Talk:Luxury car/Archive 1

message: Zouf, I am leaving this automobile section and possibly the entire wikipedia. You have a free hand now to vandalise as much as you want. I have also read some of your edits on other pages, serious readers will know from reading these edits what their quality is. Samstayton 00:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Further Vandalism by Zouf

message: Though Acura is often seen as a luxury brand, it is actually only a semi-luxury brand. The vast majority of Acuras sold were not proper luxury vehicles. While the majority of Acura's sales used to be proper luxury cars, the company has been in decline for almost a decade. Today Acura is by technical defenition is not a luxury brand rather it is a semi-luxury brand. Due to its past prestige as the luxury brand it once was I listed it in italized writing at the bottom of the luxury brand list. 
Thank you Gerdbrendel 17:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Western European defenition of a luxury car is pretty close, check out the VDA annual report, besides I should know-I'm German. But of course the situation looks a lot different in developing countires but considering this issue it would be plain IMPOSSIBLE to have a defenition of what a luxury car is. But also consider the following if you apply the General Defenition on any market it will point out the luxury cars in that market. Even in developing countires such as Russia no one calls an Escort a luxury car, even if they themselves can't afford it. But the cars that fit the criteria outlined in the "General Defenition, and most propbably only those, will be identified by the people of that particular developing country as a luxury car. Even though I'm gonna think of a way to create a sperate defenition for developing countries, it really does seem to be impossible. Thanks for being concerned though, Gerdbrendel 05:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: understood, Gerdbrendel. Perhaps making clear the MSRP only refers to the USA? If the VDA report has a specification, then include that to cover Western Europe?Markb 09:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acura - Not a proper luxury brand 

message: This does seem to be a very narrow definition, seen through the eyes of a US buyer? Arguably, all cars are a luxury to the vast majority of people as they can not afford to own one. However, in the range of cars that are available clearly there are some that are considered to be luxurious, but I don't think that the MSRP in the USA can be taken to be the definition of luxury globally. Perhaps the article should be retitled "Luxury car in the USA"?Markb 09:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Western European defenition of a luxury car is pretty close, check out the VDA annual report, besides I should know-I'm German. But of course the situation looks a lot different in developing countires but considering this issue it would be plain IMPOSSIBLE to have a defenition of what a luxury car is. But also consider the following if you apply the General Defenition on any market it will point out the luxury cars in that market. Even in developing countires such as Russia no one calls an Escort a luxury car, even if they themselves can't afford it. But the cars that fit the criteria outlined in the "General Defenition, and most propbably only those, will be identified by the people of that particular developing country as a luxury car. Even though I'm gonna think of a way to create a sperate defenition for developing countries, it really does seem to be impossible. Thanks for being concerned though, Gerdbrendel 05:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: understood, Gerdbrendel. Perhaps making clear the MSRP only refers to the USA? If the VDA report has a specification, then include that to cover Western Europe?Markb 09:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General definition

message: Hi, there needs to be differinciation between cars made by luxury brands and car made ny mainstream brands. For cars made by luxury brands the threshold for them to be considered entry-level luxury cars lies at $29k, to include the Lincoln Zephyr, Cadillac CTS, Lexus ES etc..., all of whom are condifered to be entry-level luxury cars by kbb, nctd, forbes and all other leading publications. For non-luxury brands the same threshold lies at $36k, as to include the Volvo S80 and Buick Lucerne (which are entry-level luxury according to kbb, forbes, etc...) but exclude the Yukon which is not considered to be a luxury vehicle by leading media. Thanks. Gerdbrendel 20:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference between luxury and non-luxury brands 

message: I am somewhat of a car fan, to say the least. I read up on new cars, and research older ones. However, upon viewing this article, I have to say that I have never heard of these terms used ever before. I find this article to be almost completely illegitimate, in that it is almost completely unsourced. Who made up this info? I would comment out the parts of the article that I feel were unsourced- therefore illegitimate, but I'm afraid I would have to comment out the entire article. Having over half the edits done by an IP might also explain this. 
Firstly, would someone please explain to me where this superior definition of luxury car came from? Who thought up that terminology about the MSRP. I admit, maybe there's something I didn't read, something major that I'm missing, but I don't know. Even if there was, please, someone cite it! I don't quite see the point of the entire article. Basically, you're categorizing cars into their MSRP classes, and then claiming this to be be the definition of what type of luxury car it is. I have found an interesting morsel of truth while researching the claims of luxury found in this article. Zouf
This, beyond a doubt, proves that the number to classify luxury cars is completely illegitimate. The luxury car market is not determined by User:samstayton. Furthermore, what about the problem of every antique / old luxury car? How are they classified? Clearly, a 1990 Caddy Eldorado is a luxury car, and a 1980 Rolls is a luxury car- but how on earth would they be classified in this system? 
This article needs major revamps, but more than just copyeditting, but in the actual content of it. There is more absurd info in it, such as the "10% of vehicles sold by price" for the mid-level, and the "1% of vehicles by price sold in the US" for the high-end" and the "0.1% of vehicle market" for the ultra. Now, unless this is the most freakish- logarithmically perfect- setup of numbers ever, I think these numbers are slightly fabricated, to say the least. Also, these numbers don't fit with the luxury's definition of the "10% of cars sold by price", as if you add the entry-level, the number goes far higher than 10%, thus eliminating its own definition.
O, another thing, "vehicles"- what is that supposed to mean. Since the people who made this article wikilink it to the automobile article, that must mean it accounts for all automobile. Do you mean to include trucks and buses in these percentages- I'm sure you didn't. And if I am misunderstanding these numbers, which are most likely fabricated to begin with, they could sure use a bit of work to make them clearer and not be ridiculous to understand. 
This article needs even more work than what I have just said. In fact, this aritcle is so undercited, and even makes derogatory claims (Jaguar X-Type attack?), that it honestly should have its entirety commented out. Will someone please message me back, or make another post. This article is beyond repair- because I do not feel that it makes any substantiated claims. (by the way, anything above the S500 Mercedes (S55, S600, S65 would  be an "ultra" luxury; and so would a 750 and 760 Bimmer)    Zouf 02:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding the Legitimacy of this Article

