Talk:Ferrari 360

Can we please stop making edits on the designer of the Ferrari 360 without credible sources? There have been repeated changes to the designer attribution that are not supported by reliable, verifiable sources. This issue needs to be addressed in accordance with Wikipedia’s core content policies.

All available official materials from Pininfarina consistently credit Lorenzo Ramaciotti as the designer responsible for the Ferrari 360. This attribution is further supported by the United States design patent associated with the vehicle, which aligns with the sources currently cited in the article.

Claims attributing the design to “Goran” appear to rely solely on employment at Pininfarina. Employment alone is not sufficient evidence of authorship. By that standard, numerous individuals involved in the design process would also need to be credited, which is not how authorship is determined in reliable sources.

Additionally, there are no known design patents or authoritative sources for the Ferrari 456 GT or Ferrari 550 Maranello that attribute authorship to Goran. If such claims are to be made, they must be supported by strong, independent, and verifiable references. If anyone can provide such sources or patents, please present them here for review.

At present, the repeated addition of unsourced or weakly sourced claims goes against: Verifiability No original research Neutral point of view

Before making further changes to the designer field, please: Provide high-quality, independent sources explicitly supporting the claim Ensure those sources clearly establish authorship, not just employment or involvement Discuss proposed changes here on the talk page if there is any ambiguity

Until such sources are provided, the attribution to Lorenzo Ramaciotti—supported by official documentation and existing citations—should remain stable.

Repeatedly adding contested material without proper sourcing may be considered disruptive editing and may lead to administrative intervention if it continues. Ferrari360OG (talk) 21:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

You need to understand that Ramaciotti was not the stylist, he was a managing director, a supervisor to the team of designers. That is why as a director he is on the patent documents, exactly the same way as Fioravanti is on the Camardella-designed F40 patent documents, as a director. You are jumping to conclusions based on their specific corporate structure. YBSOne (talk) 12:05, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand the distinction being made here, but I do not think it invalidates attributing the Ferrari 360 to Lorenzo Ramaciotti.

The issue is not whether car design is collaborative — of course it is — but whether Ramaciotti was merely an unrelated administrator. The available sources do not describe him that way. Auto & Design identified him, at the time of the 360’s launch, as “General Manager of Pininfarina Studi e Ricerche” and directly quoted him explaining the design brief and the themes developed for the 360 Modena.^[1] FCA/Stellantis’ own corporate biography for Ramaciotti also states that during the 17-year period in which he headed Pininfarina design, he “developed” the 360 Modena along with the 550 Maranello, Enzo, F430 and 612 Scaglietti.^[2]

The patent trail points in the same direction. U.S. design patent D411,138 for the production car lists Ferrari S.p.A. as assignee and Lorenzo Ramaciotti as inventor.^[3] Whatever one’s view of internal studio workflow, that is still part of the formal attribution record for the finished design.

So I am not claiming Ramaciotti worked alone or that no individual stylists contributed within the studio. I am saying that crediting the design director / head of design for the completed work is a normal and source-supported way of attributing authorship in a team medium. It is broadly analogous to crediting the director of a film: many people contribute, but the director is still commonly treated as the accountable creative lead for the final work. In Ramaciotti’s case, even later coverage describes him as Pininfarina’s design director for the latter two decades and the person responsible for signing off major Ferrari designs.^[4]

For that reason, I continue to credit Lorenzo. That does not erase team contributions, but it does reflect the strongest documented attribution presently cited. So the material I added was not “jumping to conclusions”; it was based on the patent attribution and published descriptions of Ramaciotti’s actual role at Pininfarina during the 360 program. If there are equally strong reliable sources naming another person as the principal stylist of the 360, those can certainly be discussed as well. Ferrari360OG (talk) 12:27, 22 March 2026 (UTC) Ferrari360OG (talk) 12:27, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

"I am not claiming Ramaciotti worked alone", yes you do, claiming he was the "sole inventor" just because the patent only lists him because he was the general director at the time. This is the part of a synthesis you still hang on to, but is false. See the Ferrari F40 designers and patent for the analogy.YBSOne (talk) 12:37, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

To be clear, the sentence in question was describing the patent document, not asserting that Ramaciotti necessarily worked alone in a broader studio sense. U.S. design patent D411,138 for the 360 explicitly identifies Ferrari S.p.A. as assignee and lists Lorenzo Ramaciotti as the sole inventor named on the patent.^[5] That is a factual statement about the contents of the patent record.

The Ferrari F40 analogy does not make that wording false. Its U.S. design patent, D306,274, likewise identifies Ferrari as assignee and names Leonardo Fioravanti as the inventor on the patent.^[6] So the point of comparison may be useful for discussing the limits of patent attribution, but it does not change the basic fact that the 360 patent itself names Ramaciotti as the only inventor listed on that document.

