but as I said, it's irrelevant.

So, we can list a number of small details that set the Q apart from the LS, but still their history and general concept is parallel (also note that the Q actually has been having a LWB version most of the time in the form of Nissan President, not that the LWB/SWB issue is overly relevant). If I had to name a car that is "like LS" in general aspects, and considering the LS from 1989 until now (and not just the LS today), I would say first and foremost Q. Later cars are quite disputable, as the discussion here shows.

Moreover, it's not that I believe there SHOULD be a list of one. There should be a list of vehicles that are more similar to the given vehicle than any other vehicles, and to help narrow it down, I suggest it is no longer than three. In this case this is "certainly Q" + an undefined number of other RWD luxury sedans. Since it seems impossible to make a convincing argument to include only any given two of them that would be "more similar" then any other, and including all of them would lead to "Consumer Guide", we are left logically with the option of "one similar car" (conversely, for the Cima/Q45, the only really "similar" car would be the LS, if we dismiss the short-lived Mitsubishi Proudia). It's not limiting to one because of being "overly restrictive", it is limiting to one because the only other option is "limiting to seven" (if I counted correctly). Bravada, talk - 07:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

My basis is merely to fulfill the requirements of brevity, which you have strenuously insisted upon. It is, to my mind, an 'either or' choice...sort of like those multiple-choice tests where you are torn between 2, but most choose 1--and realistically the 2 choices are equally valid. If it were up to me, I would included all 5. But since you have insisted upon a limited number, I have chosen the S-class as it has the most public reference and comparison, is the vehicle which is most consistently cross-shopped and compared, matches in sales, distinction, and benchmarking (it is truly no secret that the S-class was the main LS target). With the new pricing, the LS will be in between the S-class and the Q, more towards the Audi A8 in fact. A near $100,000 price tag is quite high indeed.

And may I suggest that the S-class hasn't always been this expensive? There are multiple S-class sedans sold in the past and now which are stripped down models and are more towards Q45 pricing than anything else. But to simply subdivide based on country of origin is in my opinion making an overly simplistic generalization--that the Japanese cars are the same, when in fact they are quite different. And although the US is the main market for 'both' -- really that is barely accurate as the LS sells more vehicles a month than the Q45 sells in a year. The high-end luxury market in the US is made up of #1 LS, #2 S-class, and #3 7-series. The Volkswagon Phaeton even outsold the Q45 last month in the US! Realistically, to the average reader, looking at 'similar' the S-class would come first to mind, along with the European competitors (and possibly American). Few have even heard of the Q45. And the fact that the Audi, S-class articles specifically mention and reference the LS makes another case for similarity/competitiveness. I suggest that the European competition--the LS' main target and the ones it was initially designed to be similar to--be considered. Enigma3542002 07:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not want to disagree with you, but I think it is rather circuitous reasoning to say, 'only 3' but since 'there are 5' thus 'there can only be 1.' I see little problem in showing 7 if that is the total. The human mind, according to neuroscience, is capable of holding 7 concepts ('The Magic Seven') in comparison at any one time. If I were to name any car that is most like the Lexus LS, I would suggest the S-class. I concede there is some amount of Q-related element, but there is a whole host or reasons why it isn't.Enigma3542002 07:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Remember this is not competitors but similar cars. There are only five RWD, fulls-size, V8, luxo, flagship-sedans. So is mentioning five instead of three really so bad? I agree with Bravada on the Q and that the similar cars section needs to reflect all LS generations, not just the LS 460, but also the LS 430 and LS 400. Regards, Signature^brendel 07:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

