Talk:List of Cars characters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Animation
Animation Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Pixar work group. (rated as mid importance)
Assessment comments
Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
List
This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.
NA
This article has been rated as NA-importance on the priority scale.
Disney Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Disney on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Lightning McQueen

The article states that the name "Lightning McQueen" was based in part on the name of a late Pixar animator. While this may be true, I seem to recall that the name was said to be based on the 1960s actor and racer Steve McQueen. I have not viewed the Extras on the DVD recently. Perhaps someone has already verified this? HealthySkepticism (talk) 14:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other possible models for Wingo and Boost

When I look at these models, I see Boost as a 90s Toyota Supra and Wingo and a Mistubishi Evo VII of VIII. The biggest nod I think is the rear tail lights on both cars. The Supra has very unique tail lights and Boost matches these perfectly, the same as Wingo, his rear lights are simular to the Evo's rear lights. Anyway, I'm not going to change the page unless I can get enough people to agree with me on this.

[edit] First race Official Car.

The track official in the first race, who goes to examine the finish tape while the SUV is telling everyone to go away, appears to be either a Mazda 323F (aka Lantis), or the Mazda 6 5-door. The taillamps lead me to believe the second one.MattA1GP 01:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Could we try and get images for each of the cars? --WestJet 15:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a great idea, to improve the article. -AMK152 20:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll try. --ANNAfoxlover
I've gotten a few pictures, but some of them are not very good. I've gotten GOOD pictures for the following cars: Lightning McQueen, Mack, The King, Chick, Sally, Lizzie, Doc, Mia, and Tia. How are they? ANNAfoxlover 22:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
"How are they?" That's a question we can only answer if we can see those pictures you have. -dogman15 21:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm a fanatic of this film. My computer at home (not this school computer) has a bunch of artwork and screenshots from the film. If you need a picture, I'm your man, but I'm still a bit aprehensive about all those copyright issues, if you know what I mean. -dogman15 21:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, may I add pictures of: (and I'd like an answer and/or vote)
  1. Leakless #52
  2. Mario Andretti #11
  3. Nitroade #28
  4. RPM #64
  5. Fred (BTW, I have two pictures of him: official, and screenshot from Rust-eze tent. Which one?)
  6. The Rust-eze brothers
  7. Darrell and Bob (announcers)
  8. Kori Turbowitz
  9. Michael Schumacher
  10. Mrs. The King
  11. Tex (Also two pictures, like Fred. Which one?)

Also, even though we don't need them here, I thought I'd say I also have pictures of Lightning's other paintjobs, Ramone's other looks, Hamm, the Abominable Snowman, Mike and Sulley, a tractor, a night picture of Frank, young Mater, Buzz and Woody, and (for the Doc Hudson or Fabulous Hudson Hornet articles,) Doc in his old racing paintjob. And yes, I did get most of these from the official website. I will not be offended if you vote against this, but if you guys say it's okay, I'll have a lot of uploading to do. WestJet, AMK152, and ANNAfoxlover are the main Wikipedians who are with this. Will this be too much of a copyright nightmare? Should this happen?
(And yes, I do have pictures of all these characters, plus a plethora of regular screenshots... -dogman15 05:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay that's it. It's been almost 24 hours, and even though I didn't warn you, no one's responded. I'm going to upload these pictures (you may delete them later if you wish), and substantially improve this list-class article. -dogman15 03:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and ANNAfoxlover, what about all the pictures you have? -dogman15 03:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Please respond to this question: Do we already/still have pictures of DJ, Boost, Wingo, and Snot Rod? Or were they deleted? Either way, I think their pictures should also get back into this list-class article. As you'd expect, I have these pictures on my computer, but I am cautious to upload them without further consent. -dogman15 04:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I would first like to know where you got the images with the white backgrounds from. They look great! I think you deserve a Photographer's Barnstar! Would you sign my signature book here, please? Where did you find those images? They're amazing! A•N•N•Afoxlover PLEASE SIGN HERE, ANYONE! 18:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
As much as I would love to receive a barnstar, I don't think I deserve that. All of the Cars pictures of characters with white backrounds can be found at the official site. Main characters have movie set backrounds instead of white. I first copied all of my contributed pictures to My Pictures folder. Then I put them into "/Pixar/Cars/Movie Srcreenshots" or "/Car Artwork". I have tons more pictures than what I've given to Wikipedia, but I don't know if they're neccessary for the purpose of articles here. -dogman15 00:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delinquent Road Hazards: Ages and Wingo's model and writing.

I've been filing through the change history for the article, and I kept seeing that the DRHs kept going back and forth between their teens and 20s, and Wingo go from Nissan Silvia to Honda Accord and back, and Wingo's writing going between インポート (inpōto; Japanese for "import"), and Witi-H. What's going on here?! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kanjilearner (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Re-Volting Car

The Re-Volting car is a #84, because I have "The Art of Cars" and it has unshaded rendered models of the other racecars, the Re-Volting car has an 84 on it, like the Apple Computers car.

Just a reminder that there is a #74 car that is yellow, it is the one that has the camera mounted on his back that McQueen looks into. --Imax80 22:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pixar Spoofs?

