Talk:Zastava Koral

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zastava Koral article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
Peer review Zastava Koral has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Zastava Koral is part of the WikiProject Serbia, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Serbia 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 so as to become familier with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] WP:NPOV

I believe the jokes must go as they are not encyclopedic and violate neutral point of view. Also, someone find out if indeed Porsche ever had anything to do with the engines found in Yugo's. If you find it, cite it.--MONGO 12:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC) Image:1990yugo2.jpg proofs the porsche connection - look in the article .--Nestore

Neutral point of view means we don't take sides. If popular opinion - and press reviews - have it that the car is crap, it can be reported here. What NPOV means is that you or I can't enforce our opinion, or try to make the article unbalanced. In other words, what you or I as individuals think shouldn't influence the article at all. Neutral point of view does not mean neutered. Whether jokes are encyclopedic or not is a different matter of course - probably not, although it wouldn't do any harm to mention that the car was the butt of many jokes (assuming it was, it would seem it had a higher profile in the US than here in the UK. Our jokes were mostly about Lada and Skoda). --kingboyk 18:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

Now that the user who caused the page protection has been blocked for legal threats, is there any reason to leave the page blocked? Understanding that if he backs off his threats and manages to get himself unblocked, it could all easily start up again. But as long as he's indef blocked, I don't see any reason for the page to remain blocked. Just IMHO. - TexasAndroid 21:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Got one to run for 10 years

Yes, really. I bought a new 1988 GV for $3990, added my own cassette deck and a set of new Michelins (the Yugoslavian Tigar tires were horrible and truly unsafe) but I loved that car. Even with the smog equipment, its Italian roots shone through and it was a joy to drive. Yes, the plastic was cheesy, and the defroster wasn't up to snuff. What do you want for $3990? It would rev to 6,000 rpm through a 1-1/2 inch exhaust pipe, and when that rotted away, a two-inch pipe made it a lot happier. How many 1988 models could you actually diagnose and fix yourself without special tools? The Yugo's included tool kit would get you out of almost any jam short of a blown head gasket.

Keep clean oil in a Yugo, like you should do with any car, and it will live forever. My first Yugo went over 120,000 miles on the original engine, the same engine that took that car 200 miles in two hours, and covered 850 miles in one day. It finally died when the water pump started to leak, and my brother in law let it run out of coolant.

The timing belts only last 30,000 miles, so you have to keep on top of those, too. Oil changes and timing belts are cheap, and they're not hard to change. Nothing's hard to change on a Yugo, except the water pump. You can even do a clutch in four hours with only hand tools.

I owned 25 of these cars over a span of 10 years, most of them with two-digit purchase prices, or free. Few of them had anything seriously wrong. Most were merely misunderstood and/or neglected.

An automobile is a machine. Machines require care and maintenance if they are to last, whether that machine is made by Zastava for $3990 or Rolls-Royce for $349,000. Run either one on the same oil for 20,000 miles and you've got junk.

Yugo could have worked in America, but subsidized competition from Korea made it untenable, and the 1992 UN embargo made it impossible. Now the time is past, unless Zastava can build an SUV with 24 inch rims.

Go ahead, laugh at my Yugo. It's still out there giving reliable transportation to somebody, and it's almost old enough to vote now. How many cars have that kind of lifespan? Now, let me ask that question again: how many $3990 cars have that kind of lifespan?

Stu from Cleveland Proud Yugo owner for 10 years

I won't get into the issues of whether or not the car was good, bad or the worst car of the millenium, obviously each person has their own view and in general, encyclopedias are supposed to be content and viewpoint neutral. I'm not sure why those comments are in there at all as it's widely acknowledged that Yugos continued to sell until the importer went out of business due to UN sanctions in 1991/2. The numbers may not have been high, but the product clearly was available.

From a facts perspective, this article has flaws. The "engine designed by Porsche" is clearly incorrect. The motor, like all of Fiat's powertrains until its recent joint venture with GM, was designed in-house without assistance from anyone. Fiat, and other members of the Fiat group including Alfa Romeo and Lancia, have a historic tradition of engineering and innovation in the powertrain space, including several breakthroughs with the packaging of the 128-series cars. Ing. Carlo Lampredi was the designer of the particular series of motor that DMB was licenced to produce in Yugoslavia and that ultimately showed up in the Yugo we saw in the US. Please see http://www.mirafiori.com/~courtney/128/history/MOUSE_THAT_ROARED.html) for more information.

