Talk:Ford LTD Crown Victoria

Merging Page?
Should this page be merged with the Ford LTD page? This article is kind of sparse, and the LTD article already refers to this car. This model is still technically an LTD, although the base and Brougham were no longer fullsize. --Sable232 03:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Would probably make more sense to merge it with Ford Crown Victoria Atarivideomusic (talk) 07:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Popular culture and in fiction?
Is it just me, or does it seem like the two should be combined under one heading? I mean, why would you have two separate sections covering basically the same information? Raan0001 17:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Scope of article
What is this article supposed to cover? The info box and parts of the lead imply it's covering all of 1979-1991, other parts reflect the "LTD Crown Victoria" as so named not being produced until 1980.

Yet Ford LTD (Americas) would seem to cover all of the 1979-82 models already.

What's the least confusing way to resolve this? Restrict this article to 1983-91 only? Have it cover the entire generation regardless of naming? Or, as suggested above, merge it with the Ford LTD article since it is, effectively, the same car? -Olds 403 (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I placed a merge tag on the article. My reasoning for merging it into the Ford LTD article is this: from the standpoint of the LTD itself, it retains an unbroken lineage through 1991. The same car, same brand, same body, same name. It's still an LTD; the only difference is that the LTD Crown Victoria was the only model available from 1983 on. This is partly why I wouldn't support merging it into Ford Crown Victoria. Further, since the 1979-82 information needs to stay where it is in order to be accurate, it makes far more sense to continue to separate the pages where there was a complete redesign. -Olds 403 (talk) 02:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Oppose If we are looking at multiple generations of the same car with a couple generations split off into separate articles, then there is no point into merging things back; this is largely what exists here. If there was a case for a merger, merging this article into Ford Crown Victoria does make SOME sense, but these two articles are able to stand alone as well. --SteveCof00 (talk) 09:33, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That's part of the problem - this is split, but not by a generational break. Part of the generation is in the LTD article, the other part is here. Given the fact that it was a very mild refresh and the addition of fuel injection that distinguishes the '83, I don't see a case for keeping a split along that line. - Olds 403 (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2018 (UTC)