Talk:Volkswagen/Archive 1

Possible Cleanup

Everything after "From 1970s to Present" and before "Corporate Structure" should be moved to other, or new page(s). Possibly keep "Relationship with Porsche" on this page. The article seems too long in general, as well as Wikipedia noting it is possibly too large. --UrPQ31 15:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Volkswagen vs. VW in page titles

Is there a reason why we’re using ’’‘VW’’’ instead of ’’‘Volkswagen’’’ in the individual model pages? I realize the redirects are all in place, but it seems that an article about the Golf should be titled ’’‘Volkswagen Golf’’’ with a redirect from ’’‘VW Golf’’’ instead of the other way around. Doesn’t the company refer to its own models as Volkswagens? —Milkmandan 17:00, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)

The Company refers to its own Models as VW Golf, VW Touareg, VW Phaeton. I know this company well since I live in its homeland, Germany. No one from the company (and no one not from outside) says ’‘Volkswagen Golf’’. This sounds really stupid in german... I’m not registered because I am a member of the German Wikipedia ([1]) (I speak both languages), and not of the english version. Greetings from Wikipedia Germany... 84.140.146.16 17:28, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good enough for me! —Milkmandan 18:14, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)

A quick look at Category:VW vehicles shows that some model pages now are under the Volkswagen name. And using "Volkswagen" instead of "VW" makes sense to me. The fact that "VW" is easier to pronounce in German language, shouldn't be an argument for English Wikipedia standards.

Anyway, I think we should have one standard for VW model pages, and then follow that standard. --Boivie 12:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I would use "Volkswagen" because "VW" is more of a slang term while "Volkswagen" is more proper. --ApolloBoy 23:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

This is splitting hairs. Either one is equally acceptable. V.W. is simply an abreviation of Volks Wagen which is two words if taken literally (People's Car), Just like B.M.W., so do you suggest we make it convention to use "Bayerische Motoren Werke" instead of BMW.

--Paulbass 15:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Aus Liebe zum Auto - the proper translation of what it actually means would be "because we love cars" in my opinion.

Stop The Bus

The appropriate slang for Volkswagen could never be written here. My father in law died in a W.W. bus. He was one of those psuedo intellectuals who would throw his head back, with his nose in the air, and pronounce it VolksVAAgen.

I prefer 'Volkswagen' as well—it is this in most price listings in car magazines. It's 'Volkswagen' at the UK site[2] when referring to the company, but the individual models aren't prefixed by the make! (Cheeky!) However, our German friend puts forward a convincing argument. If mine was the deciding vote, I would agree with ApolloBoy above, but otherwise I'm happy to sit on the fence till I hear others' views. Stombs 11:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think all pages are changed to Volkswagen now. --Boivie 13:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Boivie. I came into this discussion a bit late. Stombs 02:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

That's too bad your father-in-law died in a W.W. bus. I'm not so sure what the W.W. bus has to do with the VW bus, however.

Oh-NO

Does that mean the poor Bastard died in vane?

Advertising and music

It would be great if someone could expand on the innovative advertising the company has used over the years. In particular, some ads from the late 1990s and early 2000s have been particularly influential music-wise in the U.S., with several selections becoming very popular because of ads (probably just goes to show how crummy radio is in the U.S. right now). In particular, there was “Pink Moon” by Nick Drake and “Da Da Da” by Trio. A lot of other interesting things have been done at other times as well. —User:Mulad (talk) 04:51, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Also, mention should be made of the new ‘Aus Liebe zum Automobil’ tagline (For the love of the automobile) of the company. http://www.vwasia.com/publish/vwasia/vwasia/en/know_vw/aus_liebe_zum_automobil0.html

—bquanta 11:09, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The company that did the wonky "Less flower. More power" & "UFO" ads for the re-intro was Arnold Communications, in hommage to those of Doyle Dane Birnbach ("Lemon"), which have been called the most important in the history of commerce. Trekphiler 03:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Adolf Beetle

A best car in the world episode on Discovery TV claimed it was Adolf Hitler personally, who facelifted the original-original VW Beetle design to the classic big-eyed form. They showed a few seconds b&w footage of the ancient one with smaller headlights and a somewhat strange looking front. How much is the classic Beetle design styled by Adolf? Had that failed painter kept competing with Pininfarina rather than Joe Stalin, the world would surely be a much better place today.

I dubt it. The VW beetle is almost identical with the Tatra T97. [3] // Liftarn

Beetlemania

I rewrote this:

"The new factory in the new town of KdF-Stadt, now called Wolfsburg, purpose-built for the factory workers, had only produced a handful of cars by the time war started in 1939. Consequently the first volume-produced versions of the car were military vehicles, the Jeep-like Kübelwagen and the amphibious Schwimmwagen."

The Kubelwagen wasn't just a modified Type 3, it was an all-new design, the Type 81. Trekphiler 03:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Trivia

All the original KdF-Wagene were splits. And the prototype had the headlights on a spreader bar on the trunk, not in the fenders. Trekphiler 03:51, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

T-Bug

"T-Bug was an experimental automobile created by the Volkswagen Corporation in the late thirties to fulfill the Fuehrer's desire to have an all weather, 3 wheeled, go-cart." - is this a hoax? Kappa 02:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of it; consider the reliability of your sourceNazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann worked as a foreman at a Volkswagen factory in Argentina before being captured by the Mossad in 1960..--Porsche997SBS 00:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

There was no VW factory in Argentina by that time. Eichmann did not work in a VW factory but in a Mercedes Benz factory, leaded by his protector, argentine peronist businessman Jorge Antonio who accepted this in a magazine intervieu about 40 years after. G.A.B Olivos, Argentina

Unpimp my ride & VW Commercials

I think this hilarious new ad-campaign, as well as the fake one with the suicide bomb contained by the car, should be mentioned somewhere. 209.33.36.146 06:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

VW commercials have always been critically acclaimed. If someone has time, a write up of VW's historic commercials (like "Big Day" and "Synchronicity", or even newer campaigns like "Safety Happens") would be an amazing contribution. --04:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

• I agree. I was taken aback by the recent "Safety Happens" line of Volkswagen commercials, something no other commercial has succeeded in accomplishing. For the first time ever, I was still thinking about a commercial minutes after it was aired. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 03:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The Downside

Although someone insists on deleting my viewpoint on the safety issues, they nontheless exist. The fact that hundreds of thousands world wide died in these cars should be (albiet tactfully) mentioned in the article. What about the lousy heaters? the noisy engines? Although there are those who choose to ignore it, the "cute" little beetle killed more people than cancer.randazzo56

Do you have any references to those facts? Or is it pure speculation? --Boivie 08:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Speculation as to the comparison of those who died of cancer. Living in the U.S. I based my opinion on having seen the aftermath of collisions involving V.W.s and standard size American vehicles built during the sixties and seventys. All opinions and speculation aside, shouldnt we address the safety issues in the article? randazzo56

To those claiming there was a VW Beetle hecatomb--sorry, but you are just going to have to come up with references and figures. "[H]undreds of thousands"? "[K]illed more people than cancer"? These are facts? Give me some documentation, or give me a break. If anything, something should be said about the myth that a vehicle's engine somehow protects you in a crash. Most collisions aren't head-on, making a rear-engined VW comparably as safe as any car of its era. On another note, the heat in an air-cooled VW does not, I repeat, does not come from the exhaust. Nor does it only work while the car is in motion. Granted, the early VW heaters may have been lacking, especially in more wintry climates, but that hardly detracts from the fact that they were very well-built and well-designed cars. Bashing them because they couldn't keep pace against today's standards is like bashing an apple for not being an orange.

