Talk:Peugeot 1007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peugeot 1007 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Automobiles Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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.

I work for Peugeot and we're told to call it the one thousand and seven.

Someone should add the 007/James Bond naming/copyright issue

Class

Wikipedia has the 1007 as a mini MPV but Euro NCAP has it as a supermini. Does Wikipedia classify it as an MPV simply because it has sliding doors? --anon. 68.161.213.208 (talk) 04:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)- Reply - I'm not sure, you'll have to go on the Peugeot website to find out... Darrenm540 (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

"The car also features user-swappable Cameleo interior trim pieces which cost around €250 for a set." Is that section really appropriate? Advertising costs of the parts must surely be breaking a Wikipedia rule? Thanks Jenova20 15:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted that section, also wondering about the Sales Figures at the bottom. That section should name where those figures are from; America, UK, Europe, Worldwide, etc. Thanks Jenova20 15:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"MPV" claim

So far I have been unable to find any reliable sources in English providing significant coverage of the 1007 that directly refer to it as any sort of "MPV", yet alone a "mini MPV" specifically. The term is used on WP:USERGENERATED sites (possibly parroting the Wikipedia article) or in listicles which only provide passing coverage of the car and generally focus on the fact that it had unusual doors, but actual reviews don't directly say "this is an MPV", only "there are ways in which this is like an MPV", and it would be misrepresentative WP:SYNTHESIS of those sources to use those as a justification for unambiguously calling the 1007 an MPV. The RAC say it has "MPV-style tricks" but call it a "hatchback" and a "citycar". What Car? say it has "MPV-style sliding doors" but call it a "small car", a "hatchback", and say that it "is pricey in comparison to other superminis". Auto Express call it a "two-door, four-seater with an MPV look", which is closer to calling it an MPV but still not a direct statement of "this is an MPV". Similarly, the AA say that the 1007 has "MPV-style benefits", "MPV-style drawbacks", and an "MPV-like shape"; but when it comes to actually defining the 1007 rather than comparing it other things, they opt to call it an "urban runabout" (whatever that is). If we are to WP:STICKTOSOURCE, it is at least as much an "urban runabout" as it is an "MPV". Pininfarina call it an MPV, but they're a primary source and often companies will describe their products using terms few others would agree with or even understand. How it is referred to in languages other than English is largely a separate issue that can still be addressed in the article, but in English the evidence generally points away from this car being "an MPV" rather than it merely "sharing certain qualities with MPVs". HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 19:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is currently doing a good job in presenting the different points of view regarding the classification of the vehicle Monettt (talk) 11:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]