What Gerd said is right on the spot, and as concerns reasons vs. reasons, most of the reasons you listed are "competitive", but much more "conceptual" reasons speak for the Q. Both cars were conceived as a luxo cruiser to be sold by a mainstream manufacturer under a newly-created upscale brand in export markets (while also selling under the "parent" brand in the home market), both were launched at the same time. One failed, one succeeded. Bravada, talk - 07:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, thank you gerdbrendel. I think it is perfectly fine to include them. Frankly I think the interests of the article are better served by including them, as there are key, specific, objective similarities in the vehicles that cannot be denied. If the Q is to be included or not at all, the others should be included. To ignore them would be a disservice to the reader. Just because 2 vehicles came from different continents--yes a difference--does not make them necessarily so dissimilar that they warrant no listing or relation. And doesn't it make sense that all the other Wikipedia articles reference them as similar? The dozens of authors of the other pages certainly seemed to agree. Enigma3542002 07:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, five is not too much and they are similar- I am going to say good-night fow now though (Its night here in CA ;-)) Best Regards, Signature^brendel 07:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you and good night, I really appreciate all your contributions, from both of you. Before editing this article I looked long and hard over the discussion, the GA discussion, and all the hard work you both have put into it, and I think that the combined efforts and seriousness we apply to this article represent something of the postive potential Wikipedia can have--provided no one gets too burned out! Best wishes and good night. Enigma3542002 07:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, if you forget that those five (as you say, only five, I'd say excluding A8, Phaeton and Quattroporte is not justifiable if you insist on "competitiveness" criteria) are competing with each other here and now (with here being relative), and look at them, beyond RWD and size they have little similarities. Mercedes comes from a brand that has been making luxury sedans since I don't know when, Jag and Lincoln quite comparably, BMW to a lesser extent. Neither of the mentioned brands were created by a mainstream manufacturer trying to move upmarket, quite the opposite can be said of BMW and Mercedes. They are competing cars, but how they were created is very different.

Also, an encyclopedia does not provide buying advice. Like I said, try to look at it as if you would be reading in 50 years. I don't think one would miss not having a list of models in the class (you can always click the appropriate category for a listing), I think, however, it would be good to point to those really good examples of really similar vehicles, be them competitors or not. Again, think about the NSU Ro80!

Where I live the day has just started and I am about to leave home, so I am wishing you good night and myself a good day :D Bravada, talk - 07:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I was under the impression that there were supposed to be no more than three cars in the "similar" field. Is that not correct? IFCAR 12:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Yup, that's why there is this whole discussion. Bravada, talk - 17:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

No Bravada, you misunderstand. The five are included under the similar criteria. This has nothing to do with competitor. These five are the only RWD, V8, full-size, luxury flagships that are mainly sold in North America. If we narrow the list to three, then it becomes somewhat POV because we are chosing the cars we think are similar instead of basing the list on some objective criteria. The A8, DTS, Phaeton, and TL do not feature the above characteristics and thus can be excluded. Fact is that only the XJ, TC, S-Class, 7-Series, and the Q share these characterisitics above mentioned thus making them similar cars. You are right Lincoln, Jag, MB were all created as upscale brands (Lincoln was actually independent once, like Jag) and only Infiniti, Lexus and Acura "were created by a mainstream manufacturer trying to move upmarket". So we are still faced with the same options we can mention all five RWD, V8, full-size, luxury flagships, which are similar cars, or we can limit ourselfs to the Q and I guess the Acura TL. Regards, Signature^brendel 18:47, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Umm, I admit I never saw sales stats, but I'd seriously doubt Jag, S-Klasse and 7er sell mainly in North America. B-sides, all three also come with a selection of other engines. The TC is in particular an absolutely different car here, with its body-on-frame, live axle and dimensions out of a bygone era. The last car the TC was really similar to died in mid-90s at the hands of General Motors. The cars have different histories, were built around different concepts, and just happened to be in the same market segment in one country at a certain point in time.

I mean - sure, there is no doubt an argument can be made that they are similar in this way or another, but we are looking to cars that are really the most similar. In case of the LS, it's the Q. Bravada, talk - 22:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Brendel, how could Wikipedia possibly be expected to list every similar vehicle? Of course there has to POV in narrowing the list down, how else do you think cars like the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are kept down to three? There are dozens of midsize mid-priced front-wheel-drive sedans sold around the world, it would be impossible to list every one. IFCAR 23:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Compromise

