At first the "limousine" category was made for stretched limousines. But then we also included long sedans, and now lots of sedans with 3 side window are listed there. This is correct, since it is what means "limousine", but I wonder if it is useful to keep these separated from other sedans?
So what to do with the "limousine" category?
- Keep it like current
- Add a "stretched limousine" category
- Rename it to "stretched limousine" and move "small" limousines to the "sedan" category?

I think Limousines ...should just be for stretched Limousines.
A lot of older cars were called limousines ... but are just long saloons/sedans.!
I had a Buick Electra Park Avenue which was close to 19ft long ... the same size as a Daimler DS420 (limousine.!) ..but the Buick is just a Sedan ..it may be long..but still a sedan.!
There are special cases ..such as the above Daimler ... which was made especially..as a Limousine.(No normal saloon versions.!)
Also Rolls Royce Phantoms(all Limousines)

By the way, having too many categories is not really useful, so I would be for the 3rd solution.
Cf the other topic about merging hatchback with sedan, I do not think that it would be useful to keep 4-window sedan and 6-window sedan (=limousine) separated.

I disagree with the definitions put forward for "limousine". A limousine is merely a sedan that is separated into two compartments: one for the chauffeur and one for the passengers; length does not come into the equation. Cadillac made for many years the Fleetwood 75 SEDAN (no division) and the Fleetwood 75 LIMOUSINE (with division); both cars look the same on the outside. You need to keep a category for sedans (any length) and another for limousines (even short ones, like the mentioned Daimler).

That definition is for the French word "limousine"... I thought it was the same in English. You are sure that it is not a meaning used only for Cadillacs?
It is not useful to put limousines in a separate category if they are identical to the sedans when seen from the outside... For the Cadillac example, both could be listed in the same category, IMHO.
On the other hand, stretched limousine have to be listed separately, since they are much different from the sedan used as basis.

I don't think that there is any current and universally accepted definition of the word limousine. Size is not a good measure as some old american 2 door coupes were larger than european limos.

If it was called a limo by the maker then I don't have any problem with our calling it the same. I certainly don't think that we want to put the old formal town cars in the sedan category just because the are not stretched. I see the poll results but no place to vote, I would vote to keep it the way it is.

The VW Beetle was called "Limousine"... (since in German it means "Sedan" :D)
The current use of the category is most of the time for stretched limousines or long 6-window sedans.

I understand but the site is in english and french and no one (even the germans) would consider the VW a limo. Would you call http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_25647-Rolls-Royce-Phantom-I.html a sedan because it is not stretched??

For me it is a sedan (well, actually a "coupé de ville", but we do not have enough categories, so I would put it in the "berline" category, i.e. sedan).
Not because it is not stretched, but because it does not have an extra 3rd lateral window after the door.
http://correlalicorne.free.fr/pages/quoi.html
There is also an official naming from 1930, but these names are different from the link above:
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/desa.dom/fr/modeles/carro-fr.htm
(page also include UK ans US names, click on "anglaise" and "américaine" links)

It is as I said, there is no one definition that will satisfy everyone so perhaps we should leave it alone. In the US most people call the airport shuttle vans Limos .

However, by no stretch of my imagination can I agree that an actual "coupe de ville" (open driver/closed passenger) should be listed as a sedan

What else would you call it? In French it does not match at all the "limousine" definition

I just have to quit getting into these discussions because it is highly likely that don't understand the nuances of the other languages and am making an ass of myself.

Personally, I think a limousine is a luxurious, chauffeur driven car with a partition between the passenger and chauffeur - this includes the coupe de ville and some small london taxis. It does not include other non-partitioned cars.

If we are going to have separate classes for mini and super-mini, I just can't understand putting a rolls royce, coupe de ville in the same class as a citroen 2CV. If I understand the words correctly you would call a 'coupe de ville' (city/town car) a 'berline'(sedan)?

I do agree that we don't need too many classifications. In fact, left to my own devices, I would probably just have, car, truck, bike, military, farm, bus, construction/warehouse, and custom vehicles. The remaining information could go in the extra info or be obvious from the picture.

Of course it would be easier for classification to merge sedan, limousine and hatchback What you say about the few general categories is indeed an easier classification system. I do not really know why we made so many categories for cars, bikes, etc.

Many categories certainly make things more difficult and does not add much that could not easily go in extra info. Frankly, I would merge most all of the cars into one category and move pickups to the truck category. One could put for example, 1975, Cadillac, coupe de ville in the cars category and "stretched limousine" (or anything else they think fits) in extra info.

We could easily get into a discussion regarding SUV/4x4 when you think about the Subaru Outback is it SUV, 4x4, break, or car? The answer is probably yes to all. Also, think about the Audi, it may be 4x4 but not SUV!

The more categories we have the easier it is get into nit-picking discussions about what fits into what category.

In addition, it causes me to get into these discussions Forgive me but I'm old and like things to be simple.

One of the appendices to the "Styling" section of my Cadillac Database gives the encyclopaedic definition of the various body styles and types of wheeled vehicles, including the horse-drawn versions of today's automobiles:
www.car-nection.com/yann/Dbas_txt/Sty_apdx.htm
Like "Wrenchhead", I'm old and I like things simple yet precise. If American-English is to be the language of the site, then we need to use proper definitions in that language. In French, for example, a "Coupe de Ville" is what the Americans call a "Town Car" (a car with no roof, or a removable one, over the driver's compartment). The Cadillac "Coupe de Ville" has no relation to either; it is simply a model NAME that was added to the firm's catalog in 1949. The idea of basic categories like car, truck, bike, military, farm, bus, construction/ warehouse, and custom vehicles is a good one, provided there is a "box" of sufficient size to include salient information of interest to the researcher and historian.

About moving pickups to trucks, I do not really like the idea. I agree that some US pickup may have a size/weight closer to a heavy semitrailer truck, but others like a Chevrolet El Camino or a Peugeot 504 Pickup are just normal cars. It is like if you list a minivan as a bus

I don't know about europe but in the US pickups are built, sold, registered, licensed, insured, and taxed as trucks -Granted some may be small trucks but they are trucks nevertheless.

In Europe they are less common, so I am not very sure.
The limit between a real "truck" and a car is the weight. I do not know for other countries, but in Belgium the "car" driving license allows you to drive 4-wheel vehicles of max 3500 kg with max 8 passengers (+ the driver then).
For the tax, they can be (but it is optional) less taxed because they are commercial vehicle, but it also works with any car that is declared as commercial, i.e. where there is more than x% of space available for goods, and that this space is separated from the seats by a fixed panel or grill.

Maybe that the "truck" category should be renamed as "heavy trucks" then?

I think its probably OK. I was just pointing out some of the inconsistencies in the classification of vehicles from my point of view.

I guess the US is different regarding trucks, I guess the main difference is that trucks (including pickups and many SUVs built on truck frames are classed as trucks and do not have to meet all the safety standards that are mandated for cars.

If I had to separate them your explanation may be best e.g. commericial and non-commericial trucks.

current