Talk:Lotus Mark X

Mark VIII or Mark IX ?
This article appears to have been merged into two others as a redirect. Whilst not commenting on the merge in general, I think it ought to be at only one of these, not both.

Presumably the Mark IX would be best? Was the X chassis a IX chassis, or a VIII chassis, as shortening the chassis between VIII and IX seems to be about the only major difference. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I performed the merger to save the article as it had been proposed for deletion. According to the contents of Mark X, the car is heavily related to the Mark VIII so I created a sub-section of that article.


 * Should just one article exist, with various sub-sections for each iteration? OSX (talk • contributions) 23:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Why not have an article for each model? That vast spew of prods was bogus anyway. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * If the cars are heavily related, then do we need more than one page? I am not fussed either way, but I am just making the suggestion. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They're separate models, so separate articles are entirely justified. If the argument is that only a handful of X were ever made, and that they were merely a derivative with a different engine, then it ought to be a section with IX, but not VIII. VIII and IX should be separate, as they're a completely different chassis and represent a significant step in the technical sophisitication of Lotus' chassis design. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)