Idiot, where then does the heat come from? stupid, the muffler, Most collisions are not head on? serving as a paramedic for fifteen years I can tell you dont know what your talking about. A beetle being impacted from any angel is leathal. Volkswagens could never keep the pace with any standard, just ask the relatives of anyone who was ever killed in one, when driving or riding in a normal auto would have saved their lives. Wamt to see? drive your "luv-bug" into a tree. Forward, backwards or sideways, your dead. But thats O.K., we wont have to read anymore of your bullshit. Kaltenborn

No, the heat doesn't come from the muffler and it never did. It could be that you think an exhaust manifold is the same thing as a muffler in which case you're even stupider than your spelling and grammar would indicate. Apparently some measure of intelligence isn't required to be an EMT in whatever shit-hole you live. You also seem to be fundamentally lacking in observational skills, otherwise you'd know that most collisions aren't head-on. Maybe a lot really bad wrecks are, and those are the ones to which EMTs are called, but so what? That doesn't prove your case. Most wrecks aren't head-on, period. Why don't you spend some time in a junkyard and count all the t-bones and rear-ends and compare that to the number of head-ons. If any vehicles are inherently dangerous, they're the ones driven by dumbshits like yourself. And you drive an ambulance? God help us all.

To Bad

you dont have the balls to sign in, I cant wait to see what happens to you when your V-W gets broadsided or rear ended, either way, your dead. I dont drive an Ambulance, I drive a Monte Carlo, unlike traitors like yourself who favor imports. I live in Royal Oak Michigan. Go ahead. Sign in, I would be more than happy to vandalize your sorry ass. Kaltenborn 22:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Ha... this is so hilarious. I love reading these discussions. Remember one thing guys, Arguing online is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still a retard !! ha...

No One

Cares64.12.116.9 20:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the engines are loud, engines in other older cars are lous as are engines in race cars.... you dont drive a bug to to have a perfectly smooth quiet ride....you drive a bug cus you love them.

btw...there are modifications that can be made to make the engine alot more quiet than they originally are.

and...there are amazing good heaters in old bugs...youi just have to know how to get it to work... alot of the time its just an burnt out fuse or a bad connection...do your homework next time.

-margaret digthesixstring@aol.com

I agree about the deathtrap opinion. Where are there fuses where there is no blower for the heater?. The heat came from the muffler and did not work unless the car was moving. How can an aircooled engine be modified to quiet it down? When it comes down to doing homework you just got an "F"

Origins in 1930s Germany

I'd like to request a little bit more information on the following claim within the section noted.

"The new factory in the new town of KdF-Stadt, now called Wolfsburg, purpose-built for the factory workers, only produced a handful of cars by the time war started in 1939."

If more specific information can be provided by anyone on this aspect of the article, please include it, as I was only aware of the oldest Volkswagens being produced in 1940 (according to the German wikipedia article on Volkswagen).

Thanks in advance! --CBecker 03:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello CBecker,

HALT Conflict of info here 2 stories

No.1 http://beetle-minsk.mebius.net/vwhist/bughist.ok.htm

No. 2 50 working test prototypes were built from July 1939 as display vehicles called VW39.

Source is book Volkswagen Chronicle by Graham Robson & Editors of Consumers Guide

--VWphaetonfan 05:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronounciation

According to the beginning of this article, the companies name is pronounced 'Fôlks'-vagen. ?. I have never heard it pronounced with an "f". Or a "vagen". It's wag-in. I mean in their own advertisements on the television/radio/whatever they pronounce it as volks-wag-in. This actually sounds like a gross exageration of the German accent. I think we should say it as its common, and true, pronounciation: volks-wag-in.--Porsche997SBS 21:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose the "'Fôlks'-vagen" prounounciation is in the German language. Is it relevant to write how it's supposed to be pronounced in English as well? --Boivie 13:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

and in German it shortens to "Fow-vey" not VeeDoubleU. GraemeLeggett 14:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Here & here (click on the picture with a man) are two German Volkswagen commercials. I think it sounds like they are saying volks-vohn, what do you people think?--Porsche997SBS 01:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say it sounds like folks-vagn. In wiktionary you can see that Volk is pronounced [f?lk]. --Boivie 23:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I have an idea! Why don't we find a German wikipedian, then ask them how they pronounce it? Say, is anyone out there German? --Porsche997SBS 05:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

To my knowledge Volkswagen is pronounced FolksVagen in Germany outside Germany is Volkswagen, V in German is pronounced like an F eg Germans call BMW BMV, W is pronounced V, I know when VW were developing the W12 most press thought it was originally a V12.

I tend to think that Volkswagen should be pronounced the way the country who built it pronounces it but thats just my opinion.

But I'm now trying to kick the English pronouncation & going Deutsch.--VWphaetonfan 07:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

VWpheatonfan is right, its Pholks-vagen, the e in wagen is almost silent while the emphasis is put on the a. Hope that clears things up. Regards, Signature^brendel 01:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

As a German native speaker, I can only confirm that in this country it is pronounced Folks-Vagen (or Pholx-Vagen); provided that the V is meant to be pronounced like the regular English V; the l preceding the k is not mute; the stress is on the first syllable (Fólks-Vagen - sorry, dear Gerd) and the final e is murmured, similar to the second o in the English word "common". As for the short colloquial form VW (Fow-Wey), in Northern Germany this is often stressed on the first, in Southern Germany always on the second syllable. Hope that helps. As an aside, German V is mostly, but not always pronounced like an F; there are cases when it´s pronounced like the German W, i.e. sometimes it´s spoken voiceless, sometimes with voice. --328cia 00:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC) PS: Letter to Car&Driver, sometime in the Eighties: Is it pronounced Porsche or Porscha? Answer: It is pronounced "it"...

Carefull

Your pronouning it Folksvagen might lead others to thing your a D.P., or simply brain damaged. And why would anyone call a four door sedan a Pheaton? Kaltenborn 00:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Why would somebody think that you sound like a DP pronouncing the company Pholks-vagen. Well maybe if your accent is to strong ;-) The Pheaton had four doors, it was a luxury sedan. Regards, Signature^brendel 06:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

A Pheaton was an open four door sedan, a convertible, or as it was known in the twentys, a touring car, not a sedan. 205.188.116.8 01:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

VW Fox in America

In the late 1980s/early 1990s VW sold the Fox, a low-cost sedan. It was nearly a duplicate of the Audi Fox from the 1970s. I apologize, but I am not able to research this at this time, but invite anyone to help.

The VW Fox is covered in the Volkswagen Gol section.--VWphaetonfan 09:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

1974 Audi Fox

A 1974 Mechanics Illustrated road test of the Fox was indicative of the simplicity and quality involved. The Small-by 1974 standards-Audi had front wheel drive and cost a whopping $4200.00, the cost of a nicely equipped Chevy Impala or similar G.M product or Ford L.T.D. Yet the car sold well. Or at least well enough. It was equipped with a small displacement high reving 4 cylinder engine and most were ordered with the 5 speed transmission. Like many V.W. products of the times, the Fox was plagued with corrosion problems. 64.12.116.9 03:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

VW South Africa also produced a Fox from 1987-1995. This was however a Jetta MK1. --Paulbass 15:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Current Volkswagen Models Section

It seems strange to me that in the Current Volkswagen Models section, only models sold in the US include prices. I'm thinking that maybe no prices should be listed for any locality and that the United States part be changed to North America for the benefit of the Canadian Market. --Vkmitg 08:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

kudos

Your 74 V.W. 411 just made the list of Worlds ugliest Cars. Take a look, your right below the 67 Oldsmobiles. --Margerate Suckley.

Reliability Issues

That 'Reliability Issues' section looks more like personal bitterness than actual fact. I flagged it as needing a citation, but I think there may be reason to simply deleted. Fracture^Talk   01:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with just deleting it. There is already a paragraph about reliablitiy under the 'From 1970s to Present' section.Vkmitg 02:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

50 THOUSAND BILLION?

The revenue says 50,000 billion, I think it's supposed to be 50 billion..

?--Greasysteve13 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Joke section?

I really don't see the relevance of the following... Dan100 (Talk) 22:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Volkswagen Bolt patterns

This section defines the bolt pattern with which the wheels are bolted to the car. For example 5x100mm refers to 5 bolts 100mm apart.

