Alphabetical Lasts

I'm not sure where you draw the line for "major" auto makers. Wiesmann falls after Volvo in the alphabet. Also, technically the car division of Volvo was sold to Geely Automotive (China) and are manufactured by them. Between 1999 and 2010 it was Ford who manufactured Volvo Cars. Technically at this point Volvo is purely a name and not an automaker. Volvo as an automaker is technically named AB Volvo, and only produces commercial vehicles - trucks, buses, and construction equipment. It really has no place as an answer to an automaker question. There are two manufacturers that produce Volvos, AB Volvo, and Geely. Wiesmann or Volkswagen should be the answer.

"Major" kind of falls into the category of "common." Zongying is a common girl's name in China.

Is a major company one that produces 1 million cars, or 200,000 cars? Volvo only produced about 230,000 vehicles under their AB Volvo name. All heavy duty trucks & buses. I wouldn't say that's common. Volvo is common but incorrectly so for this question. Volvo doesn't make cars, it is just a brand made by Geely. Just Volvo is not an automaker. I'd say Volkswagen would be the easiest answer to use. It's major and common (about 9.25 million vehicles produced).

Yaris.

Yaris is not a brand, is it? It's a Toyota model.

Poor Yugo. Still famous.

It's Zastava, not Yugo

Zonda. Winnebago.

I could only guess Yamaha. The use of "auto" made me think that this included all motor vehicles, which isn't quite correct, but Wikipedia lists Yamaha on its page "List_of_automobile_manufacturers" so it should probably be accepted?

Also this lists XPeng which made over $3b in revenue in 2021, which seems like a major brand in China.

absence of colour is transparent

From the mathmatical articles I am reading, it looks like the status of zero as a whole number is controversial.

Zero is a whole number. There is controversy about counting it as a natural number, but no mathematician doubts that it is a whole number.

@lizzie djee is right, 0 is doubtlessly a whole number but might not be a natural (since it has not negative counterpart)

@LizzieGirl what articles are you reading? There are a lot of inaccurate articles about maths. I'm thinking of making a quiz about it.

I don't know exactly when it was added, but I know for sure it was a word in 2006, so I wouldn't say recently. And frankly, I've never once gotten the opportunity/reason to play the word anyway.

btw it is an onomatopoeia, which I dont see as a word, just the visualisation of a sound, like sst sht or psst. I dont know what the official stance on it is, but this is how I feel about it.

There are two blank tiles in Scrabble. If you use both of them as 'z's you can get it. Exceedingly rarely, though, I'm sure.

Common in the US is not the same as common. Why don't you change it to "common in the US" so we know what you're asking for?

Of course Zoey is a common name. I'm sure I've seen it spelt "Zoe" far more often (and my browser's spell check agrees with me). The clue says common to differentiate it from names English speakers would consider foreign or made up. People these days will make up anything and call it a name. You could name your child Zzumulda.

I've only ever seen it as Zoe in the UK.

@quizmaster, shouldnt it be common female name (not names)?

And it might be different in the uk/us but here Zoe/Zoë is usually used for a girl. And Zoey (can) refer(s) to a boy

I stopped 3,628 people in the main street yesterday and not one person knew 'zyzzyva' so I dispute your statement 'Pretty common knowledge'

Man, that is one sexy cattle!

In science (such as astronomy) it is far better to deal with the latin or greek given names rather than use local names. That way scientists all over the world know what is being referred to. Otherwise the constellation 'Virgo' would be known as .....Dziewica in Polish...... Maagdelijk in Dutch ........ Vierge in French ......... Jungfrau in German .......... अछूता in Hindi ........... and other scientists would not know to what they were referring to in scientific papers etc.