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
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
I could swear to a relative degree of certainty that no Geminis have been on the streets in the Philippines for at least 10 years, although accurate about it being popular in the 80's and early 90's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MENDOZA I (PH) (talk • contribs) 06:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Guigaro denying design credit for Gemini/Spectrum[edit]
Is there a reference for this? I don't recall him denying credit at the time, he did take credit for the nearly identical (but more awkward) Gen 1 Hyundai Excel, and it is currently listed as a project on his website:
I'm not certain how best to bring this into the article, but the Gemini had an exceptionally unique advertising campaign, at least in Japan, which involved several dozens synchronized car stunts. The commercials pop up online sometimes when unique commercials are being discussed. Here's a youtube link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsL5W3myU5YElijya06:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Don't Merge, do link the articles, do not merge them. The Holden Gemini page and Isuzu Gemini page contain very different information, with the Holden Gemini page containing information relevant to its release in Australia that is not relevant to the Isuzu Gemini page, and would therefore lack sense if included on there. Tinkstar198510:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't the Holden article say, exact duplicate of the Isuzu Gemini, meaning rebadged Isuzu Gemini, for that case, that is the reason for merging the article. Please refer to the discussions at WP:CARS. Willirennen (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So you are suggesting there should be 64 different pages on the Mini, reflective of how many countries it was built in and the potentially unique quirks in each country? --Falcadore (talk) 09:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, I'm in favour of merging the two articles. Perhaps if the Holden Gemini was sufficiently different from the Isuzu Gemini, for example, like the Ford Laser was different from the Mazda Familia it was based on, but the changes were relatively minor. A lengthy Gemini in Australia paragraph on the Isuzu Gemini page could perhaps be most appropriate. Certainly the content lends itself towards expanding the 1974 section of Isuzu Gemini which is quite thin. What is sufficient grounds for an independant article is to explain how the Holden was different to the Isuzu, which has not really been done. The diesel engine might be the best defence as I do not believe that was offered in the Isuzu. The problem is unnecessary duplication of information. If wikipedia did not police issues of duplication of articles there would be the potential for a massive blow out in content. --Falcadore (talk) 06:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would hardly say that a completely new interior (minus dashboard), different gearboxes, differentials, brake system, cluster instruments, tail lights, side strips, side impact bars, wiring, suspension and many other changes would render it minor. There were very many changes to this vehicle for the Australian market which were not used on the Japanese model, I would be here all day if I was to list them all. It was a World T Car as you know, each country that received the T car was to modify them for the local market, which is what Holden did even if some consider the changes a downgrade from the Japanese models, they are still there and plenty of them.
Yes some of the changes were supplied from Isuzu in Japan, but they were also never used in the Japanese models. The car was not a direct import, parts and machinery were sent over from Japan for us to build the car, but a lot of local parts were also made and used in the vehicle. Even though the resemblance is very similar to the Isuzu Japan model, most of the parts (including the metal it was made with, BHP Steel) were sourced, pressed and assembled in Australia.
In addition, almost all technical specifications and references from the Isuzu Gemini would be useless when compared against the Australian model, due to the large variations in electrical system wiring and various other component tensions.
In my personal opinion, having owned and restored a large number of these cars over the last 10 years, there is far too many changes for it to be considered a direct re badge of the Isuzu model. A decision to merge the two articles would be based on misinformation and not true to the history and facts surrounding this vehicle. There is much more to a car than just exterior looks and the type of engine it uses.
220.238.86.101 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So your belief is that there should be a seperate article on the same cars with different interiors? How many different interiors and mechanical specifications do you think there are for say... Volkswagen Beetles, or Minis, or Ford Escorts. You are advocating a different article for each of them? You are essentially advocating a ten fold, at least, increase in the number of Wikipedia articles, splitting and diverging every car in the world that is sold in more than one market. How does this serve best those looking for information on such cars if there are 67 different articles on the same car?
Is the car the same design? Yes. That is where it begins and ends. Different engines, drivetrains, seats are essentially, accessories. A British Mitsubishi Carisma GSR has substially differed systems to a bog standard Japanese market Mitsubishi Lancer. 4WD against front wheel driver, turbo-charged, side intrusion crash protection etc, etc but they are covered in the same article. The wikipedia standard on this is clear. Unless there are substantial differences, different to the point that is it a completely different car with the same name - for exampe, Ford Escort (Europe) and Ford Escort (North America) then they should be merged. --Falcadore (talk) 03:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of that logic, you should also merge the Opel Kadett C into Isuzu Gemini also, as they used the same body press as Isuzu and Holden did, they made some body changes and a different driveline, but many parts are still interchangeable. Your mind set and appearance to myself and other members in this talk article seems rather rude and verging on abusive, in resistance to accept opinions other that yours. Show some respect for other peoples opinions and knowledge in this area, then take on board their suggestions.
How many Gemini's have you built or worked with over the years to see the differences first hand? Can you show me where any major difference lies in the Gemini other than the engine, body press and some small exterior components? If you do your research even further, you will see Australia even contributed some local parts for the later Isuzu Japan models. So why in this respect should the Holden Gemini be directly classed as an Isuzu car? Half the world used their body presses in Chevettes and Kadetts, does this mean seeing as the original press and body work was done by Isuzu, including about the same amount of supplied parts and technical information, that these cars also are Isuzu Geminis?
