Talk:Lamborghini Murciélago/Archive 1

Is it a sports car?

Please vote (with a one-line answer, indented) on the following question:

Is this vehicle a sports car or supercar?

Dudes, this is a freakin' supercar; not a sports car, not a GT car, nor a sports coupe. It is a SUPERCAR!!!

1. It is a sports car and not a supercar
2. It is a GT car and not a supercar
3. It is a sports car and a supercar
4. It is a GT car and a supercar
5. It is a supercar and not a sports or GT car

--SFoskett 13:22, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

It is a sports car and a supercar. SamH 17:04, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is a GT car and a supercar--JonGwynne 01:45, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is a supercar and not a sports or GT car Mark alec 12:35, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is just a supercar - over 55hp, RR, relatively light, quite expensive... a GT would be heavier, 2+2 and FR, while a sports car is at least half as expensive (like the Gallardo and 430). NabUru38 - March 13th 2006, 18:21 UYT

supercar baby!

it is a supercar, sports car, gt...it don't matter, it is the pinicle of cars. you got one, you got it all.

It is a supercar and not a sports or GT car. A sports car is a car that is a bit sportier than your standard sedan, it is still affordable though and people don't take pictures of it if they see it in the street. A GT car is a fast luxury car for cruising across country-sides in comfort, like a Ferrari 612 Scaglietti or a Maserati Coupe. GT cars are generally heavy, luxurious and faster than a sports car. This is a supercar, all for performance with some luxury as an afterthought. James086 ^{Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review!} 04:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Let's take discussion of what is and isn't a sports car to Talk:sports car and try to get a concensus there. --SFoskett 01:56, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

Merge with Lamborghini Murcielago LP640

The L640 is only a variant of the Murciélago. Besides, the size of that article should be small enough to be included into the Murciélago article's LP640 section (which would certainly benefit from the merge). ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 11:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC) ╫

I absolutely agree. TomTheHand 15:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree as well. IMHO, it should be a merge similar like Dodge Viper variants section.

Merge has since been performed. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 22:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Manufacturer

While it can easily be stated that Audi AG and thereby VW AG are the parent companies of Lamborghini, SpA, to put the manufacturer as Volkswagen AG is just cheesy. The cars are assembled in Bologna at Lamborghini, thereby it is the manufacturer. You can easily state the parent company in the text and also at the VW Group page. If you go by the "owner" then you will have to go through each marque in Wiki and do this? What about changes in ownership? When the Lamborghini Diablo was built Lamborghini went through many changes of ownership, from Chrysler, to the Malaysian-Indonesian consortium, to VW AG. 71.106.167.177 00:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again, the policy is to state the parent company, and all articles should be changed to do so. MINIs are manufactured in Oxford, but they're still manufactured by BMW. It does not add information to say that the Lamborghini Murciélago is manufactured by Lamborghini; it's redundant and obvious that Lamborghini is the marque. VW AG is the corporation that manufactures it. TomTheHand

"Once again", what? If that is the policy, it sure isn't being done consistently. Just look up the model pages for Ferrari, Maserati, Aston-Martin, etc., etc. And where is this policy stated, or are you just making it up? If you put the manufacture as Lamborghini, then you click on that it and it shows you the main Lamborghini page which states who are the shareholders. Also, you avoided the argument about the situation where ownership changes in some companies two, three times, during the production of a model. Rare, but it happens. The Diablo page shows Lamborghini, why doesn't it show Chrysler, and Suharto's son and his Group as the manufacturer?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.175.177 (talk • contribs)

I'm not just making it up; this is what we do. Eventually all automotive articles will be this way; two people so far have told you so (myself and BSI). TomTheHand 03:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

So it is you and another user on the huge Wiki project. Because you say it is this way, without pointing to any so-called policy, that is just how it is. I really love it when an argument is retorted with "this is what we do". Why don't you answer the points I'm making so we can have a good, mature discussion over this. I feel my points are good. Listing VW AG just leads to confusion. Are we just trying to show we are somehow auto-savvy by pointing out who is the parent company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.175.177 (talk • contribs)

