Talk:Mitsubishi 3000GT

Unnecessary Edits

This page doesn't need the edits that the last user requested. In my opinion this page is complete and doesn't need anymore edits at all unless they are grammar related.

In the section about the second generation models there is a 'citation needed' notice just because "the car was well received"? Unnecessary. In fact there is already a citation/source from a 1994 MotorWeek test of a 1994 2g VR-4 and they praised the car heavily. The 2g cars had more HP&TQ, higher boost, a closer ratio 6 speed manual, and Mitsubishi perfected the design. One of the biggest complaints about the 1g VR-4s styling was the blister caps on the hood; these were removed in 1994 for the US market and the motoring press did notice.

If you insist on *another* citation about the motoring press MotorTrend named the 3000GT 'Import Car of the Year' in 1991, it's easily found online.

This is one of the most misunderstood JDM cars created, the last thing this page needs is more confusion and nitpicking. This page has many, many legitimate citations/sources to back up everything stated. VR-4 Enthusiast (talk) 05:28, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

STOP DELETING INFO. YOU ARE LAZY AND INCORRECT

Whoever you are, you have destroyed this page. I spent an hour putting relevant links in the GTO MR section. I will do it EVERY day until you stop deleting it. I have the sources and the information backed up. It is verifiable FACT that the GTO MR ran 12.8-13.3 quarter mile times, I'm assuming you were too lazy to even watch any of it. Best Motoring IS allowed as a source, and the GTO MR section is BARREN because you keep deleting information. I will continue to copy and paste the info I did daily, and you get the fun job of erasing the same VALID SOURCES I put up. GO TO A DIFFERENT PAGE. You know nothing of this car and do not care about how sentances/paragraphs flow...most importantly, you want to live in your comfortable bubble where the GTO MR didn't run a 12.8s stock 400m run. I am also altering the reception page to reflect how much faster the VR-4 was than the Nissan 300ZX TT and Mazda RX7 TT, neither came close to the DOCUMENTED 13.4s run in 1999 by PM or the 13.3 it ran in 1995 by SCI. You are denying video proof done by professional race car drivers. GET A LIFE. I will continue to paste in the relevant information and the moment you delete it, i will put it RIGHT BACK UP. 2603:8000:C33E:11B:B5C1:90D1:8547:76DB (talk) 11:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

The countless various acceleration times achieved by various magazines is of no relevance to this article. See WP:STYLE for tips on how to write an article, WP:NOT for what doesn't. See Talbot Samba for a good example of the type of content that does belong. See WP:3RR for some pointers on edit warring. The comfort of my bubble is in no measure affected by the quartermile times achieved by the good people of Best Motoring, whose videos I do enjoy for their entertainment value.

The fact that you deleted Road & Track's test results because they don't suit you tells us all we need to know. Perhaps you should spend all of this time creating a 3000 GT fansite instead?  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

I hope you got my reply. I again apologize for the mess. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 23:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I added to the GTO MR section, it is a bit barren. The final drive ratio is different and I also put some sources in about its' performance.

My son sometimes edits on here, I apologize if he deleted anything or said anything rude. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 23:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Are you VR-4 Enthusiast (talk · contribs) by any chance?  Mr.choppers | ✎  23:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

No, that isn't me. It could be my son's. I see you've already deleted what I put out

 LotusEsprit4me (talk) 23:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

The final drive ratio and performance numbers do matter. A 12.8 second 0-400m run is significant. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to start a war. I think you should consider how important the numbers are to fans of the platform and to those who don't know it well. I believe people should be aware of how fast the GTO MR is. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 23:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I *barely* edited the section on GTO MR. I only added TWO relevant links. The FD ratio on MRs is different than that of the normal GTO TT and a 0-400m run of 12.8s is the fastest time this platform has ever ran. Its significant. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 00:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

See WP:LITTLEBROTHER and WP:SOCKPUPPET. And no, magazine test times are not significant.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

It's not a magazine its a TV show. I'm not a troll, but thanks for assuming that.

Actually a 12.8s 0 to 400m run is important. What isn't is your awful section on the Spyder. You don't even name the actual colors LotusEsprit4me (talk) 00:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Go ahead and delete what you want. There are enough fans of this platform that the 12.8s run will inevitably be on the page despite you thinking colors are more important than performance times. You don't have a reason to delete what I edited. None besides you seemingly "thinking" this is your page. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 00:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I think maybe you need to stop assuming things. You claim to be a kei car fan but your kei car pages are awful. LotusEsprit4me (talk) 00:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

You are a buffoon and you will be blocked if you keep using sockpuppets. Numerous editors have explained to you dozens of times over the years why selectively listing scores of magazine test results is unsuitable for an encyclopedia. What makes you think I added the colors? Also, the names of the colors used to be in the article but were removed by 842U back in 2018. See here.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

 Mr.choppers |  Your resorting to name-calling is seriously impeding your effectiveness here. Please do your best to assume Good Faith -- and reduce the vitriol, where possible. Thanks for your wanting to improve the article. 842U (talk) 10:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@842U: I have been extremely patient with this guy for several years now. I would argue that his attempts at goading me (see top of this entry, attempting to criticize "my" articles on kei cars, hating on "my" section on the Spyder) are actual examples of buffoonery. But I agree, there is no benefit to it, I should just have him blocked and gone. Thanks.  Mr.choppers | ✎  23:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