No, you misunderstood, the mainly-US sold only applies to the LS, TC, TL, and Q-thus making them similar. I Agree with you Bravada that the Q is by far the most similar. I also agree that the TC is one of its kind, the Fleetwood Burgham was last similar car, though some press releases state the DTS, a FWD uni-body, to be similar. Anyways, in this case it is possible to list all five similar cars, as these are luxo flagships and not mainstream mid-sizers. There are only five car that have RWD, are full-size with V8s and are the flagships of a luxo marque. It is possible to list all five. Now you can say let's only count uni-bodies, that eliminates the TC. Then we can say lets eliminate those cars whose brands were not conceived as being luxury that eliminates the BMW (a preformance brand originally). So we could say lets only list the XJ, S-Class, and Q as they are: RWD, full-size, unibody, V8, flaghsips of marques conceived to tend to the luxury market. (well, MB has been tending to the luxo market before anyone else, so... I think that would work). BTW: Isn't the XJ made with an Aluminum body or something, if so, perhaps we should discount the XJ instead of the 7-Series. To sum up here is my compromise:

1. Exclude the TC as it is body-on-frame
2. Exclude the XJ as it is Aluminum or exclude the 7-Series because BMW was not initialy a luxo make as Lexus, Inifniti, etc...

So we can either list the Q, S-Class, and XJ or under the provisions above, list the Q, S-Class, and 7-Series. How about that?Signature^brendel 00:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

It is even more of a foot-in-mouth than trying to argue that all five cars listed (you seem to conveniently forget about the Quattroporte) are equally "similar" while A8 and Phaeton are not. What is indisputable is that the Infiniti Q is by far the most similar. All the other can be argued to be similar in this way or another, but this is always by using some awkward and/or disputable criteria. I'd say let's leave the Infiniti Q alone and stop going over and over again about something that is not worth the time and effort. Also, a one-item "similar" list could serve as a good example for all those cars that contain a Consumer Guide listing in the infobox that you can actually have just one entry in the "similar" field and that's fine too! Bravada, talk - 00:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, including only the Q is fine with me. The Quattraporte is in a whole another segment in the US, up there with the Bentley. What do you mean "you seem to conveniently forget?" Uhhh... ;-) You said some POV is neccesary. Okay, there is some POV in those exclusion guidelines. The Pheaton and A8 are exclude because they arn't RWD (are they?). The Pheaton can also be excluded as it is not made by a luxo marque. But you're right you can make up nearly any criteria to fit any configuration of luxo cars as being similar. That said I'm fine with having only the Q on there, but other user seem to differ from our consensus. Also, aside from the Q which is more similar than all others, the remaining four are not "equally 'similar'" but it takes "some awkward and/or disputable criteria" to rank them. So, as I said, lets just leave it at the Q. (Hmmm, sounds catchy) Regards, Signature^brendel 02:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't add the Q45 as its only similar vehicle ever again. The Q45 is discontinued. -- Bull-Doser 17:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Links proving that S-class is closest competitor

here are some links from well-known sites and not a single one of them mentions Q45 or town-car or cadillac. Almost everywhere S-class is the number one competitor.

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2006/08/2007_lexus_ls_4.html http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=116509 http://www.autosite.com/content/shared/articles/templates/index.cfm/article_page_order_int/7/article_id_int/2079 http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/LexusLS460/ http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/AutoshowArticles/articleId=108790 http://www.newcartestdrive.com/sneakpreview.cfm?Vehicle=2007_Lexus_LS%20460&ReviewID=94 http://www.autosite.com/content/shared/articles/templates/index.cfm/article_page_order_int/8/article_id_int/2079 http://www.canadiandriver.com/roadtest/07ls460.htm http://reviews.cnet.com/How_do_you_improve_the_Lexus_LS_460_Carefully/4660-11443_7-6417079.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YIk8EnrCp5I (This video is in German, a language this vandal gerdbrendal knows. This video consistently compares LS with S-class).

How long will this vandalism go on?? Is it not time this user gerdbrendal is permanently banned from wikipedia. His IP address should be examined and investigation should be launched to find out if he is paid by any company, organisation or outfit to pursue this hate-agenda.

[edit] V12

How does a hybrid version compensate for the absence of a V12. My competitor has a gas guzzling 500hp+ V12 so I'm going to put a hybrid in my car to steal his business??? Gerdbrendel 05:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

The theory is that the hybrid engine adds enough HP to the output of the gas engine to make it equivalent to the power of a typical V12. Obviously the power of V12s vary, but at 444hp (as it was recently reported that the 600h will have) it's at least in the right ballpark -- the BMW 760i V12 puts out 445bhp. Note also that the 600h is named according to the same principle; it's a 5-liter engine so it ought to be the 500h, but Lexus is implying that the added power from the electric motor is equivalent to another liter of displacement. Whether customers buy this logic, well, we'll see next year...