I did answer your points. We list the parent manufacturer instead of the marque because we feel it's more valuable and actually adds information to the article instead of being redundant. Not every article does it because not every article has been updated in the same way. To put it another way, it's just you, on this huge Wiki project, trying to change the Lamborghini pages against consensus. Quit it. TomTheHand 14:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

You still can not sustain an argument. You saying "it's just you" and "Quit it.", shows a real lack of maturity.. Who are "we"? Where is the policy stated? I have asked this one multiple times. I see you are just out of school, do I have to make this multiple choice for you? Maybe you havn't learned that a majority doesn't necessarily mean something is CORRECT. If you want to list the parent company, why not add another cell. Parent: VW AG; Manufacturer: Lamborghini. Then everyone is satisfied. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.166.128 (talk • contribs)

Let's see, nope, looks like you are not even in the majority. Most pages I see state the primary manufacture. I've found a few that list both the manufacturer and parent company, as my second suggestion. But it looks like it is mainly you and your pal that are stuck on only listing VW AG, and doing so in such a beligerent fashion. Maybe you can spend some more of your time arguing with the people who made all the other auto-related pages as well, instead of having any sort of meaningful discussions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_360

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maserati_Quattroporte

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aston_Martin_DBR9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_156

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_9-3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.166.128 (talk • contribs)

Refrain from personal attacks, which are against Wikipedia policy. Stating that I cannot sustain an argument because you do not agree with my position is ridiculous. Listing the parent company is not written Wikipedia policy; it is simply what we do. Thank you for posting five links to articles that do not conform. However, you're quite incorrect that they represent the majority; go look at, say, every Cadillac. Or every Jeep. TomTheHand 03:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I had reverted your change. I'm incredibly insulted that you imply that there's something invalid about my opinions because I'm just a couple of years out of school. I can communicate my reasons for listing Volkswagen without stooping to personal attacks; I believe that puts me a significant step above you. In between claims that I'm not able to conduct an intelligent debate, you're just crying "but not every page on Wikipedia does it!" Here's an example of a page where the parent company changes three times in the course of the vehicle's production: Jeep Wrangler. We list every parent company. TomTheHand 04:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I question your discussion skills, not your opinions. It's all been, kind of well..., punctuated by you flipping out just now and reverting back and forth. Why don't you do this: relax. Your manner was quite insulting in the first place; rather than calmly discuss things you just play the arrogant. So in my opinion, it was you that chose to make this personal instead of professional. Why? That's your issue. Now, let's try this one more time: 1.) where is the policy stated? This seems particularly important since you are now claiming other's pages are noncompliant. 2.) who exactly is the "we" that you keep refering to ad nauseum? This is quite important also, since maybe there is some actual group who can discuss such thing calmly. Let's see how far we get this time...

One more thing. Seriously, you should take some constructive criticism and look back and read how you discuss things. If you can't take someone saying your discussion skills are lacking, well...what can I say... Anyway, just relax man. We are supposed to be thinking what is the optimum for the user. I compromised, and I think the result (that was actually used by someone with the Saab pages) works out to be the most useful.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.105.111 (talk • contribs)

--- Look, all pissing contests aside, let's keep our eyes on the point. The company that manufactures Lamborghini automobiles is called "Lamborghini". There is no question that Lamborghini is owned by VAG, but owning a company isn't the same as manufacturing the company's products. Would you also argue that FIAT manufactures Ferraris or that Ford manufactures Aston Martins? Of course not. --SpinyNorman 09:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, could you explain to me the difference between this situation and that of the Jeep Wrangler? Or do you plan to head over to Jeep Wrangler now and change the list of parent corporations to simply read "Jeep"? Or change the MINI page? The Opels and the Holdens will need updating as well, and most Audis, as well as every American marque. Be sure to fix the recent Bentleys and Rolls-Royces, as well as the Maybachs. The vast majority of pages state the parent company. Is Lamborghini "above" this? VAG uses Lamborghini engines and chassis for Audis. Lamborghini is a VAG marque, not an independent company. TomTheHand 12:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I would list Jeep as the manufacturer. You go to that page and see the history of this company. Then list the parent(s). You could list Chrysler (19xx-19xx), Daimler(19xx-20xx), etc. Are you arguing that stuff shouldn't change because it will take work?? Have you indeed gone through every car model page and calculated the percentage one way or the other, and have concluded it is a majority? Or are these soft numbers... 157.127.124.14 23:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that's where you're wrong imho. Lamborghini isn't just a brand of VAG, it really is a company, named Automobili Lamborghini Holding S.p.A., owned by VAG nowadays. Obviously they share components with other brands of the VAG group, but that doesn't make VAG the manufacturer. LPJ 14:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