This entries in the list of characters:

  • Woody = Ford Woodie wagon
  • Buzz Lightyear = Toy Spaceship Car
  • Flik = 1966 Volkswagen "Bug"
  • Mike Wazowski = Isetta
  • Sulley = Monster Truck
  • Abominable = Snowplow Snowcat
  • Hamm = small SUV
  • P.T. Flea = Unknown Car

Are they correct? I'll see the movie again. I don't remember them. Arabigo 12:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

  • As I recall, they were at the end (maybe during the closing credits) when the film's characters were at a drive-in or some such, watching what was essentially a recreation of these characters (complete with original voices) as if they had been performed by cars instead of toys, monsters, etc. Wahkeenah 13:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganisation?

I think this article could do with some reorganisation. I propose we arrange it like this:

  • Rust-eze Team
    • Lightning, Mack, Harv, Rust-eze Brothers
      • I don't think Doc should be considered part of it, because that's a spoiler.
  • The King
  • Chick Hicks
  • Possibly Mia and Tia?
  • Radiator Springs population
    • All twelve cars still in Radiator Springs, and possibly Stanley
    • Frank and the Tractors
  • The Delinquent Road Hazards
  • Piston Cup Cars
    • Other Race Cars
    • Announcers
    • Officials
    • Reporters
    • Fans (Merge with Motorhomes)
      • Mia and Tia here if not above
  • Other Cars
    • Merge Superstars, SUVs and Other
  • Pixar Spoofs
  • Characters only seen in the games?

The misc section with fantasies/off screen characters should be removed.

I also believe we should minimize, wherever possible, specualtion about what model a particular car is.

What are your thoughts? Should I do this? RMS Oceanic 18:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

NO!!! PLEASE, NO!!! ANYTHING BUT THAT!!! NO!!! ANNAfoxlover 22:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scion?

Is DJ a Scion? He IS a bit boxy, but I doubt he's a Scion. The headlights are different, the body is angular and less boxy than an xB, it's a two door, the height is too short, and the wheelwells are impossibly big to be a Scion.

Instead, I believe he might be a 93 Honda Civic SiR II. Look at a 93 Civic and compare to DJ. The cars are almost identical.

I vote to change his classification.

Also posted in the disscusion section of The Delinquent Road Hazards.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.18.110.233 (talk • contribs) .


Have you ever heard of factory models being MODIFIED into race cars? Same thing here. I've looked at it close, and DJ is close enough to a Scion xB such that we need not be too concerned about it. BTW: MODIFIED Corvette is often cited as Lightning McQueen's source, but my son says it resembles more a Dodge Viper. I agree with him, but I'm not too concerned if anyone else wants to see Lightning as a modified Corvette. Rpaltza 21:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Rpaltza

[edit] Boost and Wingo

I'm not sure about the current classifications. To me, Boost looks more like a modified newer-model Viper, especially if you look at the taillights and the angular shape of the headlights. Wingo also resembles a Mid-90's Civic more than a Silvia S15, to me. T1g4h 04:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


I agree that boost is for sure a 2007 dodge viper. I think that wingo looks like a modified scion tc.

[edit] One P.T. Flea Car, Many Voices

The credits at the movie info sites (c.f. http://www.hollywood.com/movies/fulldetail/id/1750902 ) list about 40 people as voices for the P. T. Flea Car, including John Ratzenberger. Can anyone explain this, and should the article include the explanation if it is of interest? Carboncopy 15:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I have two guesses -- humorous outtakes or special feature on the DVD where various crew members recite P.T. Flea's lines to the film animation, or a clerical error where "miscellaneous voices" all got credited as P.T. Flea Car for some reason. I think it's fairly likely that forty people weren't all credited as P.T. Flea Car in the theatrical credits. Powers T 15:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellaneous

Okay, seriously, it features only two cars, neither of which are even seen in the movie, and are only mentioned, what, once? Do we -really- need this section? T1g4h 13:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Nope. I've removed it twice already. Consider this number three. RMS Oceanic 14:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Right-o. I'll be on the lookout in case it gets re-added then. T1g4h 14:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


Concerning spelling typos: I have noticed that the text uses the word "bares" when the proper verb "bears" should be used, such as: "#__ car BEARS a resemblance to ..." Please edit the text accordingly. Thank you. Rpaltza 20:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Rpaltza

[edit] Mayfield??

I was playing the video game and after a piston cup race it happened that a car named Mayfield finished 2nd behind me. Does anybody know this mayfield?? Fishhead 9:27PM, December 25, 2006 UTC

[edit] Car Exhibitionism

Way down in the section part for Mia & Tia it reads: in fact they look like McQueen and ( in one of the most risque moments of the movie) show him their "headlights" (a common euphemism for breasts) when they meet him,; is this even verifiable? I highly doubt that the headlight-breast thing was intended (much less thought of) by the writers. Furthermore since they are seen booing/abandoning Chick Hicks at the end, it sounds to me that Mia & Tia have social standards and wouldn't resort to "boob-flashing" (pardon my french). That and my long ramble said, should this be removed? -WarthogDemon 01:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. dogman15 21:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Getting Rid Of Gender

