Talk:Volkswagen Golf Plus

Lack of sourcing on claim that this is a "compact MPV"

Multiple sources cast doubt on the claim that this is a "compact MPV". Autocar says in their review that one should "never escape with the idea that this is actually an MPV in disguise" and describes the car's interior features as "more akin to what it is – a large hatchback – than a conventional mid-sized MPV like the Touran." They later summarise that the Golf Plus is "not as flexible as a real MPV". Parker's Car Guides suggests in their review that it falls somewhere between a hatchback and MPV without directly commenting on what kind of car it is (beyond calling it a "family car"), and thus can't be used to draw conclusions without being WP:SYNTH. Auto Express says in their review that "the Golf Plus is neither a regular hatchback nor conventional compact MPV". The RAC's website's review compares the Golf Plus to "other five-seat MPVs like the Ford C-MAX" but then says that the Golf Plus is "Just like an MPV in fact. Or is it?", which leaves me inclined to say that it may be WP:SYNTH to use this source to back up the claim that the Golf Plus is an MPV. What Car's review describes the Golf Plus as both an MPV and a hatchback. Honest John's review does not use the term "MPV" anywhere and echoes Autocar by calling it "a large Golf hatchback". Top Gear magazine's review avoids using terms like "hatchback" or "MPV" in favour of simply describing the vehicle's characteristics and comparing them to those of other cars. The Sunday Times indicate in their review that it could be considered an MPV or a hatchback, although they note that "Volkswagen says it’s a hatchback, not an MPV (people carrier)". HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 07:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

I admit it is written as a compact MPV by WP:OR by matching it with similarly-sized and proportioned competitors such as the Renault Scenic, Citroën C4 Picasso and SEAT Altea and by comparing it to the VW Golf Mk5 which is categorized as a compact hatchback. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Reviving the discussion

@HumanBodyPiloter5: How a journalist will refer to the segment of a car as will differ and will all come down to the author's bias. I've seen compact cars referred to as mid-size, hatchbacks called station wagons, sedans called coupes, and so on. Wikipedia's manner of identifying vehicle segments relies more on how the car compares to other cars because nobody will every agree on one thing. For example, Indian news sources tend to call cars "compact" which people in North America or Europe would normally call either a city car/A-segment or a subcompact car/supermini/B-segment. Another example, most news sources and Kia itself refer to the Kia Soul as a crossover or SUV, but on Wikipedia, it has been identified as its properties being more similar to those of a small hatchback rather than a crossover. But unlike a crossover which is a marketing jargon that never got any further than such, a multi-purpose vehicle is a legitimate vehicle segment that's been practically established for decades regardless of whether someone refers to it as a wagon or hatchback or crossover because there is a clear pattern of cars that are not long enough to be wagons, too tall to be traditional hatchbacks, and not wide or rugged enough to be crossovers. Essentially, MPVs, excluding the larger ones with sliding doors that many would call minivans in NA, are to hatchbacks and other vans like what crossovers are to hatchbacks and SUVs. The Wikipedia article for mini MPVs refers to them as cars that "are typically based on the platform of a B-segment (supermini/subcompact) hatchback, with a raised roof and five-door body" and also say they'll have a "raised roof allows for higher H-point seating and easy passenger access compared with traditional hatchbacks". This perfectly describes all models in the supposed mini MPV segment, including the VW Golf Plus, save for it being based on a C-segment car rather than a B-segment one (however it is more similar in size to the mini MPV models). Why not classify all upscaled hatchbacks that some credible sources (even if some others call it something else) or even their manufacturers consider MPVs as MPVs when that's what's been already established here on Wikipedia? In my eyes, "hatchback" is a more wide and recognizable term (not to mention an older and lesser-used one too—MPV first was used in the 80s, I believe) than MPV is, so of course sources or people in general will inevitably call cars with a shape vaguely resemblant of a hatchback a hatchback, so I would be more trusting of the source that refers to the car as a more descriptive term like MPV.

If one of the concerns is that not many people know what a MPV is and therefore it should not be used to describe a car as opposed to a more simple term, that's what linking articles that will describe the subject are for. I cannot recount all the times I have not known what something was when it was described until I clicked on the linked article for it, and it's where I've come to understand and differentiate all of the many car segments and other unofficial classifications of cars. Waddles 🗩 🖉 02:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

I am not disputing the existence of multi-purpose vehicles, although I do think the term is a vague neologism that lacks MOS:COMMONALITY and that it shouldn't be used without first clarifying that the subject is a car or a van for the sake of any readers who live outside the UK and Ireland and aren't car enthusiasts. That isn't relevant in this case, however, where the issue is that there are multiple sources directly calling into question whether the Golf Plus is an MPV (try reading the quotes above), which to my eyes makes declaring it to "objectively" be an MPV without attribution a violation of WP:NPOV. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

It isn't really a vague neologism if it's an official vehicle segment that is defined as something specific. It also is not a term exclusive to the UK and Ireland, and is very prevalent in Asia (if not more there than in Europe) and has a small presence in the US too. Like I had said, if the case is that not everyone knows what it is, then it can be linked to the article that explains what it is. Plenty of articles will start off by referring to something that might be unfamiliar to readers. But it's not just about the lead section calling it simply a "car", the infobox has also been stripped of its vehicle segment parameter info.

If the real issue is that various sources refer to it differently, then why not identify it with all other vehicles with the exact same characteristics that are all being called one thing? BMW calls their SUVs "Sport Activity Vehicles" and some of their sedans "Gran Coupes" and so do some of the sources that cover them, but that doesn't stop Wikipedia from them what they actually are in the scope of vehicle segments, because they're clearly SUVs and sedans. In the case with the Golf Plus, even if Volkswagen marketed it as 'the hatchbackiest of the hatchbacks', it'd still be an MPV. The high roof, short body, more practical interior, clearly indicate it's an MPV. That doesn't disqualify it from being called a "5-door hatchback" when referring to its body style, because in that scope, it IS a hatchback. How would we know for sure if the sources that are calling it a hatchback aren't only referring the body style or the fact it is based on an actual hatchback and the ones that call it an MPV are only referring to it as such because it matches the dimensions of other vehicles in the MPV segment? Waddles 🗩 🖉 17:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)