message: Zouf, may be you are the fabricator here.  The 0.1%, 1% and 10% precentages are based on mathematical analysis and strong evidence.  The ultra luxury category includes vehicles above 100K .  Now lets count year 2005 sales in US:
Rolls Royce                         	400
Bentley                             	3000
Aston Martin                        	900
Ferrari                             	1500
Maserati                            	2000
Maybach                             	150
Porsche (Turbo + GT3+ Cayenne Turbo)	2000
BMW: (760i and 760Li)               	550
Mercedes: (CL + SL-AMG + S600)      	3000
It comes to about 15-16,000 cars.  Which means 0.1%.  So before you start bad-mouthing others check your mind.  
The 1% market-share for high end Luxury can be proven in the same manner.  
Also Jaguar comment is not POV I will add reference now.  Samstayton 06:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer to Zouf

message: Hmmm.... interesting, I think that this proves my point quite well. Note the self-induced reducing of the MSRP for luxury cars. O, so this number is from other car sources according to Brendel? Apparently not, unless Samstayton is the author of Forbes magazine. Furthermore, in your little number count, you include Ferrari. O, thats interesting... its not a luxury car!!!!!! Neither are all Aston Martins (some are, I do not doubt that). Also, those Porsches (except for the Cayenne) you listed ARENT LUXURY CARS. CLEARLY, it is illegitimate. YOU NEVER LIST THOSE CARS OR COMPANIES IN THE ARTICLE!!!!!!! I'm glad though that you are able to add up cars to make 0.1%.  What about the 1% and 10%? Unable to back it up? HM, thought so. Again, you did not explain what a "vehicle" is either... hm, another glitch? You also forgot some models of Audi in your little bit of math there.
Again, let me re-emphasize that, as of yet, there is still no substantiated claims. As I have proven, the numbers are fabricated. IT IS MADE UP IN THE COMMENT LEFT ON BRENDEL'S DISCUSSION PAGE! Also, I have heard of the terms before, (entry, mid, high, ultra), but I've never seen it defined in such concrete and, frankly, fabricated terms for the sake of a nice definition. This article might be a nice personal reference for car shopping, but it is not substantiated (in the manner you made it sound) in any car mag I've read. Maybe it is, but, again, PLEASE cite it. The comment that I previously left is 100% correct, in that everything I said is coherent. You have done nothing to correct what has been mentioned except cite the Jag reference and do some shoddy, half-job math to try and substantiate the one claim of 0.1%. Again, PLEASE define vehicles, AND FIX ALL OF THE NUMBERS. They do not make sense. There are still quite a few sport cars that would skew this freakishly (I'm sure not coincidental) system of percentages. Fix it, please.
I have people look at this article who are not only confused by the definition of vehicle, but are amazed at the way in which a luxury vehicle is classified. This is before I can let them know that it is NOT legitimate, because the claims are NOT PROVEN. THere's no citing, and I even checked www.kbb.org to see if the categories exist, and surprise to me, they don't. 
You dare call my mouth full of illegitimacy Samstayton, when I have proven that you made up those numbers? When I proved to you that you did not cite your jag comment? When I proved to you that your math is almost completely incorrect because you add things and leave them out?...hm...time for some introspection? This is not meant to be a personal attack on anyone, and I don't intend it to be. However, this is an attack on the falsified, and unsubstantiated claims made on this article.
You shall silence me when you give me physical evidence that these numbers are legitimate terms (if they are not, say so in the article), and that these percentages actually exist. 
Yours truthfully  Zouf 13:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rebuttal from Zouf

message: OK, I never said Vettes were luxury cars. Vettes are among my most favorite cars, and I know they aren't luxury cars. Look at the graph of Sam's comment. He includes Ferrari in his lux car argument. THATS NOT WHAT IT SAYS IN THE ARTICLE. Sam's numbers are unfounded, they are based off of expensive cars. We're not discussing expensive cars, we're discussion luxury cars. I do know Forbes, and I agree with their definition, it is a high level of comfort. However, where is this MSRP definition coming from? As I clearly showed in my rebuttal, it is a fabricated number by Sam... I showed it with the provided quote. Is it not clear? The quote explicitly states that he/she made the number!!! So, again, where is the justification of that random MSRP used to define a luxury car. Again, Sam answered the Jag comment with a link and a reference, the proper way to go about proving his comment about Jags. You must have not read the above rebuttal, because much of your argument is not in attack of anything new... it was what was said last night.
I will reiterate my argument, so that there is no confusion in what my argument is
# The definition of a luxury car is not sourced. There is no proof, not even in the provided reference, of the precise number used to define a luxury car. Please provide me with concrete evidence that $38K is the defined price for a luxury car. If this is provided, this part of the argument shall be resolved.
#Define vehicle. It is very unclear what a vehicle is...just a car? or all automobiles (trucks, cars and buses) as the wikilink implies.
#The percentages are clearly fabricated. User:Samstayton provides a graph that is intended to prove that ultra-luxury cars are 0.1% of the market. However, this number is clearly forced... as he includes Ferraris and Porsche super-cars... which are not in any way luxury cars. He also does not inlclude any Audi's (where a few deserve to be included).
#Samstayton proves that 0.1% of the automobile market is ultra-luxury cars. He says nothing about the other percentages which were haphazardly thrown into the argument. It is surely not a coincidence that high end cars are 1/10 of mid-level cars and ultra-cars are 1/10 of high end cars. PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR THESE CLAIMS!
#The article provides very few references and the one referring to luxury cars brings one to a website that is almost impossible to navigate (I am not the only one that had trouble determing what the page is trying to do, other than list somewhat random information about everything from cars to jewelry). Please link the article to the proper part of that website.
#This article is unfounded, and the vague reference to www.kbb.org proves nothing (there is no mention of prices set on entry, mid...etc.)
Let me make it clear. I know cars very well. I do not doubt that Samstayton and Brendel also know cars very well, they seem to be very knowledgable. I, in fact, have seen the use of entry, mid, high, and ultra. However, in the magazines I have read, I have never seen such a set price and definitive cut off as Brendel and Samstayton seem to suggest. While I do not doubt that there exist levels of luxury cars (and I, by the way, never said anything about vettes or vipers being luxury cars), I do not think that your methods of determination are true. MSRP does NOT define the price of cars. PROVE (with legitimate quotes) that $38,000 is not made up by Samstayton (as my quote proves [see quote at top of rebuttal]). Until then, as I have evidence that the information is falsified, and you have no evidence that it is true, this article is illegitimate. 
I rest my case by claiming that you have provided no substantial, clear, and consistent evidence to the length and duration of the debate. Your claims are clearly wrong, and there has been no rebuttal to what I have said other than a somewhat of a non-sequitur (clearly Brendel did not read my post).
 