That's exactly the same with Audi AG, but nevertheless their products are tagged Volkswagen AG (manufacturer wise) here on WP.

Btw I seriously doubt that this is the right place to 'discuss' this topic. This isn't a Lamborghini specific topic, so it should be discussed in a more general place like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles.--BSI 15:06, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed on Wikiproject Automobiles; check the talk page archives. I didn't wake up Friday morning and decide "I'm going to tell everyone Lamborghinis are Volkswagens!" TomTheHand 23:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It actually has been discussed multiple times, because a lot of people disagree with it. Someone proposed to use a different label than manufacturer (e.g. parent company or corporation), however nobody changed it and the discussion died. I agree with you though that this schouldn't be discussed here ;-) LPJ 07:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes! Exactly like this. List the manufacturer with a link, and the parent/umbrella, what have you, second. You get more information, everyone is satisfied, the user can see the corporate structure right in front of them. TomTheHand, you seem a bit fierce against change, eh? :) 157.127.124.14 23:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not that I'm fiercely against the change. However, this is not the place to make it; if we're going to put separate boxes into the auto template for parent company and brand, it should be discussed on WikiProject Automobiles and implemented according to consensus. Currently the vast majority of pages list the parent, and this one did too until a couple of days ago. I am against a one-time change, only on these two Lamborghini articles, for the purpose of placating a revert-warring anon and keeping him from insulting me more. TomTheHand 13:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it takes two to tango, and from what I read above, it didn't sound like you were actually discussing things. And above all, I don't think you should let your personal feelings have anything to do with project decisions, don't you think? 157.127.124.14 18:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

As I said, I don't believe this is the place to make that kind of decision; if this sort of thing gets discussed on WikiProject Automobiles and something gets implemented by consensus, then that's one thing. However, I'm opposed to changing only this page and the Gallardo from the format of the majority of auto pages by someone whose reasoning is "put[ting] the manufacturer as Volkswagen AG is just cheesy." I believe there are valid reasons for listing the parent company or companies. I'm opposed to changes to the status quo on select pages without wide consensus and a clear reason why those pages should be changed and others should not. TomTheHand 18:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well, I think you are talking semantics now, and it is obvious you are still taking this personal. I don't need to hear it though, no offense. I think no one is disagreeing it should be discussed with regard to all companies/pages. 157.127.124.14 18:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I'm talking semantics at all. I'm just speaking in the context of how this started. This began because only this page and Gallardo were changed. It originally had nothing to do with all companies/pages; it was just felt that Lamborghini, specifically, should be listed as independent. It wasn't a far-ranging revert war across twenty brands. As I said, I am opposed to changing just one or two pages for no clearly defined, universally applicable reason, and that's why I'm here. TomTheHand 18:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The basic point here is that it simply isn't accurate to say that VAG "manufactures" Lamborghinis. If someone wants to create a separate category for the parent company, that would be fine with me. As for the Jeep situation and the new Mini, I don't know enough about the details to really comment so you'll forgive me if I don't change those pages. But I do know that Lamborghini is a separate company that is owned by VAG - much like Aston Martin is a separate company even though it is owned by FoMoCo. --SpinyNorman 07:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you precisely define your criteria for considering a subsidiary a "separate company" and perhaps give a few examples of cars that should be on either side of the line? It would be better if the examples were borderline cases (like, not Pontiac). For example, how do you feel about Holden, Rolls-Royce, Bentley, MINI, Audi, Dodge, and Land Rover, each of which predominantly list the parent company in the "manufacturer" boxes of their car articles? If you feel that some should list the parent and others shouldn't, why? TomTheHand 18:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The parent company of Lamborghini is VAG. Lamborghini is a subsidary, which means yes it is a seperate company, controlled and owned by another company- VAG in this case. From the article title we already know that this is a Lamborghini, so we use the parent company as manufacturer (why mention the same info twice), espcially as it is the parent company that control the factors of production. If it wanted VAG could order Lamborghini to make station wagons, they could lay off Lamboghini employees or close down the marque all togther- VAG class the shots, owns the capital. It is really very simple economics- if you own the factors of production and you have the last word in how they are used, which VAG does, then you are the manufacturer. Jeep, Mini, Jaguar, Land Rover, Bentley, Rolls-Royce all have their parent company listed as manufacturer for the reasons mentioned above. The manufacturer of Aston Martin is also FoMoCo, which controls and owns Aston Martin. Again, think about it, if you own the company, the factory, can fire and hire, arn't you the manufacturer? Signature^brendel 18:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you all make this simple and just expand the listing by one cell? Otherwise this debate can go on forever, because one can easily jump onto either side of this fence. You simply list the manufacturer (in this case Lamborghini) and you list the parent company (in this case the Volkswagen Group). Where things are going to get confusing, as someone stated above, is where ownership has changed hands. Lamborghini stays the same, but what about the case of the Countach, the Diablo, etc.? There were both produced under various Lambo parents. To me the above argument that brendel makes, please take no offense, is very subjective. I for one do not agree. Well, I agree with your economic assessment, which is kind of off on a tangent, but I do not agree it is a reason to list only VAG as the manuf. To provide the most information, just list: manufacturer; parent company. End of the story. Unless some of you all have too much time on your hands, no pun intended. :) 157.127.124.14 00:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