I am currently getting rid of "he" "his" and what not in the list of car racers, whom we don't know the gender of. Granted, all the racers COULD be male, but there's no evidence that suggests that they are indeed all male. -WarthogDemon 20:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary; they are all male. Male cars have eyelids separated by notches; females have curved eyelids. All of the racers are male.
That would make Mater a girl. -WarthogDemon 04:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Nonsense; Mater's eyes are separated by a notch just like any other male. For further identifiers, male's eyelids are occasionally different heights, and all females have black eyeliner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.224.53.218 (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC).
Exactly. You guys nailed it on the dot. Male and Female cars have different eyes. :-) -dogman15 21:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I'd refrain from calling it "eyeliner". The way girls' eyes look it merely the Pixar's artists' way of rendering the eyelids, to distinguish. -dogman15 05:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That yellow and blue car

Here is one car you have forgot to mention in this page, at the start there is a stock car racer that has a yellow and blue color scheme that resemble Dale Earnhardt's Wrangler Jeans sponsored Chevrolet Monte Carlo of his early days, and in the film it was involved in a multi-car pile up. Trouble is I can't input much information of this car as I have already taken the DVD back to the video store, so thats all I can mention, feel free to mention that if you have more info. Willirennen 17:08, 3 January 2007 (utc)

[edit] Delinquent Road Hazards section needs rename

That title is a fan created neologism that never appeared in the film and is really not suitable for an encyclopedia. Tagged for WP:OR. It needs another name.--Isotope23 21:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

...and pertaining to Wingo, I removed the model section as original research. Who is debating this? You either need a reliable source that establishes the model, or it should be stated that "Wingo has an appearance similar to a Japanese import vehicle".--Isotope23 21:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
How so? It is mentioned in the video game at least. And I think *I think* I heard the Sheriff mutter the phrase under his breath during the movie (though I admit I could be wrong about that part.) At any rate, this shouldn't be considered Original Research. Though perhaps there should be an opening sentence stating that the name comes from the video game. -WarthogDemon 23:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
In the videogame it refers to a board, not specifically to these characters as a group. I don't remember that part from the movie either, though I don't have a copy in front of me. That's the problem here, outside of Wikipedia, mirrors, and fan sites there are no reliable sources that refer to these characters by that name.--Isotope23 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I am fully aware of Delinquent Road Hazards not being their official name, but in the absence of a collective name, what do you propose? I wrote in their individual article that the name is taken from the game, and is only used to identify the gang. RMS Oceanic 11:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a good suggestion off the top of my head, which I why I posted this here. Leaving it with a neologism name that is unsourced isn't a good idea, but I'm open to discussion about what it should be named instead. Perhaps an request for comment would be helpful. The individual article on these characters was deleted because the concept of these characters as a group with this name couldn't be reliably sourced.--Isotope23 14:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
"The Delinquent Road Hazards" was a name given to DJ, Wingo, Boost, and Snot Rod, by Pixar employees AFTER the movie came out in theaters. ANNAfoxlover 22:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Can this actually be reliably sourced?--Isotope23 03:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CHIBI and other facts

CHIBI - She is far from MAZDA AZ-1, the coupe car with wedged styling and gullwing doors. She rather look like AUTOZAM REVUE (MAZDA 121) if to pick from MAZDA lineups.

DJ - I know a better look alike than SCION XB. I recommend JDM HONDA S-MX which is boxy, have three door body type, grill less faced and small. It targeted youth just like XB.

There are also some more informations that the page should have.

PISTON CUP is fought by 43 cars. (MCQUEEN says there are 42 losers.)

Number 74 Sidewall shine - He had the hip live camera in DINOCO 400.

The boy - Little one waving toy plane at the tie break race, is a rare sample of "child" car. Two cars on both sides of him may be his parents, as the boy's purple color is the mixture of those two. (red + blue)

The director - He is the person that found HUDSON HORNET in the circuit and cued cameras and announcers to pick.

PISTON CUP letter cars - The cars that formed alphabets on tie break race.

Okay, first, we never see the doors, so it is imposible to tell if it has gullwing doors or not. Second, Honda never made an S-MX.Hondasaregood 22:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Honda did make S-MX, I have picture of it here. http://www.honda.co.jp/news/1996/images/smx_lowdown.gif

Also, The CHIBI car is in NO WAY an AZ-1, its rear is a vertical, upright area, which means hatchback. Also, the AZ-1 has black a-pillars, and a glass/black roof, which the Japanese Reporter doesn't have. http://www.jcars.ca/photos/mazda_az1.jpg MattA1GP 01:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

"We never see the doors," is false, I believe, because the cars in the film do have doors, but they are never used as there are no humans in this universe. -dogman15 21:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Governator, Arnie or not?

This page claims at one point that Arnold Schwarzenegger voiced the Hummer "Governator", but later claims it was an uncredited impersonator. Can't be both. Fjbfour 12:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Since we don't know for certain, I think we can only say that he's obviously styled after Schwarzenegger. RMS Oceanic 21:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Who voiced the Governator in the Disney/Pixar film Cars?

A Arnold Schwarzenegger
B A Pixar animator's imitation of Arnold Schwarzenegger
C A Disney person's imitation of Arnold Schwarzenegger
D Me

What is your final answer? (NO LIFELINES LEFT!!!)

| My final answer is...A.

