Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bicycle mechanic


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was keep. Johnleemk | Talk 05:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Bicycle mechanic
Dictionary definition Tom Harrison Talk 01:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

As Mary Poppins would say the Keep the Super-Califragilistic aspi aligotios extra strong, Keep!!! : And I think the nominator should be forced to add 10 hours of volunteer work to improve the article because of the bad nomination. He can start by adding. --CyclePat 03:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per dictionary definition Deiz 02:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete dictdef Segv11 (talk/contribs) 03:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain. Seems similar to auto mechanic; if that article is valid, maybe this should be kept and expanded etc. Emphasis on the "if". --Qirex 07:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP. i love da butt  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.116.5 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep, as it has potential for expansion. Information to be added could include skills, training, common repair work and such. -- Kjkolb 12:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Legitimate topic. Clear potential for expansion into a full article. Could mention reference works (e.g. Barnett's Manual is four volumes). Suppliers (Park Tool Company). Schools (UBI in Portland), etc. etc. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * keep and please expand the topic is important Yuckfoo 01:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a real, non-obscure profession.  Seems like enough to merit an article.  --Thunk 01:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valid, if esoteric. Youngamerican 05:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I've tossed in some things to bulk it up and make it more than a dictionary definition. I've also asked the folks in the Bicycle Mechanics forum of bikeforums.net to take a look, and I hope some of them will accept my invitation to Be Bold and edit the article. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep after Dpbsmith's expansion and documentation today. Article is now much more than a dicdef or restating the obvious.  Agree with invitation to knowledgeable people from Bikeforums.  Barno 22:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe the article didn't deserve the nomination, but so what? I believe it was made in good faith, and the AfD process doesn't delete articles that should be kept (not that it's infallible). I hope your comment about "the nominator should be forced to add 10 hours of volunteer work ..." is a joke, else I could find that quite offensive. --Qirex 03:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Mary poppins wonce said "In every job that must be done, there is an element of fun. You find the fun and - SNAP - the job's a game" and further more, as within Mary Popins Movie... I decided I'll do it myself.  The dialogue with my fictional meandering character in my mind went something like this:
 * CyclePat: I'll do it myself.
 * Mary Poppins: Do what?
 * CyclePat: Wiki... and a bit of magic. It's easy. You think. You wink. You do a double blink. You close your eyes... And jump.
 * [Nothing happens]
 * Jane: Is something supposed to happen? [].

But to answer your question. No. sorry if that offends you but I actually believe that there are many editors out there that don't know WP:DP. And yes, now that I think about it that may be bad faith. But not putting an expand stub as per WP:DP could also be considere the same. But well... Superca - Super - or whatever the infernal thing is. Of course, you can say it backwards, which is dociousaliexpilisticfragicalirupus, but that's going a bit too far, don't you think? --CyclePat 05:08, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * To clarify, the reason I dislike that particular comment ("offensive" was an exaggeration I guess) is that if people are afraid of doing anything but minor edits then we won't be getting anywhere. I'm not sure how quite to explain it but it gives off a vibe something to the opposite of the "be bold" mantra. I feel that this kind of attitude is intimidating.


 * I agree that many editors aren't familiar with WP:DP; when I was talking about "good faith" I meant that the nominator had good intentions of trying to help the project. By your comments I thought your opinion was that the nomination was made with bad intentions; I'm sorry, I now understand you were just saying that the nominator didn't know the guidelines, which is a fair thing to say.


 * I don't understand these Marry Poppins references (never seen it), in case you wonder why I don't reply to something you're saying with them. I think this is becoming a bit of a tangent to the actual afd... I hope you don't think it rude, but I suggest taking this to user space if you'd like to talk about this some more? Feel free to drop by my talk page. I mean this sincerely. --Qirex 13:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: If the consensus is not to delete the article, I'm fine with that. Certainly it's greatly expanded since I nominated it, and everyone who has since contributed to it deserves credit. I appreciate CyclePat's contrubution and his enthusiasm for the subject. I am not at all offended by his comment, which I take in the friendly spirit I'm sure he indended. Tom Harrison Talk 14:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment IMHO it was a reasonable nomination. Nominations are an invitation to discussion. That's why we have discussions and a five-day review period. There's nothing terrible about nominating a borderline article. Nominations should not be interpreted as antipathy; nominating "bicycle mechanic" for deletion does not mean "I hate bicycle mechanics" or "I hate cyclists." Dpbsmith (talk) 14:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I thought the article would be about that Monty Python sketch where everyone is superman, one superman breaks his bicycle and no one can fix it, except one superman who's in fact a bicycle mechanic, who fixes the bike and saves the day.   Grue   16:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.