Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 4

The project banner and assessment
Using WP:PROJGUIDE, I updated the project talk page banner (Cycling project) to be a more advanced. It now has scope for assessment - and as such we have to think about assessment criteria and actively assessing each others work. We should be able to get a lot of articles in the assessment scheme due to assessments made by other projects (WikiProject Biography has been particularly hot on this of late). WP:PROJGUIDE stresses how assessment improves the overall quality of articles (see Image:WPTC assessment GA+.png). Please add your thoughts or work on an assessment scheme! Severo 21:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Nearly 100 articles assessed, mainly as stubs off of the back of articles already assessed by other projects. My question is, would an importance or priority parameter help? SeveroTC 20:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Loads of articles assessed now, lots of ground covered. I don't think priority or importance is really needed, but we could do with nominating a few core articles - perhaps 5? I'd definitely say Cycling and Bicycle are core topics for this WikiProject. SeveroTC 22:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

How-to's
Lobot84 added this a few weeks back on the To do list for the project:


 * 1) Add common maintenance how-to's, such as, how to fill a Presta or Schraeder valve, how to adjust common brakes, gears, change a tire, etc. Lobot84 16:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC) lobot84

However, WP:NOT states that Wikipedia is not a How-To guide. However, this is good material over at one of the Wikipedia sister projects, Wikibooks. The book on Bicycles has a maintenance and repair section which very much needs these articles. Regards, SeveroTC 15:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Standardize cyclist biography layout
I made an effort to standardize cyclist biographies. See the result on WikiProject Cycling/Standard cyclist biography. If somebody has an idea to improve the standard, please let me know on the talk page, or just do so and explain on the talk page what you did/why you did it. It is not my goal to force everybody to use my lay-out, I only used my favourite lay-out as a starting point for discussion.--Pie.er 14:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * How we present palmares has troubled me for a while. I'm struggling to find wikipedia guidelines about it, but some editors frown upon such lists in articles. After all, it is the prose of the article that is important, not the list. There are some articles where far too much is listed in the palmares section when we could be improving the rest of the article. I think we could collaborate to put one biography article through the Peer Review and Good Article processes, which would identify any weaknesses in the layout of the article. Regards, SeveroTC 19:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, sometimes the palmares section is too large. That's one reason why I made the undefined and undefined templates, so that there are no several screens of palmares. The templates are extremely simple and maybe could use some improvement, but it's a start. But that's only layout of course, I assume you mostly mean content. Which article do you propose to put through Peer Review? I think one article might not be enough to generate a standard... I think everybody agrees only 'notable' results should be put on palmares, but what's notable for one cyclist is not notable for another. Maybe one cyclist with few notable results (Franz De Mulder?? although it could be hard to get past the stub-stage), one cyclist with average notable results (Walter Godefroot??) and one cyclist with many results (Miguel Indurain?)) --Pie.er 07:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Good question. Retired, definitely, so we can then work from a stable model. Probably with an average to good palmares. And fairly recently active, so there will be loads of available sources. Francesco Casagrande? Michele Bartoli? SeveroTC 14:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no special emotion for any one of them. So I agree with them ;) I will try to find more content for Francesco Casagrande and Michele Bartoli, and improve the articles simultaneously. For whoever is interested, I suggest we discuss the proces on their talk pages.--Pie.er 15:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Mountain Pass
I'm a new boy here, so forgive my presumptuousness. I have been adding bits to Tour de France pages, and was surprised how few articles there are on the mountain passes, especially in the Pyrenees. I'll quite happily start creating articles about some of the climbs to be used in this year's tour, but before I do so can I briefly comment on the Template:Infobox Mountain Pass that's currently in use. If you compare the template on Col d'Aubisque with its French equivalent, I hope you'll agree that the French one is far more informative. Would there be any objection to me creating an improved template based on the French one? Daemonic Kangaroo 12:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We can probably improve the existing template&mdash;if you put comments on the talk page I will have a go at improving the infobox. It might be worth putting a note on the WikiProject Mountains talk page as well as it is in the scope of their Project too. SeveroTC 14:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Project image
At Commons, our old project image Image:USDOT Bicycle highway sign - white on green.svg is being replaced by Image:Bicycle Route sign.svg. I don't really like the new one, as the writing is very small in our uses. Since the previous one was picked, WikiProject Olympics have developed the image on the right (Image:Cycling pictogram.svg). I prefer this one for our use as its really clean and simple. What do other people think? SeveroTC 23:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