On a related note, I'd like to remove the sentence

Critics, however doubt whether Lexus will be able to command more than $12,000 premium over LS 460 L, thereby resulting in a MSRP in $80,000-85,000 range for LS600h L; still $15,000 short of the $100K ultra-luxury segment mark.

The footnote refers only to Europe, where Lexus doesn't do very well (that's the point of the article). I didn't see any reference to $12,000. And, given that the 600h appears to include as standard equipment many option packages from the 460L, one of which goes for $20,000, this point of view doesn't seem to make sense. --Steve Pucci | talk 04:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see. The hybrid versions will have as much power as the V12s of the competition. Perhaps we should clarify that in the text because V12 and hybrid sound like opposites at first sight ;-) Also, feel free to remove unsourced info. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

Hi, I just nominated this article for good article under self nominations, since I have contributed quite a bit to it over time. Signature^brendel 01:53, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

It is a more thorough and well-written article than most auto articles. I'm planning to put some time into the Lexus GS article; while it has a decent amount of information, I think it could use a bit of organization and maybe a bit more technical info. Great contributions, by the way. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 02:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

There are no references (GA criterion number 5). Slambo (Speak) 15:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I'm going to add a reference section over the next few days and put the GA back up.Signature^brendel 15:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

You want it, you get it. Here's my after-a-sleepless-night take on the article.

• First and foremost, IMHO the article is really nicely structured, well written and much closer than further from the ideal. I really appreciate the way the sections are formatted to match templates, or the other way around.

Nitpicking:

• Summary - in general, it is a very good summary, but the third sentence should be substantiated with some (easy to find, I believe) references.
• The following ones are on the border of POV and "my aunt Mabel thinks it is better than sex, but my counsin Alfrieda believes it ranks between BMW 7 and apple mousse". There is a version somewhere in history that formulates this notion much better and more concisely. If you believe this matter really should be discussed more thoroughly in the article, I think a section might be appropriate, but not the summary. The Cx thing is substantial and should certainly stay and be more highlited.
• I believe a reference for the "initally intended to be introduced as a standalone model for Lexus" sentence might come in handy.
• The very last sentence in the UF20 IV section should IMHO be put into perspective for its significance to be understood by the general public.
• In the same section, the transmission is referred to as "smooth" - bordering POV, I believe.
• UF 30 I:
  • A bit of editorial attention might be advisable. The exterior and interior changes are mentioned in the first sentence, but the detailed description of them is relegate to the second paragraph. I suggest grouping the first sentence and the second paragraph into one paragraph, and the suspension/engine into other.
  • The interior volume claim might use a reference.
  • Dynamic Laser Cruise Control should better be explained, or at least Wikilinked.
• Engine specs - the "number of gears" line makes it more appropriate to name it "Powertrain specs" or "Drivelines". Noting that all transmissions are automatic, and all generations have FR setup, as well as a more detailed description of the engines (bore/stroke, comp. ratio). I know this type of table is usually used in such articles, but I find it moderately visually attractive.
• The "Future possibilities" section is more like a "gossip and commentary" one. The second paragraph would suffice. The reference site only briefly mentions the V12 possibility, nothing on the Century there.
• The J.D. Power achievement in trivia is no trivia, it's a very significant achievement and belongs in the summary, IMHO.

What I believe could be added to make the article more comprehensive:

• LS's status in most important market (sales vs. important rivals) - which means USA, Europe and Japan (if you can find any data on the latter). The difference between mainstream success in America and relative insignificance in Europe should be highlited IMHO. Sales results/ownership comparisons with competitors, perhaps?
• The role in shifting perceptions and market positions of Japanese vs. American and European brands is worth noting
• Perhaps you might find some sources that would enable you to say what distinguishes LS owners, if anything?
• Does LS have any role in popular culture?
• Some insight into the development history would be interesting.