YOU'RE A MILLIONAIRE!!!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ANNAfoxlover 23:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Care to provide some proof of that? Without proof, we can't make that claim. RMS Oceanic 09:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Motorhome Voices

The article claims that Mater Keever does the voice of McQueen's Biggest Fan and that Larry Benton does the voices of Yahoo and Right. It's the other way around. Mater does Yahoo and Right, and Larry does the Biggest Fan. In the "inspiration" documentary, we see them both. Keever has a Southern accent, Benton doesn't. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.59.60.173 (talk) 04:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] DRH Pictures

The pictures did exist, then they were gone when their characters' article was deleted. Now I'm wondering if the pictures still exist, but since no one seems to be responding to me for three days straight, I guess I'll just re-upload their pictures from my database. Thank you and goodnight. -dogman15 05:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notablitiy Of Video Game Characters By RobJ1981

"video game exclusive content isn't notable in this case. A one time game that didn't even sell very well (like most movie-based games)." (Edit summary quote by User:RobJ1981.)

It's a rather big section, and shouldn't be deleted without discussing it first. I went ahead, and brought it back, and put an Unencyclopedic tag on the section. Let's discuss. -WarthogDemon 00:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not Chuck

Could his name be "Not Chuck"? Because in one scene, he was shouting to McQueen, saying "MY NAME IS NOT CHUCK!" Could he be saying that his name is "Not Chuck", or is he saying his name is not "Chuck"? He is referred to in the credits as "Not Chuck". Oh, well. I'm confused. What's your opinion? A•N•N•Afoxlover St. Patrick's Day 2007 20:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I say his name is not "Chuck". -dogman15 19:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mrs. The king

mrs. the king is eerder een Chevrolet station wagon (1972) en geen town and Country (1942)! Tom Baartmans 9 years Holland —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.80.21.32 (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC). A friend of mine pointed out the similarity between "Mrs. The King" and a late '60s or early '70s Mercury Grand Marquis wagon. I believe there is a pretty strong similarity here: note the hidden headlights, the shape of the greenhouse, and the line at the top of the rear doors just below the window glass: http://www.stationwagon.com/gallery/1972_Mercury_Marquis.html

When I was growing up a friend's father drove a '69 Mercury wagon, it had chrome along the top of the fenders and somewhat smaller door handles than those on the '72 picture linked - just like "Mrs. King".

While it makes sense that the Petty family would have been tooling around in a Mopar of some sort in the early '70s, I don't think Mrs. King is a Town and Country. Note the different lines in the back door, exposed headlights, and more rounded tailgate area: http://www.stationwagon.com/gallery/1973_Chrysler_TownCountry.html

Mrs. King is definately not a '72 Chevy, my neighbours had one of these when I was growing up and they are quite different: http://www.stationwagon.com/gallery/1972_Chevy_Kingswood.html. One of the most distinctive features of these cars is the unique power operated "clamshell" tailgate, which is extremely cool, but looks quite different to "Mrs. King"... Djmorris 19:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

Why is this page being semi-protected? It doesn't have much information and the sections need to be expanded. I think this article should not be protected. A•N•N•Afoxlover hello! 18:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture Genocide

I believe this revision was very strange. Why would TTN just get rid of most of the pictures? He said, and I quote: "The fair use policy states that FU pictures must actually contribute to the article. These certainly don't." I worked hard to upload many of those pictures, and I also think the left-right staggering was artistic page design. Who here thinks that these pictures should come back? -dogman15 18:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I! The only problem is that the pictures needed to be arranged in a better way. I say, bring back the images, but move all images to the left, but make them smaller. A•N•N•A hi! 18:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
How exactly does a picture of a thirty second character (i.e. the Elvis car) help this article? Every character does not need a picture. The secondary characters should be the only ones to need them. Characters with main articles also do not need them. Nemu 19:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
No, not every character needs its own picture, but it would help. This article is just poorly written, and I am (probably) the only one working on it. For now, let's keep the images, because they are useful. If you have the images, you do not need to make a long description of what they look like. This article is useful, but still needs work. Let me work on it for at least three weeks, and then we'll start removing things from it. But right now, the article is in need of some major cleanup, so please do not remove any images right now, because they help a lot. A•N•N•A hi! 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Or, how about you increase the size and point of the sections first, making the need for pictures actually exist? At this point they fail points three, five, and eight (and probably ten) of the Fair use policy. Nemu 19:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Radiator Springs Populace

There is very little information in this part of the article. The cars in Radiator Springs, New Mexico, are the main characters of the film. Anyone, please add more information to the Radiator Springs Populace section. Thanks! ;-) A•N•N•A hi! 19:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC) Ka-chow!

[edit] Merge?

