Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fastest accelerating SUVs


 * 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.  Sandstein  09:32, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

List of fastest accelerating SUVs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can anybody please tell me the point of this list? A list for cars in general is fine as the media talks about it a lot, but a list for suburban soccer-mom gas-guzzling grocery getters? What is the benefit of this list?

This criteria is purely WP:OR as not all SUVs have 4WD, also pick-up trucks are not SUV. The source cited does not make claim that the BMW X6M or any others are the fastest accelerating SUV out there. Unless I've seen a list for the fastest production sub-1-liter 4-seater city car or the fastest production unicycle, I don't see the point of this list. Donnie Park (talk) 02:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the search list! now added, there were surprisingly many articles covering this subject, although times are harder. The everyday practicality is one of the things that set SUVs apart from Veyrons and Lamborghinis - it's not up to us to discriminate against soccer moms, whatever their juice. We sort the lists by verified timing, not words - the sources don't have to claim "fastest", they just have to record times. We discussed the criteria at length for the main list, and can for SUV list also - and others. Don't like pickup-trucks? Argue their own list. Don't like 4WD? Then set a different criteria for not sliding into race car territory (4+ seats?) - but arguably, all relevant performance SUVs do have 4WD. Don't like the title? Then argue a different title. Be sure to add that city car list too. TGCP (talk) 10:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't thank me. Well, not all pick-up trucks have 4 seats, not even the HSV Maloo R8 and that achieves 0-100 in 4.9 nor is 4WD either, being based on a Holden Commodore. I take that won't make inclusion criteria despite being a pick-up truck. Donnie Park (talk) 02:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: to facetiously connect to the above, I don't like the article, so I argue for deleting it. Seriously though, lists aren't supposed to cover every possible intersection of obscure criteria. Wikipedia is not a cache for SQL queries. Do we have a "Wikipedia is NOT a cache of SQL queries" policy? Maybe we should... WP:INDISCRIMINATE may come close. LjL (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Purely irrelevant non-encyclopaedic material. Class455fan1 (talk) 16:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep (of course, I made it) per WP:Notability, subject is well covered by media which also sets the outline of criteria and a valid categorization (so, WP:NOTDIR doesn't apply) - no OR needed here. "Like" og "Dislike" should not be a valid argument for keep or delete; specific reasons are needed. TGCP (talk) 18:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Goes both ways. Your arguments about "liking" are about as valid as my (facetious) one, i.e. they aren't. I had other arguments though. I'm curious: if those external links are valid enough sources to establish notability, then why are they external links rather than references? LjL (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggest using proper arguments instead of (dis-)"liking" pickups or 4WD - "liking" is not a main argument. The external links (which don't include pickups) kindly supplied by the "Find sources" function above are new, but as some question the rather minute difference between this and the main article, I guess we could work to include them more formally. In due time. TGCP (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Constantly changing, irrelevant, and non-encyclopedic and WP:PEACOCK material originating from the marketing departments and advertising agencies of car makers, as well as their beholden automotive journalists. This is nothing more than a WP:PROMO for companies, rather than authentic knowledge. This list also falls under the category of WP:NOTDIRECTORY (even if covered by select media) and that "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" (WP:INDISCRIMINATE). In short, this list of boastful superlatives (BS) does not belong in an encyclopedia. Moreover, there is already a List of fastest production cars by acceleration, so there is no reason for a separate list for SUV-type vehicles (which in itself are subject to interpretation). If this list remains, then there should be lists of acceleration for every conceivable type of vehicle, such as autonomous cars, convertibles, hearses, busses, electric cars, pickup trucks, etc. In other words, this is pointless list (except to satisfy fanboys of particular auto brands) that will need updating on a constant basis and also contribute to endless arguments as to identical test conditions, use of non-stock equipment or modifications, etc. CZmarlin (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge or Delete - the information is somewhat interesting, and it struck me that it could be added as a table to List of fastest production cars by acceleration.. but then that would open that page up to a table for every other sub-type of vehicle that might be counter-productive. Shritwod (talk) 10:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per CZmarlin. It is difficult even to determine where the limits of the subject lie.Charles (talk) 14:15, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment We can rely on third-party sources to determine what is an "SUV" and not. A75 (talk) 15:02, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Now this will help you, now you know my point that pick-ups and SUV are not the same, not all in terms of chassis or is it that you never seen a car based pick-up trucks like the Ford P100, Holden Ute or the Chevrolet El Camino. What about the Morris Minor, they had a pickup truck in their line-up; if that was fast enough to meet criteria, will it be included? If you look at the Euro NCAP, they class "off-road" and pick-ups differently. Personally, I think the inclusion criteria is totally controversial. I don't know if you remembered the old list of supercars and the supercar article from many years ago but I remembered it before I became an editor, one has since been salted away and the other reduced from what it was then respectively because they were subjective enough to spark arguments like this list will. You know my point, this article is as good as a list of fastest drying paint? Donnie Park (talk) 02:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep looks like nice counterpart to cars and has plenty of references.A75 (talk) 15:02, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Google has almost 70k hits for "fastest SUV" A75 (talk) 17:33, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry but that must be the weakest WP:GOOGLE-type argument I've ever heard, and they're all pretty weak... it gets a full 49 (!) results on Google Books, which is a slightly more reliable test for encyclopedic subjects than all-out "Google search" can be. LjL (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Those 50 includes everything from Popular Science to marketing books? and that is just for the term "fastest suv" A75 (talk) 22:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per CZ & Charles - What next ... "List of fastest growing plants" ? ..... Vehicle speeds (although not fast accelerating) etc are on the individual car model articles so IMHO none of this is even needed, We're an encyclopedia.... not a car magazine!, 5 references isn't plenty either ... It's not even a handful!, Anyway IMHO it's better off deleted. – Davey 2010 Talk 15:17, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment This is a encyclopedia of different topics, including being an Automotive encyclopedia. To fulfill being an encyclopedia of vehicles, and yes, an encyclopedia of SUV's this seems like a reasonable topic for inclusion. Cheers A75 (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Despite including different topics, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia of WP:EVERYTHING. You need to show that the topic is suitable and just implying that any topic is won't do. LjL (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * LJL's bang on - IMHO We don't need articles for every little thing in the world unless ofocurse it's actually notable which in this case it isn't..... – Davey 2010 Talk 20:17, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * SUV's are not "everything" they are a major class of automobile. A75 (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * So are hatchbacks and MPVs .... Doesn't mean we need moronic articles on how fast they accelerate tho!, If you wanna send this shit to Wikia go & knock yourself out but this website isn't a magazine nor is it a fansite (and as I've said speeds etc etc are all on the individual model articles.). – Davey 2010 Talk 22:00, 6 March 2016 (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.