--- Maybe some of this is cultural? I'm not sure where everyone is based, but I do know that in the USA there was a mindset that came about thinking about THE manufacture. At one point General Motors built 50% of the cars in the US and just slapped different badges on them. I guess in many ways, many of the brands in the US were simply that, a made up label. It wasn't like Lamborghini, Ferrari, Audi, etc., which all had their own rich histories, and were definitely real companies that were acquired. Regardless, I think just listing VAG on this page (and similarly on others) is just wrong. You can't fit everything into this US-based mode of thinking. It just gives me the feeling of dumbing down the page. 157.127.124.14 00:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

That is actually not quite true. Many of the brands now belinging to GM or FoMoCo used to be independent auto brands. Lincoln, Cadillac, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Opel all used to be independent car makers before they were bought up by GM and Ford. Look on the Ford web-site, you will see that all Jags, Aston Martins, Land Rovers, Lincolns, Volvos, Mercuries, Fords and even Mazdas are listed there w/ MSRP. They are officially part of FoMoCo. How can we correctly list Lamborghini as the manufacturer? It is a subsidary- as I said it does not own the factors of production, how can it be the manufacturer? I will, though look into a seperate cell for "parent company." (FYI: We have listed VAG as manufacturer for Audi, just like GM for Cadillac and Ford for Lincoln, all these luxo sibsidaries used to be independent until they were bought up) Signature^brendel 01:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I've actually grown up in the US and have worked at two of the three Big Three, so this is an impression I get. I'm also very familiar with culture in Europe. I'm not sure which statement you are referring to though when you say, "That is actually not quite true.". About the brands in the US? I didn't say all, which would be untrue, but I said many, which is true. Also, you have to put things into perspective. Even to most baby boomers, the brands in the US have always been simply rebadged cars. The history of companies being bought up in Europe was later. Also, you can not point to many brands in Europe that were just made up brand names like Eagle, Merkur, Plymouth, Mercury, Jeep, etc., etc. So there is a distinct difference in the automotive cultures of Europe and the US. Anyway, with regard to your personal definition of a manafacturer. It is a bit too specific really. The general definition of a manufacturer is much more basic and is subjective. Lastly, I think that is a good idea to list both the company and parent company. If I had to go with one, I would stick with just the company (i.e., Lamborghini). Going to the Lamborghini page explains clearly the history of ownership. Now, the question I want to ask about the parent companies. What do we do with brands (and quite a few of them) where the particular model was built during multiple parent company ownerships? That is my one concern, and the one that almost makes me feel just leaving Lamborghini works best. You go to that page, you see who owned it, and when. Excuse me if I'm discussing this in the wrong area as noted above. The discussion has been moved? 157.127.124.14 18:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay I have added parent company cell as space. In regards to vehicles that have been manufactured under the oversight and ownership of more than one parent company, we would need to simply list all of them with a <br> in-between. I know that in Eruope there are few made up brand names, however, American luxo cars such as Lincoln and Cadillac usually featured their own design- those that did have a resemblence to their lesser cousins were usually sales flops. (i.e. Cadillac Cimmarron or Lincoln Versailler) For example, the Navigator is based on the Expedition, there are however few interior and exterior clues of the relationship in the current generation. Thus I find the case of VW and Audi comparable to that of Ford and Lincoln, as you will find about as many clues in an Audi towards the brand ownership by the VAG as in a Lincoln towards its ownership by FoMoCo. As to Lamborghini, I understand that the pucharse took place more recently and that Lamboghini work independently from the VAG- so I think the new cell space should prove itself to be a statisfactory compromise. Best Regards, Signature^brendel 22:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the new template came out very nice. On the subject of made-up brands in Europe, now I'm curious. I couldn't think of any current European brand that is just a made-up badge. Did you have one or two in mind? 192.45.72.26 22:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