On another note, stop personally attacking me. "shut your mouth full of illegitimacy", "Zouf, may be you are the fabricator here", "Read Forbes, its not marxist" are unnecessary comments to make in an argument regarding cars. I did not call any of you fabricators or acutally illegitimate. I do claim this article to be illegitimate. My political should have nothing to do with this article. You are going "below the belt" to mention anything of the sort. Let's keep this business... please.  Yours truly, Zouf 17:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm trying to keep this professional as well, sorry if the "Forbes, its not marxist" comment offended you. Okay here's how the MSRPs came to life. I look at all the different car publications in the US and Germany. I made a long, long list of all the lux vehicles. Then I checked with Forbes and Kbb whether or not these vehicles are really lux. By doing so I already establisahed what brands were luxo brands and what cars were luxo cars. Now I looked at the segment they were put in. Alright, now I had a list of all luxo cars in the US and Germany as well as their marketing classification (Entry-level, High-end, etc...). Okay so besides just putting this list up I started looking at why these vehicles were called luxo cars. Then I made a list of all the things these vehicles had in common. All the cars had a high level of comfort (that was stated in Forbes). According to KBB the cheapest luxo car was the Volvo S80 with a $38k MSRP; thus, setting that treshold. I also found that Forbes, edmunds and NCTD differntiated in their defenition between non-luxo brand and luxo-brand. So, I found that the leading car mags classify all luxo-brand cars between $29k and $40k (BMW 3-Series etc...) as luxo cars. Then I found that for mainstream cars the treshold was set higher ($38k). For the guidelines of High-end, I again looked at the prices of cars who according to Forbes, edmunds, NCTD, and KBB were said to be high-end. All of these vehicles had MSRPs ranging from $60k to $100k. A Forbes article then stated that all cars above $100k are Ultra-lux, so I just took their word for it. Then I triple checked my tresholds and found that the information I had gathered was correct. Now I will go back and try to gather all the articles I have look at over months in order to build a reference section. This project, however, will take a bit of time, so please bear with me. Also, I'm saying this with all due respect, but no, your argument wasn't very clear (now it is) and the qoute you selected from my discussion page didn't really get the message through. Again, please bear with me until I gather my srouces, alright? Regards, Signaturebrendel 18:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 
(Sigh of Relief) Finally, there seems to be some kind of conclusion to a very long and drawn out debate. The MSRP issue is starting to make sense. I would like to clarrify that small correspondence with Samslayton though... and how the threshold was moved based on Samslayton's own preference. I feel much better that the MSRP issue has been resolved... it certainly makes this much more understandable. A few loose ends remain. The comments about percentages need to be removed until Samslayton can substantiate them (In my above argument, I show that they aren't as legitimate as they should be), and vehicle needs to be better defined. I don't mind if you take your time doing the references... so long as they are going to be done. Thanks for joining me in this very lively debate about luxury cars, it certainly was interesting. Yours truly, Zouf 18:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Restatement of Argument

message: Zouf, considerbale amount of time has been spent by Me and Gerd to write this article.  Your arguments should be brought on talk page first.  You are simply editing the article on some whims which is not acceptable.  Also, it is not allowed that you edit data and text without any basis.  If you think I am wrong or the data is in correct, you should point with with your caluculations on Talk page first.  Vandalism has serious repurcussions.  Also, your articulation is one thing and writing fact based article is another.  Samstayton 01:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Massive Vandalism by Zouf

