Talk:Motorcycling advocacy

Point of View
The article is slanted very much in the direction of agents helmet laws.

Some thoughts that might help: "The debate over helmets is most interesting" - What is the other side of this story? Why is it debated? Who is debating agents this? Why has nothing been done yet? R00m c (talk) 01:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

POV tag
This concerns POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. From WP tag policy: '''Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.''' Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Blanked the helmet section
The material in the helmet section waited a couple years for reliable sources and none appeared. This article could still use a paragraph on helmet laws that meets WP:NPOV and WP:RS.--Dbratland (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Added text back to this section. The text was grabbed from the Motorcycle helmet article and includes, I believe, an adequate number of refs. The helmet article has a decently sized section on helmet laws so I linked to that as a main article. Also changed some wording in the intro, but this article still leans toward an american perspective. Killian441 (talk) 17:55, 2 August 2012 (UTC)