Jetta

North America

• MKI platform - ?
• MKII platform - 4x100mm
• MKIII platform - 4x100mm
• MKIV platform - 5x100mm
• MKV platform - 5x112mm

Passat

North America

• Passat III platform - 4x100mm
• Passat IV platform - 4x100mm
• Passat V platform - 5x112mm
• Passat VI platform - 5x112mm

I wonder why this was moved. If you've ever had to look up this type of information you would know how difficult it is to find. The reason this comes up often is when you're attempting to buy snow tires. A lot of people buy a second set of wheels for their snow tirs (no need to swap rubber on the same wheels). When you attempt to go buy wheels, the question is what bolt pattern fits the car you currently own. Above is compilation of some of the more useful patterns (IMHO)

Besides, this is VW specific data and this is a VW Wiki, how is it not relevant?

This is not a VW wiki, it is the VW section of wikipedia. This is trivia and does not belong in the general volkswagen article. At best it should go in the individual car's sections. But even there it would likely be considered trivia.

As for the difficult to find factor, this was my first hit for a google search of Volkswagen Bolt pattern jetta.

Therefore I'm removing this section from the article.Improbcat 17:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hippies

There is a passing reference to the "hippie" movement but this does not appear to be referenced or expounded on. At minimum a reference is appropriate. But given how significant this "trend" had on the popularity of the Beetle (and Volkswagen) it seems appropriate to expand this discussion a bit. Anybody have more info on that aspect of history? --Mcorazao 18:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this page about the brand or company?

The Prophets and the AG would make this page look like a company, but shouldn't this page be about the brand Volkswagen, and put the prophets on the VW group article similar to Mercedes and ChryslerDaimler set-up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alan Frize (talk • contribs) 18:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Vandalism

I had deleted a vandalized section in the beginning. Please check to make sure, and lock if needed. Thank you.Ryou-kun16 17:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Largest car manufacturers

I believe the introductory paragraph might be outdated, as some figures have now listed Toyota as being the largest auto manufacturer, having surpassed GM. Lapunkd 16:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Founded

Is it fair that you use the Nazi Germany flag, it gives Volkswagen abad image, and i dont think its really fair. The modern VW company was founded after the war with the help of a British Army General anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.113.24 (talk) 23:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article talk a bit about the relation of VW with the Nazis and the SS at the time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.126.34 (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The SS had nothing at all to do with the volkswagen project, and technically speaking neither did "the Nazis" as you so colloquially put it, it was the DAF, the National Socialist Party's trade union. The Grumpy Hacker (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I don't like how the story of VW skips from the 1930s to post war. Although placing the Nazi flag is unfair as VW and the Nazi regime were not one and the same, it is unforgivable to forget or gloss over the ugliest part of this company's history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.241.52 (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, putting a Nazi flag gives them a bad reputation. You don't see a German Empire flag for BMW on its page when it was founded in 1916. The full history should be kept on it though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.191.208.60 (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Type 82 or 83?

The caption below the picture of the Beetle identifies it as a "Type 83." Yet clicking on the picture itself leads to its own page, where it is labeled with a "Description: VW Typ 82." Which is correct? 66.234.222.96 (talk) 13:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Build Quality

I believe this article should include a section for some of VW's build quality issues, notably the 2.0L I4 in the old Jetta and the Jetta itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.166.105 (talk) 03:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

BlueTec and BlueMotion

There's a serious mistake in the article. BlueTec is a technology for injecting an additional fluid ("AdBlue") to the exhaust of a diesel engine which does not reduce the car's carbon dioxide emission. BlueMotion, though, is more of a bundle of low-tech measures for reducing the car's air resistance, weight, etc. as well as minor tweaking of the gearbox and the engine software. The BlueMotion bundle, which sells at as little as 250 EUR, reduces the car's carbon dioxide emission by roughly 15-20 g/km. The only thing these two "technologies" have in common are their application to diesel systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.229.184.223 (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Privatisierung durch 600 Bundestagsabgeordnete Parlamentsdebatte Top 12

• http://www.bundestag.de/parlament/plenargeschehen/to/183.html

195.194.75.209 (talk) 09:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Help!

Before anyone gets upset at me, I just want to make it clear that I did not delete the contents of the article.

I came across this article where it only contained the text "Volkswagens are sexy, brahh" and, I think, "XOX ally". I attempted to restore the article, but have not been able to do so. However, I was able to remove the silly text.

I have made minor edits in Wikipedia before, but I do not know how to do a full restore. If anyone knows, please restore article. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.124.217.50 (talk) 07:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the heads up. --Matt (talk) 14:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler?

You sure Adolf Hitler was a founder of Volkswagen? He owned a Mercedes-Benz

Marauder09 (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

While Hitler's backing was instrumental in getting Porsche's Volkswagen project started, the founding directors of the Gesellschaft zur Vorbereitung des Deutschen Volkswagens mbH were Porsche, Jakob Werlin and Bodo Lafferentz (according to The VW Story by Jerry Sloniger, at least). I think these three are probably the most appropriate to be listed as founders in the infobox. Letdorf (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC).

...in fact, if one considers Hitler to be a founder of VW, would one consider Harold Wilson or Tony Benn the founders of British Leyland? They all provided the political will, but left the management of the formation of the business to others. Letdorf (talk) 12:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC).

I agree--no credible public reference I can find claims Hitler to be a "founder" of the Volkswagen company. He merely called on private industry to create an automobile with certain general characteristics at a certain price point. The project was undertaken by Porsche initially then taken over by the DAF under the leadership of Robert Ley. Not even the German Wikipedia articles on Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG mention Hitler as being a "founder." People who continually add Hitler to the list of founders do so for their own amusement only, not based on any historical fact. The Grumpy Hacker (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Letdorf et al have my full support to leave Adolf Hitler out. He did not "found" the company. There was no real "founder" in the sense of the word. Official initiator was the Nazi organization „Kraft durch Freude“ which founded in 1937 the "Gesellschaft zur Vorbereitung des Deutschen Volkswagens mbH (GeZuVor)" ("Corporation for the preparation of the German Volkswagen Ltd.") Bodo Lafferentz was Managing Director ("Geschäftsführer") of GeZuVor. 1938, the name of GeZuVor was changed to Volkswagenwerk G.m.b.H. Ferdinand Porsche was made Managing Director (Geschäftsführer) of the company and had a seat on the supervisory board. Just as Lafferentz, Porsche received a job, he was not a founder. Likewise would I remove Jakob Werlin. he was a car salesman, sold Hitler his first Benz. Became Hitler's consultant in automotive matters, ran the Daimler-Benz subsidiary in Munich and was a board member of Daimler Benz. According to the German Wikipedia, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Werlin he once worked in an honorary capacity as a Managing Director at Volkswagenwerk G.m.b.H., but he supposedly did that at the same time as Porsche. Bottom line: There was no real "founder." If people insist on a founder, then it's either KdF or GeZuVor.--BsBsBs (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

If we use May 28, 1937 as the inception date of the company, then Kraft durch Freude must be noted as the founder. May 28, 1937 was the date when KdF founded GeZuVor --BsBsBs (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The meaning of the "founder" field in the infobox template is defined in the template documentation as "Person or persons who founded the company." Taking into consideration BsBsBs's argument, it might be better to omit this field altogether? Letdorf (talk) 12:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC).

I'd say so. --BsBsBs (talk) 19:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Largest Car Company? Merger with Porche

I have removed the claim that VW will become the world's largest car manufacturer by 2018. It is no doubt true that they would like to, and that they are making plans to do so, but the claim is speculative and probably much less certain than they would like us to believe. Similarly, it seems inappropriate to have detailed information in the introductory paragraph describing the merger plans, both because it is speculative (it hasn't happened yet) and because it really isn't part of a proper introduction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.192.92.37 (talk) 16:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The status of this article needs to be revisited. Please see Talk:Automotive industry#Porsche / Volkswagen naming. 65.166.89.2 (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

where was vws first factory> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.163.170 (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Did not beat Toyota in 2009

I have removed the claim that Volkswagen ( plus Porsche) did beat Toyota in 2009. This is an urban legend, worthy of Snopes.

