Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sports car manufacturers

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 No Consensus to delete. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports car manufacturers

could be the first of a proliferation of arbitrary automotive lists, if the chief proponent has his way Andy Christ (talk) 23:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Unhelpful list. Created (by me) when cleaning up the sports car article, since the list was popular in the sense that it was oft contributed to, but I was hoping this discussion would come along. – Kieran T ^(talk) 00:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the only reason Andy Christ has nominated this list for deletion is that it does not include some of the "famous" manufacturers of sports cars because they have other activities and products. As can be seen in the edit history, the contributions by numerous editors have pared this list down to only the "companies that build (or built) only sports cars". They keep the list clean by removing non-specialist brands and the mainstream automakers.
It is entirely speculative to describe that this list would give rise to "a proliferation of arbitrary automotive lists". Yes, I suggested to Andy Christ that this is a list of sports car manufacturers and to establish a new list of sports car makers that also make sedans, grand tourers, sport utility vehicles, and/or trucks, as well as having other business activities almost as a jest because he does not like that "popular" brands are not included in this one. Yet, it is quite evident that the efforts by a number of editors has limited the potential to expand this list. Its purpose is not to include every manufacturer that has ever produced a sports-type high-performance vehicles.
The purpose of this list is to compile those enterprises that are (or were) developers and manufacturers of sports cars and as such, it should be helpful. It thus differentiates companies that devote efforts to sports cars, from those that serve other market segments or offer more popular designs or mass-market models -- that often produce more steady revenues. If this information is not helpful, then I agree -- delete this list! — CZmarlin (talk) 02:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't defined your criteria for inclusion or exclusion, except by including or excluding. What set of features differentiates a GT from a sports car? And how long must a company have made nothing but sports cars to be a sports car company? Clearly you have some personal definition for this list, but neither you nor any of the other active editors of this article have seen fit to share it with the rest of us. And who exactly are you helping? My first instinct is Delete, but I could also support expanding it and better-defining it, or merging it into a list of sports cars and better defining it as a section. Andy Christ (talk) 06:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and it seems you were the one who decided how to limit this list, so it really does fall upon you to explain how and why. Andy Christ (talk) 06:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It's worth noting at this point that Project Automobiles is currently discussing the various car classification articles to try to address the issue of definitions. It might be premature to define "sports car manufacturer" in isolation. – Kieran T ^(talk) 11:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - in principle, this list seems extremely useful and appropriate as a navigational aid. It may be that some names are inappropriate or missing, but I see that as a reason to improve the list, not as a reason to delete the whole list. - Neparis (talk) 03:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question/comment: Could this not be better done as a category, rather than an article? Then the navigational aid element would still be there. 82.27.192.151 (talk) 13:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It could, but I see categories and lists as complementary navigational tools, and I think it is often very useful to have both a list and a category representing the same set of articles. I find well-constructed lists slightly quicker and easier to use than navigating categories. - Neparis (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lists are not disencouraged on WP; they can do much more than categories. If there is adjustment needed, the people involved can do it. DGG (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Companies has been informed of this ongoing discussion. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.