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, but encouragement of the consensus here is to re-scope and improve the article via editorial processes. Daniel (talk) 00:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One-off vehicle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Besides the poor quality of this article, this article is also completely arbitrary and not encyclopaedic. It makes dubious claims as many of those in the article are not one-offs at all.

Sources are from it as dictionary term and about the cars itself, not the subject.

It is not unusual for these to be produced as one-offs. A notes to add to my rationale to delete, this is because of the questionable nature of this article.

• Speed record vehicles are one-offs too and so are race cars before the 1990s
• Experimental aircrafts are one-offs also. Ships are too as well as ocean liners and warships.
• Concept cars are one-offs too.
• Can cars that have been heavily modified from its mass produced version, such as feature cars in magazines such as Max Power, be considered as one-offs too?
• It was not unusual for luxury cars built prior to the war to be built as one-offs. Many cars, pre-Ford Model T, were one-offs.
• Does making a sole road version of race cars make it a one-off? (Porsche 911 GT1) Do sole racing version of production cars make it a one-off? (numerous)
• Do making extensive modifications to a production car make it a one-off? (Some Ferrari Special Projects cars)
• Do movie cars make them a one-offs too? (Chitty Chitty Bang Bang movie car)
• Does making slight alterations make it a one-offs? (Britten V1000)
• Making more than one does not make it a one-off (Moto Guzzi V8)

Question is, should we include land speed record vehicles, ‘home-built’ racing cars, soap-box derby cars, modified cars, experimental aircrafts, luxury yachts, ocean liners, concept cars into this list? If we allow a list like this, then we’ll end up with an over-cluttered list. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:59, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - seems like the nom has an issue with the article scope which could be better discussed on the talkpage. The problem of the list becoming cluttered could be addressed by consensus on scoping; for example by agreeing to only include models produced by recognised manufacturers. JMWt (talk) 09:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• my argument is, are they any different to custom cars, concept cars and custom cars for rich people? I don't see any. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I completely agree with user "JMWt".. May be the problem is in the title translation and should be changed to "unique vehicle".. that does not "exactly" mean, a ONE-OFF piece fabricated.. Mcapdevila (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Doesn't answer to my criticism of that article. SpacedFarmer (talk) 00:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:03, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• leaning delete If nothing else, I see no good reason to lump together different types of vehicles. Mangoe (talk) 17:35, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I would not be opposed to a dynamic list of one-off cars that have articles with a brief explanation of what "one-off" refers to, however as was explained, it's a very vague term that could mean anything from concept cars to movie cars to cars that were built by manufacturers with the intention of being sold, and a lot of the categories overlap. Making one for "vehicles" on the other hand means you would have to include things like space shuttles and cruise ships which are vehicles that are obviously not mass-produced. Regardless, this article needs to be WP:TNT'd. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Vehicle únic or vehicolo único vs. ONE-OFF.. May be the problem is in the title translation and should be changed to "unique vehicle".. that does not "exactly" mean, a ONE-OFF piece fabricated.. I am adding the translation of the comments of the original autor in catalan wiki, based in the idea of the italian article: "vehicolo único", with vehicles wich are "unique" in its dessign, but "sometimes" with more than ONE-OFF fabricated.

This article allows to centralize many cases that do not have an article but they deserve one. Whether they have an article on other wikis or they don't have it. It is not easy to find some of these "unique items" that can make all together an interesting article.--Mcapdevila (talk) 21:38, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcapdevila Have you forgot to declare that you are the article creator? In case you don't know, they do have their own articles. With your argument, are we going to document every one of them starting with the Benz Patentwagen? I can point this out, one-offs have existed since the dawn of the automobile. I cannot see your reasoning being a valid argument. SpacedFarmer (talk) 00:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to "declare" something obvious and evident to editors with a couple of weeks editing? Mcapdevila (talk) 20:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well you're the one who created that article and voting keep rings bells. Still, any different to coachbuilder? SpacedFarmer (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article creators have as much of a right to participate in AFDs as any other editor and doesn't it seem natural that most would vote to keep articles they created? They don't need to post a disclaimer and SpacedFarmer, you're in no position to make demands of other editors, especially ones that started editing in 2008. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:24, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- The article needs a better scoping statement in the lede, a lot of copy-edit work and perhaps a better title, but WP:DINC. The subject is encyclopaedic and RS exist. I see no policy-based reasons for deletion. I would wonder if the article might be better restructured into a stand-alone list with a strong intro, but (again), that's cleanup and not a reason for deletion. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 21:03, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  My criticism of this proposal is that the article of coachbuilder exists (as they were called then) and has that same principle. SpacedFarmer (talk) 00:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  coachbuilder coexists in parallel with custom car, or customized car wich are similar..

  One off, maybe we shall rename it to "unique vehicle".. deals with vehicles in general.. not only cars Mcapdevila (talk) 12:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I suggest '''one-off production car''' for 1) it should be about production cars with the pure intention of being produced as one, not 2 or more 2) cars always take the limelight 3) motorcycles are typically customised by a customiser because they are cheaper to do so - 2 of those of your entries are not one-offs and how do you know the OSSA was a one-off? Because it is a sole-surviving model, it doesn't mean it is. SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Per above. The article requires improvements, but has an encyclopedic scope. Svartner (talk) 04:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks.. I've done a little of copy-edit, to start with.. obviously more work is still needed.. Mcapdevila (talk) 12:36, 15 December 2023 (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.