Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Luxury Cars


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Consensus is that there is no WP:NOR definition of "luxury car".  Sandstein  17:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Luxury Cars

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

A list of "desirable or expensive" cars. How do you define that? I think my car is desirable, but you probably wouldn't. This list is never going to work, and producing it can only be an exercise in original research. Ros0709 (talk) 22:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Give it a chance. This could, maybe, perhaps be an encyclopedic list without a lot of WP:OR, but it was created on 17:49, July 20, 2008 and nominated for deletion on 18:17, July 20, 2008. Let's give it a chance, eh? ~ Wakanda's Black Panther! &spades; / &diams; 22:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete While I appreciate Jethro Thompson's initiative and welcome him to contribute to Wikipedia, this one is covered better by [Category:Luxury motor vehcile manufacturers]. Userfy it if you think that you can offer more information than simply the names of models of cars.  Mandsford (talk) 00:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is another well intended list that is inherently WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Even getting rid of the lead-in describing cars as "desirable or expensive" as these are highly relative terms depending on where you are in the world.  In that sense, it takes on a very First World POV.  If the list were better tailored to something like:  Cars with suggested retail values of over >>insert monetary value here<<, then it is more acceptable.  Given that there is a category that fits the bill, I would rather have to deal with that than a list/article. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Regretfully, as its a good initiative that maybe could work somehow in another context, but just this title requirement makes it terminally WP:NPOV. For eg. there's no universal industry concept of 'luxury'- an example (off the top of my petrolhead) would be UK/European and US perceptions of the Vauxhall Omega aka Cadillac Catera. I can foresee endless such issues with a low chance of resolution and hence an article that's going to end up all templates and Talk Page. Plutonium27 (talk) 01:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Lists and categories may duplicate coverage. I don't feel that it constitutes original research to compile a list like this as all it requires is finding a secondary source (say, Road and Track) to declare the car to be a luxury car and then it goes on the list.  If, perhaps, we were making a list of "ranking of luxury cars from best to worst" or "list of unappreciated luxury cars" or something along those lines, we would be right to declare the article OR.  As it stands the list is exceedingly bare (and includes an open wheeled race car...), so I'm not worried about the list introducing editorial content.  I've advocated deletion of lists in the past without some "unifying secondary document", but I don't think this list needs one.  Literally all we are looking as is "Luxury yes/no" for inclusion.  As for claims of WP:IINFO, I'm not so sure.  IINFO is there to prevent lists of arbitrary classification or minimal standards from ballooning--an article on "Russian expatriates" or an article on "the times someone said 'centipede' on a TV show" would fit under this category.  In this case the list can't possibly (by definition) be more indiscriminate than the List of cars. This one is a keeper. Protonk (talk) 05:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow you. I fully agree that a list and category (or for that matter two articles) can have overlap.  As I noted (and you agree) if we could impose a strict definition as to what constitutes a "luxury car" then perhaps there could be something ... but from what I'm hearing, there is no consensus among the people who want to keep this article that imposing a definition is what is wanted.  You also mention that this may not be considered under WP:IINFO, stating something like "Russian Expatriates" would be indiscriminate.  Actually, I would find Russian Expatriates to be non-indiscriminate:  this is a list for people born in Russia who moved elsewhere.  That's a pretty tight definition.  At issue is what source defines "luxury".  I used to drive a Ford Escort LX (the LX being "Luxury Edition").  I could find many reliable sources that call that old escort a luxury vehicle, and by what people are saying, it would be includible on this list .... but I think we all know that this list is not for Ford Escorts.  You also note that this list can't be more indiscriminate than List of cars.  Cars are fairly easy to define.  I hope I've demonstrated that "luxury" is far more arbitrary and "indiscriminate" than what would be good for an encyclopedia. LonelyBeacon (talk) 23:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep It is not impossible to define luxury cars for the purpose of the list. For example, we might define luxury cars to be those considered by the car manufactures aimed at the high-end market. -- Taku (talk) 07:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If we have to define anything then it is original research. The definition has to appear in a WP:RS. Ros0709 (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Obviously i will say this, as i have created the page, but i believe that it is possible to define 'luxury' as a car aimed at the higher-end market. You may then argue that you can't define 'the higher end of the market'. This debate could go on forever, and people would edit the page all the time, but if people remove/add cars to the list, then the ones that always remain can be defined, by an unofficial ballot (of not removing it from the page), that it is a luxury car. Also, i don't feel that this article/list is really covered in the rest of wikipedia, and so thats presumably why somebody put List of Exotic Cars on the requests list. I think im in the process of fulfilling that list to their wishes, although i have changed the name to 'luxury,' which i feel is less ambiguous. J. Thompson (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * (I hate it when AfD nominators argue against every "keep" !vote so I apologise for doing it a second time here - though this is both a comment and a counter-point) The article Luxury vehicle pretty much concludes there is no definition (that's the counter-point). If, however, this nomination closes as "keep" I think the list should be linked to from there, and that article should be changed so that it does come up with some kind of defintion. My concern remains that such a definition would not be possible. Ros0709 (talk) 17:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, if you look at the history of that article and its talk page you'll see that it previously tried and failed to come up with some kind of definition. Ros0709 (talk) 17:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  08:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  08:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment&mdash;If there is a well-defined selection criteria, this may work as a category. For example, the vehicles need to be specifically sold as a "luxury" car by their vendor and the price tag needs to be in the top quartile of all new vehicles sold in that model year.