message: Again, the argument about expensive comes back to my defintion argument. In essence, "relative" is what makes something "expensive". Again, I dont claim Azera is luxury... first, I havent sat in one yet, second... it most likely isn't. My argument about the price, as you can see in my example is to take the price as a "threshold" out, and make it a guideline. For example, the avg. high end car has "x" amount of luxury features and a price of "y". If a mid-level car (by your price thresholds) makes "x" amount of luxury features and has a lower price, it should still be a luxury car (within reason). I'm sure you understand that companies do weird pricing options, for example, you know you pay a couple thousand dollars when you buy a Ferrari for the emblem. I'm saying, break away from the "prestige" idea, and focus on the aspects of a luxury car. I do not doubt it should be expensive. But, two situations that I commonly see are perfect examples here:
#A car has an MSP of 55,000 but offers all of the same features that a 75,000 car does. I mean, exactly the same. Except, the 70,000 is a "prestige car". Shouldn't both be "high end"? If not, than is it fair to keep the first out soleley because its 5000 under? Again, a guideline would allow for this.
#A car costs 75,000 dollars but since it is so rare/uncommon/ "hot", it offers nothing that the other high end luxo's offer. Shouldn't it be a mid-level? 
The argument I made supports everything you said, especially about being expensive. But, I think that the numbers should be slightly more flexible than such a swift cut off. BTW, when GM offered employee discounts, it lowered many of the MSP's (for a given set of months) from over 60K to under 60K. So, based on your current model ( and being a stickler, =P) they all went from high-end to mid-level... and then back again. This happens a lot, in different ways. 
I'm starting to see a trend between the arguments. Threshold vs. Guideline... It'd be nice to get some 4th party input here. Clearly, you and Sam feel that it's threshold, and I clearly feel its guideline. .. hmm... 
Yea, sorry about the bimmer thing. Bimmer is such a common spelling and sooooo many kids spell it "beemer" because they don't know any better. I didn't realize that it was a language thing... usually its just an incompetency thing, ha!!
BTW, I saw a marauder today. Seeing as your a TC fan, I'm sure this is your favorite car...ever? If it isn't, I'd be interested to hear why not. Peace! Zouf 04:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article 2 from [[User:Samstayton]]'s talk page

message: Uhm, both of you need to stop double-teaming me. You might have spent time on the article, but it certainly does not perfect the article. First off, my edits changed some typos... but Samstayton reverted those...nice job Sam. Secondly, I doubt Sam read my comment on his MSP graph, and so he put it back without looking at the comments... nice job Sam. Thirdly, I took off the unsourced percentages because they were clearly fabricated, or based off illegit numbers... and he reverted it... nice job Sam. I would really like to deal with Brendel... not Sam in terms of this article. I do not mean this to be personal, please don't make it to be that. But, you are not structuring your argument or particularly watching what you are doing.
My evidence, definitions, and sourcing is sound. I use legit dictionary sources for a definition, I use common sense, I use proper grammar, and I also clean up unsourced info. I have articulated my argument quite clearly, with numbering and bulleting. There is no need to recite it, it can be found above. Although the majority of what is stated in the article is "right", there is a substantial number of things that are wrong. Since when is BMW's flagship sedan under $100,000? Are you outright insane?... is the 745 flagship over the 760! Not all SUV's offer more luxury than their sedan counterparts... the QX56 is the most "luxurious" car by Infiniti in terms of features and overall comfort... as is the Cadillac Escalade ESV. Ferrari's are not luxury cars. This is heresy to speak of. Every single person I have talked to has backed me up on this. That is absurd... they are performance. Also note their location on this graph...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Prestige_cars_copy.png... made by Brendel himself. You have ommitted innumberable points of my argument... and I have consistently responded to each of your contentions. Some of them have been just outright... almost hilariously... wrong. Please respond back in a way that disproves me. In sheer logical formulas... I have not yet been disproved... many of my arguments have not been refuted.
I would also like to point out the true vandal here. If Sam has reverted changes back to a "typoed" state... if he has replaced faulty information (information like the BMW's 745 being flagship), and adding information that is unsourced ALL AFTER it had been fixed... who is the true vandal? Let Brendel take care of the rest, User:Samstayton, please. I do not mean it to be personally offensive, but Brendel has been much more reasonable and understandable in his arguing. 
As described in my argument, I will again revert this article. Further action to revert again to information that has been clearly disproved will most likely result in my talking to an administrator. If you feel it should be reverted again, destroy my argument, I welcome you to. 
Even though I have already used one of your sources to prove my own argument, I will use another. Car.com (the source used to define class) states
:Entry luxury cars usually cost between $25,000 and $40,000, and they don’t always have a luxury brand attached to them. Mid-luxury cars typically run between $40,000 and $60,000, and always carry a nameplate that resonates with image-conscious Americans. Super-luxury cars cost upwards of $60,000 but less than $100,000, and inspire envy in both friends and enemies. Ultra-luxury cars are six-figure expenses guaranteed to land the hottest date in town and the best parking spaces at the trendiest nightspots.
Semantics, gentlemen, semantics. They are not defining a threshold... but a general number to go around. If theres a $59,999 Benz... according to you two, its mid-level. This is ridiculous. I will only stand to hear a structured, legitimate debate. Until I do, the person who has best proven his point (the best structure argument) will have the correct version posted. Please take none of this personally. Thanks! Zouf 04:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rebuttal of Vandalism

message: I didn't see Brendel's edit before Samstayton's. I like Brendel's much better. I read over his comments, and I decided to add some of his info to the revert I made. If anything, I would like to work with his minor reverts of mine more than working with the article's original text. Thanks again! Zouf 05:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually there is a $3,500 tolerance. That's why the $58k LS430 is high-end. So the $59,995 Benz would still be a luxury vehicles. Thought you might want to know. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert Comment

message: ===Hostility===
In your comment section Gerd has called me frustrated because I have flagged this article for its obvious lack of references.  This article is therefore illegitimate and should be deleted.  The "frustrated" comment is derogatory and a personal attack against me.  Samstayton 00:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No Sam. Its an observation and expession of concern on my side. FYI: Please don't assume that a user name is the real name of the person behind the account of that particular user name. Regards, Signaturebrendel 00:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I have not attacked you, but wanted to bring it to your attention that you have insulted me, as you have perviously done with other users. You have exhibited nothing but direct and indirect hostility towards me since you reappeared from your hiatus. Signaturebrendel 07:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You wrote that, where did you get this? Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Common knowledge and you created that threshold. My data indicated $40k to be the treshold and I have refs for that. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster and common knwoledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The references are listed already. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You came up with this, where did you get the info; tell me so I can add it. This info comes from the graph, over which you according to your previous statements "spend two days creating." Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster, Common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Not it isn't you don't need tags for everything you say. You simply don't. No offense but I think you need to read the wiki manual more carefully. Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Forbes Magazine; the word new millineium is POV. How??? Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The manufacturer's web-site. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: This statement is not found in the article. Please abstain from making grossly false accusations; this only sustains my concern over your editing being the result of you expressing your frustrations. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Kelley Blue Book. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Manufacturer's web-sites, New Car Test Drive, and common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Not true. Yes we need references, but citations => No. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: German wikipedia, and ADAC (German Automobile Club) as well as VDA (German association of car manufacturers). Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sam's referencing demands 22 March 06

