Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old man car


 * 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 keep.  Majorly  (o rly?) 21:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Old man car

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - nothing links here, arguably original research (the references just go to car reviews). --Vossanova o&lt; 17:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 *  Delete . Ol' man car, he jes' keep rollin' along?  Actually, a better version of this might be worth keeping (and moving to old person's car).  The reviews do suggest that the phrase "old person's car" has some currency; and we know intuitively what they're talking about.  But speculating about what qualities make an old man car strikes me as trying to catch a moonbeam in a jar, especially considering it relates to elusive questions of style and image. - Smerdis of Tlön 19:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep article as rewritten, and kudos to Uncle G. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - I agree with Smerdis of Tlön. This is perhaps a three-liner for Wikinary, but not for Wikipedia. HagenUK 21:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. It might actually be possible to flip this around, and write it not from the standpoint of "which cars are old people cars", but from the standpoint of "which automobile advertising campaigns have been targeted towards young people, or towards old people?", since at least some literature profs study that sort of thing.  Otherwise I don't see Wikipedia ever being able to pin down a firm definition of "old man car", or ever using anything but flimsy references that mention "old man" in anything but a offhand and arbitrary way.  --Interiot 21:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep after Uncle G's excellent rewrite. Though I still wonder if it might be useful to rename it "Age targeting in automobile advertising" or somesuch, since I'm not sure other editors will resist the urge to use the page to label a given car as definitively "old man's" or not.  --Interiot 00:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep now that the article has been greatly revamped and sourced, though it should probably be renamed to "Old man's car" or "Old person's car," which is more grammatically appropriate. Krimpet 01:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - the references are adequate.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 16:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to wiktionary or Merge into advertising or automobile related articles. Phrase of historic and cultural interest but not suitable for encyclopaedia as an article in itself. Would suggest other participants that AfDs are not to be treated as mere Delete/Keep debates. Give constructive alternatives when topic is not downright nonsense. (possible ideas are here Alcohol_advertising, Cosmetic_advertising. Missing topic is Automobile advertising.) Shyamal 06:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete non notable steryotype--Sefringle 04:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, though maybe move to a better name. I think it's borderline as a valid WP article, but User:Uncle G's impressive expansion has brought it up to about as good a standard as it could get to. I'll give his hard work the benefit of the doubt. --DeLarge 11:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep stereotype used by numerous auto magazines... see references for proof.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 17:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep following Uncle G's improvements (see diff). -- Black Falcon 18:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Effects of the automobile on societies, which appears to be the most thorough WP article on automobiles in society & culture. This replaces my original delete vote, although I'm not withdrawing this Afd as we're having needed discussion.  --Vossanova o&lt; 18:33, 22 March 2007 (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.