Talk:Haynes Manual

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] VfD

This article was subject to a VfD which resulted in a keep vote. The discussion may be found here. The article has greaylt improved from when it was first listed for deletion [1], and the VfD probably helped to get the article noticed and subsequently greatly expanded. Harro5 22:52, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

The article is way better now than it was yesterday. I'm not sure about the point of listing every car for which a manual is available though. Would it suffice to say (and be more maintainable) that many of the more common cars are covered? Friday 13:17, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

• If it were a list of the shops in the world that one could buy Haynes manuals from, it wouldn't be a terribly useful or maintainable list. But a list of the vehicles for which a Haynes manual exists is both useful (to those who want the answer to the question "Is there a Haynes manual for my car?") and maintainable. Whilst it is difficult for any arbitrary Wikipedia editor to compile and maintain a list of all shops in the world where the manuals are sold, it is comparatively simple for any arbitrary Wikipedia editor to compile and maintain a list of all vehicles for which there are Haynes manuals. Furthermore: Wikipedia articles on bands contain lists of the albums that they have created, Wikipedia articles on writers contain lists of the books that they have written, Wikipedia articles on actors contain lists of the films that they have acted in, and Wikipedia articles on South Park characters contain lists of the episodes in which the characters have died. Why should an article on Haynes manuals not include a list of the vehicles for which there is a Haynes manual? Jonathan de Boyne Pollard 13:58, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I guess I'd been assuming people wanting to know if their car is covered would use the Haynes website, maybe using a page like this [2]. If we're just cutting and pasting from a website, I don't see the value. But then again I suppose I don't see the harm either. BTW I completely agree that in some topic areas, the number/length of articles is completely out of control. In this case, between the 40+ makes, the sometimes large number of models per make, and the number of years, I thought it was too much. But if people want to add it, I'm certainly not going to go trying to delete it. Friday 14:28, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] list

The list is unencyclopedic, incomplete, and outdated. It's far more appropriate material for the HAynes website, or for the website of a bookseller. I'll be removing it in the next few days, if there are no well-reasoned objections. -- Mikeblas 03:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• After two months with no comments or improvements, I've removed the un-cited content and the unencyclopedic directory of available manuals. -- Mikeblas 15:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
  • You evidently didn't read the rest of this talk page first. Read it. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard 11:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Actually, I did. You're for it, and Friday is against it, but won't take action. I took action. The list is unencyclopedic, and Wikipedia is not a directory. An external link to the list is appropriate, but including the list in this article serves no use, churns the article, and crowds the rest of the content. -- Mikeblas 12:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Your action is wrong, as is your idea of what is unencyclopaedic. Your position will only become a consistent one when we see you removing all of the discographies from musician articles, too. After all, they, too, could just as easily be externally linked to, and they, too, crowd articles. Go and erase some discographies and then come back here. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard 13:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Musical releases listed in the article describing the band or artist are a very different matter than reproducing a list of all the titles produced by a publisher. The list here pretty clearly falls into the latter category, as the books don't have a single author and aren't descriptive of a representative style or mode of artwork. I've again removed the list. If you still disagree, I think we should seek a third opinion. -- Mikeblas 21:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Offering a third opinion here (in case it's still needed). A copy of Haynes's vehicle coverage would be redundant and inevitably out-of-date. If someone doesn't see their vehicle listed on the page they'll check the Haynes website anyway just in case Wikipedia's list is out-of-date. Maintaining a copy of the list on Wikipedia just creates unnecessary work. Regarding the comparison with discographies etc., I don't see this as valid for several reasons:

• there is not always a complete, up-to-date primary source for discographies like there is for the Haynes list,
• many works listed on musician pages have or may deserve their own articles - Haynes Ford Focus 01-05 et al. will never need their own articles,
• discography lists convey information that cannot be inferred from a single sentence - "covering a wide range of makes, models, and years (300 models of car and 130 models of motorcycle)" gives me a pretty good idea of what the Haynes titles will be,
• many lists on Wikipedia are unnecessary and arguing for consistency with them will only spread the list-mania. -- AbleRiver 11:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)