If the concern is that readers may confuse patent inventorship with sole overall design authorship, then the remedy is not to remove the patent fact, but to word it more precisely. For example: “Ramaciotti later filed a U.S. design patent for the 360’s external form; patent D411,138, granted on 22 June 1999, names him as the sole inventor on the patent and depicts the production 360 Modena from multiple views.” That keeps the statement accurate, document-based, and avoids over-reading the patent. Ferrari360OG (talk) 12:51, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

This is a patent for Ferrari F40 designed by Pietro Camardella under Aldo Brovarone, states that Fioravanti is the "sole inventor". YBSOne (talk) 15:29, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Take a look how many Fiat/Ferrari/Maserati cars are "invented" by Ramaciotti. Almost as if that was his job to oversee? YBSOne (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

another interesting find. Alfa 164 designed by Enrico Fuamia, "invented" by project manager Giorgio Guelfi.

"Two project managers will follow the entire definition of the models: engineer Giorgio Guelfi and Mr. Alfonso Cosma." YBSOne (talk) 16:03, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Here is something interesting:

In 2007 Andrea Pininfarina invented Maserati GranTurismo, the car designed by Jason Castriota, but in 2009 Ramaciotti also invented the very same car, designed by Jason Castriota. YBSOne (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

You still have not provided the one thing required here: a reliable source specifically crediting Goran Popović as the designer of the Ferrari 360. Everything you have posted about the F40, Alfa 164, GranTurismo, or Ramaciotti appearing on multiple patents is beside the point. None of that sources the Ferrari 360 to Goran.

By contrast, there are multiple sources directly connecting Lorenzo Ramaciotti to the Ferrari 360. At the car’s launch, Auto & Design identified Ramaciotti as “General Manager of Pininfarina Studi e Ricerche” and quoted him directly, in first-person plural, explaining the 360’s design brief and the proposals developed for the car.^[7] FCA/Stellantis’ own corporate biography of Ramaciotti states that during the 17-year period in which he headed Pininfarina design, he developed approximately 20 concept cars and “directed projects of successful automobiles,” specifically including the Ferrari 360 Modena.^[8]

The patent record says what it says. U.S. design patent D411,138 for the 360 names Ferrari S.p.A. as assignee and Lorenzo Ramaciotti as the inventor named on that patent.^[9] If your argument is that patent inventorship does not automatically settle every question of studio authorship, that is a separate point. But it still does not provide a source for replacing Ramaciotti with Goran Popović as the credited designer of the Ferrari 360.

Just as importantly, Pininfarina’s own design process was not a one-man exercise. A case study on Pininfarina explains that specific projects were distributed to teams specialised by client, and that these teams were “composed of 6 to 7 car designers led by a design team leader”.^[10] That actually cuts against your present edit, because it supports the point that Pininfarina projects were team efforts under design leadership, not that an unsourced individual name should simply replace the documented head of the programme.

So the sourcing issue remains very simple:

1. There are direct sources tying Ramaciotti to the Ferrari 360.
2. There is a patent record naming Ramaciotti on the 360 patent.
3. There is also evidence that Pininfarina handled projects through multi-designer teams.

What is still missing is a reliable source that specifically says Goran Popović was the Ferrari 360’s designer. Until that source is produced, you should stop restoring that claim as if it were established fact.

If you have a source showing that Popović was part of the Ferrari 360 design team, then the only potentially valid edit would be to add him among the other designers/design team contributors, with the wording matching exactly what the source says. What you do not currently have is a source strong enough to justify inserting him as the singular designer of the Ferrari 360 in place of the documented design director. Ferrari360OG (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

For the record, I reviewed the design section I wrote, and it does not generally present Lorenzo Ramaciotti as a lone stylist working in isolation. The wording repeatedly frames him as the person directing or leading the project at Pininfarina, while also making clear that the work was done by a team and that many designers contributed.

The relevant wording I used was:

• “Under the direction of Lorenzo Ramaciotti, head of Pininfarina’s design studio, the team produced a curvaceous, aerodynamically efficient body...”
• “Ramaciotti’s team at Pininfarina began by exploring a number of full-size clay models during 1996–97...”
• “Although many designers contributed during the development phase, Ferrari and Pininfarina only officially credit the completed design to Pininfarina under Lorenzo Ramaciotti’s direction.”

Those are not statements of sole studio authorship. They explicitly describe Ramaciotti as overseeing and directing the work of a team.

The only sentence using singular wording was the patent-related sentence:

• “The patent (US design patent D411,138, granted 22 June 1999) lists Ramaciotti as the sole inventor and depicts the production 360 Modena from multiple views.”

That sentence was plainly referring to what the patent document says. It was not written as a general statement that no other designer contributed to the Ferrari 360 project. In fact, the surrounding text says the opposite by expressly referring to “the team” and to “many designers” contributing.

So it is simply not accurate to say that my design section uniformly claimed Ramaciotti was the sole designer of the Ferrari 360. The text, as written, mainly presents him as the design leader / design director under whom the project was carried out, while the patent sentence separately reports the wording of the patent record itself. Ferrari360OG (talk) 19:48, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

"Claims attributing the design to “Goran” appear to rely solely on employment at Pininfarina. Employment alone is not sufficient evidence of authorship" This is original research. We don't do this on Wikipedia. We also don't use our own interpretation of the documents, we rely on automotive historians that have interviewed multiple designers. You will find out that Pininfarina does not credit any designers on their own, and even redact their signatures. I hope this case is closed. YBSOne (talk) 20:10, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

No — that is not original research. Original research would be me inventing a theory or drawing a conclusion without sourcing. What I posted was sourced material, and where I made factual statements, they were taken directly from published sources and from the wording of the cited patent record. Reporting what a source says is not original research.