Do any of these characters really need articles? In their current state, most of them are either very small or filled with pointless junk. With that and being one movie characters, most likely none of them will ever reach Good Article status. I would suggest merging them to this article, so at one point it could be like Characters of Final Fantasy VIII. Nemu 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I've expanded the Radiator Springs Populace section with more information on the cars, so I would now suggest deleting all the characters' articles and merging them here, but keep the Lightning McQueen article. How is the new info? A• •F•O•X ¡u6is April Fool's Day 2OO7 16:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I'll merge them after I see if my recent change is going to stick. There is no reason to include every single speaking character (some aren't even characters). They can possibly be merged into paragraphs similar to the Pixar cameos. If these stay, this page will remain forever crufty. Nemu 22:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Please do not merge them without coming to a consensus to do so. This article will only become more bloated if you merge every character as you have with other films. Thank you. Rhindle The Red 12:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, whatever you do, please don't do it yet. I'm still working on it. A•N•N•A hi! 13:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
(To Red) I'm definitely going to go ahead and merge them in a little bit. You don't seem to realize that dealing with a bunch of fictional characters is different than other articles (though nothing official dictates that). And, you know, I have a crazy idea: If we don't want the article to be bloated, why don't we actually list characters instead of every single thing that has a name or appearance? To be listed here, a character should have actual significance in the story. Elvis RV is not a character; he is a gag. Most of the racecars are not characters; they are placeholders given little details or quirks for people to point out.
(To Fox) You are fine with the merger of all of the characters (besides McQueen), right? Nemu 16:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Please propose your mergers according to policy and wait an appropriate amount of time before taking action. If consensus is merge, fine. I am telling you right now that without the use of the "merge" tag and a viable amount of time for discussion, I will revert any changes you make. Rhindle The Red 18:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Once again, I ask you to think logically. While the policies and guidelines are here for a reason, there are exceptions. There were various long Sonic the Hedgehog character articles about minor characters. They were used often, and most were fairly long. I used merge tags for those due to that. Besides Mcqueen, none of these are like that. They are all stubs (after taking away unsourced trivia and stuff) about supporting characters from one movie that should have started here before becoming articles.
It is fine for us to discuss here, but there is no point in delaying the inevitable. You must know that these characters fail notability, have no real attributable sources, ect. To say otherwise, and demand strict accordance to policy (which I don't think we have a true policy on) is "silly." Nemu 19:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I am asking you to consider that you may be wrong about the notability of these characters. Since there is obviously at least one person who disagrees with you, why circumvent the process just because you "don't feel like it"? You say I am "delaying the inevitable". I say it's not inevitable at all. I say, let the community do its job and don't act in such a high-handed manner, assuming your opinion is the only possible outcome. Rhindle The Red 20:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I am not wrong about it at all. I have merged enough articles to be able to see this. I considered I could be wrong with the Sonic characters as they do have some sort of notability compared to these characters. These are one movie characters that should be here according to WP:FICT. They have no attributable sources as the only info they can possibly have is junk, OR, and a plot summary (again, sole plot summaries are against WP:FICT). I asked a few knowledgeable admins a while back, and they said this kind of thing can be fine. This was discussed briefly on the film project a little while ago.
There is all that against these articles. That's why I find this kind of thing pointless. Besides you, fox, a couple of casual editors, and some fanboys, who will actually comment on a merge? This will leave a fairly biased keep, which will not stick in the end. Nemu 20:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
WP:FICT actually states: "Major characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be covered within the article on that work of fiction." (In this case, Cars (film), not this list.) "If an encyclopedic treatment of such a character causes the article on the work itself to become long, then that character can be given a separate article." This would apply to many of the characters you are talking about merging. It also says that "Minor characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters." This list should reside in the article relating to the work itself, unless it becomes long, in which case a separate article for the list is good practice.", where several of these characters probably belong. (Mia and Tia, for instance.) Rhindle The Red 21:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
The first part applies if the character is actually notable, and has the required info for an article. Really, if you go according to the second part, the list should come before the main character articles. Nemu 21:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
No merge- The articles are too large and of high importance. They cannot be merged. I suggest you keep this page for a list of minor characters from cars which only have about two lines of information! Not characters which have about a page and a half of information and are proper articles. Whoever keeps requesting to merge all the cars articles better stop it. Because it is annoying. Retiono Virginian 21:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
You have no argument. Nothing shows that these characters are important past the movie. The infomation they have is mostly junk anyways. Get an argument that is not covered here. Nemu 21:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Retiono Virginian. -dogman15 23:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I am supporting and am perfectly okay with the merge, other than Lightning McQueen, who should have his own article. Support A•N•N•A hi! 21:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
If the arguments for merging are supported, it would include all characters, including Lightning. There's no justification for removing, say, Sally and leaving Lightning alone. Here's my take: as stated at WP:FICT, the major characters need to retain their individual pages. The only other legitimate course of action would be to merge them back into Cars (film), which is not viable. To me, the major characters include Lightning, Mater, Sally, Doc and Chick Hicks. These are the characters that drive the story and the characters' development. Obviously minor characters that need to be merged are Mia and Tia and Mrs. the King, none of whom have any significant impact on the film. I'm less sure about the town residents (Sarge, Fillmore, etc.), but as they are really just there for color, I lean towards merging for them. I'm even more unsure about The King, since he is a focal point in the film, so I lean toward retaining his page. Rhindle The Red 02:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
You're following the points too literally. The main character one assumes that the characters have enough information to write about. With merging, it's obvious it would goto this list because it's techincally just an extention of where it would be merged in the movie article. Before these characters need articles, they need to have information besides a plot summary and basic cruft (unsourced trivia, the name in different languages, the different colors that it had, ect). They should be merged to this page with the chance to come back once their sourced out of universe information would be enough to warrent a page. Nemu 10:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
It assumes nothing. It says what it says. You are putting your own spin on it, choosing to ignore what it says to support your argument. The main characters need articles now because they are too big for the main page and do not belong on the list. There is nothing in the guidelines to support your statement. Rhindle The Red 11:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it's assuming the character has proper encyclopedic treatment. None of these articles are like how that says they should be. It's obvious when they say merged with the article, they also mean a character list. A character list is a break off article, meaning it's still part of the original in a way. Would you like me to ask on the talk page there? I think it's pretty obvious what the answer will be. Nemu 16:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it assumes anything of the sort. You seem to think that just because they do not now have fully encyclopedic articles that that is a reason to merge them. It is not. That would be a reason to help improve them and bring up their standards. And if they meant for major characters to be moved to a list, I think that they would say so. Instead, they clearly indicate that major characters get their own articles and minor ones go on a list. Go ahead and ask wherever you want. I think you're mis-reading things. Rhindle The Red 17:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
That's where this discussion comes in. We have to decide if these articles are destined to become good or stay trashy/a plot summary. My argument is that they've been around for a long enough time without any true improvement. Any info they do have can easily be summarized and placed here. If they meant that only minor characters go on lists, why exactly do we have them here (I guess I'll go ahead and ask)? Nemu 17:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Why they're here I can't say. I didn't create the article, nor had I delved deeply enough into Wikipedia policy previously to have realized they shouldn't be here prior to this merge discussion. Had I been cognizant of that beforehand, I would have removed them and renamed this article List of minor Cars characters. Rhindle The Red 17:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If you look at the featured list and article that I've posted, you'll see that they do keep the main characters. It shows that you are reading it too literally. If you're going to format your post, can you actually keep the flow going? Nemu 17:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Just because another list has the main characters doesn't mean they're right to be there. Frankly, the policy as stated makes sense. If a character has his own page (as a major character should) there would be no need for a duplicate listing on another page. And as for keeping "the flow" going, as we creep closer and closer to the right side of the screen, it makes the conversation harder to follow, not easier. Rhindle The Red 18:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The main characters are here because they're comprehensive lists. That's the point. The guideline can be wrong as it's edited by users, so that makes it easy for things to not be clear (as I've said). You keep the flow going until it goes too far over (like this one probably is). There is no point if it's all over the place. Nemu 18:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

