Jump to content

Talk:Tesla Cybertruck

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Negative bias in Reception section

[edit]

Other than the first paragraph, which mentions a high rating from the Car and Driver magazine, the rest of the points listed in the section are all negative, including some utterly insignificant points not worth including in the article, such as "Fortnite users quickly pledged on social media to target in-game anyone who used the virtual Cybertruck vehicle."

There is no mention of CT being the best-selling ev-The truck and nearly outselling all other EV trucks combined. There's been quite a lot of praise for the technological upgrades. CT has been seen in use by many notable celebrities, which I believe is noteworthy. Owner reviews are also mostly positive, despite what the article seems to convey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IlyaHolt (talkcontribs) 11:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Best selling isn't the same as well received.
The cyber truck can sell a million units a day but the mechanisms are still faulty and dangerous. 49.180.1.98 (talk) 07:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The thing has been recalled several times for a reason. 49.180.1.98 (talk) 07:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Best selling isn't the same as well received." - am I really reading this? How biased Wikipedia has become? 87.17.241.189 (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's worth pointing out that 49.180.1.98's comment reflects their own bias, not Wikipedia's, as they have made no contribution to the actual Tesla Cybertruck article. Largely Legible Layman (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sales numbers and use by celebrities are not evidence of negative bias in the article - the sourcing situation is. Cortador (talk) 07:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree. Best selling $100k+ vehicle. Best selling EV truck. And 3rd best selling EV overall currently. These are incredible good trends for ANY ev and implications for the switch to EVs from ICE. It seems this would be applauded for any other car manufacturer. Instead this section is overtly reporting negative aspects. Which every product has, but to not include much else, is an issue. TheSteven97 (talk) 04:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add A Fact: "Tesla halts orders for cheapest Cybertruck"

[edit]

I found a fact that might belong in this article. See the quote below

Tesla has stopped taking orders for the least expensive version of its Cybertruck, which is priced at $61,000, while making the $100,000 version available for immediate order and delivery as soon as this month

The fact comes from the following source:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-stops-taking-orders-cheapest-002525641.html

Here is a wikitext snippet to use as a reference:

 {{Cite web |title=Tesla stops taking orders for cheapest Cybertruck, offers $100,000 version now |url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-stops-taking-orders-cheapest-002525641.html |website=Yahoo Finance |date=2024-08-10 |access-date=2024-08-10 |language=en-US |quote=Tesla has stopped taking orders for the least expensive version of its Cybertruck, which is priced at $61,000, while making the $100,000 version available for immediate order and delivery as soon as this month}} 

This post was generated using the Add A Fact browser extension.

– SJ + 04:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source not used in article? ProfGray (talk) 17:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recalls

[edit]

How many recalls has Tesla cyber truck had so far? 2600:6C48:6800:2F6:6C58:AEF0:A78F:9092 (talk) 04:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the article? There is a table describing 5 recalls. --ZimZalaBim talk 05:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'low-resolution' definition

[edit]

Tesla Cybertruck #Design / 2nd paragraph / 3rd to last sentence reads:

"I had this simple idea right in the beginning: this exoskeleton idea, a low-resolution-looking type of truck"

Neither in wikipedia nor in wiktionary could I find a definition which seemed to fit.

Where can one find THE definition?

2A02:3100:5EF4:E100:19E:C552:261:3464 (talk) 05:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It comes from computer image resolution where an image is made from a low number of pixels and therefore has no extraneous details.  Stepho  talk  06:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks,  Stepho .
So "having no extraneous details (in-dependant of pixels)" is kind of a *new* usage/definition.
I think if one would just link "resolution" to image resolution (without your explanation), this would still leave (at least some) readers in a puzzle.
So your explanation should be added to the article,
as well as the new meaning to Resolution (disambiguation),
but I don't know a reference, in case someone would insist on a reference.
2A02:3100:5EF4:E100:800D:636F:DBE4:D5C6 (talk) 07:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dealership fire?

[edit]

https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2024/12/31/cybertruck-catches-fire-dekalb-county-tesla-dealership/

Might be added to the "Safety Concerns" section? Tim Vickers (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rm loaded word in the intro

[edit]

It described the body design as "controversial" which is a loaded word and distracts a casual reader so I changed that to "unusual", conveying the same idea without the overtones, as well as being more objective as opposed to a matter of opinion. 93.92.55.244 (talk) 18:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too fussed either way, but the body style polarises opinion. Some love it for being different. Others hate it for being weird. Polarised opinion sounds controversial to me.  Stepho  talk  05:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like "unusual"; it seems safe, neutral, objective and provable. "Polarisation" seems to me more of a media invention because "drama sells". Anyway, if the vehicle came with a GPMG mount or it was built by child labour that would certainly be "controversial" and "polarising", but it's just aesthetics, it doesn't need loaded words. 37.188.179.181 (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]