&mdash;RJH (talk) 17:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. It appears there has been an attempt to create a definition of 'Luxury Car' for another article in the past. This appears to have failed and the difficulty in being able to define what would be included in this list means it will be open to opinion and disagreement. As such, I cannot see this list as meaningful and it should be deleted. Good idea for a try and make a list though - it's just something unworkable :) Evil Eye (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Luxury vehicle article itself has long been the cause of controversy because there is no clear definition of what constitutes a luxury car and any attempt to define it or to list examples is a futile exercise in POV and OR. Creating this list is like waving a red rag in front of every fan boy and car nut and will undoubtedly result in eternal edit wars over whether any particular Volvo/Audi/Nissan/etc is really a luxury car or merely a family car with leather seats. There is no universally accepted definition of what a luxury car is and according to Wikipedia's own policy on Original Research it is not our place to create one.Dino246 (talk) 18:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. It does not cite any relevant reliable, independent sources, and there is no clear or objective definition of "luxury car". --Snigbrook ( talk ) 19:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Comment. Another idea: Why don't we either rename the article to 'List of Sports Cars' or 'List of Expensive Cars' or something similar, that would have less controversy. Either that, or we keep the article, and simply impose guidelines upon it, such as a minimum price, or top speed, or something like that. Theres no need to completely delete the article if the problem could be remedied by changing the name at the top, or including a better introduction paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jethrothompson (talk • contribs) 19:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)  Note: "keep" changed to "comment" as editor has already !voted. Ros0709 (talk) 20:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There is already List_of_sports_car_manufacturers which then leads you to the models. Could you incorporate your list into that? Ros0709 (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * JT, are you suggesting that by arbitrarily creating guidelines this arbitrary list would somehow become less arbitrary? Who decides at what price or speed a vehicle rises above the level of the Perodua Nippa and becomes a Ferrari Enzo? There may be little argument at the extremes but wait till someone's beloved BMW 120 is ruled out for being 3mph too slow and the references start flying that Top Gear magazine got it up to 131 while Autocar listed it at 126 and how can the Opel Tigra be a luxury car if this BMW isn't.. The list, however it is defined, is subjective, unencyclopedic, and can contribute nothing to Wikipedia but unnecessary arguments.Dino246 (talk) 20:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment The list of sports car manufacturers is a list of manufacturers that only make 'sports cars'. This rules out, for example, Porsche or Bentley, which i am sure few people would argue against me calling these manufacturers 'luxurious.' This means that anybody searching for a list or catalogue of luxury or exotic vehicles may be able to use it as a starting point, but nothing else. It is a different list to the one that has been requested that i have made, and therefore you cannot compare the two. Also, i am not trying to encourage conflicts over what is and isn't a luxury car, i am simply putting forward a list of cars that many people would consider luxurious. Perhaps i didn't explain myself well enough in the previous comment. I also dont beleive we should define a set of guidelines for what is, and isn't luxurious. Either we go by a majority vote on one particular car/manufacturer that causes conflict, or we only put vehicles into the list that are identified by their producers/vendors/manufacturers as 'luxurious.' This list isn't attempting to define 'luxurious;' the word's nature means it is, and always will be, slightly ambiguous and indefinite, but the list or article is attempting to give a point of reference to find cars that people consider to be above standard levels of quality with regards to comfort or performance. J. Thompson (talk) 21:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a rather arbitrary classification. It is difficult to define "upper end of market" since automobile markets themselves are different among nations. There are no recognized standards to prevent a ballooning of this list because every automaker promote BS (Boastful Superlatives) about their products. Marketing superlatives and hyperbole such as "luxury" are encountered in almost every car. Moreover, automotive enthusiast magazines are quick to include superlatives such as "luxurious" within articles describing almost any automobile. However, Wikipedia is not to be a vehicle for promotion and advertising. This list only invites controversy because manufacturers, marketers, customers, and fans have an insatiable appetite for BS (Boastful Superlatives) — CZmarlin (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is very relative and can more accurately be displayed by the luxury cars category, it contains a lot of first world POV and could be very controversial. I would say that it should be deleted. —Atyndall &#91;citation needed&#93; 11:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The problem is that what should or should not appear is ultimately a matter of POV. One man's luxury car may be an ordinary car in another's view.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete In the way the list is right now, it would be better off as a category. Tavix (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.