2004 Tour de France
I did a little work with this article, including adding a jersey progression table (which I'm not entirely sure makes sense; I'm mainly concerned about the points classification column {the notes above the table are accurate, if that helps anyone who might want to help me}). I also added final results tables for each jersey, which leads me to a question. Michael Rasmussen and Ivan Basso both finished that Tour with 119 King of the Mountains points, a tie for third place behind Richard Virenque and Lance Armstrong. The article previously listed Rasmussen as third, but when two riders are tied in a position for another leading jersey, doesn't GC placing break the tie? Or does that only count when it determines who actually wears the jersey? If that's the case, what makes Rasmussen third? The source I used for the tables also listed Rasmussen third, and Christophe Moreau ahead of Jan Ullrich for fifth despite them also being tied and Ullrich having a better GC position.

I left a note on Talk:2004 Tour de France, but I figured I might get more attention here ;-) Nosleep1234 21:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Article fusing proposition
Could it be an idea to fuse and redirect the articles "freight bicycle" and "workbike"? [SAME USER, SECOND THOUGHT: SEE DISCUSSION PAGE OF EITHER ARTICLE]

[And, perhaps, add redirections from "carrier bicycle", "delivery bicycle", "carrier tricycle", "delivery tricycle", etc.? ---Seems like I´ve found out how to do it - but not how to draw a line through the obsolete text.] /83.253.54.251 14:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Cyclist images
What is the copyright status of the cyclist images located on [www.letour.fr letour.fr]? Bart133 (t) (c) 04:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * They aren't explicit, but you would have to assume they are copyrighted all rights reserved. SeveroTC 11:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Jersey winners
I have created Tour de France Green Jersey and Tour de France Yellow Jersey. The format was copied from The Open champions, which has a nice collapsability feature when a number of such templates appear (see the bottom of Tiger Woods). I think all the Jersey templates including Polka dot jersey and Maillot blanc should be at the bottom of Tour de France in collapsed form. However, the other templates are not in proper form to count towards a total that would induce the autocollapse feature. I added the new tables and they were removed as too much clutter I suppose. I was hoping to get some consensus on this matter. Please discuss at Talk:Tour_de_France.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Stage recaps for this year's Tour de France
I've been writing them the last few days, and they're quite detailed. If they're too detailed, please let me know, and edit accordingly. Nosleep1234 14:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Doping at the 2007 Tour de France
Please help expand the article Doping at the 2007 Tour de France. A ecis Brievenbus 22:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Social connotations and other aspects of bicyle parts
I have just had an interesting discussion at Talk:Sturmey-Archer (or I thought I did until it was blanked) where I raised a point about certain components appearing to confer a social stigma on the user. Obviously it is not appropriate to conduct original research or to synthesise original research, but it should be possible and interesting to create well researched and referenced articles looking at social issues of cycling. I am not an expert, I was just a cyclist, so this is really a "drive by suggestion". Fiddle Faddle 20:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

2007 UCI ProTour races
Hello, everyone. In the ProTour races only the first 3 in every stage is given. Shouldn't we mention the first 5 or even the first 10??

