Talk:Green Tomato Cars

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Green Tomato Cars article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 April 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

Revert

AD, Ritchie333 and anybody, interested enough, are asked to kindly comment on:--

How prodrivermags is anywhere close to a reliable source and how awards, awarded by them are any remote indicator of encyclopedic notability?I fail to see any significant coverage of these awards, other than by themselves and equally spammy business-sources.
How this isn't unadulterated PR stuff.Moreover, how does this passes our guideline about reliable sources?
Same for FleetNews, which is semblant to one of the numerous junk-automobile-magazines that are published here and there.I fail to see any relevant editorial policy and any coverage by other RS about the magazine.Social-media-figures, though not much relevant to the issue, fails to instill any confidence about the magazine.~ Winged Blades^Godric 07:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Further, AD, how this edit summary wasn't highly misleading, given that you were plainly reverting my set of edits?~ Winged Blades^Godric 08:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Professional Driver is a professional magazine with editorial staff covering the field and so is a reasonable source for this topic. The purpose of the AfD is to consider such material and so WBoG should please not pre-judge the issue by edit warring to remove it while discussion is in progress as this is disruptive. As for the edit summary, that's not misleading; WBoG perhaps missed the "rv" which is a standard abbreviation for revert per WP:GLOSSARY. Andrew D. (talk) 08:12, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What Andrew said. It's a magazine that has named writers and a contact number, and does (AFAIK) not print anything by anyone indiscriminately. It therefore passes our reliable source guidelines. FleetNews is the same. For London Loves Business, it sounds like a similar site, http://www.loveashford.com which I happen to know is updated by representatives of Ashford Borough Council, and is so also reliable for the same reason.

The only sane answer to "is 'x' a reliable source" is "a reliable source for what claim"? The same source can be any or all of: fine for basic facts, good for explaining notability, or used with caution. For example, Godric removed the presence of the GTC app in the Apple and Google app stores as "unreliable", when all they were doing is citing the fact that you can book a GT car via a smartphone; for me this is no different to citing the sleeve notes for Europe '72 to verify that Jerry Garcia plays lead guitar on it. Neither source shows notability on its own, but can be used to cite basic facts.

If you want an example of an unacceptable source, consider https://uberpeople.net/threads/green-tomato-lite.33583/ - it's a discussion by employees (or ex-employees) and random people generally chatting about GTC. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LBL is a tabloid: The online newspaper for London’s business community...Our wider vision is to bring together London’s most established and entrepreneurial business leaders to inspire the private and public sectors to create opportunity, further innovation and drive growth... —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 09:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And that's puffery - it doesn't really say anything. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:33, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If we think every award that is doled out by a magazine that has named writers and a contact number is encyclopedic-ally notable enough to be devoted a paragraph,.....

I will also note that none of you has failed to show an iota of coverage of ProDriverMags and/or their awards in RS.~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:59, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are not required to be notable; that would create an infinite regress. For some background on the magazine and its awards, see Chauffer Driven and Fleet Magazine. Note that these magazines are primarily printed periodicals and so their websites just give a taste. Andrew D. (talk) 12:17, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first is somewhat satisfactory.2nd one ain't, given that I've raised significant unresolved doubts about Fleet Magazine itself and you (may) try to establish Fleet's notability by linking to a piece in ProMag. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 12:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And, I've my own opinions about whether this is cross promotion. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 12:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As, to LBL, whatever SN said.That's typical PR-Speak.No known editorial practices.Equally PR-semblant writing, of the articles I came across.

Yeah, I was wrong about removing the Appstore and Playstore refs.~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:59, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additional - I wonder if there's systemic bias at play here too? I was at a music group in North London last month. I personally thought absolutely nothing of walking half a mile through a housing estate to get to the nearest tube, but a group of early twentysomething women who were also there did not want to do that (it was too far and they were afraid and if you've never been a woman in her early 20s who is more attractive than Zelda from Terrahawks, well you need to talk to one and find out) and booked a cab home via a smartphone. It's something I've never done, but to them it was perfectly obvious and sensible. This is why the telemetry and tracking devices are an important factor for somebody like GTC; it gives the traveller confidence the ride will be hassle-free and without incident. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:12, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Mr Saatchi :p —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 09:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]