Having said that, I must add that this article is very good and enjoyable to read, as well as very informative and useful for a casual Wikipedia user like myself :D I wish I would write one like that myself. --Bravada 05:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your peer review, I'll take them into consideration and will make various improvements to the article in the next few days. FYI: I moved a copyyour review into the review section. Regards, Signature^brendel 05:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted as GA

A lot of work still needs to be done to make this a GA. There are very few and missing citations all over the place for one. Also, I am not a fan of the future section. It also seems out of date. I would go over everything said about the article at WP:GA/D and cover the comments made there. Just an outsider's POV. KnightLago 02:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I counted 7 citation needed tags, and citation #4 does not work in the future section KnightLago 02:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Renom?

This article has improved a lot; thus I am inclined to think that it may be time for a GA renomination. What do think? Best Regards, Signature^brendel 03:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Please give me some time to review it, I can't answer at the moment. I am afraid though that I can see already that the use some of the copyrighted images cannot be rationalized, and that can be a major problem. The comments about trivia and awards also hold true. Bravada, talk - 04:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay-the more input the better! Regards, Signature^brendel 04:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] aka Celsior

I am not very familiar with the Japanese market, but looking at the Celsior image on the article I couldn't help but notice the cloth seats, causing me to question the vehicle's position within the market. I guess my question is whether or not the Celsior is should be mention as a related vehicle or in the aka space. Signature^brendelNow under review! 22:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Well the Celsior doesn't exist anymore. It also had a different market position than the LS, namely it was positioned as a top luxury vehicle sold by Toyota for Japanese customers only, but not a luxury flagship as the LS was sold by Lexus in all other markets around the world. In the Toyota lineup, the Celsior was below the Crown Majesta/Century/etc. The Celsior also had different interior specifications, such as the cloth seats (although the first generation LS had a limited cloth seat production--extremely rare!). "Related" sounds ok to me if you want to put it there, but the Celsior is gone now.

The newest LS is sold as an LS in Japan, and now as the Lexus flagship in that country. As such, it has the highest specifications of features offered on the Lexus flagship, anywhere (including safety systems and security/entertainment options not available outside JDM). There is no longer any Celsior, the LS is a whole new animal. One thing which the US market has which Japan has promoted less of is the LS 460 L; in Europe and Japan it seems the LS 460 is more publicized. Anyhow, it is my conclusion that the Celsior was definitely related, but the LS is a separate vehicle in a number of ways, now moreso than ever. Enigma3542002 02:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks that's the answer I needed. That means we will definitely keep the Celsior in the related space and out of the aka space. As I understand it the Crown was the related to the LS 400, the Clesior related to the LS 430 and the new LS 460, is the LS everywhere. Alrighty... Signature^brendelNow under review! 05:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vehicle codes?

I was wondering whether UF10, UF20 etc is preferred...I have seen UCF10, UCF20, UCF30 etc used elsewhere. Enigma3542002 03:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Detection of sleepiness

Cut from article:

is the world's first to keep track of driver attentiveness. This system ...

I've read (somewhere) about 10 or 20 years ago of such systems being in use. Who says Lexus is the first? --Uncle Ed 19:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

This system uses facial recognition technology, which was not available 20 years ago AFAIK. There are other systems that may keep track of driver input; I know the Boeing 777 sounds an alert if the pilot does not touch the controls for a certain amount of time. If you have evidence of a comparable system, please produce it and this article may be edited--perhaps to say "world's first to use facial recognition technology to track driver attentiveness." Otherwise a more crude system would be to have your aunt sit next to you in the car and snap her fingers if you fall asleep. :D Enigma3542002 20:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

A discussion of driver monitoring system efforts is listed here: http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/cat_robotics_cars.html

The world's first claim is stated in a number of places, such as: http://www.newcarnet.co.uk/Lexus_news.html?id=5787&highlightws=Lexus

It is also listed here as 'latest' technology: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/4793854.stm