My final opinion, link the T cars together, but leave each countries model alone. This is how the car was originally designed as, a world car. Each country makes their changes for the local market, but it all originates from the Isuzu body shell as per the deal with Isuzu and GM at the time.
If you wish, I can develop the Holden Gemini page much further, to include the major changes Holden made for the Australian market, this will help expand the article much further and make it more Holden specific. If you are set in your stance however, I do not see any point in contributing to an article which may become obsolete in the near future.
My intent is not to be rude, or even to offer an opinion, merely to point out you are asking for an exception generally not granted to any other car of similar position.
The reason the Opel Kadett is not merged into the Isuzu Gemini is because the Opel Kadett has a divergent history beyond the Isuzu Gemini, dating back to 1937, and has continued to be a seperate car after the T-car project. The Opel Kadett C is not considered distinctive to merit its own article. Similarly the Holden Astra has it's own article because of its divergent history covering the Nissan Pulsar and Opel Astra meaning it could not be merged into any one article, whereas the Holden Vectra does not have its own article because it's entire history has been as the Australian version of the Opel Vectra. If the Holden Gemini had a version which was not a locally adapted version of an Isuzu Gemini and had come from another model stream, then that would be grounds. That is not intended to be rude, or my opinion, but a reflection of Wikipedia standard. Since your objection is with Wikipedia standards more than anything else, may I recommend you take up the discussion at the Automobile Wikiproject? - here at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. I will take no further action, and defer to their judgement if you believe my viewpoint is that offside. --Falcadore (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The case of the Holden Astra was the subject of part of the debate on WikiProject Automobiles. It is a MUCH trickier case than this one because the early model year Holden Astra was a Nissan Cherry where the later ones were Opel Astras. Even in that extreme case, I'd recommend a merge of article content into the Opel/Nissan pages and demoting the Holden Astra article to a disambiguation page that says "for cars earlier than XXXX see Nissan Cherry for later cars, see Opel Astra".
In this case, the effort involved in duplicating and maintaining (maybe) 95% of the content on these two articles far outweighs adding the 5% of information that's unique about the Holden into the Isuzu article. I understand that the principle maintainer here is an enthusiast - but sadly, enthusiasts are the worst possible judges in these cases because they have so much emotional investment in keeping the articles separate. The set of differences listed above are hardly relevent at the detail level of a Wikipedia article. Wiring harness differences? Oh, please. I can't recall any car articles that I've seen that describe the wiring harnesses! Most cars have different harnesses in different markets - we don't write 30 articles about the Mini - yet my Haynes manual has 30 pages of wiring diagrams corresponding to various versions of the car. The same thing applies with gearboxes and differentials - those things can be summarised in two sentences. Furthermore, listing the differences between the Isuzu and the Holden in one place provides an interesting insight onto what made the base car 'work' in both markets - and that is a valuable thing to include in the encyclopedia. Besides, there is a clear consensus in the voting above - so yeah - we need to merge these two articles. SteveBaker (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think go ahead, however try to separate the differences between the two markets, I am unsure how to reword the article to achieve this however once the article is merged I will take note of how it is presented and make further additions. I guess the debate comes from what wikipedia specifys, and the personal option of the car owners, as the Gemini was such a popular car in Australia, even more so than in Japan.
What would you guys think about having a World T Car portal type page, listing some history behind the T series project and having referals to each cars page that was built from it? There seems to be a lot of references behind each car being from the GM-T series project, however nothing on the project itself.
Virtualr84 (talk) 14:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As the person that made the page in the first place, I think that you should either merge all the Vauxhall Chevette, Chevy Chevette, Opel Kadett, Pontiac 1000/Acadian, Isuzu Gemini and Holden Gemini pages together, or leave them all alone. I'd rather the latter. To be honest, I didn't realise that I caused such a stir.
Does anyone have reference to precisely how the “PF50” & “PF60” designations fit in to the history of the first generation Gemini? The article does not currently mention either term and I can’t seem to find anything definitive elsewhere to use as a reference. GTHO (talk) 08:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the links on this page (Pontiac Sunburst, Geo Spectrum) go back to the top of this page, not to another page...if there isn't a specific article on these cars, why are they links? 162.136.193.1 (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What it indicates is that a Pontiac Sunburst is an Isuzu Gemini with a Pontiac badge on it, and that as such, the Pontiac Sunburst is not sufficiently notable to warrant a spereate article. --Falcadore (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In Poland we had 1.8 diesel (chassis code PFD60) avliable only as sedan and only as 1982 and 1983 models. Those vehicles were very expensive but also reliable. The car was sold by Pewex - a chain of hard currency shops with imported goods. Gemini was quite succesful, because it was one of a very few diesel cars avaliable over there. Diesel petrol was extremly cheap and widely avaliable without any ration cards those times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szymilk (talk • contribs) 19:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is incredibly interesting information, I never heard of the Gemini being offered behind the "Iron Curtain"! Are there any sources available? I would love to include this little tidbit in the article. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 07:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added archive links to one external link on Isuzu Gemini. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified 2 external links on Isuzu Gemini. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
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.
