Talk:Saab 9-5

Automobiles Mid‑importance

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

Brands

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Trivia removal

While agreeing that there was to much stuff in this section, that was recently removed, I ask could it be that the safety award details, based on actual crash analyses, might be important information? - Ballista 05:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion carries over into many of the other Saab vehicles, and other vehicles at large I'm guessing. I propose that it it is in fact important. It's not bragging, it's part of the history of the car. If the idea is to list the information about the car, this is pertinent information. How do we define that awards are trivia? It can be cited.Viscouse 21:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know it is hard, and I often oppose such arbitrary selections otherwise, but I would recommend selecting the really most important awards and not mentioning ALL of them. For example, the European COTY title (if the 9-5 got it), would be very relevant, but winning the Winnipeg Tribune March 2002 Premium Smaller Midsize Sedan From Sweden Award would not be ;) Perhaps there is a comprehensive list of awards and other recognition the 9-5 got somewhere in the net, and I would recommend linking to it from external links rather than listing them in the article, which is btw otherwise skimpy at the moment. I would also try to infer some general conclusions as to the awards (trying not to break into OR) and put them in the article, rather than simply listing the awards, which does not provide a layman with much insight. Bravada, talk - 22:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there should be selective inclusion, with some short explanation of each chosen (presumably important) entry. - Ballista 04:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, to end the being edited over & over as different folks decide which awards are trivial & which aren't, is there any templates that discern what level of award is pertinent? I like the idea of linking to awards, but do feel that relevant ones should be included in the article itself. How does one judge the merit of an award? Gov't level awards only (excludes important IIHS), awards listed by the vehicle manufacturer? (hard to keep updated). I think this methodology needs to be determined, and posted so others know which to include/disclude. -Viscouse 14:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for "where used as police vehicle" section

I'm not sure about the utility of that specific section. The "source - getting pulled over" bit is cool... it's nice to see personal experience updating Wikipedia... but it's out of place. Please get a real reference to back up your personal exp. The text I removed:

Surrey Police reportedly use an unmarked Aero model as a traffic enforcement vehicle. source - getting pulled over

Measurements - WTF?

Seriously: I live in the US but since when the world measures mainly in stupid inches? When I'm trying to put in the new 9-5's proper dimensions in millimeter I simply cannot - this retarded inch-based auto-conversion always screws up and I cannot get dimensions right in inches, period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Szlevi (talk • contribs) 06:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

page does not describe the difference between Linear, Aero, and ARC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.72.98 (talk) 12:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saab 9-5. 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/20061005062837/http://www.aspenpitkin.com:80/depts/53/divisions_patrol.cfm to http://www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/53/divisions_patrol.cfm

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.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Saab 9-5. 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) 10:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]