Talk:Targa Tasmania

Australia: Tasmania / Motorsport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Targa Tasmania is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian motorsport (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Tasmania.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Subaru_Impreza#WRX_&_WRX_STI|Subaru STI SPEC C]] The anchor (#WRX_&_WRX_STI) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Contestant cars[edit]

Are these the only cars allowed to compete? If not then this section should be deleted as it is far too long, and lacking in descriptive context to convey what it should, and it creates the illusion of an exclusive list. --Falcadore (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The contestant cars section has been removed in light of the above point. As there are now individual pages for each year of competition this format of contestant car listing is redundant for future reference also. --Dozycow (talk) 14:35, 11 July 2008

Rally format[edit]

This needs to be overhauled as each year sees the evolution of this event. Perhaps a 'current format' and 'changes' style needs to be adopted. --Dozycow (talk) 14:35, 11 July 2008

NPOV[edit]

In addition to this being rather poorly laid out article, there is a strong bias in the introductory section about the original concept of the event, which is not referenced. Needs to be fixed, this is an article about what the event actually is, not what it might have been. --Falcadore (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]