message: In your comment section Gerd has called me frustrated because I have flagged this article for its obvious lack of references.  This article is therefore illegitimate and should be deleted.  The "frustrated" comment is derogatory and a personal attack against me.  Samstayton 00:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No Sam. Its an observation and expession of concern on my side. FYI: Please don't assume that a user name is the real name of the person behind the account of that particular user name. Regards, Signaturebrendel 00:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I have not attacked you, but wanted to bring it to your attention that you have insulted me, as you have perviously done with other users. You have exhibited nothing but direct and indirect hostility towards me since you reappeared from your hiatus. Signaturebrendel 07:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hostility

message: This article does not cite its references and mainly POV.  Here are the following examples:
*1.  The first statement itself is unreferenced :  "...A luxury vehicle is a vehicle which provides a great abundance of ease and comfort. Although there can be a great range of "vehicles" that offer luxurious settings, a true luxury car will be a car (sedan, coupè, hatchback, station wagon, roadster, etc.), a light truck (light pickup trucks), or an SUV..."  ??? Ref. missing
:Meriam Webster. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Meriam Webster. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You wrote that, where did you get this? Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Common knowledge and you created that threshold. My data indicated $40k to be the treshold and I have refs for that. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster and common knwoledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The references are listed already. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You came up with this, where did you get the info; tell me so I can add it. This info comes from the graph, over which you according to your previous statements "spend two days creating." Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Meriam Webster, Common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Not it isn't you don't need tags for everything you say. You simply don't. No offense but I think you need to read the wiki manual more carefully. Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of References

message: *10. "...In the car market of the new millenium, it has become rather difficult to determine whether a vehicle is indeed a luxury car or not. Many vehicles such as the GMC Yukon or the Chevrolet Suburban fit the price criteria to be considered luxury vehicles, yet they do not have many of the amenities of other luxury vehicles..." 
:Forbes Magazine; the word new millineium is POV. How??? Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The manufacturer's web-site. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: This statement is not found in the article. Please abstain from making grossly false accusations; this only sustains my concern over your editing being the result of you expressing your frustrations. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Kelley Blue Book. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Manufacturer's web-sites, New Car Test Drive, and common knowledge. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Continued Lack of References

message: *16. "...This segment mostly includes the bottom vehicles in the line-up of luxury brands as well as the top-of-the-line models of some non-luxury brands. Vehicles in this segment include the Lincoln Zephyr, BMW 3 Series, Lexus IS, Audi A4, Mercedes C-class, Infiniti G35, Acura TL, and the Jaguar X-Type. It should, however, be considered that some of entry-level luxury vehicles have upgrades which put them into the class above them. For example, while the Lincoln LS V6 is an entry-level luxury vehicle, the LS V8 is due to its pricing a mid-level luxury vehicle...". 
:Manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Manufacturer's web-sites. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Not true. Yes we need references, but citations => No. Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: German wikipedia, and ADAC (German Automobile Club) as well as VDA (German association of car manufacturers). Signaturebrendel 06:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Further Lack of References

message: This discussion page will, to say the least, make a very undesirable imprssion on visitors. I would hereby like to delete or archive it. Any objections, or thoughts? Thank you. Signaturebrendel 06:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking about that... I agree, it wouldn't come out great for readers. I was going to have it archived for length anyway. I think it would be best to archive it, in the chance that someone else might have a similar discussion. So, I vote archive. How do you feel about it? I hope you have no hard feelings in this wiki-editting war. I was trying to just make the article more encompassing and legitimate. I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings... in case I did. Zouf 21:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, archiving is the best thing to do. Regards, Signaturebrendel 00:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving of parts of the discussion page 

message: The sections with references are okay. They can be included. But the other statements in this article are illegitimate and need immediate attention. Samstayton 01:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All lists of vehicles are refernced. There is reference to prove that the Entry-level segment starts and ends at the indicated tresholds and we have a complete list of all entry-level luxury, mid-level luxury as well as high-end and ultra-luxury vehicles and the guidlines by which to define these segments. I think I have addressed all your concerns. If you have any further questions please reply below. Thank you. Best Regards, Signaturebrendel 02:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Deleted? Just because it needs some references doesn't mean it needs to be deleted, you know. --ApolloBoy 02:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly, besides I'm still trying to gather more refs that I'll add. Thank you. Regards, Signaturebrendel 04:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections with references