This seems to have died... For now, does anyone care if I merge all besides McQueen, Mater, Sally, Doc, and Hicks? Nemu 21:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Eh, I went ahead and did it. It doesn't seem like there were any true issues with them. Now, why do those five characters really need articles? Nemu 01:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Because they are the major characters of the work and will not fit on its article. Rhindle The Red 23:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
How would they not fit here? Mater, Sally, and Doc really have nothing. After cutting the junk, they have about the same amount of info as the recently merged ones. Hicks and McQueen only have plot summaries which are rather pointless. It easier to have them here, and just have the basic descriptions, quick description of their roles, and any OOU info (base for design, ect). Any deep plot info would already be taken care of in the main article. Nemu 00:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Really, do you have anything new to add? You've not made your case and just keep saying the same thing over and over again. You say something is "junk", but never explain how. You say there can't be any sources ("the only info they can possible have is junk"), but never say why. Can't you accept the compromise as it stands and move on? Or are you going to keep at it until I grow so weary of arguing with you that I let you get your way without comment? I was away for two days dealing with the real world and look what heppened. You waited a whole, what, four hours between your "This seems to have died" comment and going ahead and merging the articles? There is nothing going on here that has to be done in such a rush, you know. We can take our time to do things right. But that doesn't seem to be your style. Rhindle The Red 02:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I've made the definition of junk clear. It includes OR, speculation, trivia sections, fancruft, random sections like "International versions", ect. I saw no real point in sticking with my message after rereading your comment saying that only the major characters needed to stay. At that point, I had thought your opinion was to keep all of them. We can take our time, but we shouldn't take forever.
Okay, trivia is not junk in and of itself. Trivia needs to be more properly integrated into an article, but just because it is in a trivia section doesn't make it junk. OR is, of course, junk and no one is asking for it to stay. But I didn't see a lot of it in these articles. I didn't really comment on your removal of the "international" stuff, but I don't really get why you think of it as junk. If you can back that statement up (somewhere else where it was considered junk) I'll go with you on that. You seem to misunderstand my position a lot. Perhaps if you weren't so hasty, you could take the time to understand what's being said before going ahead. Rhindle The Red 03:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
So far, there is no compromise. You have not shown why the characters need articles besides "they're major", which is not a valid argument. You should show that these can actually reach at least GA status in the future. Nothing has backed that at this point. Nemu 03:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
And you have not shown why they should be merged. My point is a valid argument. As I have stated before, it follows the guidelines set forth in WP:FICT. If that's now a valid argument, I ask you what is? I know you don't agree with my reading of the guidelines, but please do not insult me by dismissing my statements as "not valid". As for the compromise I mentioned, That was what I suggested and what, at this point, you have implemented: keep the major character articles, as indicated by WP:FICT, and move the rest to the character list. It seems perfectly reasonable to me and I can't for the life of me understand why you aren't able to see that.
Again, I'm going to point out to you that there is no reason to assume that better articles for these characters are impossible. You seem to think that just because they are not up to the highest standards right now, they never will be. I suggest that you just leave the appropriate tags (trivia,citations,etc.) and leave them to others to fix, as it is clear you do not know the subject matter well enough to fix them yourself. Rhindle The Red 03:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
The part about major characters on WP:FICT assumes the characters actually have info (as shown by the small comment under the minor characters part, and the question I posted on the talk page). There is no point in leaving these articles as they are in their current state. That is why your point is not valid. Along with being major, you have to show that they require pages. They are not notable past the movie, they don't exist past the movie, and the movie is pretty much their only source.
These articles been around for about a year with little improvement in regards to actually becoming good articles. Leaving tags will do little at this point; they'll do little to help, and just remain there for a while. It's better to merge them here, and if they ever do become too large with relevant and sourced info, the pages can be brought back. Nemu 03:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
You know, the answer to your question actually supports my position. "The notability of EVERY "element of fiction" is only as notable as determined by the notability of the original work." Cars (film) is a notable work, therefore major characters of that work are notable. Let's see what they say to my response. Rhindle The Red 17:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Notability isn't automatically inherited. Cars being a high grossing movie doesn't make Mater suddenly notable past the movie. The notability of a work can help push up a character's notability, but it doesn't define it. Nemu 21:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
That argument only works if you ignore the huge volume of ancillary materials about the character. From books, to video games to toys to comics to any number of items, Mater has had many more appearances than just the original movie. But you continually ignore that fact in order to make your point. An article on a simple movie that has only itself probably would never reach the size that Cars (film) reached and therefore the issue would not come up. Rhindle The Red 01:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
All of those materials are mere extentions of the movie. Toys exist for pretty much every single slightly popular film or series. The same goes for video games, and all of the different types of books. Just because a developer picks up a movie, and decides to make a bunch of cheep games about it, doesn't mean much. The Cars article could really use a trim (A few of the sections could be totally cut), and general clean up. After that, I doubt it would be any longer than any of the FA movie articles (with many being single movies). Nemu 01:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This seems to have died again. If nobody objects, I'll go ahead and just try a merger tomorrow . Nemu 22:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have attempted the merge. Hopefully, it will stick. Nemu 20:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up the list