I am one of the maintainers of the Volkswagen AG entry in the German Wikipedia. I worked for more than 30 years for VW. Full background on the urban legend at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Volkswagen_AG (in German.) Salient points follow.

I had to remove the urban legend several times for the German entry. Since 2/1/2010, the removal was no longer necessary, as official data had become available.

On 1/11/2010 Volkswagen AG said in a press release: „in 2009, Volkswagen has exceeded the deliveries of the prior year and reached new record results. 6.29 million (2008: 6.23 million +1.1 percent) units were delivered to customers.”

Official release by Toyota, dated 1/25/2010 “TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION (TMC) announces its production, domestic sales and export results, including those for subsidiaries Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. and Hino Motors, Ltd., for December 2009 and the 2009 calendar year (CY2009). “ The report is delivered as a table. At the bottom of the table are 7,234,439 units.

In 2009, Toyota was a million units ahead of VW.

It also should have come to someone's attention that Porsche has not been part of Volkswagen in 2009.

Official rankings are kept by OICA, and OICA has not yet released rankings for 2009.

As far as Volkswagen's goals for beating Toyota by 2018 go, the plans are reality. Hubris or not, we shall see. I leave that point to the maintainers of this page. As Wikipedia deals with facts, I'm all for leaving it out.--BsBsBs (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

VW Group overtaking Toyota was reported in The Guardian [4] in November 2009, based on a report by IHS Global Insight which estimated that the combination of VW Group and Porsche had produced 4.4m cars "so far this year" (it's unclear what the exact dates are) compared to 4m for Toyota. So, slighty more substantial a claim than a typical urban legend, and possibly even true for a period in early 2009. However, as you say, these were not official figures, and including Porsche is debatable, as the merger process was still in its preliminary stages in early 2009. Letdorf (talk) 12:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC).

I documented this on the talk page of [[5]] IHS Global Insight had done a botch job, and the media just ate it up. I spare you the details. Porsche wasn't part of Volkswagen at the time. "So far this year" referred to beginning of November 2009. Should have caused more suspicion. If VW makes 6 million cars a year, how can they surpass Toyota if they just had made 4 million in November? At VW, Global Insight forgot to count Audi, Seat, Skoda etc., but they counted Porsche (wrong.) At Toyota, they forgot to count Daihatsu and Hino. Anyway, the annual reports cleared it up. Toyota a million ahead of VW. As far as Porsche goes, that wasn't debatable. In most of 2009, Porsche had tried to take over Volkswagen, Piech turned the table on Porsche, but by 12/31/2009, the takeover wasn't consummated. (As a matter of fact: VW just raised the money for the takeover a few days ago. --BsBsBs (talk) 14:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Christian Klingler

I took the liberty to remove the Christian Klingler entry from the info box. Nothing against him, he's a nice and capable guy. But the entry makes it read as if he's the whole "Board of Management of the Volkswagen Passenger Cars" which he's not. He's the new sales chief. Officially, he is "Member of the Board of Management of Volkswagen AG responsible for ‘Sales and Marketing’, Member of the Board of Management of the Volkswagen brand responsible for ‘Sales, Marketing and After Sales’." So even the title was erroneous. If we list Klingler, then we would have to list the whole board, which would be beyond the scope of the infobox. The German version doesn't even list Piech in the box. If someone wants to keep track of comings and goings on the board of the Volkswagen AG, and the different brand boards (different thing) then be my guest, but be warned: It's a chore. Would need a special section. --BsBsBs (talk) 19:22, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Urgent Cleanup Needed

This article is in dire need for cleanup and referencing. I have given it a "This article needs additional citations for verification" tag for the time being. The intro is too wordy and strays too much from the topic. Discussions of the Morgenthau plan for instance belong elsewhere. Largely due to a lack of citations, the article contains a lot of mistakes. A small sample:

- "The first reference to the name Beetle occurred in U.S. advertising in 1968, but not until 1998 and the Golf-based New Beetle would the name be adopted by Volkswagen" is just wrong. I wrote the Volkswagen Catalogues in the 70s and the title was "Der Käfer" (The Beetle). First recorded usage of "Der Käfer" in Volkswagen brochure print number 152.947.00 2/68 of 1968.

- "By 1955 sales were on a basis that warranted the building of the fine Volkswagen plant on a 32 acre site on Scarboro's Golden Mile." Unencyclopedic and wrong. It wasn't a "plant", it was an office building / warehouse. "See 1959 Canadian Register of Commerce & Industry held in the Western Libraries at the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario" needs to be turned into a proper reference. If it's worth keeping. We can't possibly reference every office building of VW ...

- The sequence Polo - Passat - Golf is wrong. It's Passat - Scirocco - Golf - Polo. The Derby reference is confusing. The Derby came later, in 1977, and was short-lived. AFAIK, it was never sold outside of Europe and should not appear in an article that seems to be written from an U.S. viewpoint.

- The Volkswagen Law needs to be explained better. The shot down version has been replaced by a new one. It is still in effect. Citations!

- The takeover by Porsche and counter-takeover by Volkswagen needs to be explained better. Citations!

I could go on and on. If the editors would go to the trouble of properly referencing their work, it would be more precise and less convoluted.

Much to my chagrin, I found the old lie about "Volkswagen #1" perpetuated again. I had already covered this above under "Did not beat Toyota in 2009." I was astounded to find this again, despite published numbers by Volkswagen and Toyota to the contrary. I am floored by the fact that speculations along the lines of "whilst this is a significant change in the global pecking order, it's widely believed that Toyota will overtake Volkswagen again, possibly by the end of 2009, as production is ramped up as the world emerges from its economic slump" could survive the vigilance of WP editors - not to mention the fact that 2009 is long behind us. I have edited the chapter, along with proper references. WARNING: If the lies resurface, they will be mercilessly reverted. I have worked for VW for more than 30 years and I love the company. But lies are lies.

If I find the time, I will clean up the article later. But be warned, if I do it, a lot of the current content will go. If you value your contributions, please clean up and most of all properly reference your materials. --BsBsBs (talk) 09:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

PS: In rereading the article, it becomes very evident that it needs structure. There is a lot of repetition. Talk about cars battles with talk about the company. At de:Volkswagen AG the structure is CEOs, mirroring the Volkswagen custom of dividing their history into "eras" of the CEOs. Any suggestions for other structures? --BsBsBs (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with your points, assuming you can find RSs for your corrections. The structure of the History section seems broadly reasonable to me, though the two sections dealing with 1974 onwards need to be resolved. --Letdorf (talk) 12:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the discussion was meant to encourage prior editors to provide RSs for their assertions. There is a shortage. If no-one volunteers, I'll do the rewrite with RSs, when I find the time.

I had a little time on my hands and started working on it. Then I saw the sentence "This article is about Volkswagen Passenger Cars. For the business group, see Volkswagen Group. For Volkswagen vans, trucks and buses, see Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles." I immediately stopped. If that is to be taken seriously, then all corporate stuff should be taken out, possibly ported over to Volkswagen Group. Would simplify things a lot. Opinions? --BsBsBs (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there will inevitably be some awkward overlap between the two articles given the history of Volkswagen, but there is some material in this one that doesn't really belong in an article ostensibly about a car marque, rather than a corporate group. Particularly the Global Ranking and Volkswagen Law sections. --Letdorf (talk) 11:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Ownership

To put an end to the endless "Porsche owns Volkswagen" edits and reverts, I added a table as a best effort to reflect the ownership of Volkswagen. To understand the many facets of the many "Porsche" companies is beyond the scope of this article. One thing can be said with certainty: The company that makes the Porsche cars does not own the company that makes the Volkswagen etc. cars. -- BsBsBs (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

What & where

While removing Uzbekistan from "Central America and Caribbean," I noticed these interesting tables of which VWs are (were?) sold where. It is certainly interesting to learn that the SpaceFox is (was?) sold on the tiny island of Reunion, and to watch the VW line-up on Saint Barthelemy. However, the data are completely unsourced and unverifyable. I also have my doubts about their notability. I happen to know the VW sales on the Bahamas, and they aren't many.