Enigma3542002 20:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for such a quick response. I guess the only question now is whether to describe it as the first system of its type (i.e., using that specific technique) or as the first system ever developed that addressed the problem in general. I'm leaning toward the former. ^_^ --Uncle Ed 20:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, I suggest my earlier quote on mentioning facial recognition technology, that would add specificity and increase the accuracy of the description. Based on several source articles, I believe it is fair to say that this is a first in utilizing infrared and facial recognition processing to monitor driver attentiveness. Enigma3542002 23:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Failed GA

As of [12], the article during the review, I failed this article for Good Article status. The major reason is WP:MOS, which I list it below:

• Too many trivia!! Per WP:AVTRIV, lists of facts, as found in trivia sections, are better presented within the context of the text rather than in a section of unrelated items.
• When you list reference items in the References section using the WP:FOOTNOTE citation style, make sure you spell out all the necessary information regarding the source, not only the title and external links. Necessary information includes author, publisher, retrieved date (if it is online), volume/issue, etc. The purpose is to give easy verification of its sources without clicking the external website.
• The Awards section is a heavy list and it is inappropriate per Wikipedia:Embedded list. If it is necessary, then write major awards in the textual form and point out the detail with {{See also}} template to a new list article, for instance List of Lexus LS Awards.
• Read again WP:MOS for putting boldfaces. Only title of the article in the lead section and its synonyms can be boldfaced.
• The lead section is very poor, it does not summarizing the whole article if the lead length is compared with the length of the article. The last sentence of the lead is unencyclopaedic because prices can be varied. It sounds more to advertising summary than a lead section of an encyclopaedic article.
• The first, second, third and fourth generations are belong to one group of Lexus LS History, but the grouping of sections do not give that logical idea.
• Drop all price information in the main text, because it is not an encyclopaedic information. It's more to marketing report.
• After reading the First, Second, Third and Fourth Generation sections, it looks like that I'm reading a brochure from Lexus. Trim all unnecessary information about prices, features, and other show-off marketing words. Wikipedia is not an advertising website.
• Please drop also Future possibilities section. They contains only rumors and events in the future (not ready for a factual data). Wikipedia is not a crystall ball.
• Missing information: Critics? Comparison with similar type of cars?

As a result, I failed this article for the moment. If all of the above issues have been resolved, then editors can renominate it back again. As always, if you feel disagree about my review, you may submit it for a re-review. — Indon (reply) — 12:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your review and extensive suggestions. I think you made very good points particularly with regard to WP:MOS, in terms of the extensive lists, length, references, etc. We editors of the LS page will most likely attempt to resolve them in the near future. I agree with expanding the lead section in particular. However, as for first, second, third, and fourth generations belonging to LS history, I disagree in so much as noting that the "LS history" section is a summary, which is followed by a more detailed LS generation by generation review. Perhaps in the future if there is sufficient extra information, the sections per generation can become their own pages, with links attached. The fourth generation is the current. However, for now, perhaps the LS history section could be "Historical Overview" or something. I also believe that the pricing information is certainly valid, if perhaps not in the lead section. A primary part of this vehicle's historical impact has been due to its price. Perhaps specific US$ identifiers can add the proper context to those mentions. The boldface issue will have to be looked at, given that many other automotive articles use boldface to denote model designations, but I think we can work it out.

I agree that the article should be as impartial as possible, but IMO that does not preclude mentioning features. All the automotive articles I have come across in Wikipedia have ample discussion of vehicle features. One idea I have thought of is perhaps making it into bullet form like the Mercedes S-Class subarticles, even if it seems Wikipedia prefers text over lists. Regardless, in an article about a particular car, a discussion of the features should be one of the main areas of focus. I think we can also look at the word choices employed in this article, so as to avoid the "advertising" accusation, but there has already been a significant amount of toning-down the language. In particular, going through the article just now, I see verified facts being listed, with little to no weasel words and advocacy of the vehicle. Specific awards and accolades for quality and reliability are noteworthy facts, and mentioned only at key points in the vehicle history. There are mentions of automobile magazine reviews--where a third party, generally respected opinion is included. That might be looked at. Otherwise, the only other positive-sounding so-called "show-off" words in the vehicle description are "world's first" designations, which have been confirmed from a variety of sources. We have even had a challenge to one such "world's first" claim which was resolved. As such, stating that this vehicle is the first in the world to introduce something, and hence be a sort of trend-setter, is certainly worthy information IMO as it pertains to historical and technological significance. If there are specific mentions that are problematic, perhaps we can go over them.