message: "For example, because of its prestige, the BMW 3 Series might cost more than the same car if it was sold under a non-luxury marque"
*I think this is the least appropriate example to give. The engine technology, no front-wheel drive and overall build quality make the 3 series (and probably all BMW's) one of the (if not "the") top cars in its segment, regardless of the badge. An example about platform-sharing cars would be more meaningful; like one about "prestige" Audis and their significantly cheaper cousins Skodas, [despite the almost same build quality, or one about a Jag X-Type and a Mondeo or Mazda 6. 85.108.52.116 12:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Veblen good. That the BMW 3 Series is superior to the competition is your opinion, and we can't have opinion on WP (including those of press reviewers' unless they're citing facts). The BMW plaque does add to the price becuase of BMW's image, whether that's a justified image or not. Pricing and prestige may have little to do with the acutal quality of the product. Hypthetically, if Skoda was to build a car as good as the 3-Series, it would still cost less-despite the same quality. BMW has an image and that image drives up demand, and thus price. How don't get me wrong, I am a luxury car owner myself and do beleive that there is a world of difference between luxury and non-luxury cars, but I also know that a certain desirable "brand" image drives up the price. Signaturebrendel 15:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what a Veblen good is, i'm an economist myself :) You're right, we're are all in the same game, willing to pay more for some particular badge (I'm considering buying an A4 - a car not actually better than the Skoda Superb materially). I don't deny the existence of the "BMW badge premium" on the price of a 3 series. What i'm trying to point out is that a 3 series car is one of the least appropriate examples to give here. You say "...unless they're citing facts"; well if you really know about cars (the technical aspects) you'll understand i'm talking about facts. The examples I proposed are plainly stronger examples because the cars I mentioned there are technically identical. Again, I don't deny the effect of the badge on a car's price, but the badge is not the only reason behind the price difference; "if Skoda was to build a car as good as the 3-Series...", well it can't or at least won't.. :) - By the way, we don't really disagree, right?! Mine is just a tiny suggestion. 85.107.25.15 20:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you're saying, the BMW 3-Series might not be the best example, even though the concept still aplies to it. Okay, we can also use the Audi A4 if you think its more appropriate. BTW: The things is that the word "best" is always kind of POV, yes you cite facts, like the decibel noise level, etc... but still best depends on the consumer's preverences. So, as we agree on the badge effect I replaced BMW w/ Audi. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I completely agree.. :) Thanks for the nice discussion by the way.. 85.108.54.73 19:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Paying for the Emblem (BMW example)

message: I don't believe this article provides any reliable insight without being opinion based. There are marques that people (myself included) consider luxurious that others may not. There will be some that many consider luxurious vehicles, but by and large if somebody believes a Volvo is, no amount of numbers or comparatives will truly change the perception - since that is what luxury is. 
I think the Volvo and Saab brands are luxury vehicles as much as Mercedes or BMW. This is opinion, but then so is the notion that Mercedes or BMWs are luxurious. One could say the Ford 'ghia' range that were available in the Uk were previously a 'luxury' model of their car. 
If we are to call luxury are specific series of features (sat nav/heated seats/electric seats etc.) then the ballpark moves on continuously - remember when only luxury cars had multiple airbags/power steering). If we are to go on price-range then we are merely pointing out expensive cars and calling them luxury by value alone. If we are to go by 'prestige' then we are entirely in the territory of opinion. 
I'm open to suggestions (not that they are particularly needed the article is quite lengthy) but as it stands I don't personally feel the article is like that of an encyclopedia.
Anyhoo good chat everybody some impressive stuff above! ny156uk 19:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I wrote this article a long time ago (in WP time). Back then WP poloicies were not applied as strictly and another users was involved in the process with mean many parts of this article are the results of compromises. The ballpark does move, as the market is dynamic and, yes, some Fords and VWs (e.g. Touareg & Pheaton) may be considered luxury vehicles. As for prestige, you're right there is not even an objective definition of what prestige is. So, we go by pricing and media releases, that state certain cars to be luxury vehicles. We then mention those brands and vehicles and try to identify common pricing trends between these vehicles. Price is so important here because the idea or a luxury good is an economic concept; thus the concept of luxury cars is mostly based on pricing-as it is too an economic concept. See the luxury good article. Hope that answers some of your concerns. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 20:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Virtually all opinion and little can be done about it?

message: Mercedes-Benz c-class is a posh car even for Germany.Germany is not the wealthiest country in Europe as you may think.The UK,Norway,Switzerland,Ireland,Denmark,Sweden,Luxembourg,Austria and others are much wealthier.It is a common car in Germany as many buy it used in lower prices as it is a posh car for the whole of Europe.When the GDP per capita of the US is 40000$ and that of EU-15 average is that of 29000$(22857Euro) you understand that things are much different than the US and that US prices should not be considered as benchmarks for luxury cars.As an economist I know the difference between GDP and household income but I have given you data for household income and average purchase for cars in some countries...Is France a poor country?It has the same income as Germany.And there Mercedes is a posh car.No matter the sum of money they spend on a car.
:I know Germany isn't Europe's wealthiest country. But I have lifed there 60% of my life-time and no one refers to the C-Class as a posh car. (It certainly isn't average, but it isn't posh either) Also GDP per capita is not a good reflection of income, A) its an average, B) Its the economy divided by the number of poeple, and has nothing to do really with how much people actually make (You're an economist you know that). The median income for an American male is $33,000 USD. Beleive it or not rural England has a comparable median household income to the US. France isn't a poor country, but maybe they just spent less on cars, maybe the view their cars differently... there could many non-economic reasons why a car is viewed in a certain way in one country and viewed in another light in another country. In Germany a C-Class is classified as a Mittelklassewagen "Middle class car," an E-Class is a "Obere mittelklasse wagen," Upper-middle class car, an S-Class is a "Oberklasse wagen," upper-class car and a Maybach is a "Luxusklasse wagen," Luxury class wagon. Regardeless of economics, the C-Class which is no more expansive than a nicely equipped VW Passat (the average German car) is not seen as posh car. There could be other reasons, besides income, why the French press consideres the C-Class and posh and the German doesn't-maybe France isn't as much of a car-crazed country?... there could other sociological reasons, apart from economics. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 15:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MERCEDES BENZ C-CLASS 

