Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cars with unusual door designs

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of cars with unusual door designs[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Unusual" is highly subjective, I doubt reliable sources can be found, and this is possibly not encyclopaedic. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Are you kidding? Totally subjective. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although it is not really specified, what we are dealing with here is a list of automobiles that don't have doors with hinges towards the front and a latch towards the back. It's definitely a finite list (and seemingly close to complete if not complete as it sits), although I agree that the current name makes it sound subjective and open-ended. Carrite (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This subject is far too subjective to ever have accurate encyclopedic information about it. Nomader ^(Talk) 04:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a list, the encyclopedic information appears elsewhere. Think of this as a gateway for users to find articles on related topics. Carrite (talk) 14:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, but retitle it. The current title of this list is a problem: it makes it sound like it's subjective, but it really isn't: the first sentence explains that this is a list of cars that "use passenger door designs other than the standard design, which is hinged at the front edge of the door, and swings away from the car horizontally and towards the front of the car." If this were titled "List of cars with non-standard door design", the inclusion criterion suddenly becomes clear. Sourcing does not strike me as a major problem for the majority of list: the majority of the cars on the current list have their own articles where their design is covered. One might argue that the inclusion criterion is arbitrary but it seems to me that this is potentially a legitimate, and useful, way to organize a group of cars with a common characteristic. I could still imagine arguments that this list would be non-encyclopedic for some other reason, but I don't think subjectivity and sourceability are really the issues here that they seem to be at first blush. --Arxiloxos (talk) 04:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A further comment: I lean toward keeping this list in one piece, but if the criterion "non-standard door designs" is thought to be too arbitrary, the remedy would not be to delete all the content of the list, but rather to split it up into smaller lists for each type of door. --Arxiloxos (talk) 04:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Stupid title, pretty good list. Carrite (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Change to: List of cars with non-standard door designs. Carrite (talk) 04:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be alright with that renaming, but I'm worried that the list in its nature will always be encyclopedic. I think the lead needs to be expanded to clearly lay out what the criteria for inclusion for the list is. Nomader ^(Talk) 05:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep standard engineering list. There are only 6 categories recognized as unusual. If you can think of more designs, you should send your resume to Detroit. My guess, is that the delete voters never clicked through to the article and voted based on the name only. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 07:08, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles exist for each of the six types, the contents should be moved tho these six respective pages. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a list, not an article. There is no content fork involved and nothing to merge. Carrite (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, etc. Is there an article on Car door? Merge some there, merge lists to individual articles on the door styles. (If someone wants to read about Butterfly doors he or she will not object to there being a list at the bottom of the article.)Jaque Hammer (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this is a list, not an article. There is no content fork involved and nothing to merge. The functional purpose of the exercise is to provide masses of in-links for related articles. Carrite (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article clearly defines "unusual" in an obvious, uncontroversial way. The alternative would be to split the list into separate lists (List of cars with butterfly doors etc.). But I see not problem with keeping it all as a single list; separate lists may be harder to maintain and are of no advantage to the reader. The really unusual other door type examples would also get lost with separate lists. I agree that renaming this article to List of cars with non-standard door designs or maybe List of cars with unconventional door designs is a good idea.--memset (talk) 18:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but retitle. The article itself definitely has a reason to exist. The word "unusual" is controversial, though, because it does imply subjective judgment. Replacing it with a word such as "atypical" or "non-standard" might make it appear less objectionable at first glance. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 18:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and use "non-standard" rather than "unusual" as the title. These designs aren't trivial and a navigational list pointing to the individual card models is understandable and of use. Someone another 01:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Useful list with clear inclusion criterion. Renaming "unusual" to "non-standard" might help. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 09:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but retitle notable for inclusion. but need a better name per above.—Chris!_c/t 19:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but retitle (List of cars with non-standard door designs sounds good to me). Useful navigation aid; simple and objective inclusion criteria. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2010 (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.