Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

1 - 20 of 329 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just looked up the Ridgeline entry in Wikipedia and noticed that they have a warning saying that it violates their rules because it reads like an advertisement, which upon review it does. I've edited it to make it more objective and less of a sales pitch, hopefully the warning will disappear soon when the Wikipedia reviewers get to it. You can see what it used to say be clicking the 'history' tab. Feel free to edit the entry yourself, as that is what Wikipedia is all about.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,392 Posts
Nice write up, Lingered_I. I couldn't think of anything you didn't cover.

Also, Ridge, I enjoyed your RottenTomato write up. You know I love that photo of your Ridge you included with the red cliffs behind it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
"Countering claims, again by purists, that the Ridgeline is not a 'real truck', Honda says that it, through extensive market research studies, concluded that a robust medium-duty off-road capability was most consistent with the needs of the customer and that medium-duty capability readily supports trips to remote trailheads for motorcycle, ATV and mountain bike riding, and camping, as well as the weekend end requirements of home ownership such as runs to the local home improvement store and removal of yard waste."

:eek:

I suggest the following revision.

Many truck purists claim the Ridgeline is not a "real" truck. Honda counters claiming robust medium-duty off-road capability was most consistent with the majority of customer needs. The Ridgeline can readily support trips to remote trailheads for motorcycle, ATV, mountain biking, and camping, as well as the weekend requirements of home ownership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
993 Posts
Truckin' said:
Nice write up, Lingered_I. I couldn't think of anything you didn't cover.

Also, Ridge, I enjoyed your RottenTomato write up. You know I love that photo of your Ridge you included with the red cliffs behind it.
Thanks, I was going to do more write ups, but I'm lazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Awards:

Motor Trend truck of the year 2006
North American Truck of the year 2006
Detroit News truck of the year 2006
Consumer Reports top rated truck
JD Power & Associates 2005 APEAL award for the Honda Ridgeline
Autobytel 2006 Editors' Choice Award: Truck of the year 2006
Automobile Journalists Association of Canada (AJAC) Best New Pickup 2006
On Wheels Incorporated: Ridgeline 2006 Urban Wheel Award for the Urban Truck of the Year
Ridgeline wins Strategic Vision's "Most Delightful" compact pickup award.
best rollover resistance rating of any pickup tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
first-ever 4-door pickup to earn a 5-star safety rating for both front and side impact crash test performance from the U.S. National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Society of Plastic Engineers 2005 Grand Award (composite inbed trunk)
Car And Driver Rates Honda Ridgeline #1 Pickup.
AutoWeek Editors' Choice Award as the 'Most Significant' new vehicle in the show
Maxim Truck Of The Year 2006
Autoweb.com top ten tailgater
AutoPacific 2006 Vehicle Satisfaction Award for Sport Utility Trucks



This should be the default response to any and all Ridgeline haters.. lol.

:cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
for similar it lists:
Chevrolet Avalanche
Dodge Ram
Nissan Titan
Toyota Tundra

huh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
I found the "reason" in the history, someone compared its wheelbase to a 2 door silverado...so my previous 2003 s10 crew cab was full size too because it's wheel base was 123". Following this logic, chevy S10 is a full size pickup...lolololololol and a CRV is a compact car because its wheel base is similar to a chevette. I need to read that book "Who stole my cheese" so I can understand why people get so worked up about the ridgeline.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,035 Posts
A few months ago, I noticed some incorrect information in the Ridgeline's Wikipedia article put in place by someone with the username "CZmarlin". I corrected the wrong information. Then CZmarlin put it back. This went back and forth a half-dozen times. Then, someone else jumped in to "correct" him (or her). Now, CZmarlin (who is obviously very anti-Ridgeline) has essentially ruined the Wikipedia article by filling it full of erroneous and opinionated information. One part of me wants to fight this. The other part tells me I've got bigger things in life to worry about. Just one of the many downsides to a publicly-editable "encyclopedia".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Ridgeline
 

·
Premium Member
2009 Ridgeline RTL (with nav) in Bali Blue Pearl
Joined
·
2,473 Posts
A few months ago, I noticed some incorrect information in the Ridgeline's Wikipedia article put in place by someone with the username "CZmarlin". I corrected the wrong information. Then CZmarlin put it back. This went back and forth a half-dozen times. Then, someone else jumped in to "correct" him (or her). Now, CZmarlin (who is obviously very anti-Ridgeline) has essentially ruined the Wikipedia article by filling it full of erroneous and opinionated information. One part of me wants to fight this. The other part tells me I've got bigger things in life to worry about. Just one of the many downsides to a publicly-editable "encyclopedia".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Ridgeline
I'll keep an eye on it.

What parts of the page still stand out to you as having erroneous and opinionated information? Remember, everything in Wikipedia has to be referenced so if "CZmarlin" is extracting information from other article, the best way to refute it is with another article that supports your view. Otherwise, it's your opinion against "CZmarlin."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,315 Posts
I'll keep an eye on it.

What parts of the page still stand out to you as having erroneous and opinionated information? Remember, everything in Wikipedia has to be referenced so if "CZmarlin" is extracting information from other article, the best way to refute it is with another article that supports your view. Otherwise, it's your opinion against "CZmarlin."
I agree, use some factual info to refute what was given by CZmarlin. But reference 'his' information as an example of a common misconception. At the risk it will p$$ him off more, which is usually the case when it comes to those who want to remain ignorant.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,035 Posts
What parts of the page still stand out to you as having erroneous and opinionated information?
"In comparison, the Ridgeline's V6 engine powertrain offers insufficient power (Honda has never developed a V8 for passenger vehicles[14]), the lack of ruggedness due to its unibody construction, and its relatively short cargo bed compared to standard pickup trucks, all made it unsuitable for contractors."

"insufficient power" - That is vague and relative.
"lack of ruggedness" - That is vague and relative.
"relatively short cargo bed" - No shorter than the 5' beds on other pickups.
"unsuitable for contractors" - Says who?

There are also assorted grammar and punctuation errors along with missing words in multiple locations. Even some of the articles that are referenced contain incorrect information, such as one that states the Ridgeline was designed on a minivan platform.
 

·
Registered
2007 Nimbus Grey Metallic RTL
Joined
·
10,104 Posts
That "article" is riddled with opinion and bias. There is some fact to it, but the opinion is mixed in all over the place. It's pretty terrible, if you ask me. I know Wikipedia is a consumer-fed "encyclopedia" that isn't exactly a credible source, but it's pretty awful when anyone can get on there and slam something they don't particularly like. I say we all get on the "Chevrolet Silverado", "Ford F-150" and "Ram 1500" pages and rip them apart. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,315 Posts
That "article" is riddled with opinion and bias. There is some fact to it, but the opinion is mixed in all over the place. It's pretty terrible, if you ask me. I know Wikipedia is a consumer-fed "encyclopedia" that isn't exactly a credible source, but it's pretty awful when anyone can get on there and slam something they don't particularly like. I say we all get on the "Chevrolet Silverado", "Ford F-150" and "Ram 1500" pages and rip them apart. :)
Tempting. They are so common probably few people bother looking them up. Besides some rip themselves apart going down the road. :D
 

·
Registered
2007 Nimbus Grey Metallic RTL
Joined
·
10,104 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Who cares what wikipedia says about the Ridgeline. Do you think anyone uses Wikipedia to research the truck? I thought that's what this site was for.
 
1 - 20 of 329 Posts
Top