A better solution to fixing this article's problems is a bit more structure. I suggest looking to List of experiments from Lilo & Stitch to get an idea how a large list can be functional and yet manageable. (I know that article is not in the absolute best of shape, but it gives an idea how a smaller list such as this one can be organized.) Rhindle The Red 18:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you want to compare this list to List of Metal Gear Solid characters and Characters of Final Fantasy VIII which are both featured. They list the main and supporting characters without listing everything with a name like this one. Nemu 19:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
No, *I* want to compare it to what I compared it to. You see, one of the things about Cars is that it brings in interest from people who just want to know about the cars. This is why a *more* comprehensive list is needed here than in other character lists. Rhindle The Red 20:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
That's pretty funny. You want to clean this up, yet you'll only do it by your standards instead of the featured article/list standard? How exactly does comparing it to a list that has a cleanup tag help this article? There is a difference between comprehensive and cruft. Nemu 20:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I never said I would only do it by my standards. I was just pointing out that I believe a different set of criteria is necessary here compared to elsewhere. And I believe I made it clear I was pointing to the article not based on content, but structure. A list that can actually be read, not like this one is now, a jumbled mess. Rhindle The Red 21:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
How is there a need for a separate standard? FF8 (and most likely MGS) has plenty of characters that do nothing, but still have names. If I really felt like it, I could add a whole other section on those characters while just having a sentence about what they said, or what they look like. That would be deleted automatically. There are no different standards just because there are tons of two sentence characters and gag characters.
I assumed you were talking about both structure and content, but there is no need for that structure if there is only necessary content. Nemu 21:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Can we go ahead and trash these pointless characters already? A simple joke, cameo, or name is not a true character. Just because "#117 Lil' Torquey Pistons" exists, it doesn't mean he needs to be here. "Japanese News Reporter", "Elvis RV", and the Pixar cameos appeared for like ten seconds; how are they characters? Nemu 01:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Some of the characters are a little pointless. Remember the "Gold Car with Purple Mustache", "Green Car that looks like Flo", "Light blue car with Blue Eyes and New Tires", etc.? Those were absolutely pointless. I'm going to remove some more of the pointless characters, if there are any, right now. A•N•N•A hi! 17:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Do you have any objections with cutting most of those racecars? Only a few need any sort of mention. Nemu 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, the racecars are pretty much important, and I think they should stay. I'm still going through the list. A•N•N•A hi! 18:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
How are they important? They're a bunch of cookie cutter place holders; most are hardly even characters. They had to be there for the races to happen, so they decided to sick all of the different notable designs on them. Nemu 18:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, you are right about that. I say make a list of all the racecars and their color and sponsor, but no need for pictures of every single racecar. Let me try that now. A•N•N•A hi! 18:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I think it's looking pretty good. I think you can put Stanley back, though. Rhindle The Red 00:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Please put Stanley back. He is important enough. Much more important than the "Gold Car with Purple Mustache". A•N•N•A hi! 00:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
What's the point of the section? The only notable things are that he founded the town and was married to Lizzie. The first is really pointless because it has no real impact on the story, and the second is covered in Lizzie's section. Nemu 00:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
The point is that he is a notable character. Probably more so than, say, Red. Even if he is dead, the character is viable and worth an entry. Rhindle The Red 02:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and a quick question. Have you actually seen this movie? Normally I wouldn't ask, but the fact that you don't think Stanley is viable makes me think perhaps you haven't. Rhindle The Red 02:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
We have Red, a minor character used for some laughs and to help Mcqueen build up his personality change, and Stanley, a name and a statue. He serves no purpose in the story, and is as much of a character as "Big Al."
I've seen the movie. I don't remember it that clearly, but I know Stanley didn't serve a purpose (at most he was used in a motivational speech). Nemu 02:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
You need to watch the film again. You obviously do not know much about Cars. Do not edit articles that you do not know anything about. Please watch the film at least one time again before continuing to edit this page. A•N•N•A hi! 19:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you care to quickly refresh me on his role? He is a statue and a name with no importance or information. I cannot recall anything besides minor references in speeches. Was there a long backstory? Was he ever shown in a flashback? He's apparently important, but isn't even mentioned in the movie article (besides in a trivia point). Nemu 21:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Although he is dead and is never actually shown alive, his presence is felt throughout the scenes in Radiator Springs. He is referred to by his widow (who talks to him) and the sequence with his statue kind of looks over the town in a way. Also, to give some indication of the filmmakers thoughts, the statue is always referred to as "Stanley". Even the toy just calls the statue "Stanley", not "Stanley's statue". It shows the filmmakers thought of him as a character in his own right. I guess if there was a List of Cars locations, we could list "Stanley's statue", but there isn't. It and he are notable enough to need mention somewhere, and this is the most appropriate place. Rhindle The Red 01:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Do we really need all those pictures of Ramone there? They're really just filling up the article.HondasareGOOD (talk) 13:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sally Carrera.jpg

