Talk:Chevrolet Tahoe

Automobiles Mid‑importance

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

Michigan Low‑importance

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan 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.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removal of redundant info

I'm kind of a newbie at cleaning up articles, as this potentially unnecessary addition to the talk page might be evidence of; however, I have removed a grossly unformatted and redundant "paragraph" of information that had been added under the 2000-2006 Tahoe/Yukon engine infobox. The infobox itself has links corresponding to both available engines, therefore the paragraph (even if formatted properly) was not needed and was nothing more than clutter. Illini407^talk 15:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Will the 2007 generation of the Tahoe still provide a 9-passenger version of the Tahoe? --SuperDude 22:48, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When will the 2008 hybrid version be out?

Check the offical Chevy Tahoe site. Regards, Signature ^brendel 05:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did- I didn't see anything about the 2008.

Well the first question as well as my answer was in regards to the '07. The '08 Hybrid version may be out in late 2007 according to this edmunds.com article. Signature ^brendel 06:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Chevrolet Tahoe / GMC Yukon

Any objections to inclusive renaming? --matador300 04:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea, I always found it kind of strange that you had to go to the Tahoe page to read about the Yukon when we have several pages with a double name. Signature ^brendel 15:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've got an even better idea. Why not have two different articles? Even if the two vehicles are very similar or even exactly the same, they're two different cars with two different histories, and having them both in one article makes it difficult to use the article for research on just one of them. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 20:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lexus ES330 does not redirect to Toyota Camry. Sole Flounder (talk) 03:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seating capacity of different generations

Could somebody talk about the seating configurations and capacity of each generation? I'm not sure if the late 1990's had 9 passenger options, etc.

i dont think so, the k5 blazer only seated 5 or 6, so i dont think so —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.254.44.246 (talk) 04:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

68.40.43.141 15:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Politician controversy

The article should include controversy on politicians who condemn but drive the vehicle.

The article already discussed this car model in connection with The Apprentice. Are Congressman and their controversies less notable than an old TV show? On a national radio broadcast and later in various newspapers the other day, it was reported that a US Congressman was caught owning and driving this car model despite calling himself an environmentalist and campaigning to outlaw . I added three sentences to this article... Sentence 1) he owns and personally drives the GMC Yukon; Sentence 2) His public and voting records condemn the very model; and Sentence 3) A summary quote direct from Seattle Times. One admin apparently doesn't want the facts about this to get out, and keeps deleting the three sentences. I didn't know this until this morning when I go to see if anyone else added any more newspapers to the list of references discussing this, and find that this admin is single-handedly complaining about this, apparently because of some vested interest. Rather than handle the matter properly, he ignores his obvious conflict of interest, makes unfounded accusations, and locks the article so that only admins can edit it. Well he can't lock the Discussion page, and I want you to know the truth! --24.187.199.178 (talk) 19:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The issue you raise is more relevant to large SUVs in general than this particular one. It wouldn't matter whether this politician were driving a GMC Yukon or a Ford Expedition; there's nothing particular about this SUV that makes the issue important to an article about this SUV. That's why it was consistently removed from this article. IFCAR (talk) 20:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, also the accusations of "obvious conflict of interest" are entirely baseless. I have zero connection with GM or GMC or any politician nor have I taken any action to indicate this. I did not lock the page to anonymous editing (done by another admin), although I did invite the IP to bring this issue to the talk page. Which the apparently refused to do until they could no longer edit war. --Leivick (talk) 21:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the model the politician was driving, he wasn't driving any other model! If a reader doesn't know the exact model, how could the reader compare its statistics with what the politician had voted for or against? How is this news event different from The Apprentice if the only interesting thing there was the environmentalism controversy?

No one asked me to discuss this here; *I* chose to discuss rather than react in a kneejerk manner. The admin with the conflict of interest here is Ckatz. It's unbelievable the way he chose to handle this. Should an editor lock an article without once trying to discuss the matter first? Should an editor who is in the thick of a disagreement recognize that he has a conflict of interest and ask another admin for unbiased input? --24.187.199.178 (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This material is clearly more relevant to the politician in question than to the car. It does not belong here in this article. Friday (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to page protection, the article was semi-protected to avoid the demonstrated problem of a rotating series of IPs adding material not directly related to the article. The IP's spurious accusations of censorship, conflict of interest, and the like serve only to distract attention from their pattern of behaviour. There is nothing preventing them from discussing the matter here and seeking consensus. --Ckatz^chat _spy 21:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just reiterate the 'circle the wagons' mentality here by means of an example.

A hypothetical politician might condemn "terrorists" but then be photographed socializing with Osama Bin Laden. Your reasoning is that the only proper place for that account is on the politician's article, and it would be out of place on Osama Bin Laden's article? Frankly, that makes no sense to me. Please explain, or explain how my analogy is unanalogous. --24.187.199.178 (talk) 21:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In such a case, the info may well belong in both places. In this instance, it does not. If the above arguments are not convincing to you, I doubt further explanation will be. So, please, stop re-inserting this material here. Friday (talk) 21:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Lead, "including any notable controversies". Perhaps this could be included in the lead, with a link to a more general SUV article, where the full controversy could be included. I assume that the reference given is correct, and not misinformation? if so, it should be considered as notable; as "the IP" here said in an edit summary, "How often is a particular auto model the focus of a Times news story?" HarryAlffa (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The automobile is not the focus of the Times article. Its focus is a politician who mentioned the automobile. IFCAR (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articles[1] main subjects are threefold I think;

David Wu
National Republican Congressional Committee
Use of a SUV

The political "gotcha" attempt was the contrast between "green" policy and "non-green" SUV's. The newspaper article mentions the type of vehicle. I agree that the main focus is not this particular SUV, but as per WP:Link & WP:Lead, I think a mention and a link to a section in SUV or the David Wu article (or both) passes the test of sufficient notability & controversy.

