Talk:Volkswagen Karmann Ghia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia Project Automobiles, a collective approach to creating a comprehensive guide to the world of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you are encouraged to visit the project page, where you can contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Sports car?
Hmmmm... the beetle of the time, and was certainly seen by many as underpowered. But while the Mark II Sprite addressed , and often seem to forget that the vast majority of sports car owners will never drive on a race track in their lives.
Not quite sure how to handle this. As the sports car article says, where exactly to draw the line is fraught with difficulty. The Honda probably qualifies, and the Celica (even the early 1600) might just scrape in. Andrewa 20:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Hmmmm again... neither the Prelude nor Celica articles are in Category:Sports cars, although both article introductions clearly (and accurately IMO for the Honda at least) describe the vehicle as a sports car. Andrewa 20:17, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] not a sports car
Even VW in its marketing was euphemistic in its use of "sports car"
842U (talk) 11:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sources
The article could really use sources. 842U (talk) 11:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
If I don't hear from anyone on this, I'm going to start restructering the article around referencable information. The whole "English Pewter" thing sounds interesting, but it's got some puffery in it that sounds suspicious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 842U (talk • contribs) 15:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Karmann Ghia in popular culture
The "... In Popular Culture" section should be deleted. It is only a list of movie/TV appearances, which did not contribute to either the development or (unless proved otherwise) the sales success of the car. Not only that, the section was renamed from "Trivia" to "... In Popular Culture" here. You can find a discussion on trivia sections in automotive articles here, here,here and here. --Pc13 (talk) 14:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know... they are factually based and referenced. The car's popularity and social importance ARE reflected in this section of the article. 842U (talk) 17:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Not really, that's just a list of film appearances. Are they even relevant to the movie's story or plot? Because they are not relevant to the success (or lack thereof) of the car, nor to its development. Appearing in those films did not impact the sales of the cars. Therefore, it isn't needed, it's only irrelevant trivia. --Pc13 (talk) 21:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- You also said those film appearances are referenced. I don't see any refs in this page. --Pc13 (talk) 08:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- How again, do we know whether these appearances impacted sales -- what is our source of that information? And how can movies impact sales of a car that's out of production? Can we use a different standard for a car that's out of production? Realizing that issue has been argued, but not resolved, the thought is that lists like this can substantiate (or not) the notability of a car. I say it's ok to leave the list in for now. 842U (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- I told you to look here, here, here and here for previous discussions. WikiProject Automobiles has a standard for trivia sections, and that standard is for movie/TV/videogame appearances to not be included, unless they significantly impacted the sales and development, such as was the case with the Mini Moke, or at the very least were relevant to the plot, such as the DeLorean DMC-12. Trivia sections have been consistently deleted by WP:CARS members. What substantiates notability for the car is technological development (eg Lancia Lambda's monobloc design or the Jensen FF's all-wheel drive), technological trend setting (Renault 16 initiating the general hatchback body trend among European midsize cars) and sales figures (see Volkswagen Beetle and Toyota Corolla). --Pc13 (talk) 11:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- How again, do we know whether these appearances impacted sales -- what is our source of that information? And how can movies impact sales of a car that's out of production? Can we use a different standard for a car that's out of production? Realizing that issue has been argued, but not resolved, the thought is that lists like this can substantiate (or not) the notability of a car. I say it's ok to leave the list in for now. 842U (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I read those discussions -- not everyone agrees -- keeping in mind that I didn't place any of the questioned items into the article. No rudeness intended... we all know that Wikipedia has some flexibility built into it.
As frequently as these sections get removed, they get put back. Some like yourself feel the debate is closed. I don't.
Nothing about this section of te article is in stark contrast to the Five Pillars. Thanks for keeping up the discussion... and keeping it civil. 842U (talk) 11:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
