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 delete. Proto ► 00:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of supercars[edit]

I am nominating this page for deletion as people's opinion varies from one to another, even from car magazines can vary that term as for example, how can car magazines consider the Ford GT as a supercar when it is the same size as the Ferrari F430 (the latter but precessor model has been banished into the disputed supercar column) and this has been a subject to argument for a good perio so I think it would be a great to take this page out of its misery. Garth Bader 22:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep just because the definition is vague does not mean we have to delete the page. There are undisputed vehicles and cars that fall in a gray area can be listed separately. As long as we work to provide sources there is no reason to delete. --Daniel J. Leivick 23:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of transportation-related deletions. -- James086 ^Talk 23:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Though I don't agree with the reasoning of the nom, this list is very subjective and hard to reference (I added most of the refs) because some sources call a car a "supercar", while others may not. It is up to each editor to decide which source is reliable. Also the list can be and is argued over, so there are inherent POV issues whether it gets fully referenced or not. James086 ^Talk 23:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but get rid of all the OR on the page: if there isn't a reliable source that says that a given car is generally regarded as a "supercar," that car should not be on the list. (in other words, the list should be about a fifth of its current size) --Hyperbole 23:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the article's introduction says it all: "The category is a subjective one, however, and the inclusion of some of the automobiles listed may be somewhat controversial —depending upon the opinion of the reader." If inclusion on the list is a matter of opinion then the list fails WP:NPOV, which is a non-negotiable policy. Otto4711 23:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Whoa, we're having a mass list deletion massacre as I have noticed recently on my watchlist, nominated this for deletion as the term cannot be accurately be defined and even the Goodwood FoS has its Supercar Run which some of the cars featured there can genuinely be classed as supercars. Willirennen 23:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the comments above. This kind of list is too subjective to be useful. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 00:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I really want to come to this articles defense. As it has been stated above the criteria by which a supercar is defined is vague, however some cars are nearly universally accepted as supercars and sources can easily be found to back it. The article does require some changes; the intro paragraph needs reworking to encourage only referenced supercars to be added and the list needs some pruning to remove unreferenced vehicles. If the subjectivity is really such an issue I would support a name change to "list of vehicles refered to as supercars" but I don't think it is truly necessary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daniel J. Leivick (talk • contribs) 01:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Delete. I suspect this page was hived off from supercar as a cleanup exercise. However, Wikipedia articles are not lists, especially unreferenced ones like this. We have a supercar category already, and if an individual vehicle does/does not deserve to be so classified it can be disputed on the talk page of that vehicle. --DeLarge 11:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Daniel. The article can be worked with. Unless it is closed to outside editing, and no one has claimed that, standards can be assigned and agreed upon by concensus if desired. I don't like the idea of removing what has obviously been a good deal of work because someone feels it may leave out appropriate candidates in theory. Bbagot 03:46, 17 February 2007 (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.