Greetz, Mango101 15:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Resolved

 * Moved to Articles for deletion/Ben Greenwood. SeveroTC 21:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Moved to Articles for deletion/Ben Greenwood. SeveroTC 21:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)



AFD nomination of Dave Lloyd (cyclist)
Hi there. This article is up for deletion at Articles for deletion/Dave Lloyd (cyclist). The original article was a badly written copyvio, which I've reduced to a stub, but perhaps some knowledgeable folk from this Wikiproject could have a look at the article, offer an opinion on whether he's notable, and perhaps think about ways to expand the article if appropriate. If you're unfamiliar with AfD, keep in mind that it's a discussion, not a vote and that it's the quality of the arguments that count - and also see the general notability guidelines at WP:BIO. Thanks! Iain99 19:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, the nomination's been withdrawn so I suppose the urgency's gone, but the artcle couold still use some work if any of you have time to spare. Best, Iain99 21:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Categorisation
I've been looking at categorisation lately. Here is our current tree:

There are two subcategories which took my attention as not being wholly within our scope. The first is Category:Triathlon. This is encompassed by, unsurprisingly, WikiProject Running and WikiProject Swimming alongside ourselves. As the topic is unlikely to support its own project, we could approach the other two topics to create a taskforce for the subject. If I get some support on here for that one I'll approach the other WikiProjects to see what they think.

The other category is Category:Utility cycling and more specifically Category:Green vehicles. Green vehicles and its sub-categories contain over 40,000 pages (articles, categories and so on). This puts all of these articles in the parent catgeory of cycling, which isn't appropriate for the vast majority. I'm not really a category expert, but I think Utility cycling should be a sub category of Green vehicles rather than&mdash;how it is&mdash;the other way around.

SeveroTC 17:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Two more thoughts. I'm not sure if Category:Cycling road accident victims should be within the scope of our project or not. Secondly, as previously proposed, Category:Unicycling could do with a taskforce. I've been bold and altered the categorization of Utiliy cycling/Green vehicles. SeveroTC 10:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Your proposed categorisation might work for utility bicycles but arguably you are confusing the activity with the device. Utility cycling encompasses a huge range of issues that go beyond vehicle design/types. --Sf 15:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite understand. By placing Category:Green vehicles in Category:Utility cycling, you are essentially saying Green vehicles are part of utility cycling rather than, as you say, utility bicycle being part of Green vehicles. As the category tree demonstrates, the current setup puts a whole raft of topics under the primary category of Cycling, the vast majority (over 40,000 articles) of which are nothing to do with cycling. Basically: Green vehicles is not a subcategory of Utility cycling. SeveroTC 16:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Then take it out of utility cycling --Sf 16:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I did once! SeveroTC 16:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Done! Hope thats that sorted --Sf 17:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Would this image fit anywhere?


I put this on Oregon Route 58, but there might also be a cycling article it would fit in. --NE2 12:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

PROPOSAL FOR CYCLING EDITING
I'd like to voice a very modest little proposal. I'd like to ask that we cycling editors no longer link to ordinary years (e.g. 2007). I'd like to suggest that we only link years when they correspond to an event from that year. Take for example the Zuri Metzgete. Go to the winners, click on 2005 or 2006 and you get the Zuri metzgete for those years. But the rest of the years just get you some useless WP essay on some year. Or, take the UCI Championships. In the road race area, you'll see links for every single year--only about two link to the actual race in question. The rest are, you guessed it, links to some random year. But in the TT section, I changed it: UCI_Road_World_Championships%2C_Men. Now you just see links where we've got the corresponding event.

That in short is my vision for our cycling pages. We link only when we've got the event to link to. It might even motivate us/others/anyone to come along and start filling in the missing years of events. So: my proposal is no more links to years, unless that year-link actually goes to a page for the event that year (e.g. 1998 in the Tour de France takes you to TDF 1998), not to 1998. Ok, 'nuf said. Happy writing and happy riding! Smilo Don 01:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Indeed, as per guidelines (WP:DATE and WP:CONTEXT). SeveroTC 06:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)