I've recast the text so that it is neutral, interesting, notable, accurate(?)

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) stirred controversy in 2009 when it released video of Oregon Congressman and self-described environmentalist David Wu driving his own GMC Yukon on YouTube.^[1] He has voted to require fuel efficiency standards of 26 mpg in 2005 and of 27.5 mpg in 2007 for passenger automobiles and sport utility vehicles^[2]; the best mileage General Motors has reported for any GMC Yukon, the model he was driving, is 21 mpg.^[3] The Seattle Times quoted NRCC spokeswoman Joanna Burgos as saying, "What it shows is that David Wu tries to be one person when he's back in Oregon, and a different one when he's in Washington, D.C.", although she acknowledged that both Republicans and Democrats drive SUVs. The Seattle Times also quoted spokeswoman Julia Louise Krahe countering that he bought the black GMC Yukon eight years ago so that it could carry his dog, a couple of strollers and his family, and that he and his family regularly practice recycling in their household.^[4]

It would be nice to find space for it somewhere on Wikipedia! HarryAlffa (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The text (or a variant of it) already is on Wikipedia, at David Wu#Environmental controversy. That's the point that people are trying to make above. --Ckatz^chat _spy 18:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't. That text can't accurately be described as "a variant". HarryAlffa (talk) 18:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is now. I've changed that text for neutrality, & provided a link in the lead of this article. I hope this satisfies editors, WP:Lead & WP:Link. Cheers. HarryAlffa (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is only a controversy in the dreams of some politicians who hope to embarass another politician. It has nothing to do with the car. If a notable figure were to seriously rant about how a particular car is a monstronsity (perhaps a claim that it is unsafe), then such a "controversy" might be appropriate in the article on the car. But no one reading this article cares about the nonexistent controversy. Accordingly, I have removed the material. Johnuniq (talk) 23:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tahoe original usage

i used to have a 1988 s10 blazer and its trim level was Tahoe. it said it across the dash in factory trim, it said it on the options list as Tahoe equipment, much like the silverado equipment on full size trucks. tahoe was a trim level on the s10 blazer, now known as the trail blazer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.254.44.246 (talk) 04:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

how can i find out the name of a color of paint on a tahoe that i

have?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.109.167.177 (talk) 00:58, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

VIA VTrux SUV

VIA Motors has announced that they are planning to make a model called the VTrux SUV, which is based on the Tahoe. Can you please add this to the article? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.54.191.225 (talk) 19:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merging Suburban and Tahoe Articles

The idea of merging the Wikipedia articles about the Chevrolet Suburban and Chevrolet Tahoe is not a good one, as both articles are too long to read, given that the Suburban should be the primary article (the Tahoe section would have to be combined with the ninth to twelfth generation sub-sections) plus the merging would mean taking out too many sources as the vehicles do have different histories. Unless there was a proposal to give the GMC Yukon its own article (which would be a better idea and could reduce the excessive amout of information), then there would be a reason. They should be kept as separate articles. (Robert Moore) (talk) 11:53, 09 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose A merged article would be awkward and confusing to readers. Many sentences would have to begin, "In the case of the Suburban..." or "In the case of the Tahoe..."Tetsuo (talk) 05:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Chevrolet Tahoe. 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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} 18:33, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Chevrolet Tahoe. 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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} 18:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is THAT possible?

"1992-2000 (GMT400)
Also called
Chevrolet Tahoe (Bolivia and Chile)"
Chevrolet Tahoe also called Chevrolet Tahoe? What the hack? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.93.166.149 (talk) 18:27, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assembly in Seoul, Jakarta and Dover?

Even though CKD assembly of the Tahoe in South Korea and England could eventually make sense, the sales volume in those markets and regional exports for other countries where a full-size LHD could find its way don't seem to justify that operation. When it comes to Jakarta, since LHD imports haven't been allowed in Indonesia at least since the '60s and the 1st generation of the Tahoe was the only one with an off-the-shelf RHD setup available due to the GMT400 Suburban counting with that option catering to the Australian market, it doesn't make so much sense that subsequent generations could have been assembled in Jakarta. Is there any documental proof of that, or at least some picture of their dashboards? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7F4:C480:FBC0:0:0:0:1 (talk) 21:14, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chevrolet Tahoe. 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, 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: 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Available markets

Hello everyone, I edited the page specifying that both the Tahoe and Yukon versions are not available in certain markets such as Iran as the page just says "Middle East". But Vossanova keeps reverting my edit stating " "except Cuba" and "except Iran and Syria" are generally implied. American cars haven't been sold in Cuba or Iran for quite some time." And "again, such information applies to all American cars, not just the Tahoe/Yukon, so it should go on company pages or automotive industry as a whole" But not everyone will be aware of that and not everyone will go or even know to go to the company and automotive pages to find out. And it just leads to miss-information. I left the user two message on why it's Unnecessary. But the the user is not being cooperative. 2600:1700:AAC0:5D50:A5A9:ED8A:5589:C987 (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An exhaustive listing of which nations the vehicle is or is not available in is excessive and outside the scope of a Wikipedia article. A general listing of broader regions is sufficient. The idea that the average person would assume "North America" as a sales market includes Cuba is untenable. --Sable232 (talk) 16:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Video at YouTube

[2] OnTheIssues.org, linked from Wu's website

[3] GMC Website

[4] Seattle Times, October 8, 2009

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]