Perhaps the person who posted this was referring to the Lada Samara-Sputnik (VAZ 2108), a car built in the USSR (later Russian Federation) that debuted in 1986 and was designed with assistance from Porsche, including the motor. It is _not_ Fiat 12x-series based at all, though it does share with many modern cars a front engine, front wheel drive layout. VAZ Lada does continue to build the Fiat 124 sedan based Lada 2104/5 series cars, perhaps this is where there is confusion. Please see www.vaz.ru for more information and model series.

Yugos, and Zastavas are in existence at all because of Fiat's 1950-60's policy of licensing car designs to Communist-bloc countries. Fiat and its component suppliers became the defacto car industries for most of the countries in the Soviet sphere of influence, with the notable exception of Romania, which licensed Citroen and Renault designs. Besides Russia, Poland, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, Fiat also licensed designs to other countries for the same purpose of establishing national auto manufacturers. SEAT in Spain and TOFAS in Turkey both built Fiats under license, just as Zastava/Yugo did in Yugoslavia. None of this is mentioned in the article, or only briefly so.

Also in the article -- or perhaps it was another person who posted comments -- is something to the effect that automatic Yugos were imported under the name "GVPlus". That's not correct. The GVPlus model was simply an improved version of the GV with fuel injection, significant interior enhancements and an optional automatic. Yugo GVPluses were just that, a model like anything else, with optional equipment.

-APD

This article is extremely biased in, shockingly, a pro-Yugo light. I suggest a POV dispute flag

[edit] Yugo in the Movies: Inspector Gadget

Someone continues to add that a Yugo was in the 1999 Inspector Gadget movie. The car which was in that movie was a Chevette, not a Yugo. I deleted the misinformation. Thank you. yugobrandon 04:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

>>>The actual quote from the movie DRAGNET, described the car as "The cutting edge of Serbo-Croation technology"....or something like that. Spoken by Dan Akroyd.

[edit] Vandalism

  • I have compiled a body of evidence suggesting that User:NestorYugo is actually User:Nestore, who has vandalized this page in the past. Please be aware. -Litefantastic 01:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
    • User:Nestore was blocked for a week a few days ago, which has not yet expired. This could be reported to WP:AN/I for block evasion. — TheKMantalk 01:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
      • I've blocked him and his sock puppet indefinitely for serial violations of copyright, per WP:COPY. Please see my comments on User_talk:NestorYugo/Evidence. If he reappears, I'd be grateful if you could let me know. -- ChrisO 01:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drowning Mona Note

In the movies section, there is a note about Drowning Mona: "As with Dragnet, the Yugos were provided by Zastava." This is not accurate. All of the Yugos used in Drowning Mona were between the 1986 and 1988 model years, and this movie was filmed in 1999. The director's commentary also states that Yugos were purchased from all over the United States and not "provided by Zastava". In fact, when the director tried to contact Zastava concerning the movie, it had just been bombed. I am going to go ahead and delete this part of the note now, and if later proof is posted we can put it back in. Also, I will give my contact in Kragujevic (who worked for Zastava when the Yugo was exported to America) a call and check the part about "Verplanck, New York, the town where the Yugo was test marketed in the U.S." Again, from the directors commentary, it was implied that this bit was made up just for the movie. Best wishes. yugobrandon 05:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Found out today that Verplank was not a "test market" for the Yugo, rather it was a bit made up for the movie. Also, the Yugos in drowning Mona were provided by Apple Motors (www.applemotors.com) in Denver Colorado, and other donors from around the US. yugobrandon 17:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please see if all international names are correct for this car..

...and if anybody know the dates when the model went by those names in all the different countries. That would be a help.

Thank you.

Jesus.