Lastly, the "Future Possibilities" section has been criticized before, and it does seem that it lacks a fully encyclopedic quality. In this section there is also criticism of the fourth generation vehicle. Perhaps the "Future Possibilities" section can be pared down significantly or eliminated, and the critical discussion of the LS 460 moved up to fourth generation section text.

Thank you for your review, it is appreciated! Those who accuse Wikipedia of being unreliable due to free user editing should see the GA process and see the careful attention that Wikipedians bring to it! Improvements will be made, and your suggestions are duly noted. Thanks again. Enigma3542002 02:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I should also note that this article is nearing a transition point in my view for the near future, as it is getting quite long eventually (most certainly by fifth generation debut) to be split into sections or have material pared down. I would like to add that the current level of detail in this article is worthwhile information in my view, particularly as it pertains to flagship vehicles. If too much material must be sacrificed to achieve a GA rating, then perhaps it would be advisable to leave the article alone at a B-level or something. Hopefully that won't be necessary and the best of both worlds can be achieved. Enigma3542002 02:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1994 pricing

I have added a "citation needed template" next to the 1994 starting MSRP figure. If the starting MSRP of a 1994 LS was $50k in 1994-then the model has actually gotten cheaper. $50k in 1994 = $63k in 2005. Yet the LS started at $58k in 2005 ($45k in 1994 dollars). I thought the LS has gotten continously more expensive (in inflation adjusted as well as total terms)?? Is there any reference that the base MSRP for the LS really exceeded $50k as early as 1994? Signature^brendel 02:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The pricing reference is listed in the Edmunds LS Generations article: "The LS traipsed through 1994 virtually unchanged — except for the ever escalating base price (now over $50,000). Designing a car this good must have been tough."[13] I will add the reference in. I believe that the price of the luxury flagship segment and the LS did not fully match the pace of inflation; consider from the Edmunds article:

1990 420 SEL started at $61,210 ($91,000 in 2005 dollars)

2004 S 500 starting at $81,000 ($83,000 in 2005 dollars)

...which indicates that the equivalent S-Class Mercedes MSRP has dropped about $8,000 from 1990 to 2004. Similarly:

1995 LS 400 starting at $50,000 ($63,000 adjusted 2005 dollars)

2004 LS 430 starting at $55,000 ($57,000, adjusted 2005)

... means that the Lexus MSRP dropped about $6,000 from 1995 to 2004.

In the long term, the current path has been that the LS has gotten more expensive from then to now (from generation 1 to generation 4). But from year to year, the trend is not so clear (based on MSRP; inflation etc.). The article however currently states, correctly AFAIK, that there was a rise in pricing for the first generation which was quite consistent. Later on there is not such a significant rise, and if inflation is taken into account, the cost of the vehicle was less at certain points. However, the pricing has been consistently advertised in the $50K range (2nd generation) and $55-70K range (3rd generation).

Some factors to consider include the threatened trade war between the US and Japan in the mid 90's when the idea of massive tariffs on Japanese luxury goods was suggested, and the softness of the luxury market in certain years. Not to mention the exchange rate and its effects on imports...

I should also note however that Lexus in recent years has advertised comparatively low MSRPs, while shipping options packages galore (vs. the 1990 LS 400 when there was only 1 or 2 options packages, now there are half a dozen and they can easily at $5,000-$10,000 to the price, when in 1990 the options were IIRC usually less than $3,000, and even in the $1,000 range or less). This may have mitigated the effects of inflation. For certain, the current LS 460 at $61,000+ and especially the LS 460 L at $71,000+ (up to $95,000+ with certain packages) has topped the cost scales for this vehicle. Enigma3542002 06:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

mmm... interesting. You are right, the overall price (non-inflation adjusted) has increased from generation to generation. As you have a reference, I suppose the pricing of the LS (if adjusted for inflation) as gone up and down quite a bit... The S-class stats are also quite interesting. For some reason I am very suprised that prices have actually fallen when considering inflation (perhaps increased competition is another factor at work here)... Regards, Signature^brendel 06:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)