The Caribbean is covered in great detail, China (where Volkswagen is selling more cars than at home) is getting short shrift. South America, where VW has an ancient tradition, is AWOL. Also, sometimes mere trim/engine levels (such as GLI) are listed as cars.

Sorry, can't help. In the more than 30 years I worked for VW, I gave up on tracking what is sold where under which name. Just tracking the many permutations of Bora, Jetta, Jetta, Sagitar and Vento is a nightmare. -- BsBsBs (talk) 05:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this kind of data is difficult to source and to keep up to date. I think the article would be no worse off without it. Letdorf (talk) 12:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC).

I'll wait a week and put it out of its misery if nobody else speaks up. Speaking of which: The article turns more and more into an article about the company, the intro notwithstanding. I think we should leave it at that. The major cars could get a small blurb, and then a link to the car itself. I've just been on a little Snopes tour of the Volkswagen Jetta and Volkswagen Golf - some people put too much trust in German logic ... -- BsBsBs (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite

I started rewriting / copyediting the article. I begun when I started writing for Volkswagen, in 1973, when the Passat was launched. After that, I did every Volkswagen car launch. I put the cars in their correct order and removed some fluff. The lack of sources bugs me, this is a rewrite/copyedit, I am not responsible for the lack of references. I checked the years against my notes and compared it with de:Volkswagen AG, of which I had written a large part some years ago. The article needs more tweaking. With a little time ... -- BsBsBs (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know

My enthusiasm for major edits of this article wanes. There simply is too much unsourced and wrong material, oftentimes skewed by a U.S. and UK view, which is natural, given the language of the article.

For more than 30 years, I worked in various capacities for (not at) Volkswagen. I was the consultant of high executives. A lot in this article does not reflect the facts. However, absent of sources, my knowledge would be Original Research.

One example. The article states: “By the early 1990s, Volkswagen's annual sales in the United States were below 100,000, and many car buyers found the company's products to be lacking in value. Some automotive journalists believed that Volkswagen would have to quit the North American market altogether. VW eventually realized that the Beetle was the heart and soul of the brand in North America, and the firm quickly set about creating a new Beetle for American and Canadian showrooms.”

Partially truth and partially fiction.

It is true that a withdrawal from U.S. shores was discussed, not only by journalists. The reason to stay was not the New Beetle. In the words of one high Volkswagen exec: “The U.S. sets world standards for comfort, quality, emissions, safety. Withdrawing from that market would mean losing touch. If we cannot compete in the U.S., then we will fail in the world.” So they toughed it out. With only 243,472 units sold in 2009, the U.S. market is still a relative nobody at Volkswagen. In China, VW sold 1.12 million in the same period. However, being head of VWoA is a glamorous job. Heading up China, VW’s largest market, was for a long time thought as a demotion to Siberia.

Like many things, the New Beetle was a fluke. It was never intended as the savior of the U.S. market. Wishful myth-building. The New Beetle started as a design study by young designers in VW’s new design studio in California. A mock-up was shown at several auto shows and drew large interest. Eventually, the car was built. Wolfsburg remained skeptical. One indicator: Wolfsburg did not launch the car as “Neuer Käfer” in Germany, but as “New Beetle”, testament to their ambivalence. Due to a lack of a proper engine, the car was nearly launched with a diesel in the U.S., a disaster that could be averted at the last moment.

Nostalgia and retro design often result in a pop that quickly fizzles. Such was the case with the New Beetle. After its launch, it sold quite briskly in the U.S. In Europe and elsewhere it never really caught on. The last number I heard was 1 % of VW’s sales. Fact: Last year, only 3,400 changed hands in Germany.

Anyway, much of this you won’t read elsewhere, and I won’t write it without a source. Properly fixing it would mean weeks in the Volkswagen archives and a year of edit wars. While I’m not holding my breath for the New Beetle, don’t hold your breath for a big rewrite of this article. Both seem a lost cause. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BsBsBs (talk • contribs) 05:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Introduction

The introduction is meant to be a summary of the article. After reading the introduction, you should have an idea of what the subject is all about. The fact that VW is one of the world's largest car manufacturers belongs in the introduction, as it is a key fact. It would be hopeless if readers would have to read a long article just to distinguish a major company from a minor one. The introduction is less than satisfactory and needs improvement. Trivia like former slogans could probably be removed. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section), the introduction could also be twice as long. Josh Gorand (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the intro is way bloated. I had to banish the size discussion into its own chapter after outrageous claims were made. You may have noted that I bolstered the "Europe's largest" with a source and additional info. You have my full blessing to trim the intro way down. And that's just the start of what needs trimming. Less verbiage, more references. -- BsBsBs (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

That better? -- BsBsBs (talk) 14:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that was a clear improvement. Josh Gorand (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Clean Diesel

"Clean Diesel" is a marketing term developed and used by VW. It's still a diesel engine. Ja3kko (talk) 02:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

What about Adolf Hitler

This car called "volkswagen" by Adolf Hitler and actually the first drawings of the car was made by Hitler.... You should mention it in the first paragraph... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.250.139.95 (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

If you find a reliable source, and maybe a link to the drawings, we'll do. Actually, under the Hitler regime, the car was called "KdF Wagen". There is a lot on Adolf, Volkswagen etc further down in the text, and that's where trivia like these belong. BsBsBs (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I was astonished to find no mention of Ferdinand Porsche in the history of Volkswagen! Porsche worked since the 20's on his idea for a small car for the masses, but found no buyers. He drew the first shape of the "Beetle". Hitler was interested in this concept, they talked together in the early 30's, and when no established car company would agree to take on this project, Hitler directed the state to form a company, and basically used Porsche's ideas as the blueprint, with a few requirements of his own. Then Hitler went back his other duties, checking in occasionally. As soon as the factory was complete though, war broke out and production was switched over to military vehicles. Only a very few Beetles were produced under Hitler's reign, and the company was re-organized after the war, becoming the Volkswagen gmbh of today. I don't understand this fascination with making Hitler the "father" of VW - his support was critical initially, but Porsche, Hirsch and Nordhoff were the ones to really make the company and the first car work. (BTW, I fixed the oversight of Ferdinand Porsche) Nerfer (talk) 05:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Too Long

The article is too long, and needs to be cut down. I propose moving the History of Volkwagen to its own article and creating an article that lists volkswagen vehicles.

I have made prototype pages. Please give me feedback on them and tell me what should be moved/worked around.

Volkswagen, List of Volkswagen vehicles, History of Volkswagen

Also, what should the title of the articles be named? If it is called List of Volkswagen vehicles, then would people mistake it for all of the groups vehicles including Audi, Porsche, SEAT, etc? Should there be a about tag that says "This page is about Volkswagen Passenger Cars. For other cars manufactured by the Volkswagen Auto group, see (Put article name here)." L Kensington (talk • contribs) 21:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree the model lists could be factored out (How about "List of Volkswagen passenger cars" as a title? I don't think readers should expect to see other VW Group models in it, if the title doesn't mention "Volkswagen Group") but we still need at least a potted history of the company in this article, IMHO. Per WP:IG, the large gallery could probably be got rid of. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 12:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

Im not sure about splitting it yet, this current article could be cleaned and fixed much shorter by replacing those model tables, reducing link section and overall cleaning. -->Typ932 ^T·C 18:00, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

It definitely needs cleaning, but the History section takes up a lot of space. If it won't be moved, then it needs to be significantly shortened. A page with the current history of vehicles + changes I've made and a removal of the endless list of VW cars, is still 86kb. Volkswagen Passenger Cars. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 20:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree the current History section could be used as the basis of a separate "History of Volkswagen" article, but if we did that, we'd have to condense or rewrite it into a shorter version that is still coherent and representative for this article. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 13:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC).

