Talk:Alfa Romeo Spider

Spider vs Spyder
A European convertible is called a "spyder" not a "spider". 169.233.58.87 (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC) If you own a Porche. Alfas were spiders period.


 * No Italian convertible is Spider, Spyder is German and maybe others.. --Typ932 T&middot;C 21:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

This page by a USA resident ignores actual history and production in the homeland of Italy. (not germany) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.103.119 (talk) 00:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Alfa Spider NOT comparable to MGB
In 1967 an Alfa 1600 "Duetto" Spider cost US$3,950 while an MGB at that time cost only $2,605. Many people miscontrue that the MGB was the Alfa Spider's closest competitor. My father had a 1966 Volvo P1800 which cost US$3,995 when new. And so if this car is $45 less than the Volvo P1800 and almost $1,500 more than an MGB why do people compare it with the MGB and not the Volvo P1800? Can anyone reply to this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevjgav (talk • contribs) 03:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * In Alfa Romeo Spider Ultimate Portfolio by Brooklands Books, Spider is compared to: Jensen-Healey, Fiat 124 Sport Spider, Austin Healey 3000, Reliant Scimitar, Lotus Elan, Marcos 1600. YBSOne (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Price in the UK
I know this car listed for about 2000 pounds in the United Kingdom. I just don't know the exact number; not that it matters and also my keyboard doesn't have the "pounds" symbol on it. Therefore I need some help from someone who does have the pound sign on his/her keyboard. Thank you--Kevjgav (talk) 16:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You get pound sign by typing ALT 0163, keep alt pressed and press numbers. Check also WP:PRICES, if the price in UK was somehow high or low and relevant to the article, I think it was quite pricey in USA but dont know in if it was in UK? -- >Typ932 T&middot;C 04:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that it was pricey in the American market: US$3,950 was a lot of money in 1967, considering that a Volvo P1800 listed for US$3,995 which itself was priced closer to a Jaguar E-Type than an MGB. And no I don't think that the price in the UK is relevant to this article. After all, WP is not a directory. Therefore I'm not going to add the price in the UK. Thanks anyway though, that was helpful info.--Kevjgav (talk) 03:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Just read the article it says "In the United Kingdom the car's price was close to a Jaguar E-Type." so maybe it has been quite pricey also there. -- >Typ932 T&middot;C 10:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Question: Older Vehicle Encylopedia in much more detail
Cars as a mode of transport are relatively new, early 20th century. However, as the years pass, the knowledge base dies. People who knew a car intimately, including part numbers, how to fix something, parts used in other cars, pass away. The attempts to collect this knowledge get lost as well, as they tend to be in specialist web sites run by volunteers who also die. When they stop paying, the site goes down.

I was the registrar for a very obscure car, the Bristol, and until recently, the factory had a man in his 90's still working, who was there when the first car was built in 1946. The knowledge he held is irreplaceable.

How can I propose to Wikipedia to permit specialist pages under each motor vehicle heading?

FYI: This happened to be prompted by a very specific problem I have this morning. I own an Alfa Romeo Spider that is 46 years old. I needed a simple part, but when I went on the internet, I found about fifty different part numbers, many of which were incorrect, with incorrect sizes, etc. I posted a query on an enthusiast web site, and a guy in his 60's who has been running the site since the 1990's gave me the information. But what happens when he dies? The information is lost.

In another industry - old bicycles, there is an excellent example of such a site, not on Wikipedia, but saved because a bike shop finds it drives business. If the bike shop closes, it may be saved because bike collectors tend to be less scattered than car collectors, but have a look at it, to see the wealth of knowledge that now is frequently referred to in Wikipedia articles. The site is called http://www.sheldonbrown.com/ and it is connected to the late Sheldon's employer, Harris Cyclery in Boston. It's old fashioned because Sheldon did it in an earlier era. He died in 1998 see Sheldon Brown (bicycle mechanic), and his site is kept up by those loyal to him. But the knowledge there is irreplaceable.

The only true safe repository for such knowledge for older technology, be it cars, bikes or PC's is Wikipedia.

At present, this web page on Alfas is very general, nice for a reporter or a kid doing a high-school paper, but of no true value for someone seeking knowledge. What is needed is a policy on retaining historic knowledge in detail. Once approved in a proper format by Wikipedia, the word will spread among the collectors and car clubs that Wikipedia is the place to log the information. While my expertise is limited to two brands, world-wide the knowledge covers almost every car out there.

I realise that anyone can post anything to each page now, but unless this is sanctioned by Wikipedia, it runs the risk of a volunteer editor deleting it as non-encyclopedic. It needs an official approval, and perhaps an official format (History, Key personalities, Parts Details, Cross Indexes, Used in Other Makes, Repair procedures, Work Arounds, Factory Specs, As-original detail photographs). The pages would include details like cross-indexed part numbers, sequence of removal and installation, mid-year changes, factory colours, etc... all the information a person would need to return an actual vehicle to its factory original condition, or to keep it on the road as such things as fuel sources and tyre sizes change (yes, this one is a big problem).

So, I put it out there? Who in Wikipedia can make such decisions? BristolRegistrar (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)