I would advise to rename the article "Yugo" and add the list of models referred further down in the current article, then create individual redirects for each one of these models, pointing at Yugo: Yugo 45, Yugo 55, Yugo 65, Yugo Koral, Yugo Tempo, Yugo Ciao, etc as these are basically variations of the same car. Also add "For the rest of Zastava models, visit main article Zastava"

In the same way, I will then try to start brand new articles for (hopefully!):

Zastava 128 (redirects from Zastava 101);
Zastava Skala (redirects from Zastava ZLM,Zastava ZLC, Zastava ZLX, Zastava 311, Zastava 411, Zastava 413, Zastava 511, Zastava 513, Zastava GTL, Zastava Comfort, Zastava Mediterran, Zastava Stojadin)
Zastava 750 (redirects from Zastava 850, Fico, Fićo, Ficho and Zastava Fićo)
Zastava 1300 (redirects from Zastava Milletrecento) (first Zastava made under Fiat license)

Regards, Asterion 12:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC) (Proud UK Zastava 311 owner)

[edit] List of Countries

In all honesty, I believe the best option is to follow the United Nations and stick to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. This whole issue is collateral to the nature of the article and I would not like to see it hijacked by anyone. Regards, Asterion 23:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thats ridiculous. Wikipedia has a Naming convention. Unlike the UN etc. we don't have to bend over backwards for Greek nationalists. I can go into more detail if you like but essentially /no-one/ says FYROM in real life, people either say Macedonia, or, if they are Greek nationalists they probably say Skopje or Skopjan (for the language), or sometimes they say Slavo-bulgar or something. Whatever, the important thing is that Wikipedia doesn't have to kow-tow to nationalists. :) - FrancisTyers 23:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Not that I want to get into an argument, but I hope common sense prevails :) - FrancisTyers 23:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but I cannot see the point of starting an edit war. I stick to the internationally accepted view (UN, European Union and even NATO). Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is a NPOV term, while Macedonia or Rep. of Macedonia is not. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not an "anti-nationalist platform". The article is about cars, nothing else. There is no need to add wood to the fire. I respect your opinion but cannot agree with it. Regards, Asterion 00:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, FYRM is a POV term. We generally call that country Republic of Macedonia on Wikipedia, so that's the most logical way to go and will cause least reverts. --dcabrilo 00:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I did not say FYROM but the full official name, as recorded in their UN membership, that is Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. If you check the page history, I was the first one to revert FYROM. This way, we also cater for anyone searching for the word Macedonia in articles. To be honest, as long as we reach consensus, I would be happy. I just don't want a bloody edit war for a matter totally unrelated to the article subject. Regards, Asterion 02:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The convention on Wikipedia if for either "Macedonia" or "Republic of Macedonia". I could do a count of pages that mention either in a similar context if you like, but the outcome is clear... Hell, even the countries Wikipedia page is at Republic of Macedonia. :) - FrancisTyers 11:37, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Francis, the name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was used by the country itself in its applications to join the UN and for the EU admission talks. It is not Greek namecalling (before you ask, I am neither Greek nor Macedonian). Besides, I am simply interested in writing about the car. I just would not like to see the article turned into an edit battlefield by third parties, with no real interest in the subject of the article. I will stay aside any further discussions on the country name. It is up to you all to agree on the terminology. Regards, Asterion 22:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I see you've removed the reference... that works fine for me too :) - FrancisTyers 22:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Break it up

Okay. The edit wars are over; the unlicensed pictures have been weeded out. I think this article should be broken up into different articles, one for each of the vehicles in its new - and, forgive me for saying this, poor title. Then we can have the 'Yugo' page back. -Litefantastic 00:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I just changed the title to "Zastava vehicles" from the previous one, but I am totally supporting what you just said. --dcabrilo 01:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
If anyone wants to take up my suggestion for separate pages, I would be really happy then :o) In the meantime, please redirect Yugo to the new title, so we do not miss any searches. Asterion 02:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
No it shouldnt be Zastava Vehicles as there is a separate Zastava page - most of this is just about the model range that featured the Zastava Yugo 45 / Koral / American range rather than the Florida, 600, 1900, 1400, 1100, 1300, 101, 10 etc etc etc etc!!
If it was Zastava vehicles it would have to be from 1954 to date (ref: THE COMPLETE ENCYCLOPEADIA OF MOTORCARS 1885 TO THE PRESENT by G.N.GEORGANO)...will change it back again. - JESUS
My choice would be to keep it as Yugo for all Yugo 45 derived cars and create separate pages for the rest as I already outlined. Thanks, Asterion 02:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