Would you just recommend taking out the current cars section and replacing it with lists? L Kensington (talk • contribs) 05:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a fairly straightforward first step. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 22:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC).

Absolutely. The intro says "This article is about Volkswagen Passenger Cars. For the parent group, see Volkswagen Group." Most of the content here, including the history, belongs to the group level. "Volkswagen Passenger Cars" are Volkswagen branded cars. Not more, not less. BsBsBs (talk) 20:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hitler Fascination

What's with the Hitler fascination?

I took the liberty of removing old Adolf as a key person. He's dead. Died long ago. "Key persons" are by definition living persons who are key to the company. Try getting keyman insurance on someone who died 1945. Both Ford and General Motors list currently serving and living people as key people.

Key person insurance defines a key person as "anyone directly associated with the business whose loss can cause financial strain to the business. For example, the person could be a director of the company, a partner, a key sales person, key project manager, or someone with specific skills or knowledge which is especially valuable to the company." If you are dead, you can't be key.

Please leave it at that.

It wasn't even clear that Adolf was a founder. See above. Let him roast in hell.

If there is a reliable source that an Adolf Hitler currently serves as a key person at Volkswagen, then he can be reintroduced. BsBsBs (talk) 18:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Volkswagen Law

I took the liberty of amending the Volkswagen Law paragraph in the "Relationship with Porsche" section. My main concern was the technicality that the Advocate General does not "rule", but only delivers a non-binding opinion to the court. The error was probably due to the misleading BBC article which I did not remove because it provides comprehensive information on that topic. Instead, I added the official documentation on the case. If anyone has a more accurate article, it should be substituted. Please revise and amend as required. The-hilario (talk) 13:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Model range

The current overview of models only lists models sold in Europe. I recommend adding the models sold in Asia and Latin America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.235.176.195 (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hitler designed the Volkswagen?

So Mr Shirer writes in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, "He himself, it was said, took a hand in the actual designing of the car, which was done under the supervision of the Austrian automobile engineer Dr. Ferdinand Porsche". However, if you consult more credible sources such as The VW Story (Sloniger, PSL, 1980), The Birth of the Beetle (Barber, Haynes, 2003) or Battle for the Beetle (Ludvigsen, Bentley, 2000), then this is clearly overstating the case somewhat. Hitler did suggest various parameters to Porsche - at their first meeting he specified that it should be four-wheel-drive, with a 3-cylinder front-mounted diesel engine and cost less than RM1000 (Ludvigsen, p.15) - but that is far from "taking a hand in the actual designing". To claim that Hitler was involved in its design at the same level as Porsche, Rabe or Kales is absurd. If, perhaps, Shirer was alluding to popular myth at the time, it would be misleading to quote him here without making that clear. Letdorf (talk) 18:22, 27 March 2012 (UTC).

This is repetitive, see various other sections above dealing with Hitler. Hitler's role in the company of Volkswagen is about as direct as his role in the Autobahn system - he promoted it, funded it and got it built. Then the U.S. copied the idea decades afterwards. So our interstates owe a debt of gratitude to Hitler. For that matter, so does our rocket program that put a man on the moon.

BTW, although Nelson's book "Small Wonder" has the same basic idea - Hitler had some suggestions on Porsche's basic design - it doesn't say anything about 4WD or front-mounted diesel engine, but says Hitler wanted it to be air-cooled so nothing could freeze as Germans didn't have garages then. Porsche had worked on a 3 cylinder rotary engine for prototypes of small cars previously, but found it hard for mechanics to maintain. Nerfer (talk) 05:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree if anyone is implying that Hitler shouldn't be credited as an important contributor to the Beetle, whether you call him a designer or VW founder or whatever. No matter what title you give Hitler, establishing the design parameters is extremely important. The early Honda Civics were a challenge to Detroit's larger, less efficient, more expensive cars because of the design parameters. The willingness to believe it's worthwhile to build a car only so big, with only so much power, etc. Other companies lacked the vision to build such a car. The Honda Super Cub was another important example. Takeo Fujisawa was no engineer, but his concepts: price, size, low maintenance, ability to ride with one hand (i.e. no clutch), and the low cost, stupendously high volume manufacturing that were critical to the monumentally influential motorcycle that resulted. Fujisawa, with some difficulty, convinced Soichiro Honda to follow this idea, and Honda handed the engineering details to a more junior engineer. But it was the idea, the design parameters, that separated the Super Cub from the many, many other motorcycles of the time that had nowhere near the same importance, because other motorcycle companies lacked the vision.

If Hitler is the one who decided how much the Beetle would cost, its engine and drivetrain type, and so on, then that's a big deal. Or if Hitler's parameters were changed, then an explanation of why is important. Saying he "just promoted and funded it" is as misleading as saying that "Fujisawa just handled the financing of the Super Cub." --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Nuclear powered Volkswagen

There is reference to an idea/concept of a nuclear powered, brain wave controlled VW proposed by a Volkswagen worker in the 1950/60's at http://specialcarnews.com/?p=292 Would anyone have a better reference than this - hopefully the original news article. I am trying to determine if it was a genuine concept (ok I know you can't have nuclear reactor on the back of your car, but at the time there were several concept cars with that as an idea) or something else. NealeFamily (talk) 19:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I really can't decide whether it would be funnier to string you along for a while and let others join in the fun, or whether I should let you down gently. But I'm a nice guy (for a biker) so I suggest you read the start of the article again. Carefully... --Biker Biker (talk) 20:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Stolen?

"savings of these 336,000 people were stolen by the Russians in 1945 when they captured Berlin." Really? "To the victor goes the spoils"? "Captured" or "seized" would be a factual statement, not an opinionated one. According to the laws of war, the country doing the capturing owns the military and state property of the capturee. Since the company (and it's assets) was owned by and run by the German government, nothing was stolen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.202.89 (talk) 10:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:BOLD - go fix it then! --Biker Biker (talk) 10:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

some discussion of the the 2008 short squeeze, please

See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/globalbusiness/3362913/Porsche-crashes-into-controversy-in-the-ultimate-short-squeeze.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikedelsol (talk • contribs) 15:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Urgent cleanup needed

Ladies and gentlemen, this article is a mess. It purports to cover Volkswagen passenger vehicles, but it time and again describes matters pertaining to the Volkswagen Group, as there are:

• History, with the inevitable never-ending fascination with Hitler and the Nazis. There was no Volkswagen Passenger Vehicle entity during Nazi times, and there was none long thereafter.
• Operations
• Size
• Worldwide presence
• Work-life balance
• Relationship with Porsche, and the Volkswagen Law

…and probably a few more. These chapters all pertain to the GROUP, not to Volkswagen Passenger vehicles. This has been mentioned several times over the past years, and it never has been fixed. The article is quite specific, saying that "This article is about Volkswagen Passenger Cars. For the parent group, see Volkswagen Group. For Volkswagen vans, trucks and buses, see Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles." This serves as notice to discuss and repair. If nothing is done for a month, I will have to do the cleanup myself.

