Talk:Proton Saga

Proton Saga was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 10, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed

Malaysia Mid‑importance

	Malaysia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Automobiles Mid‑importance

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

Brands Mid‑importance

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

Untitled

i dont understand why the width of the content is only about 80% of the page? - haniff

I changed the phrase in the Popular Culture section "Bean's balls were stuck in the exhaust pipe of a Proton". Hahahaha ROFL. It was only one ball (and just to avoid confusion) I added the word golf as it was a golf ball stuck in the exhaust :P81.246.93.2 21:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enormous amount of vandalism

Benhocking has vandalised quite a bit of this page. I've tried to revert some of it, but as I know nothing about Proton Saga, I'd recommend that those who do look over this page (and Benhocking's edits) to remove stuff that doesn't belong. Ben Hocking ^{(talk|contribs)} 12:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replace 'generation' to 'facelift'

reason to replace is because from the earliest version is still same chasis and body style with the new version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.62.78 (talk) 06:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Facelift" is usually reserved for subsequent reiterations of the original car from the same make with the same platform. The first Saga is a rebadge of the Lancer, not a "first facelift" of the Lancer, if that is what you are implying. The original Saga underwent one facelift, the Iswara underwent another facelift, while the 2001 re-release is a facelift of the Aeroback Iswara, followed by the 2003 re-release (second facelift of the Iswara) and 2007's re-release (third facelift of the Iswara). Given this somewhat confusing chronology of development, it's preferable to divide the groups of cars by years and marques instead, if the by-"generation" sorting is not proper.

Clumping the cars into one parent section also has its purpose. In addition to categorising relevant portions of the article, it also allows for any future expansions in an even the Saga cars are still developed. Take the Proton BLM for example. With rumour it will serve as the next-generation Saga, there is reason to reserve space on the BLM when a merge is made. - Two hundred percent (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LMSS badge, and cite tags

Found out an anonymous claimed the "LMSS" badge is made up by "the local enthusiasts as LMST is the newer model, thus the alphabet before 'T' is 'S'".[1] Suggestively an unofficial name, it barely has any merit of mention if it isn't a name Proton adopted on the car. There is reason to believe there is similar original research all over the article. - Two hundred percent (talk) 15:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently there were also unexplained removals of {{cite}} tags on passages regarding sales and competition. Are you fanboys whitewashing or something? - Two hundred percent (talk) 11:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Proton Saga/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bob talk 21:19, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Hello, to assess this article, I thought it would be a good idea to compare it to current car GAs. I have come to the conclusion that while this probably would once have passed GA standards (i.e the Talbot Samba article is an older car GA of comparible quality), looking at current standards like Holden Apollo and Lexus LS, this isn't quite up to scratch.

First off, I appreciate that this article is on a topic that perhaps does not generate huge numbers of references, but I feel that at present, the article is rather short of references to reliable sources to be considered above "start" class. There are far too many uncited paragraphs throughout the article - for example, the paragraph about the Iswara only has one citation, which only verifies that the model exists and what spec it had. There are even a few "citation needed" templates in places. Other sections use references such as "New Car Shopper.au", which although it cites some of the information, doesn't look like a very reliable source to me. It is this lack of references that is my primary reason for failing the article.

Secondly, the prose is rather poor. For instance, I don't feel some elements are very clear - "to avoid R&D costs" is in the opening paragraph. I know this means "research and development", but would most readers? The whole opening barely mentions the second generation model, and also does not adequately summarise the article contents. It also has a few nuggets of information not found in the article body.

Some paragraphs from the section about the latest version appear to be lifted from a Proton publicity brochure: "The new Saga is bigger and has ample room for 5 Malaysian adults of average height." How is a Malaysian adult different from another nationality? Also, some sentences just appear to have been thrown in without context; one uncited line mentions an electric version of the latest edition, but this is not expanded upon, leaving it hanging as a single sentence, despite potentially being quite an interesting development for the manufacturer.

There are also paragraphs that I suspect may be Google translations from Malaysian: "However, many public complaints have been filed to this version including interior quality problems such as broken power window switches and uncontrollable flow of the air-conditioning system due to Proton's carelessness in skipping quality tests to ship the car quickly from overwhelming demand during promotion time". That's not cited, and is poorly-written; without a citation, it also fails NPOV guidelines.

I don't feel there is enough scope to improve this within seven days, so I'm going to fail the article, but don't let this put you off developing the article further, and it could be re-nominated in the future. Thanks. Bob talk 21:59, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Safety Features ABS and EBD for Saga 1.3 FLX (2011-present)

I've added description mentioning only Executive model of Saga 1.3 FLX comes with ABS and EBD, referenced it with two links containing some information about that, and I am very sure about this information as I owned the Standard model and it doesn't equip with ABS or EBD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokkeongfoo (talk • contribs) 07:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Separation into first and second generation

The Proton Saga page is in need of dire improvements. I believe that it would be necessary to create two new pages for the first and second generations of the Proton Saga respectively. The main page will be summarised and likened to the format adopted for popular cars such as the Toyota Camry and Honda Civic.

Rest assured that I will handle this entire project on my own over the course of one or two weeks. Aero777 (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Task Completed - ... took a little longer than expect due to unforeseen circumstances; nonetheless, better late than never. Cheers. Aero777 (talk) 20:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]