  • Every day, I keep finding this page with a different name, so perhaps we should go ahead and decide on one that we can all be happy with. — TheKMantalk 01:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I say we take the Yugo information, put that in the "Yugo" page and take the rest of it and lump it in another article, for the time being. List of Zastava vehicles, for instance, would be a good starter page. -Litefantastic 03:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
      • But in this instant its not about a range of Zastava vehicles its about one model range...the name it is called now is the one theat globalautoindex goes with...
        • I've never heard of the "globalautoindex", and I think it's time to let common sense take the wheel. Not that I'm accusing anyone here of stupidity, but if we think too hard about this we'll go nuts. If it's all about Yugo models, let's call it Yugo because that's the name Americans, who comprise the largest percentage of native English speakers, are familiar with. If its about something else, let's break it up. -Litefantastic 00:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
          • That is misleading. The Zastava 311/511 was sold in the UK under the name Zastava Yugo 311/511, even if not based on the Yugo 45, which was the model base for the US Yugo. We must accept that at one point Yugo became synonim with Zastava outside Yugoslavia and reflect this somehow and somewhere. It is not as simple as deleting any non-US Yugo info from this page. Asterion 01:38, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
            • Alright, how about we just take that and make it a redirect to 'Yugo.' Or, we could have a different page for each model of Yugo, which is what most of the automaker pages do. I'm still not sure whether or not Yugo is a brand name or a nameplate. -Litefantastic 13:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC) badge, sorry. It's the difference between Oldsmobile and the Oldsmobile Cutlass, for instance. -Litefantastic 13:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zastava 101 movie?

Has anyone seen this? Is it a feature film or a documentary?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0353028/

As the Zastava 101 came out in 1971 I say it is a promotional film (motor industry propaganda)

FYI - Zastava 101 aka Zastava Skala

[edit] Datsun 260C Cedric is listed as the...

Nissan Cedric From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nissan Cedric is a large luxurious automobile produced by Nissan since 1960. It was developed to provide upscale transportation, competing with the Prince Skyline and Gloria which were later merged into the Nissan family. In later years, the Nissan Skyline was positioned as a sports sedan/coupe, whereas the Nissan Gloria was turned into a sporty version of the Cedric (with identical styling but using a different radiator grille and front & rear light clusters). In Japan, the Cedric/Gloria series was affectionately called Cedglo, and this long running series finally came to an end in October 2004, being replaced by the Nissan Fuga.

which is, if you notice, the modern company brand name and not the name that the car is refered to in this month's Classic Car magazine!!! So I think it's best to keep to the same standard and at least the word yugo does appear

[edit] Page name

A well intentioned but new user has been unilaterally renaming a few well-established pages today, without consensus and without fixing double redirects, including this one. I've moved it back to Zastava vehicles. Please note that this was just an admin action and I have no opinion on what the name should be. All I will say is, please discuss any moves first - or at the very least fix double redirects when a page has been moved. --kingboyk 18:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SynLube?

Can anyone confirm this? Asterion 16:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


1984 YUGO 45

yugo2.jpg (28709 bytes)

The first three YUGO's were introduced in the USA in May 1984 at the Los Angeles AUTO EXPO 84.

The vehicles were imported and modified for the US market by YugoCars, Inc of Sun Valley, California.

More interesting than the low Retail price of $4,500, was a 10 year or 100,000 mile warranty that included all scheduled maintenance FREE. This was possible due to SynLube™. Essentially only topping of the engine motor oil with ADD OIL to compensate for normal oil consumption was needed. There were no oil changes scheduled over the 10 year 100,000 mile interval. This was possible because SynLube™ Lubricants were used in the engine and in the 4-speed transaxle.

What was amazing is, that after accumulation of 92,000 miles, one test car that was equipped with SynLube™ had exhaust emissions 20% lower than a new car with only 1,500 miles on Conventional Petroleum Motor Oil (CASTROL GTX 20W-50). Two other test cars that were equipped with Conventional Petroleum Motor Oil (one with ZASTAVA OEM oil, the other with CASTROL GTX 20W-50) and with 5,000 mile oil changes, have both failed the California Exhaust emission test at 32,000 miles and 36,000 miles respectively. The increased emissions were attributed to excessive engine wear due to use of low quality metals in the engine production. This was a proof that SynLube™ can make even a poor quality materials last at least three times longer than normal.

Emission testing was done by Olson Laboratories in Orange County, California.

Engine disassembly and inspection was done by M.I.K. Automotive, Inc. in North Hollywood, CA.

In August of 1984 the marketing rights for the YUGO were sold to IAI (International Automobile Importers) of New Jersey operated by Malcolm Bricklin. He later formed Yugo of America, Inc. a company which marketed the YUGO in the USA until 1992.