Also, a source is needed for the claim that Volkswagen Passenger Vehicles is a “Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung”. As far as I know, Volkswagen Passenger Vehicles is an unincorporated business unit and brand. Volkswagen’s 2013 Annual Report backs that up:

“Volkswagen AG is the parent company of the Volkswagen Group. It develops vehicles and components for the Group’s brands, but also produces and sells vehicles, in particular passenger cars and light commercial vehicles for the Volkswagen Passenger Cars and Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles brands.” BsBsBs (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Dow Jones VW "AG"

Wir bauen Auto, die auf Amerikanischen Autobahnen ("Reichsautobahn") mit mindestens 300 Kilometer pro Stunde fahren muessen. Bosten nach San Franscisco in 25 Stunden. Wir haben im Jahr 2014 insgesamt 10 Millionen Auto verkauft. Wir wollen jeden US Buerger zum Besitzer der Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft machen, deshalb verkauften wir 300 Millionen VW Aktien an 300 Millionen US Buerger zum Preis von 1 Dollar und zahlen innnerhalb der naechsten 50 Jahre bis 2064 pro Jahr jeweils 5 Dollarcent Dividende. Aus 1 Dollar Aktienwert werden garantiert bis zum Jahr 2064 3 Dollar und 50 Dollarcent. 129.177.121.25 [6] [7] (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

e-smartConnect

Suggest include information about e-smartConnect. --Lagoset (talk) 07:05, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

V-Park

Suggest include info about VW V-Charge. --Lagoset (talk) 07:46, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

The savings of these 336,000 people were seized by the Russians in 1945 when they captured Berlin

Any sources? The story sounds fantastic. The Reich collapsed together with the banking system.Xx236 (talk) 09:30, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101216072143/http://www.volkswagenag.com/vwag/vwcorp/info_center/en/publications/2008/05/chronicle.-bin.acq/qual-BinaryStorageItem.Single.File/HN7e_www2.pdf to http://www.volkswagenag.com/vwag/vwcorp/info_center/en/publications/2008/05/chronicle.-bin.acq/qual-BinaryStorageItem.Single.File/HN7e_www2.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090922221709/http://www.vwvortex.com:80/artman/publish/article_2661.shtml to http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/article_2661.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090217073817/http://www.edmunds.com:80/insideline/do/News/articleId=119559 to http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119559
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090301021345/http://www.edmunds.com:80/insideline/do/News/articleId=122568 to http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=122568
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110226110727/http://www.volkswagen.com:80/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/en2/unternehmen/mobility_and_sustainability0/management___daten/management_und_verantwortung/Umweltziele.html to http://www.volkswagen.com/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/en2/unternehmen/mobility_and_sustainability0/management___daten/management_und_verantwortung/Umweltziele.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110727010238/http://www.formulaveesa.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=62 to http://www.formulaveesa.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=62
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120727185344/http://europeancarnews.com/2011/07/28/volkswagen-in-f1-by-2018/ to http://europeancarnews.com/2011/07/28/volkswagen-in-f1-by-2018/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100826224542/http://www.vw.com:80/vwbuzz/browse/en/us/detail/Twenty_two_drivers_qualify_for_2010_Volkswagen_Jetta_TDI_Cup_final_driver_selection_event/339 to http://www.vw.com/vwbuzz/browse/en/us/detail/Twenty_two_drivers_qualify_for_2010_Volkswagen_Jetta_TDI_Cup_final_driver_selection_event/339

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Top 10 cars

Whilst the link may be correct, the criteria are a bit dubious. If a company continues to use the same name for new platforms of cars then eventually they will get into the list. More relevant I think is the same vehicle chassis/platform, in which the original beetle makes the list but the new would not, and not passat either. A top 10 of keeping the same marketing name for the same size vehicle is not a great achievement. I have revised the paragraph slightly.Mike163 (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

We need better sources than just 24/7 Wall Street, but every top 10 or top 5 list you can cite is going to have the same flaws. The Corrola is going to be #1 but that includes multiple generations. We're not really here to give readers our opinions as to what is or isn't a great achievement. Describe the list criteria factually, without editorializing. If good sources say VW has 3 cars on the top 10 list, then we include that. So the best way to help here is to find a higher-quality source than clickbait lists like AutoGuide.com, Investopedia.com, 247wallst.com, etc. I'd look for industry, academic or book sources rather than websites. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Please create redirect from Emissionsgate to Volkswagen emissions violations

I do not have a Wiki account. Please help me write a redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.141.34.166 (talk) 03:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

 Done --Munja (talk) 12:51, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101009042128/http://www.amda.org.br/assets/files/gASOLINA.pdf to http://www.amda.org.br/assets/files/gASOLINA.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:25, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Wolfgang Porsche, listed as "Founder", was born in 1943... VW was founded in 1937.

In what way does Wolfgang Porsche satisfy the definition of "founder"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.161.251.161 (talk) 12:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110710193215/http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=534 to http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=534

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:53, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Volkswagen of America, Inc.

The hyperlink of this article in infobox is for Volkswagen of America, Inc., not for Volkswagen AG. --IM-yb (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1038/is_n6_v35/ai_13246858
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227203948/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002339093_brazilfuel17.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002339093_brazilfuel17.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090208192704/http://veja.abril.com.br/arquivo_veja/capa_24051989.shtml to http://veja.abril.com.br/arquivo_veja/capa_24051989.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101009042128/http://www.amda.org.br/assets/files/gASOLINA.pdf to http://www.amda.org.br/assets/files/gASOLINA.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.gazeta.com.br/GZM_News.aspx?Parms=2108086%2C604%2C1
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId%3D119559
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId%3D122568
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328123429/http://www.parkers.co.uk/News/News/VW-hybridelectric-cars/ to http://www.parkers.co.uk/News/News/VW-hybridelectric-cars/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150428232126/http://www.sebeetles.com/champion.htm to http://www.sebeetles.com/champion.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110808211605/http://www.acea.be/images/uploads/files/20100615_PRPC-FINAL-1005.pdf to http://www.acea.be/images/uploads/files/20100615_PRPC-FINAL-1005.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725175213/http://media.vw.com/press_releases/volkswagen-group-reports-6-7-percent-growth-in-worldwide-deliveries-in-july to http://media.vw.com/press_releases/volkswagen-group-reports-6-7-percent-growth-in-worldwide-deliveries-in-july
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090818162016/http://news.taume.com/World-Business/Business-Finance/Volkswagen-to-take-a-42-0-percent-stake-in-Porsche-AG-11861 to http://news.taume.com/World-Business/Business-Finance/Volkswagen-to-take-a-42-0-percent-stake-in-Porsche-AG-11861
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160621062535/http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2016/06/2025.html to http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/en/news/2016/06/2025.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151105103847/http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/4A45A5661216E66C85257EF10061867B to http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/4A45A5661216E66C85257EF10061867B

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Volkswagen Group of America

I disagree with making a special case for the VW Group's American operations on the lede because there's no such thing as a worldwide VW Passenger Cars operation separated from the VW Group, and the American subsidiary isn't a exceptional one. The current text misreprents the (primary) source used, because the original text isn't claiming something exceptional is happening on VW America compared with other overseas operations. In fact, there's not a Volskwagen company separated from the VW Group. In most countries outside Europe, there's ultimately a single company (the local VW Group branch) manufacturing and selling all VW Group vehicles (Audis, Skodas, and so on). Some of these marques have separated operations in a few countries, especially in Europe (although still under the VW Group), but the VW marque (at least for passenger cars) has not. --Urbanoc (talk) 11:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Volkswagen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815195037/http://automuseum.volkswagen.de/index.php?id=2&L=1 to http://automuseum.volkswagen.de/index.php?id=2&L=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111011211316/http://automuseum.volkswagen.de/urkunden.html?&L=1 to http://automuseum.volkswagen.de/urkunden.html?&L=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006165850/http://veja.abril.com.br/idade/exclusivo/petroleo/130679.html to http://veja.abril.com.br/idade/exclusivo/petroleo/130679.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Volkswagen name

Can someone source the quote for a prior name "Wolkswagen" ? There is no occurence of it on the german page.

I cannot figure out how the word "Volkswagen" translates into "People's car". 173.86.41.249 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

This isn't an article on the German language. It is broken down at Wiktionary. --Dennis Bratland (talk)

"Volkswagen" literally means "folk's wagon," which, in simple terms, means "people's car." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:1003:6346:B4D5:50AF:4EC:7564 (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Is 'Beetle' a wrong nickname?