message: Are they luxury vehicles? Some source says they are. Some says not. I'm confused. Is there any affirmative answer? --Mato Rei 13:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No there is no affirmative answer. Deciding what vehicle is and isn't a luxury car is a highly subjective topic- it all lies within the eyes of the beholder. Signaturebrendel 16:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will the entry-level luxury solve the problem? I know 300C can be considered as entry-level luxury. How about H2? Will it be disputed even as an entry-level luxury vehicle? Or it has enough prestige to be an entry-level luxury vehicle? Which answer will that be? --Mato Rei 05:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It still depends on your view-point. A 300C may be called a luxo car, or not. There arn't any definite guidelines. The H2 may not at all be seen as a luxo car as it is not comfortable-though others only take price into consideration and do see it as a luxo car. I think many publications will probably mention the 300C as an entry-luxo, but unfortunately there are no definite answers. Signaturebrendel 05:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your reply. It's enough for me to know the general views about the cars above. --Mato Rei 12:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chrysler 300 C and Hummer H2

message: The gallery isn't working
:...and it isn't needed either. A bullet-fomrat list is easier to read and more professional in apperance. All that's needed is picture of a traditional luxe car, a modern luxe car, one from the Eastern Hemisphere, one from the Western Hemisphere (preferably American and European -66% of readers are in the U.S., and around a quarter are in Europe). Signaturebrendel 15:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Help

message: I took out "geriatric" and wrote "American" instead, since it sounds degrading and unprofessional. Lithdoc 20:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section

message: What is with the whole link business? When I first added my link to Ultraluxurycar.com on this page, there were four other links, all of which directed to magazines. My link was to an informational site. I am not saying information that was lacking in the page, but I am saying that it would be good for further research. Ten minutes later my link was removed. After three days, I added it back in. The next day, the whole "Link" section was gone. Is it the work of Wikipedia fanatics who don't want Wikipedia to be a "directory of links"? Sure, I could go through and remove every link on every page I find, but what have I accomplished? Absolutely, nothing! Yes, Wikipedia would have no spam links, but all the valid ones would be gone too. I sincerely think that my link is valid and should be used on this page. Zach4636 12:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I'm the Wikipedia fanatic, here.  I'm enforcing the guidelines for external links  We already discussed your case on your talk page.  I think you have a conflict of interest regarding that link.  It should not be added by you, else it just looks like spam.  Aside from the COI, we add information to Wikipedia by adding content, not links. --Mdwyer 19:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: User:71.234.11.63 is adding the image of the Oldsmobile Achieva coupe -- describing it as the pinnacle of luxury! Including this car of course is a good joke! — CZmarlin 12:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank for your being a good sport and appreciating my humor.  Achieva's are truly crapmobiles.--71.234.11.63 20:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Joke image

message: If anybody has a picture of a "Luxury crossover SUV" or a "Luxury pickup truck", I think that this page could really use them. Right now there are pictures of every other type of luxury car except them. I will also try to find applicable pictures. Zach4636 12:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Car Pictures 

message: I think that there should really be an external link section. Not having one detracts from the integrity of the page. Zach4636 21:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Link Section 

message: Whoever wrote this sentence really needs to clarify it because it does not make sense:
For vehicles such as smart fortwo, although the base model costs more than the 4/5-door subcompact or compact cars (in some cases, even compact cars loaded with factory options) for the same market, and was sold through luxury brand dealers, are not commonly regarded as luxury vehicles.
Thank you. Zach4636 14:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed 

message: This whole article seems to be based on rather arbitrary unsourced definitions of what a luxury, ultra-luxury etc car is. I would suggest that the whole article is bordering on original research WP:OR. There is no accepted universal definition of what constitutes a 'mid-luxury', 'high-end luxury' or any other type of luxury vehicle and it's not Wikipedia's job to create one. I think it should be rewritten to reflect this rather than attempting to state as a matter of fact that car X is 'entry-level luxury' and car Y is 'mid-luxury'. As it stands, the article is a collection of opinion presented as fact. Dino246 (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary divisions/ original research? 

message: See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Luxury_Cars. Ros0709 (talk) 17:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads-up. Anyone who's been involved or observing the arguments here over the last few months should click above and vote 'delete'. The only thing we've basically all agreed on here is that there is no accepted definition of what a luxury vehicle is so to attempt to make a list of them is ludicrous.Dino246 (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the interests of fairness I should add that those who have been involved with this article will be well placed to comment on the AfD (which I raised) - whatever your views. Ros0709 (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, sorry, I didn't mean to engage in any voter harassment.. vote how you like but do contribute to the discussion. A little talking now could save a lot of time and nonsense later, whatever the conclusion.Dino246 (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renewed discussion about what a luxury car is 

message: There used be a huge article on luxury vehicles a few months back, why did it get downsized into something useless and completely amaturely made???
::Please bring back the old article, we're not going to debate what a luxury cars is because it's a waste of time, everyone today has a pretty clear perception of what a luxury car is, like Mercedes, BMW, Audi or Rolls Royce. Now you want to debate if a luxury car is a tree or a rock or any type of concept you deem fit...
:::Please bring back the old article. Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.162.63.62 (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: From article history I can see that User:842U was one who downsized the article in April 2008. From his edits you can see that 842U just does not like the term claiming it is not official and subjective. This is very NPOV (sorry, typo). Downsizing article from 22 kb to 1 kb looks almost like vandalism. 842U, be aware that term "luxury car" is used by motor press in very objective meaning. See a section below for more information. I would agree with 62.162.63.62. Netrat (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

