Talk:Alfa Romeo GT

Next-gen
When the next-generation GT is expected? Are there any chances for it to be coupe cabrio? Netrat_msk (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

rear suspension
Same thing as with the Alfa 156, rear suspension is McPherson, no difference how many lower control arms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybsone (talk • contribs) 22:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

not a grand tourer but a sports car
Please bear in mind that the only grand tourer made recently by Alfa Romeo was 8C. GTV, Brera, GT are NOT grand tourers. Cars like Maserati Coupe, Jaguar XK8 ARE grand tourers.YBSOne (talk) 20:16, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

2-door coupé?
That's a hatchback to me! So why not 3-door coupé? Cloverleaf II (talk) 10:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Because despite wht You think, and many others, Alfa Romeo states that this car is a 2-door coupe, see their sales brochures. And i agree as the rear is a half-box and therefore should not be seen as a hatchback, Brera on the other hand is a 3-door coupe and is so stated in sales brochures. Hope this helps, keep up the good work. YBSOne (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Alfa Romeo GT. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120410173807/http://www.alfaromeo.com.au/media/pdfs/Alfa-GT-LimitedEdition-Brochure.pdf to http://www.alfaromeo.com.au/media/pdfs/Alfa-GT-LimitedEdition-Brochure.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:22, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Alfa Romeo GT. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101121092310/http://es.autoblog.com/2010/08/06/alfa-romeo-cesa-la-produccion-del-gt-coupe/ to http://es.autoblog.com/2010/08/06/alfa-romeo-cesa-la-produccion-del-gt-coupe/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927234244/http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/alfa_gtcoupe.asp to http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/alfa_gtcoupe.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131013163324/http://www.trapularenzo.it/it/tecnica/documenti/IL%20MOTORE%20JTS.pdf to http://www.trapularenzo.it/it/tecnica/documenti/IL%20MOTORE%20JTS.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140224132146/http://www.quattroruote.it/notizie/auto-novita/alfa-gt-quadrifoglio-oro-sessanta-pezzi-per-il-giappone to http://www.quattroruote.it/notizie/auto-novita/alfa-gt-quadrifoglio-oro-sessanta-pezzi-per-il-giappone

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Formatting
FF9600@undefined has asked me to comment on why Typ932@undefined has been reverting his edits. As always, I ask both parties to read WP:BRD, which suggests that discussing their differences is more likely to produce a good result than continuously reverting each other. FF9600's changes seem to be: Comments?  Stepho  talk 23:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC) does. In addition, I tend use over  due to shorthand and less code usage.
 * 1) converting   to  spread over multiple lines. I find these much easier for editors because each entry is clearly separated from the other entries instead of being all tangled together, although I personally prefer the equivalent but less cryptic template.
 * 2) Converting '–' to – . I have a slight preference for the Unicode character (easy to see but not always obvious how to type it) but others avoid non-ASCII characters like the plague.
 * 3) Changing ... ... to ... undefined . Both are fine and both are processed by the underlying template code.
 * 4) Addition of more conversions. Always good until the Americans finally go metric.
 * 5) Addition of more nbsp . Makes the wiki code less tidy but does keep the numbers and units together on the final page where the read sees them.
 * 6) Removal of table colouring. Without a really good reason, I prefer to not override a template's formatting. I can't see any really good reason here.
 * Thank you Stepho-wrs for your assistance in this situation. Let me elaborate on what they have stated.
 * This is my point with infoboxes and situations where a parameter has multiple items "listed" out. allows the list to be more easily defined and cleaner in the code.  also uses less vertical space than
 * The usage of & ndash; over "–" deals with it being Unicode (more accessibility) and also & ndash; being a lot easier to code out then searching thru the special characters for the "–".
 * I tend to only convert ... ... to ... undefined in situations where I'm already editing the code. This again goes back to less code usage.
 * Agreed with Stepho-wrs.
 * Keeps the value & the defined measurement together. This also aligns to SAE International's recommend standard of values & their defined measurement staying together with a non-breaking space.
 * Wikipedia has class="wikitable" & Manual of Style/Text formatting for a reason, and going against them creates issues of consistency within the Wikipedia project as a whole & more importantly, accessibility.
 * #FF9600 talk 02:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oops, my point 2 should have been converting '–' to the fully spelt-out & ndash ;  Stepho  talk  04:53, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Cvt and ubl etc dont bother me, but its hard to revert only table for that mess, for tables I have already explained the situtation for FF9600s talk page, so there is no need for second discussion here. So if you want to change other stuff dont change those tables at same time, because its very hard to edit. -- >Typ932 T&middot;C 08:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It would be great if you could explain things here so that other editors can see the entire thread instead of just bits or having to go on a scavenger hunt. Hopefully a few other editors can then chime in.  Stepho  talk 08:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Typ932@undefined: Your "explanation" for the tables is basically summed up to you don't care about the established class="wikitable", MOS:COLOR, & MOS:FONTSIZE standards (which are there to encourage accessibility & standardization across the Wikipedia project) & you think you know better, at least that's how it comes across. You also say that other Alfa Romeo articles all use the same table styling, but when I've done some spot checking, the tables vary by a fair amount from one article to another. #FF9600  talk 14:23, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No they dont, because I have made most of them, most of them have same layout, I dont explain nothing more here, because I have said all things already to FF9600, and this thing isnt only for this article it concerns hundereds of articles, so the right place is not here for discussin it -- >Typ932 T&middot;C 14:39, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Typ932@undefined, FF9600@undefined, how is your edit war going? Is it producing the result you desire?  Stepho  talk 22:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)