After a recent visit to Germany, I realized that what they know as: 'Käfer', the local name for VW People's Car, is: Ladybug, and not: Beetle. I'd say this is important, as feelings elicited by both types of insect are not same. Patent GB570814A -of open and free download in Espacenet, applied in Sept 1943 by Roy Fedden, most known from his research in Sleeve valve, draws a Car exactly with the same arrangement and look as VW's: 'Ladybug'. ??? Salut +

I'm not sure the matter is worth pursuing, but as an alternative to getting on with what I'm meant to be doing ..... I do remember back in the 1960s being told that "Beetle" is British English and "Bug" is US English. But these days I think "Beetle" works just fine in pink-skin-majority countries where English is the first language. But of course if you go to Germany - and especially if you get away from the hotels and restaurants and by doing that manage to find someone who doesn't insist on conversing in embarassingly good English - the word is "Käfer". "Kever" in Dutch, "Coccinelle" in Italian and French. I would have thought the German word "Marienkäfer" would normally be translated into English as "Ladybird" and into American as "Ladybug". And vice-versa in both cases. I've not heard "Marienkäfer" used for a Volkswagen Typ(e) 1. Maybe you encountered a regional dialect? Maybe I don't know as much about the names they give Volkswagens as I'd thought I did. Happy day Charles01 (talk) 13:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

It's like those other languages have a different word for everything. The German word käfer doesn't even appear in this article. It's mentioned over in Volkswagen Beetle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Even on the German language version of VW's website, the car is currently referred to as the English word "Beetle". (source) -- Scjessey (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Volkswagen new logo of 2019

I’ve heard from Logopedia on Wikia that on June 5th of 2019, Volkswagen changed their logo. The logo isn’t mentioned everywhere right now, though it is appearing on the newest Volkswagen commercials. Here’s the proof: https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Volkswagen#2019.E2.80.93present

Now I know this feels a little bit idiotic, but you may think that it looks like a printed version of a Volkswagen logo, well it is, but it’s their official logo. They went back to a 2D logo again, and this is also for their new line of electrical cars.

I think that one of the experts here on Wikipedia should upload and update this article with the new Volkswagen logo. I don’t want to do it myself, because of Wikipedia’s (not-so-good) Copyright Images Rights. I’ve tried to do it one time with updating a different logo, but that failed, so I just wanted to make a quick reminder. REALAreesh101 (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring about the new logo

There's a bit of an edit war about the logo used on the page. The new logo was unveiled last summer so it's been a while. I believe the disagreement on which logo to use in the article is in large part due to the fact that the 3D logo is prettier than the new 2D logo and that people are accustomed to the old logo. These are two pretty bad reasons for not using the new logo. If you believe that we need to keep the old logo, please make your case here rather than reverting to it so that we can get a consensus about it. Pichpich (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Volkswagen Tupka86 (talk) 20:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

That comment does not explain why you're fighting for the old logo and recruiting other Wikipedians to do it for you. Pichpich (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Volkswagen Tupka86 (talk) 12:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Finally this edit-war is history. Tupka86 (and the IP) got blocked: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Tupka86_reported_by_User:Koreanovsky_(Result:_Warned). --Koreanovsky (talk) 19:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Group or brand?

This article purports to be about the Volkswagen brand, and not about the Volkswagen Group which has a separate article. Nevertheless, this article in large parts conflates the group with the brand, down to sales numbers, which, instead of being Volkswagen brand numbers, are Volkswagen Group stats, i.e. the sum of sales of the 10+ brands of the group. For another instance, the diesel issue was a group issue, and not just one of the brand. The depicted “former Volkswagen AG CEO Martin Winterkorn” was CEO of the Group, not of the brand. The “Environment-friendly vehicles” chapter is in large parts about the Group, not the brand. I know it’s hard, but it needs to be fixed and cleaned up.BsBsBs (talk) 17:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Information on the 'Controversies' section of the article should be put into chronological order

In my opinion, the information on the 'Controversies' section of the article should be put into chronological order as the order in one part goes from 2011 to 2015 then back to 2013, which in my opinion makes the section unprofessional. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 09:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Name change

Looks like Volkswagen has announced that, at least in the US, they've changed their name to "Voltswagen", to something something reflect their commitment to electric vehicles. There are some questions to be asked about how to handle this—it should definitely get at least a lede mention, but as long as the international name remains unchanged, a move might be unwarranted. In any case, @Materialscientist: your revert without a comment seems quite heavy-handed—the IP user appeared to be acting in good faith, at least initially, and (admittedly, in an edit message that was otherwise very inappropriate) attempted to provide a source.

Also, it's worth noting this proximity to April 1st—this doesn't seem like a prank, but it's worth keeping in mind. Gaelan 💬✏️ 19:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I would imagine that if we give it a couple of days, better sources - as in better-informed sources - will become available. But the proximity to April 1 does indeed beg a few questions. I read somewhere that they weren't planning to announce it for another month or two, but there was a leak so they had to rush out a quick press statement. Or felt that they had to. Hmmmm. Charles01 (talk) 19:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I actually was planning on checking if there was a move request here due to the "leak" and failed to remember. [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-name-idUSKBN2BM2YJ Reuters just published an article saying, "Volkswagen AG’s U.S. unit will not change its name even after the German automaker issued a statement on Tuesday saying it would..." which leads me to believe that this has a better chance of being an April 1st stunt. You have the leak, an anonymous statement that the leak is true (with some mention that it 'is not a joke', then confirmation that it is happening, and now that it isn't happening. At this moment, the only thing that will convince me this isn't a joke is if "Vol?swagen" continues this into or beyond April 3rd as it is hard to separate the news articles from how close we are to the 1st. --Super Goku V (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)And even at that, official or legal names are not the main criterion for what we name articles. We exclude Inc or AG in article titles except in special circumstances, and we rarely name a biography with a person's full legal name. Even if the company, even all of Volkswagen not just Volkswagen America, officially renamed itself, the only guideline would remain what they're commonly called. It takes some time for a new name to become commonly used, and often people stick to the traditional name and never warm to new names. And even then, Wikipedia is written from a broad historical perspective with no special preference for the present. We have an article at the topic of Volkswagen, spanning eight decades across many countries, and the name of that topic construed broadly doesn't change because in a single one of those 84 years they rebranded.

We may or may not also have a separate article named specifically for a legal corporate entity, a specific subdivision, if that topic merits an article. Often it doesn't. One example is Kawasaki motorcycles, which is a topic that exists independently of the various divisions of Kawasaki that made motorcycles at different points in history. We have an article on the current subsidiary making motorcycles, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Motorcycle & Engine, but it's previous incarnation, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Consumer Products and Machinery Company is only a redirect and the one before that I don't think we even make note of. Chrysler is a topic that is under constant threat of being renamed to whatever they're called this year, when we should remain aware that the topic spans 95 years, apart from formal name changes and corporate acquisitions.

We really don't have to jump every time a company rebrands something. We're looking at the big picture and the entire timeline, not only the last five minutes.

See WP:COMMONNAME, WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

NPR has confirmed that it was an April fools prank. [8] Gaelan 💬✏️ 23:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

How is it an April Fools prank if it was published on March 30th? 71.94.157.155 (talk) 23:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

There is always the possibility that it was a joke gone wrong with someone not knowing about it and spoiling it. Speculation aside, they claim it was, so the matter is moot unless someone wants to add this to one of the April Fools articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Considering the number of articles talking about this prank gone wrong and in the climate of misinformation (they told AP multiple times it wasn't a joke) I think we should include a section about this in the article, under Controversies: https://apnews.com/article/volkswagen-us-name-change-prank-voltswagen-f600024d7e80549539dc90831b41ba3d Stéphane Rangaya (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't need a whole section, but one sentence somewhere, perhaps in 2017–present: Focus on electric vehicles, would be appropriate. Reywas92^Talk 17:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

"Voltswagen" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Voltswagen. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 12#Voltswagen until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)