What is a problem here is that you keep asserting broad counter-claims such as “Pininfarina does not credit any designers on their own” and “we rely on automotive historians that have interviewed multiple designers,” yet you still have not produced a reliable source that specifically credits Goran Popović as the designer of the Ferrari 360. That is the central issue. Under WP:V and WP:BURDEN, challenged material must be supported by a reliable source. Repeating objections is not a substitute for citing one.

I also reject the suggestion that nothing can be said unless an automotive historian interviewed multiple designers. That is not Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia uses reliable published sources, including books, period publications, company material where appropriate for straightforward factual claims, and formal records such as patents when they are being described accurately and without overstatement. That is exactly what I did.

To be absolutely clear: I did not invent authorship, I did not write my own theory, and I did not rely on “employment alone”. The text I added described Ramaciotti using source-based wording such as directing the project, heading the studio, and being named on the patent record. In the design section itself, I also explicitly stated that many designers contributed during the development phase. That is the opposite of original research and the opposite of claiming a one-man effort.

If you want to challenge any specific sentence, then challenge that sentence and explain exactly which source-backed wording you believe is unsupported. But blanket dismissals of sourced content as “original research” are not convincing, especially while you continue to avoid supplying a direct source for your own preferred attribution.

So no, this case is not “closed” merely because you say so. It is closed when reliable sources are applied consistently. At present, I have cited sources for what I added. You still need to cite a reliable source that explicitly attributes the Ferrari 360 to Goran Popović if you want that claim maintained. Until then, your position remains unsupported. Ferrari360OG (talk) 20:28, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

A further source worth noting here is Top Gear’s interview piece “Meet the king of Italian car design”, written by Sam Philip and published on 1 April 2015.^[11]

That article describes Lorenzo Ramaciotti as having remained at Pininfarina for over 30 years, serving as its design director for the latter two decades, and says he was responsible for the sign-off of major designs including the Ferrari 456, 550 and Enzo.^[12] That is relevant because it again supports the point that Ramaciotti was not being treated in the sources as a detached administrator, but as the senior design authority overseeing and approving major Pininfarina/Ferrari work.

There are also later automotive-publication sources that credit him with the 360. Kenneth Hall wrote in Motor Authority that during the 17-year period in which Ramaciotti headed Pininfarina design, he developed approximately 20 cars including the Ferrari 360 Modena.^[13] Automobile Magazine likewise described him as having been in charge of countless vehicle projects at Pininfarina, including standout Ferraris such as the 360 Modena.^[14] Noah Joseph also referred to Ramaciotti’s “hits like the Ferrari 360 Modena” in Autoblog.^[15]

So, while I have not yet found an ideal open-access historian source phrased exactly as some editors may prefer, there are plainly published automotive sources that connect Lorenzo Ramaciotti to the Ferrari 360, including a contemporary design article quoting him directly about the creation of the car. Ferrari360OG (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2026 (UTC) Ferrari360OG (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

It is literally the first source in the article: , That is why we use multiple sources from people that know what they are talking about. Also take note that journalists do jump to easy conclusions and attribute every design to the Carrozzeria name-sake, like in case of Bertone and Nuccio Bertone. Drop the stick. YBSOne (talk) 23:44, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

That is exactly why my position has been consistent: I have no objection to Goran Popović being mentioned in the design section as one of the contributing designers involved in the Ferrari 360 program, if that is what a reliable source specifically supports. What I do object to is the attempt to elevate that into a claim that the Ferrari 360 was his project/design, or that Lorenzo Ramaciotti can be removed from the design account. Those are entirely different claims, and they require entirely different sourcing.

Comments like “drop the stick” are not sourcing arguments and do not help resolve the content dispute. If this discussion is now at an impasse, then it should be reviewed by an uninvolved third party.

Ferrari360OG (talk) 01:43, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

It is requested that an edit be made to the fully protected article at Ferrari 360. (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, so that an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately. Edit requests to fully protected pages should only be used for edits that are either uncontroversial or supported by consensus. If the proposed edit might be controversial, discuss it on the protected page's talk page before using this template. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request. When the request has been completed or denied, please add the |answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template.

Could the article temporarily use Pininfarina as the design attribution, rather than naming either Lorenzo Ramaciotti or Goran Popović individually, while the current sourcing discussion is being resolved?

The individual attribution is actively disputed, and a broader company-level attribution would be a neutral interim wording that avoids reader confusion until consensus is reached through the talk page and third-party input.

This request is only for temporary stability and does not seek to prejudge the final outcome of the discussion. Thank you. Ferrari360OG (talk) 02:42, 23 March 2026 (UTC)