External Link

Hi i have currently made a new exotic car site [/http://www.exoticarchive.comcontent/view/38/64/ here]. I was wanting to add the relevant pages to relevant wiki pages and wondering if thats ok to do so? Please let me know.

Thanks, Richard

Link doesnt work... BabyJonas 02:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

In any case, it wouldn't be appropriate, as we try to keep external links to a minimum and don't link to forums or fansites unless there's content considered notable and not derivative (rare)

Pictures are displacing the edit links

The placement of the thumbnails is forcing the edit links of the sections down from the section titles. I tried to fix this in the Sandbox, but even putting the the LP640 picture in the LP640 section and the roadster and engine picture by the LP640 Roadster section (where it doesn't belong, since it's not a LP640 roadster...) doesn't give the edit links enough space. Does this article need that many pictures of the Murciélago coupe? Respectfully, SamBlob 23:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have noticed that too. Could we arrange all the thumbnails as a horizontal bar along the bottom of the article (above the links)? BabyJonas 02:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, the pictures in this article are subpar. Sincerely, Alheim 00:01, 18 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.25.130 (talk)

Cars Based on the Murcielago

I added a section like the one on Enzo Ferrari (car) and Bugatti EB110 meant to show other cars based on the Murcielago. User:SGJ91 17:59, January 23, 2008 (PST)

Castilian pronounciation of "Murciélago"

User 71.114.38.199 changed it to "mur-cee-EH-la-goh". Prior to that it was "moor-thee-EH-la-goh" which I believe is more similar to the correct pronouciation, because that is how it is pronouced by Lamborghini employees (who are Italian, but still I think they try to use original Castilian pronouciation.) Castilian Spanish speaker generally lisp their weak "c"s. The "TH" is probaly the best English equivilent of that. I will change it in a week if I have no objections. Here is a webpage with a link of native Spanish speaker saying Lamborghini car names: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=80005 . Here is a video of a German anouncer in saying it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnD7-mryxvY . It is about 9 seconds into the video —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebrojug (talk • contribs) 19:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Littlebrojug (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Littlebrojug

Reventon Link Dead

The 7th (And currently last) reference link for this article linking to a story about the new Lamborghini Reventon is currently inoperative. I will remove this link in a couple days if nobody can find the relevant article or one that includes the same specifics. Isikari 2:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

External links ?

Hello,

I've just went over this page again, and there are several links on the 'external links' section that are links to pages with additional information on the Murciélago, like the lamborghiniregistry.com link. But when I added a link to my pages, that hold a wealth of information and additional images on this amazing car, it was deleted quickly and considered spam. Could someone please let me know the difference between a link to my reference site and a link to the registry site ?