This is out of control, all over a small section. Personally I think any acceleration figures for the 3000GT/GTO are important; as one professional put it, the VR-4s biggest draw is its' straight line speed. Also little is known about the GTO MR in the US so the more info the better JDM90sStyle (talk) 22:03, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 21 October 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Sound policy-based proposal with (ultimately) no opposition. Well done. В²C ☎ 06:17, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

---

Mitsubishi GTO → Mitsubishi 3000GT – This car was sold as the Mitsubishi 3000GT in all countries outside of Japan. As per WP:CARNAMES, if the name used in the manufacturer's home country is not used in English-speaking countries, then the article title should be the model name used in the majority of English-speaking countries.  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

• Comment - I note the specific wording of WP:CARNAMES is whether or not the model name is "used" in English speaking countries, and what the model is "known as". On Carsales (an Australian website) there are currently 13 cars for sale listed as being a GTO [1], but just one 3000GT [2], presumably because (significantly) more were imported from the JDM than sold locally through dealers. Of course this isn't a standard argument in a RM discussion, and I haven't checked any other sales sites etc so I leave it here as a comment only. A7V2 (talk) 08:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@A7V2: Yes, there are a lot of JDM cars floating around, but the car's biggest market was the US (by orders of magnitude, at about 80 percent: nearly 84,000 3000 GTs were sold stateside in nine model years, plus over 63,000 Stealths, out of 182,867 GTO/3000GT/Stealths built for the entire world according to Japanese WP). As far as I interpret WP:CARNAMES it means "what was the car marketed as when new" - otherwise the entry for Chevrolet Cavalier should be titled "Pile of Steaming Garbage", for instance.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:22, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

That makes sense. Happy to support this move. A7V2 (talk) 00:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is this page finished?

I was unable to edit the GTO MR or add sources where there's a "need source" notification - some kind of bot erased it. Honestly this page is finished, it has all the info it needs. I'd like to add a bit but it doesn't 'need' it. @MrChompers - thank you for changing the name to 3000GT, it makes more sense. Also thank you for taking care of the page.

Is this page able to be edited? Thanks JDM90sStyle (talk) 22:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

GTO MR info - can I use this source or is this not useful?

Hi, I'm a big fan of this platform and have made edits to this page in the past. The GTO MR section is goobut d could be better. I found this quote online - "The GTO was Mitsubishi’s entry in to the high performance Japanese sports car market. The MR version posted better 0-60, 1/4 mile, and braking performance than the MKIV Supra, and the Skyline GTR V-Spec, while costing a fraction of the price"

this is the website - http://www.hoshimotion.com/autos/1997-mitsubishi-gto-mr/

I won't edit this in unless it's relevant. If not, thank you for your time. 2603:8000:C33E:11B:4CF:AAEB:5410:504E (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It's an advertisement, a puff piece. Not dependable, I am afraid. See WP:RS. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  21:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! 2607:FB91:8820:53F6:1074:A4FF:FE03:ED1F (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent model name | Move request

I notice there is a closed discussion regarding the name and page title from a couple of years ago, when the page was moved from "Mitsubishi GTO" to "Mitsubishi 3000GT".

The previous discussion references WP:CARNAMES and makes a handful of claims. One of these is that the page should be titled based on whatever model name was used in "English speaking countries". I have no clue why such a policy would ever exist, as I find this to be closed minded and xenophobic. Another claim made is that it was sold as the 3000GT in "all countries" other than Japan. I can personally confirm that this is factually inaccurate as these vehicles were sold brand new on the New Zealand Market as the Mitsubishi GTO. You can find one for sale here: https://www.trademe.co.nz/4788523608

I'm not sure how much the wording has been changed since the move in 2022 however when I look up WP:CARNAMES it initially states the following:

"The titles of automobile articles should be the model name used in the country where the vehicle's manufacturer is headquartered."

Having also looked at the contextual examples given, particularly the one regarding the Daewoo Lacetti, I believe this makes perfect sense and should be the case here. Indeed the GTO was marketed under different names in some parts of the world, however from what I can gather this was simply to avoid confusion or conflict with other automobile manufacturers. I should also point out that despite the title being 3000GT, the Japanese name is used throughout the body of the article itself, suggesting that previous editors are comfortable using this instead. In fact many Americans etc seem to be aware of the GTO model name and use it interchangeably, whereas here in New Zealand I have never heard a single person refer to it as a 3000GT.

I propose the title be reverted and the page be moved back to "Mitsubishi GTO" for reasons of simplicity (especially when looking at the "GTO disambiguation" page), consistency (within this article as well as with other automobile article titles) and impartiality (set aside any personal and cultural biases).

Nga mihi. Crazfulla (talk) 13:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you should take trademe's text about that car having been sold in NZ when new with a grain of salt. Show me a reliable source that says these were sold as GTOs in NZ when new and we can reopen the naming discussion. I reckon all GTO's in NZ are used imports from Japan.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah, here we are: Look at this picture of the GTO's speedometer - it ends at 180km/h, required by Japanese market legislation but not something you'd see on an NZ market car.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)