The Bricklin organization decided that to market a car in the USA with "unconventional oil" in the engine was not a good idea, and that Fuel Injection was too luxurious for an economy car. They reduced the retail base price to $3,995 and reduced the warranty to the 3 year or 36,000 miles, a durability that was expected from the YUGO if it was operated on conventional petroleum motor oil as was documented by Olson Labs.

The YUGO 45 as introduced by YugoCars had 850cc 4 -cylinder engine with BOSCH L EFI and BOSCH electronic Ignition with BOSCH Platinum Spark Plugs and ZEUNA Three-way Catalytic Converter so that Unleaded Gasoline could be utilized for low exhaust emissions. The same system was utilized by FIAT and later BERTONE from 1980 to 1989 and was able to meet stringent California emissions through 1992 model year. A 4-speed manual transaxle was used. This allowed a top speed of over 75 MPH and delivered fuel economy of 45 Miles per Gallon and engine delivered 45 HP, hence the marketing name of YUGO 45.

The vehicles that were eventually sold by Yugo of America had 1.1 and 1.3 Liter engines with 4 or 5 speed transaxle, but only retained the BOSCH electronic ignition. The very complex emission system ( which was cheaper than EFI) used a carburetor, a two way Catalyst that required an Air Pump and EGR; it was one of major problems that caused the vehicles to get a poor reputation due to poor driveability, inability to meet emission standards when used, etc.

Making the initial "indestructible" maintenance free car $505 cheaper, effectively killed all prospects of YUGO to become another VW Bug or FORD Model T as the initial promotional advertising claimed.

Yugo America realized its "fatal" mistake by 1990 when, EFI version of the YUGO GVX was introduced, but it was too late to save YUGO in the USA. The prospects of recalling over 126,000 vehicles that were sold in the USA by EPA, due to failure to meet exhaust emissions effectively caused Yugo America to close its doors for good in 1992.


[edit] Moved back to Yugo

I moved this page back to Yugo, because it is it's best known name, and the only reason it got to the Zastava name is because someone thinks making it a global view is making it a hundred diffrent names. for eexample, the Ford Mondeo is also known as the Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique, but it's not named "Ford Mondeo/Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique", now is it? --Karrmann

You got this wrong. This page is about all the cars made by Zastava and not all are known as Yugo. Therefore, it should be moved back to Zastava vehicles and new articles created for each family, as discussed. In the meantime, Yugo should redirect here. Asterion 09:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Yugo was also used as a brandname in amongst others the Netherlands. Cars as the Yugo Sana (Yugo Florida), Yugo 45 etc. were not sold as Zastava at all.

[edit] Innocenti Mini 120

For more details on my last revert, see pictures of the Innocenti Mini 120 at [1] and you will understand. --Asterion 22:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page name argument continued

The Nissan Cedric page is entitled "Nissan Cedric" because that was the name the car was originally sold as, and the Datsun brand was not used on that particular car in Japan. The Ford Mondeo article is named "Ford Mondeo" because it was the name the car was first sold as. It is general concensus of Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles that articles for cars that were sold under many different names or slight variants should be named after their original domestic name, so the same should apply for this, i.e. the page should be titled after the original name the car was sold under in Yugoslavia, be it Zastava Koral or whatever (the article isn't very clear on what name was actually used there). All other names specific to this car should redirect to this page, and there should be a disambiguation page on Yugo saying what the name was used for, as (certainly in the UK anyway) it was used on several different models and was regarded as the brand (i.e. it was a more apparent name than Zastava). --Zilog Jones 19:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm asking you, in the name of peace over logic, just to let this argument die here. You can argue back and forth (as they do over the alternate spelling of aluminium), but at the end of the day, most people in the English speaking world will (I think) know this car much better as Yugo than as anything else. -Litefantastic 00:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Change the article name to Yugo

The article's name should be Yugo, not Zastava vehicles. Why, because Yugo and Zastava are to two diffrent brand names under one company. And Zastava vehicles should be in the Zastava article. Also, the article mentions Yugo, many, many times. So there is my reason to change the article's name to Yugo. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 02:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this would make sense as long as American wikipedians stop insisting on using it only for the Yugo 45 derivatives sold in the States (they never got the 128-like models over there). I own a 1989 Zastava 311 (in the UK) and it is also branded under the "marque" Yugo in the bonnet (though Zastava is on the front grill). As long as people understand this, I am happy with moving it to Yugo. Regards, --Asterion talk to me 19:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Move it to Yugo, it is this article's proper name, and the car's most common name. --Karrmann