Many thanks Lambocars (talk) 13:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Murcielago SV

Hello,

there is no such model in the pipeline at Automobili Lamborghini, the SV designation dictates a lighter, rear wheel drive version ... Lamborghini will not produce a rear wheel drive model in the near future. I've spoken to Stephan Winkelmann at various events, and naturally he can not talk about future projects (I can't publish any info anyway) but one thing he insists upon is the fact that Lamborghini will stick to the VT system on all it's models, it has become a Lamborghini trademark since the Diablo VT evolutions, the Murcielago R-GT isn't a factory built car, this one does have RWD by the way. The wing they talk about in the referenced pages is just an old GT wing they had lying around, first it was left in plain carbon fiber on a green Murcielago, now it is apparently painted on this orange car. The only rear wheel drive Murcielago at this moment is the LP710/2 from edo competition, my guess is they will introduce a Superleggera model at Paris, not an SV model.

if you like I can edit the article to reflect this. Lambocars (talk) 13:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose not! AniRaptor2001 (talk) 17:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Murcielago R-GT

I noticed the motorsport section didn't have much info on the actual car, the Murcielago R-GT, so I added an external link to a page detailing this amazing race car.

If you prefer a reference I can edit the article with up to date info and put the link as a reference to it. Lambocars (talk) 13:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add information on the R-GT if you have a reliable source. I don't think your site would be considered a reliable source. Also, linking to to your own site is generally a conflict of interest. swaq 15:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a good one, not only is my link gone ... again, while other links just remain, but now you are telling me that I'm not a reliable source ... official Lamborghini dealers and Clubs from around the world use my site as their reference ... I've seen enough, apparently this is a closed club of a few people that run these pages and they don't like new blood, even if it is an almost direct source from the factory. Lambocars (talk) 12:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

{{RFCsoc}} Apparently Lambocars wants to contribute information on Lamborghini to these pages, but every time he add a link it gets deleted, I know that spamming isn't allowed, but I truly believe that the Lamborghini Cars pages are an addition to the articles on Wikipedia ... one editor even goes as far as stating the Lamborghini Cars site is an unreliable source ! As mentioned in the answer to this blatant lack of respect, the Lamborghini Cars site is used by official factory dealers and clubs as their reference, so I think that the info is as correct as possible.14:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

(Everyone can see the ownership of edits made.. altering your own, unsigned, addition to be a creepy mixture of third and first person (? in an effort to make it seem like someone taking your side ?) probably doesn't help your case. Quaeler (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC))

if you could take a look at the rfc page you would be able to read that you should not put your name under the rfc, but sign with only the date. By the way, I know Mark, and I for one would be glad if he would contribute to the Lamborghini pages on wikipedia. I really don't understand why you are all so hard on him, Mark is a reference on Lamborghini on his own, stating his site would be an unreliable source is showing a total lack of respect for a man that has spent almost 10 years on compiling the nr 1 source of Lamborghini information on the net today. Even the PR people at the factory in Sant'Agata respect him, but apparently that doesn't count over here 87.65.84.3 (talk) 16:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

RfC comment. Signing doesn't really matter, but explaining the dispute does. In particular, what links are you talking about. I see this one. It seems like it's against WP:EL insofar as it doesn't provide a unique resource and is not an official site. I should also add that Wikipedians tend to look suspiciously at users whose sole focus revolves around adding links. Looks like promotion, but I will assume that's not the case. Still, it doesn't need to be linked. Cool Hand Luke 21:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, reviewing your contributions, it's pretty clear that you're just promoting links. I'm closing this RfC, and leaving a warning on your talk page. Cool Hand Luke 21:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Lamborghini tuning

Hello, I've added a section on Lamborghini Murcielago tuning to the article, it was about the IMSA GTR model, but I intend to add other tuners too. However this section has been deleted already ... I would think this is interesting material for people who are reading about these amazing cars, not all of them remain standard factory issue, so I was under the impression a tuning section would be nice.

Can I at least put a small overview of possible tuners in the article, not a detailed list of who and what they do, but just an small section for people that are looking into customized Murciélago's ? WikiBull (talk) 13:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedic content, referenced in reliable third-party, may be included. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 17:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)