Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old man's car

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. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:58, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old man's car

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not an encyclopedic subject. 1292simon (talk) 02:55, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 05:28, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Old age and driving. Vorbee (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Old age and driving per comment above. 344917661X (talk) 23:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, albeit with amendments needed. I considered also aligning with the above merge votes, however the Old age and driving article is actually distinctly different in what it discusses (that being more to do with cognition and driving ability). The article in this AfD is focussed more on ownership and expands a little into comparisons between car preference in the older vs younger generation. I'd be looking more to expand this article to be broader in terms of making that comparison and distinction between older and young preferences, perhaps with a change of name too. I don't feel a merge in this instance would be appropriate. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:54, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bungle - Merging the article wouldn't really make sense as such .... It's hard to explain but yeah IMHO it just wouldn't make sense, –Davey2010^Talk 14:56, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm not sure why this is supposed to be not an encyclopedic subject. It's an industry term for a class of cars, and completely different from the suggested merge target of Old age and driving. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Power~enwiki. Could you provide some references showing that it's a common industry term please? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 23:08, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence this is a "industry term". Of course, some cars do attract more older buyers. But I don't see the makings of an encyclopedic article here. Many of the refs are offline, but the first NYT article doesn't use the term and makes only one reference to age: "... it can't be denied that [Cadillac] Fleetwoods have a diminishing audience, with the median age of buyers at 67". This seems more of [{WP:SYNTH]] than summarizing what reliable sources have written about the topic. The iMedia ref does say "But while you can sell a young person's car to an older person, you can't sell an old person's car to a younger person." Again, a broad general statement without much "meat". That could be said about many things besides cars. Agree with above comments that merging to Old age and driving is not appropriate. MB 05:08, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:58, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a notable idiom rather than merely as an "industry term", which it isn't anyway. Plenty of good sources show it's notable. Bearian (talk) 14:53, 29 June 2018 (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.