It is not "the car" but "a brand"--Asterion talk to me 01:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I moved the article back to Yugo. Karrmann 19:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case let's start adding info on other Yugo cars (i.e. Skala) to this page as Yugo is a marque not a single car. Regards, --Asterion talk to me 06:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a winner. Karrmann 12:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for moving this article back to Yugo. I agree, start mentioning names of Yugo models and lets start articles about those cars. CrnaGora (Talk/Contribs/E-mail/Edit Count) 23:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I will take some pictures of my Yugo 311 tomorrow, depending on weather. I also have many UK sales brochures from the eighties, depicting the whole range available in Britain. Considering Yugo Cars (GB) stopped trading around 1991, would it be OK to scan and use some pics (i.e. "Fair Use")? In any case, it is about time for me to move my lazy arse and start the Skala/101/121/301/311/313/etc page, I reckon :o) Asterion talk to me 13:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV edits

I've waded through this article and tidied up grammar where necessary. As for the 'evil NATO' issue, I've simply reduced the existing reference down to a mention of UN sanctions on Yugoslavia. For whatever reason, the sanctions were the cause of the company's problems. If anyone thinks the sanctions were unjust, they can create an article about them and argue their case there.

I've also made an effort to remedy the imbalance in the "Response to Criticism" section by retitling it, reorganising the material, and removing blatantly POV or irrelevant claims such as

  • using the same gauge of steel as Volvo - could be said about a number of vehicles
  • 'very easy to repair with mechanical skills' - also relevant to a large number of vehicles.

The cars were inarguably more basic than contemporary Japanese and European vehicles, and buyers attracted by the low sticker price most likely expected to encounter a vehicle that could be abused and neglected with the same impunity as a Toyota (although under prolonged abuse, Japanese cars will pack up just as catastrophically as any Yugo). The Yugo can be a reliable car with the correct maintenance, as enthusiasts and proponents have shown, but modern buyers generally aren't prepared to get involved with cars to that degree - to their cost. I hope this helps to make some common ground between the various camps arguing over this article.

One final comment - a lot of people aren't displaying much of a sense of humour here. So I don't quite know why I find the volume of debate so immensely funny. And here I am becoming a part of it... it's a funny old world.

Anyway, please let me know here what you think of my edits. --Samf-nz 07:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed deleted image(s)

Just a note to say that I have removed some [or an] image[s] from the page beacuse they were speediable under either:

  • Category:Images with no fair use rationale
  • Category:Images with no copyright tag
  • Category:Images with no source

Or similar category. Iolakana|(talk) 15:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vedat

[edit] Headline text

[edit] Was NATO attack on factories US-led?

I have heard that the attacks on Kragujevac were really US-led, but were labeled as "NATO." Is it true and is "NATO-led" just hiding the fact that a specific country actually did this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.16.196.129 (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] More internationalisation please

Why is there a huge section specifically dealing with the US, but hardly anything about Western Europe, where the Yugo was also (albeit briefly) quite popular? The Bricklin stuff is notable, sure, but does it really need to be covered in quite such extreme detail, down to the precise trim levels? Stuff like "This event earned Yugo's already-tarnished reputation in the Motor City another devestating [sic - typo fixed now] black eye" doesn't help the impression of a US-centric article either. Hopefully some European editors with knowledge of Yugos can improve the non-US coverage; at the moment it's teetering on the edge of a {{globalize/USA}} tag. 86.132.138.205 13:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed some subtle POV.

I was reading the article and I removed two subtly POV sentences. First off, saying that that local media outlets in Detroit are instruments of the big three automakers is completely ridiculous. Its unreferenced, making it WP:OR. This also falls under WP:Avoid Weasal words as well. If someone died because her car blew off a bridge when that had never happened before in the bridge's history, I'd say that's pretty significant and doesn't deserve being explained away by a supposed media bias. Second, in the trivia section, I removed the sentence about that incident. Its mentioned above. Also, there is nothing in the source that says the accident was due to high speed and not the car. Again, at least WP:OR and at most a POV push. Although this article presents both sides, there is little fairness of tone. Whether or not editors believe the criticism was fair, the criticism needs be given a fair shake and not be explained away immediately after its presented. I'm going to come back and give it a thorough reading to see if I can balance the points of view. --Jdcaust (talk) 12:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)