Talk:Ford of Europe

This reads like it was written by Ford themselves. There is a lot of self-congratulatory wording. --128.243.253.113 (talk) 16:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:Yeah, I was about to make a similar comment. It all seems very very apologetic of the brand. The only somewhat negative comment " it started to look a little dated by the end of the decade " is also the only opinion marked with an "according to who" when pretty much nothing of the apologetic stuff is sourced.

:This is beyond obvious and ridiculous. Phoxtrot (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Not only is it not npov but it is totally unreferenced and unverifiable. Propose the article be deleted and started from scratch with verifiable information. Fordline (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

:Well, rewrite the article in your user-space and show it to the community then.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 19:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

:What's your relationship with Ford?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 19:35, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

::Removed the PR like heading, and some statements. Highlighted some claims with fact tags, as blanket removal would butcher the article, but needs inline citation for verification. Added some items from other articles about parts of ford Europe sold off.

::Details of products relating to each plant would make 2nd half of article more encyclopaedic. Last section on history is out of date as refers to future in 2007.

:: The claim above that its totally unreferenced, is a bit out as has several external links and a ref section that was below the ELs (now moved up), needs ref improving with inline cites - BulldozerD11 (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The PR headings hype style headings previously removed have been deleted again. (they had been reinstated with the edit summary as possible vandalism by Fordline), they were not removed by Fordline but by BulldozerD11 - see comment above (and edit history). They are not WP:NPOV and have no citations to back the claims they make. Large sections of the article is still uncited & articles is still very much as if written as a press release still.

The (new) table of facilities looks neater than the old list but for a balanced article should list previous (former) facilities as well, not delete them from the article as appears to have occurred - 79.74.4.168 (talk) 01:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

:What is it that the hype style PR headings? What was not under WP:NPOV? --Tomcha (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The RS2000 (Mk5 onwards) wasn't based on the Zetec engine atall. It was a variotion of the DOHC 2L engine used in the Sierra and the Granada that had a more advanced 16 valve cylinder head. This engine was also used in the Galaxy (in both 2L and 2.3L compacities).

The RS Cosworth was just a 4x4 Sierra Cosworth with and Escort bodyshell but a Sierra florrpan and running gear (the engine had some changes to keep it fresh and up to date). It was nowhere near an evolution, turbocharged version of the RS2000 as that was based on the Escort platform.

If someone would like to make these changes or dispute what I've written here then feel free.

78.105.127.162 (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ford of Europe. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=803624471 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/20090911082043/http://media.ford.com/news/fordbeginstransitconnectproductionatitsnewplantincraiovaromania.htm to http://media.ford.com/news/fordbeginstransitconnectproductionatitsnewplantincraiovaromania.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150412061731/http://origin-corporate.ford.com/our-company/operations-worldwide/global-operations-detail/belgium-assemblyplants-genkbodyandassembly to http://origin-corporate.ford.com/our-company/operations-worldwide/global-operations-detail/belgium-assemblyplants-genkbodyandassembly

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

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

any help on colour coding for ford escort mk4,part number 86AG13B302AA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mars 6669 (talk • contribs) 08:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)