Image:Sally Carrera.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mia And Tia's . . . Breasts

Should we add a hidden message telling people not to add the "boob flashing" reference? Or would that just encourage more vandals? -WarthogDemon 20:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cars Sequel Featuring Chick Hicks?

In the section on Chick Hicks there is a sentance at the end that has no source provided: "A sequal to the movie is being made based on Chick Hicks." Is this true? I couldn't find anything about it.

Considering Chick Hicks toys didn't sell as much as other toys, I seriously doubt there's going to be a sequel about him. That'd be like Shakespear making a play about Iago. XD -WarthogDemon 00:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, that's partially because they didn't make as many toys of Chick as other characters. I had a heck of a time just finding one. But the line about a "sequal" is preposterous. I've removed it. Rhindle The Red 02:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The List

I think we should the Toy Story, Monster Inc, bugs life, cars, and all othe pixar related character list combine to make one long page and history of Pixar chararcters. From User:4444hhhh

In this case I would strongly disagree. The page would become too long, even without everyone adding in everyone down to the minorest(word?) of characters. -WarthogDemon 18:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
That would be a very long list, but maybe a category that would serve the same function? There used to be a List of Disney Characters, but it was deleted. Useight 16:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lightning

The start of his bio on this page refers to him as a "generic Le Mans car from the 70s". Puhlease. He's clearly a late series Nascar car. Piston/Winston/Nextel/Whateveritisnow Cup. Waltrip. Petty. How can this slip through?? I know I could edit it but I figured there must be an uncited reason why he's called that? VonBlade 21:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What is Mater?

This may have been discussed in the old Mater article, but that is gone now. I have been trying to figure out why Mater is noted as being a 1951 IHC pickup. Going way back to this edit from April 17th that merged the Mater article into this page there have been three refs in the mater section talking about what he is that don't actually reference anything.

Then in the main Cars article there is a comment in the external links section to this effect: Note: Contrary to the MSN article cited in reference 4 (above) **speculating** on the truck being a 1955 Chevy, the **actual** truck is **photographically documented** to be the 1958 IHC. Please do not put other speculation in this entry.

Which is then followed by this link which doesn't even mention the year of the truck and provides no proof that the truck was the inspiration for Mater. Anyone can submit a tip to roadside america, and they are not checked for accuracy. Furthermore, the tip appears to be submitted by the owner of the gas station the truck is at, so it seems like they are simply trying to drum up business for their station.

Furthermore, that link calls Mater '58 IHC (though the truck looks like a '51), the Mater section calls him a '51 IHC. But if one looks at a pic of a 1951 IHC and a pic of Mater you can easily see that they bear no relation to each other. A 1958 IHC does look a bit more like Mater, though not nearly as much as mid-50's chevy, or mid-50's chevy wrecker.

Does anyone know where this '51/'58 IHC designation came from? Improbcat 20:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup

I've been working my way through this article, trying to clean up and standardize the entries. I'dd try and finish it later. Improbcat 19:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Just went through the article fixing massive vandalism, poor grammar and errors. This article has major problems with tone and style. Improbcat (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I just went through and fixed a ton of slight errors. Useight (talk) 00:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion: Other Racecars

How about we put Other Racecars in numerical order? Skywatcher68 (talk) 04:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Albert Hinkey & Trev Diesel

Please leave them off the list until their identities are confirmed. Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Website!!! Images from Blu-Ray

www.carsdriveingallery.com Has images of 217 cars and their repsective die-cast, every car includes brief summary. Fishhead —Preceding comment was added at 22:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Die Cast Backstories

Shouldn't the backstories from the die-cast versions be on their own page instead of here? Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lightning McQueen

I'm sure that Lightning McQueen looks like a Mazda RX-8. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevzspeare (talk • contribs) 07:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)