text: K. "where is the "motoring press'" definition?" - I believe the motoring press definition is pretty obvious. "Who is "the motoring press?" - how about European Car of the Year jury? You probably know that this council includes top industry journalists only. "There were no references, no objectivity,  nothing to verifiably define a "luxury" vehicle.  In fact, there appear to be very few definitions around the world for what defines the term "luxury" when applied to a vehicle." - true, but your version is not very well sourced as well. What makes an Audi a luxury car?  A Suzuki SX4 with standard Naviagation system, arguably high build quality... is that not a luxury car?  Where is the cut-off? - the only reference that supports your version (the PDF version of the marketing report) answers this question by including only few select brands in its report. The revision reflected that consensus. - would it ever be a consensus, there would not be any rollbacks, right? I can see at least two of them in the history. Netrat (talk) 22:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The old version was extremely POV. It was almost entirely unreferenced original research, it was heavily Americacentric and it read like a very long haphazard collection of contradictory opinion phrased as fact. Luxury Vehicle is a subjective term applicable to vehicles of all shapes, values and sizes and the previous article took it as an objective car classification which it desperately and unsuccessfully tried to define. The current version is also quite flawed but I would much rather build on this than go back to the old one and start trying to clear that up because it was pretty much beyond repair. Dino246 (talk) 16:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the hell is wrong with you people? 

message: Interwikis point to articles about the European F-segment (North America: luxury full-size car), not about the luxury concept in general as this article does. --NaBUru38 (talk) 00:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is not with interwiki, but with the contents of THIS article. It should include F-segment information, since the truth is in most markets outside USA, "luxury car" equals "F-segment". There are two editors who have their own concept of what luxury car is (marketing term that can be applied to any vehicle of any brand and any body style), and they are pushing it in this article. They succeeded in finding a single source that supports their concept, but:
# Only one source supports this concept
# The article ignores the meaning of the term as used by reliable motoring press
# There's absolutely NO consensus about the version that "marketing term that can be applied to any vehicle of any brand and any body style", as can be seen from numerous attempts to restore the old content. And Wikipedia:CONSENSUS is one of the most fundamental rules. Netrat (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad you agree that European F-segment equals North American luxury full-size car (in fact F-segment is more like simply "full-size car", however most mainstream American full-size cars are not large enough to be listed in the F-segment (for example, Dodge Intrepid was an E-segment car) while US-made luxury full size cars are larger than mainstream ones, thus "F-segment"="luxury full-size car" sounds closer to truth). If fact there WAS a major section of luxury full-size car in this article before those two came and kinda "downsized" the article. Netrat (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwikis 

message: 842U keeps removing car size classification template, as well as any mentions of F-Segment. Why that's wrong:
1. "Luxury car" may be a marketing term in American English, but in British English it refers to F-Segment cars. Sources: , , , . What Car? and AutoExpress are premier UK auto magazines. Netrat (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with 842U here. I'm normally quite quick to accuse an article of being Americacentric (as so many on Wikipedia are) but in this case I don't think it's the case. Luxury Vehicle is not an objective car classification in the UK either. Dino246 (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

text: "Not one of these references defines the term "Luxury Vehicle."  They use the term without defining it." - still, note that they only include F-class sedans in the category. No Cayennes, no Gallardos, no Escalades (Capitain Obvious: I mean, no luxury SUVs, no luxury coupes, no luxury trucks - strictly sendans). No 3er or A4 as well (Capitain Obvious: I mean, no compacts or mid-sizers from luxury brands - strictly full-size cars). "without a definition or some reference, there is no way to tell" - well, I cannot see a strick definition in the source that supports your version as well. "I also don't see on your links, a clear connection between F segment and luxury vehicle" - true, I'm still looking for such sources. Just wait. Netrat (talk) 23:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason the terms F-segment, D-segment etc are used is to deliberately avoid using subjective terms like luxury, family or executive. Dino246 (talk) 04:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This does not anwser other arguments I've listed Netrat (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not one of the sources you provided makes a direct equivalence between 'luxury car' and 'F-segment'. That various car magazines have a subjective annual award for the best 'luxury car' does not mean that there is an objective definition that defines what a 'luxury car' is and certainly doesn't suggest that there is an internationally accepted one. In some parts of the world even a lowly Fiesta is an extravagant luxury. Even without going to extremes, there are plenty places where the inclusion of such hedonistic accessories as electric windows and a CD player makes a car into the luxury model of the range, described perfectly legitimately as a 'luxury vehicle'. Dino246 (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Not one of the sources you provided makes a direct equivalence between 'luxury car' and 'F-segment. - please re-read my original message. My point was (and is) British motoring press uses "luxury car" only for largest sedans on the market. F-segment is completely different issue. Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

text: That various car magazines have a subjective annual award for the best 'luxury car' does not mean that there is an objective definition that defines what a 'luxury car' is - These magazines are reliable sources when it comes to car market. Can you explain why they include luxury SUVs/hatches/estates/coupes/roadsters in different catregories thus excluding them from "luxury car" category? Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

text: and certainly doesn't suggest that there is an internationally accepted one. - an object does not need to be international to be listed in Wikipedia. Netrat (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not answered any of my arguments. I guess this is because you have no counter arguments, and it's no wonder as "Can you explain why they include luxury SUVs/hatches/estates/coupes/roadsters in different catregories thus excluding them from "luxury car" category" argument is pretty strong, but still - not answering the question is a violation of Wikipedia:ETIQUETTE rule. Netrat (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Sorry if you thought I was ignoring you, Netrat, I didn't see that you'd added to this debate. I still stand by my argument that the categories chosen by a couple of car magazines for their annual awards can not in any way, shape, or form be considered an accepted definition of "Luxury Vehicle". If you want to add that "Auto Express considers a luxury vehicle to be xyz" then go ahead. Dino246 (talk) 07:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If Auto Express and WhatCar? are not reliable sources when it comes to cars... what sources ARE? Netrat (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Weak argument. Like, chemists are insiders to the Chemical Industry, they are not neutral and we should not trust them when it comes to Chemistry. Netrat (talk) 08:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification