Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorcycling/Archive 4

Yamaha FZ 750 AfD
A new user has created Yamaha FZ 750, it has been nominated for AfD. The discussion is here: It is poorly written but perhaps between us we can clean it up and keep it. Thanks. Nimbus227 (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually it is a copyright violation so must be deleated or completely rewritten. ww2censor (talk) 00:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, I spotted that later and mentioned it on the AfD page. Think it will have to get deleted. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have created a new article with the correct title of Yamaha FZ750 and suggested that the AfD is either deleted or redirected to this. Nimbus227 (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Result was redirect to Yamaha FZ750 Nimbus227 (talk) 01:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Super Single
LA Times writer Susan Carpenter challenged us to provide the missing article on the Super Single in her Throttle Jockey column (http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-hy-throttle6feb06,0,1622727.story). I think we should take her up on it. Brianhe (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Help with Motorcycling
Have any of you read Motorcycling? It is awful and does this project no favours. Anyone fancy a bit of collaborative improvement work? --TimTay (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Triumph Motorcycles
There is a comment on the Triumph Motorcycles article talk page that this article should be split into two articles to reflect the difference between them. Triumph Motorcycles could be left as the disambig page with Triumph Engineering Company Ltd and Triumph Motorcycles Ltd as the titles for the split articles. There is overlap in the Triumph Bonneville article as well with the Hinckley bike having a section. Any thoughts/objections/agreement? Nimbus227 (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if two articles are needed, in my opinion the existing article should be edited with the Triumph Motorcycles Ltd infobox moving to the top of the page and edited to say founded in 1885. I see Triumph Motorcycles Ltd and Triumph Engineering Company Ltd as the same manufacturer the first being a continuation of the second. In the same way that the current Ducati Motor Holding SpA is a continuation of the original Ducati Meccanica SpA and Ducati under the Cagiva group and motorcycles in the Superbike family like the Ducati 1098 made under Ducati Motor Holding SpA are considered successors of bikes like the Ducati 851 made by Cagiva. Chris  Ssk  talk 13:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

BMW Motorcycles - model naming convention
There has long been debate in BMW Motorcycles and related articles such as BMW F650GS and BMW R1200RT, that the model names should include spaces e.g. R 1200 RT, which is how they are presented in BMW's brochures and on their website. One user is proposing that the F650GS and R1200RT articles should be renamed to include the spaces. Personally I oppose this, but I'm just one user and as a good wikipedian I'd really like others to contribute their opinion. Can I ask you all to take a look at Talk:BMW motorcycles, Talk:BMW F650GS and Talk:BMW R1200RT?
 * I would suggest to pick a single location for the discussion. --87.189.62.202 (talk)

Motorcycle tire codes
The automotive category has a page on car and light truck tire codes. It would be handy to assemble the same information for motorcycle tires. Some years ago I found the following page on tire designations and conversions. How can information like this be incorporated into a motorcycle page while respecting the license guidelines, etc.? N0NB (talk) 22:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have completed a draft page at N0NB/Sandbox. Any comments, feedback, or critique would be appreciated before it is added to the Motorcycle category. N0NB (talk) 02:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It would benefit from some examples of how the tyre codes are used together on a tyre to indicate size/speed/load/construction etc. --TimTay (talk) 08:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I am thinking about snapping a couple of pics from my bikes. Others I've seen on the 'Net and those from the reference links probably would need permission.  Maybe I can get a chance to do that in a few days. N0NB (talk) 01:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sound bites
I see that Wiki is now using sound bites in articles. I'm wondering if the Motorcycle project could do the same? Stock exhaust sounds of the bike to go along with specific stubs. I say stock because an after market exhaust would not represent the true sound. Thanks Ytak171 (talk) 18:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting idea, but stock exhaust on what bike? V-twin, boxer, inline 4, 50cc single? All are bikes but all will have very different exhaust sounds. Of course, the best exhaust sound of all is a Remus Revolution fitted to a BMW R1150GS and with the baffle removed! --TimTay (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking of using sound bites with motorcycle stubs. Not only will viewers see a picture of the bike, and the bikes specifications , but also be able to hear what that bike sounded like. Just an Idea. I'll get one done and post the results here. Ytak171 (talk) 02:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Help with Rocket III article upgrade
I am improving the Rocket III article so any thoughts on content are welcome Tony (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

BMW Motorrad
A discussion has started whether or not to change the article name BMW (motorcycles) to the proper manufacturer's name BMW Motorrad. Please see the discussion and help us come to a conclusion. Thanks! Roguegeek (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It should be noted that this is merely the current name of the manufacturer and not any of the previous names.M-72 (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Engine power figures
I was reading the Ducati 1098 article when I noticed that the the kW figures converted from the hp figures using convert do not match Ducati's figures for the 1098R. Ducati gives 180hp - 132.4kw for the 1098R. convert gives 180 bhp. The reason being that by hp Ducati means Metric horsepower (PS, CV, etc.) but with that little error the bike is listed as having 2.5bhp more than it does.

Moreover Ducati lists the 1098 and 1098S power as 160hp - 119.3kw same as the bhp to kW converter (160 bhp). So in this case by hp Ducati means brake horsepower.

This can create a great deal of inaccuracies in articles. I believe it would be a good thing if we had a policy for the way power figures are listed. I think listing them in kW and converting them to bhp is the best way to avoid confusion by what is meant by hp. Chris Ssk  talk 00:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

New Category: British Motorcycles
I'm slowly working my way through the stubs for all British motorcycles and starting some of the important missing articles. To help organise things have created a category for British motorcycles. Please will you add to any British motorcycle pages you find or create. I've also linked it to the Commons British motorcycles so you could help with matching pics to articles or adding the missing images to the Commons - take your camera next time you go to a rally! Thanks Tony (talk) 07:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

"Similar" in Infobox Motorcycle
I'd like to suggest removing this field from the infobox. What are the criteria for similar bikes? same production years and same engine configuration and displacement? same class? There are so many similar motorcycles, especially for bikes that keep the same name for a series of bikes. For example the Yamaha YZF-R1 when it came into production in 1998, the similar bikes one could list were the Ducati 916, Aprilia RSV Mille, Suzuki TL1000R, Honda CBR929RR, Triumph Daytona 955i and Kawasaki Ninja ZX-9R, in 1999 the Ducati 996 can be added, in 2000 the Honda RC51, in 2001 the Suzuki GSX-R1000, in 2002 the Ducati 998, in 2003 the Ducati 999, in 2004 the Aprilia RSV1000R, Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR in 2005 the MV Agusta F4 1000, in 2007 the Ducati 1098 and in 2008 the KTM 1190 RC8, BMW S1000RR, Aprilia RSV 4 and maybe the Buell 1125R

I think in the end the field provides more misinformation than it provides information. Chris Ssk  talk 03:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A general simplification talk is taking place here. Chris  Ssk  talk 14:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree and have never used the 'similar' field - but I am a supporter of the infobox and am adding it to British Bike stubs Tony (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup
Currently, 1836 articles are assigned to this project, of which 333, or 18.1%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 2008-07-14.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Piaggio X8
I added the link to the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piaggio_x8_250cc on the page Piaggio. --TheWikiFox (TalkWithMe) 11:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I just tweaked the article and changed its name to Piaggio X8 as I think it would be better to have an article about the range rather than a single model. --TimTay (talk) 12:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * b.t.w. You can do a wikilink using  two sets of square brackets rather than just one. That way you don't need to insert all the http stuff. Shout if you need any help using Wikipedia, we are always happy to help a fellow biker! --TimTay (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Reverts to moto clubs
An anonymous user is reverting notable motorcycle clubs on the listed on the Motorcycle_club page. I've reverted them several times, but I'm not going to any more because of the 3RR. I've asked the anonymous user to post his reasons on the talk page, but he hasn't. Can someone neutral help me out? here's the most recent revert. Tedder (talk) 00:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

External links need to be cleaned up in many articles.
I have just cleaned up all the BMW motorcycle related articles which were full of external links to personal websites, wikis and forums - all of which are discouraged in the policy given in WP:EL. I would appreciate others in this project keeping their eyes open for similar problems in other motorcycle articles.--TimTay (talk) 21:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I'll try to clean up articles as I run across them, too. tedder (talk) 21:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Can I also ask that you take a look at some of the BMW articles as I seem to be in an edit war with another editor who persists in keeping the personal website links. Articles in question include BMW R 1200 RT, BMW R75/5, BMW R60/2, BMW R51/3. These all fall foul of WP:LINKSTOAVOID which states personal sites should not be included. The sites in question, e.g. [spam://jeff.dean.home.att.net/r75.htm this one] (and many others by the same author), are all interesting, but are hardly encyclopaedic as they are not by a recognised expert/source and are therefore WP:OR. --TimTay (talk) 22:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied, and I'll help monitor the links and the discussion. I do agree, they aren't notable. tedder (talk) 23:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Help requested on Honda VFR related articles
On articles Honda VFR750R, Honda VF and VFR, Honda VFR400 and Honda VFR800, I am running foul of a Portuguese anonymous/IP contributor who keeps adding the Portuguese VFR club website to the VFR articles and also keeps reverting my removal of the long list of inappropriate links on these pages. I don't want to run the risk of 3RR so I would appreciate members of this project keeping an eye on the pages and removing these links if they are re-added. --TimTay (talk) 09:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the assistance. The IP vandal has been banned for 31 hours (using 2 different IP addresses). As a short term measure I have requested temporary semi-protection for the four articles above so that IP-only editors cannot edit the article. Hopefully page protection for a couple of days will mean this person will get bored and move on.--TimTay (talk) 00:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * All quiet for a few days because of the semi-protection, but now it has expired the IP vandal is back adding the same Portuguese VFR club links. Be vigilant! --TimTay (talk) 19:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've tagged all four articles for references that are lacking even though the articles seem pretty decent, but verifiable sources are needed preferably with inline citations. ww2censor (talk) 23:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

It's happening again. New IP, same MO. I requested page protection from user:thingg. Here's the IP to watch. tedder (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sigh... Just reported for vandalism. Hopefully this user will get banned (yet again) the will most likely come back again (yet again). In the meantime I have requested that the website be blacklisted - MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist --TimTay (talk) 19:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * thanks, timtay. Blacklist is a good idea. Otherwise we'll keep playing Whac-A-Mole. tedder (talk) 19:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blacklist now done by admins, clubevfrportugal.com cannot now be added to any wikipedia article. --TimTay (talk) 20:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

100 bikes in Category:British motorcycles
I've finally achieved my target for 2008 to get 100 articles listed in the special Category:British motorcycles. Please have a look and se if there are any you can expand - or add more? I've also sorted out all the red links on Template:British_motorcycle_manufacturers and researched the current manufacturers as best as I can. The people behind the bikes also bring it all to life - I've created the Category:British motorcycle pioneers so please see if you can add or expand any of those as well? Thanks Thruxton (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well done! I am busy in the aircraft project at the moment and I'm not getting out on the T140 much either. Super effort. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   15:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, some friends and I used to sit around and try to name as many motorcycle manufacturers as possible and we could name somewhere between 70-100 (worldwide), but 100+ British manufacturers is great. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And another added to the category - Métisse Motorcycles. Click the external links to see the Steve McQueen tribute bike. I defy anyone to show me a better looking British bike :-) --TimTay (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Matchless G12 on main page
One of the project pages, Matchless G12 is featured on Wikipedia's main page. Congratulations to editors/project member Thruxton. Brianhe (talk) 19:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thruxton is clocking up the motorcycling DYKs, well done. Next thing we need is a motorcycling FA. ww2censor (talk) 19:27, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Refresh for 2009
Its time for a refresh so I've borrowed some ideas from other WikiProjects and would welcome any thoughts on how we can really get a bit more attention and increase the active membership. I've also started two Special Interest Groups - any thoughts on more? Thanks Thruxton (talk) 13:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thruxton, one thing that looks nasty is the toc box is jammed into the top left of welcome/scope/intro box. Please try to fix that. Otherwise some good wok. I have a few ideas too and will see if I can do them later. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed the toc overlap by forcing a reduction in the box width. ww2censor (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I was wondering if it is worth sending a short message to all the listed members - what do you think?  Also, do you know how to move the To Do list to a new page?  I tried it but just got the generic Wiki To Do list so reverted for now.  Cheers Thruxton (talk) 18:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll make it into a hidable/showable format in the main page but it is and will remain on its own separate page at WikiProject Motorcycling/to do. Hope that suites you because it save space and refines the overall look of the page, just like the membership list modification I made. ww2censor (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Navbox templates?
I am quite active in the aircraft project, we have in the last year added many navboxes to the articles to link related articles. I don't think there are many (if any) of these in use in the Motorcycle project and I would be willing to create some here if that is felt to be a move forward for this project, I think it would be, other language wikis are using them for bikes. How it works is that we have one navbox that goes at the bottom of every article which covers the project generally, this is aviation lists, above that goes a manufacturer's group like Boeing model numbers and sometimes other boxes for related article groups. You can see how it works at the bottom of the Boeing 747 article. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   00:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * They are used, but more would be very welcome. Three good examples, all different - Template:BMW motorcycles, Template:British motorcycle manufacturers and Template:Honda motorcycles. I find the latter rather ugly and clumsy as it nests two navboxes in the same template - I would rather they were separate. However, the Honda timeline navbox contained within it is excellent. I do think about doing the same for BMW motorcycles. I would say that some of the major manufacturers, that feature a large number of articles, would benefit from a navbox e.g. Triumph, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki. In contrast a manufacturer like Harley Davidson is unlikely to need a navbox of its own as there are very few articles about individual bikes.  --TimTay (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Great, the BMW one is good (not that the other two are particularly bad!) although I agree that they should be separate boxes. We discovered early on the importance of standardising the layout although that is not as important as the template naming convention, if they were all the same like BMW motorcycles and then Yamaha motorcycles (I thought that was going to be redlink!) it makes it a lot easier (instinctive) for editors to add them. We had to change quite a few to get them all into line. The manufacturer groups are relatively easy to do, a priority though would be to create a general motorcycling one which would take a little bit of imagination. Looking again at your post 'British manufacturers' is ok and would be an extra box in a Triumph or Beezer article for instance. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * On the Harley, we ignore the guidelines and put the redlinks in the manufacturer's navboxes to show that the articles are missing, no one has complained or spotted it yet, works very well and the links get filled fairly quickly. The Yamaha template is actually a timeline, I would move it personally. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   01:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've been wondering how we could make it easier for people to navigate around the British bikes in particular, so a clever navbox that brought together manufacturers with the lists linking to all the models would be great. Happy to help if we can get a prototype together. Cheers Thruxton (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * We could use the lists in Category:Lists of motorcycles to help. A Triumph navbox would be quite big on its own if both Meriden and Hinckley bikes were included. NVT perhaps? In the av project we often started with smaller templates which were joined together later. Might have a bit more time this weekend, its a fair size job! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   00:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

motorcycle tires category
What, we don't have a category for motorcycle tires? I was adding Maxxis to our project and was surprised. Of course, I could easily be missing something. tedder (talk) 05:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Norton rotary edits
I checked back onto the Norton Rotary Motorcycle page and noticed that my edit on the history of the Norton Rotary had been edited back to information that was incorrect.

My edit came from published sources (some of the edit remained) and personal correspondence with Joe Seifert to verify that what I had written was true.

We can argue about what "slow sales" implies but we cannot argue that the Rotary was a victim of lack of sales and interest. Please see the www.nortonmotors.co.uk site for more information.

Tell me what I did wrong here and why the edit was reversed.

Charles - uhhh... Charles.O.Wilson (talk) 17:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you provide a link to the diff/edit? tedder (talk) 17:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You edited the Norton article in October 2007. There have been many edits (100+) since then so without going through each one it is hard to determine when it was changed and by whom. If you can provide suitable references for any information within the article then change the article and add the reference.--TimTay (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Boot merge
There are a bunch of motorcycle boot related articles (engineer boots, harness boots, motocross boots, motorcycle cop boots, racing boots, touring boots). I'd prefer to merge them. Both opinions about the marge are AGAINST my merge. I'm okay with that, but it's been ~8 months since I originally broached the subject. For the few of you that are active with WPMOTO (TimTay, ww2censor), do you agree with me for the merge, or would you disagree that they should be merged? I'm more than happy to delete the merge proposal if there's no consensus (or if the consensus is AGAINST), but I have a feeling it was overlooked by most people. Again, here's the discussion page: Talk:Motorcycle_boot tedder (talk) 06:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I hadn't seen this before. Definitely merge. --TimTay (talk) 07:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Motorcycle trials links are spammed up
The article Motorcycle trials needs some major cleanup in the external links. The links are excessive at over half of the article length (Wikipedia is not a directory). Unfortunately, there is not a dmoz topic for this yet so it's too soon to just replace everything with the dmoz link and leave NoMoreLinks for the spammers. Does somebody want to take on moving a few links to dmoz for this purpose? -- Brianhe (talk) 08:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I just deleted all the individual club links and the training companies. I also removed a forum from the publications section. That makes a huge difference already. Individual clubs can be found from the publications or the national bodies or google so I have no qualms about deleting so much. --TimTay (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

List of motorcycle clubs is a mess
List of motorcycle clubs is a mess. Various editors have tried to clean it up but it still contains a huge number of red links. I personally don't like red links, but I do appreciate that they serve as a link to try to encourage people to create the article. It would be good for some of this project's members to discuss and reach consensus on the article's talk page about exactly what should and shouldn't be put in the list. --TimTay (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm with you. We may need to come up with an interpretation of the general notability guidelines and the notability:club guidelines before we just start deleting stuff. It's spilling over to other pages, such as here.

Lane splitting and filtering forward
A couple of editors seem to be involved in an edit war in the Lane splitting article. It would be good if some of the good people from this group could pay a little attention to the article. Also, I have proposed that lane splitting and filtering forward be merged as they are essentially the same thing. Others in this project may have strong feelings for or against, so it would be good to get some more opinions on the talk page. --Biker Biker (talk) 13:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merger of farkles into accessories.
I have just proposed that motorcycle farkle be merged into motorcycle accessories. I really don't see why both articles are needed when one could amply cover both - which after all are exactly the same thing. Would appreciate comments for or against from members of this project at Talk:Motorcycle accessories. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Drive-by edits of motorcycle top speed on Ninja 250
Are there many other bike articles where, like the Ninja 250, various random folks will jump in and edit the top speed to be 110 mph (or 170 kph as the case may be). Because their speedometer said that when rode their bike -- possibly their first motorcycle, and maybe their first vehicle of any kind -- and so they make their very first WP edit to announce that in fact the bike's top speed is not 95 mph but is really 110! I myself have seen 110mph indicated on my very own 2003 Ninja 250, but that doesn't mean I was really going that fast, or that I should say it on WP.

Sometimes they go to Talk and ask, which is great: Talk:Kawasaki Ninja 250R, Talk:Kawasaki Ninja 250R.

But often they are bold:  (lol)  and so on.

These are not too difficult to revert as they pop up, but my question is, if this happens with other bikes besides the EX250, what is the most efficient means to head them off? I'm thinking along the lines of a friendly message that introduces WP:V and WP:OR to users who want to make their first WP edit based on their personal riding experience. And perhaps also mentions speedometer error and whatnot. But mostly that WP needs to have a sources for data. I don't think it happens enough to protect the article; I'm only thinking of a helpful info note before they save their edit.

On Hero Honda Splendor I attempted to use to slip a little note to those who want to change the AKA field of the Infobox to say "World's largest selling motorcycle." I don't know if it will work or not. One disadvantage is I can't use hyperlinks in comments.

If this doesn't happen very often with other motorcycles, then it isn't worth worrying about. So does it happen much, or is it only the Ninja 250? Thanks for your time.--Dbratland (talk) 03:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've seen that on music pages too. There's really only one way to fix it- you must have a reliable source for the top speed. What I mean is- put a with the source for the top speed. If someone claims a higher top speed because they've done it, it's WP:OR. The real trick is to get that ref in the first place. This says the 'jette's top speed is 96. That's probably best until something else comes along. tedder (talk) 04:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, yes, that's another question I guess. See, I used Motorcycle Consumer News, and put the up at the top of the Infobox, for example here.  But that seemed too weird to some people, so currently the Infobox uses stats primarily from that source, but doesn't cite it in the Template:Infobox_Motorcycle at the top of the aricle.  I think nobody likes seeing the superscript up at the top of the infobox like that, yet it's ugly and redundant to have a superscript after every single field in the infobox.  Unless every field's stat comes from a different source, which is rare.


 * Later, I moved the down below in the table EX-250-J Specifications/Performance, and it has stuck for the moment.


 * So (in general) where should one place the sources for the stats? Template:Infobox_Motorcycle doesn't seem to say, and Ninja 250 also has some non-standard tables for the various versions of that bike.


 * Are you saying just make top speed a special case and stick an extra tag next to it?--Dbratland (talk) 04:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, MCN, that ad-filled rag :-)


 * I have been reffing right next to the template data on school and music articles. Yes, some templates have a footnotes field, but if the data is RIGHT THERE, it's hard to miss (and much easier to catch on antivandalism patrols). Here's what I mean. The only thing that makes this format weird is the performance table. I'm not sure what the answer is, except it's at least somewhat redundant to the infobox, and perhaps not necessary. tedder (talk) 04:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent! I should learn more about how vandalism patrols work; obviously there is more going on than just people like me and User:AniRaptor2001 keeping an eye on one page.--Dbratland (talk) 05:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Nah, antivandal patrols are useful for people like me who can't create real content :-) tedder (talk) 06:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

List of findings in the Hurt Report nominated for speedy deletion
See Talk:List of findings in the Hurt Report--Dbratland (talk) 21:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move Ducati Motor Holding → Ducati

 * Ducati Motor Holding → Ducati — (Discuss) --Dbratland (talk) 15:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Some other opinions from members of this project would be useful at the above discussion. If you do, then please also read Talk:Ford_Motor_Company in which the same person who requested the Ducati rename requested and failed to get Ford Motor Company renamed. What is notable is that the exact same arguments were used (and failed). --Biker Biker (talk) 16:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Flagicons in infoboxs
Many motorcyclists' articles are using flagicons to indicate nationality in the infobox in order to avoid flag problems. Flagicons fail MOS:FLAG if used to indicate nationality or country of birth in infoboxes in order to avoid flag problems and their use to indicate place of birth or death are expressly forbidden per WP:FLAGBIO for reasons described in that section of the Manual of Style. This can be especially difficult for people born in the constitualt countries of the United Kingdom because someone born in Scotland is actually a National of the UK and not Scotland. Northern Irish people are difficult too because you may not even know which nationality they are; many are entitled to be both Irish or British, so adding a flag only causes more problems than it solves and the Northern Ireland flag is being used when a UK flag would be correct, but and Irish flag might be correct too. I don't want to get into any nationalistic issues and that is the very reason why flagicons should not be used in the first place. Many editors are not aware of this so if you see such use please remove them as I have been doing, in occasional bursts, for some time. Most non-motorcyclists are free of the flagicons but many remain so any removals you can do will only improve things. Thanks folks. ww2censor (talk) 04:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree for exactly the same reasons. I would also argue that flagicons should never be used in any infobox - even for the nationality of companies. They are simply unnecessary. --Biker Biker (talk) 06:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Disagree in that the above is incorrect. Flags are permitted in the MOS to denote sporting nationality, i.e. the country under whose flag the subject competes. This is a non-negotiable, verifiable fact, e.g. John Surtees competed as a British rider, the British flag was flown on the podium etc. Thus all of the above flag problems and nationalistic issues are irrelevant. Other flags in infoboxes, e.g. for the nationality of companies or non-competing team members are a different matter. Ww2censor, I would urge you to discuss your edits to Formula One driver articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One, where the points you raise will no doubt be discussed in a most lively fashion. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * On my talkpage I have countered Bretonbanquet's arguments though my reply mainly refers to the flagicons on Formula One racing drivers' articles rather than to motorcyclists or companies. Most flagicons are used either as decoration or to show nationalistic pride, neither of which are promoted uses and they are not shown properly to indicate "Sports nationality" in the F1 templates. It may well be a fact that a Union flag was flown for John Surtees but I sincerely suspect when he drove for the Ferrari team or MV Agusta that he was regarded by those manufacturers as representing Italy. In my mind there is way to much WP:FLAGCRUFT all around this wiki but it is well entrenched and fighting it is way too debilitating. ww2censor (talk) 06:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have similarly contributed to the argument at Ww2censor's talkpage, but I disagree with the idea that sporting nationality is not properly indicated, as there is a clear wikilink in most F1 cases to an explanatory article. The F1 wikiproject has worked hard to remove flagcruft throughout its articles, and a large number of flags have been deleted. The flags in th infoboxes do conform. The idea that Surtees represented Italy is, as I outlined on the talkpage in question, ludicrous. However Italian his team may have been, or how the manufacturers of his vehicles viewed it, according to the FIA he represented the UK whenever he took to the track. It's really that simple. Bretonbanquet (talk) 07:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

In Popular Culture section mentions of movie cameos
I undid an edit to MV Agusta F4 which mentioned one of the bikes showing up in Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen, but then noticed that Brianhe kept and fixed up a similar edit for the same movie, re: the Ducati 848. Which is all no big deal; I can see how you could go either way.

But looking over "In popular culture" articles, it seems it shouldn't be hard to have some criteria for whether or not to mention that a particular bike appeared in a film. It says, "However, passing mentions in books, television or film dialogue or song lyrics should be included only when that mention's significance is itself demonstrated with secondary sources. For example, a passing reference in film dialogue may be notable if the subject of that reference themselves responds to it in a public fashion — such as a celebrity, or a government official from a city, publicly expressing pleasure or displeasure at the reference."

To me the MV Agusta sounds like a very minor character with only passing mention, and barely makes a blip in secondary media. I would guess the only reason they appeared in Transformers is that there is a family resemblance between the F4 and the 848 -- Massimo Tamburini designs -- and they look cool. But couldn't they have just as easily used any exotic looking sport bike?

So beyond what WP:IPC says, I'd draw the line at:
 * Either the vehicle is a verifiable cultural icon (such as the Harley-Davidson Easy Rider Chopper or the Dodge Charger The General Lee, the Ponticac Trans Am in Smokey and the Bandit)
 * Or that we have specific reasons for why that particular motorcycle was chosen to be in a film.

This would exclude the Ninja 500 in True Lies and the ZZR250 in Kill Bill because as far as we know the only reasons those bikes show up is that they look the part, more or less, and are cheap, and easy for actors to ride. The Kawasaki Kz1000 police motorcycles that often show up in films like Terminator 2 or Lethal Weapon 3 aren't notable either; they just needed a police bike and they found one. In contrast, the Harleys in Electra Glide in Blue are notable; the particular model is actually a focus of the plot and you couldn't just stick any old bike in there without changing what it meant. I would say they could have used just about any economy car for the Mini in The Bourne Identity (2002 film) but that the same model was notable and worth mentioning in The Italian Job (both versions), because the small size of he the cars was integral to the plot. The the Plymouth Valiant in Duel_(1971_film) would just barely qualify.

IMHO.

When in doubt, I would fall back on WP:V. Is there a mainstream newspaper, magazine, journal, or book that says the bike in the movie matters? Did the film makers even care enough about that model to mention it in the film credits or the commentary? If not, delete.--Dbratland (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  --Dbratland (talk) 19:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Rather than scattered mention of the Transformers movie on the bike pages, it might make more sense to give an in-depth discussion of the topic on the page RetroSBK, an article which could use some help. This article would be a good place to start.--Dbratland (talk) 17:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I remember making that edit and being torn between Please do not bite the newcomers and WP:TRIVIA. The commentary here makes me believe that in fact it was trivia and (if even notable) belongs in the movie article. -- Brianhe (talk) 05:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * In the interest if brevity I should have just said we should follow WP:WPACT. --Dbratland (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Help watch the Chopper article
Can folks in this project help me keep an eye on Chopper (motorcycle)? It seems to attract low-grade advertising, lately by Hank Bagrowski Customs, ChoppersAustralia.com, among others. -- Brianhe (talk) 20:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and have s go at cleanup and add some decent refs if you have them? Thruxton (talk) 18:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

What's the difference between Category:Motorcycle clubs and Category:Motorcyclists organizations?
Can we write a rule that tells us what determines which category you go into? I understand that List of outlaw motorcycle clubs and List of motorcycle clubs are exclusive, and Category:Outlaw motorcycle clubs is a subset, but some clubs are also organizations, right? Is that a good thing?--Dbratland (talk) 04:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedway photographs
An archive of Speedway photos - 1974-78 - is being uploaded to Wiki Common by Lawson Speedway. These will be available to illustrate entries on riders from that era (see Ivan Mauger, Peter Collins, Gordon Kennett to date) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawson Speedway (talk • contribs) 09:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice work! (pics here)] --Biker Biker (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

"Mother's Motors"
Is the defunct motorbike store Mother's Motors of any verifiable significance, and if so are there any reliable sources for it? Its article, quaintly written in the historical present tense, cites three sources but I think these could all be termed elusive, unreliable or both. A fairly typical sentence:
 * ''1968, February: Dick Raymond, Stewart Brand and Timothy Leary of the Portola Institute in Menlo Park, visit Mother's Motor's [sic] to see what Charles Wehrenberg means by "all you need is access to tools."[citation needed].

which mixes trivia and name-dropping.

See its talk page too.

I'm crossposting this to the California project. -- Hoary (talk) 23:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I certainly don't see any. I'll support in an AfD, for what it's worth. tedder (talk) 23:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think the whole thing is fake.--Dbratland (talk) 23:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Nominated for deletion: Articles for deletion/Mother's Motors --Dbratland (talk) 16:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Popular pages request
Popular pages tracking request was submitted for WikiProject Motorcycling.--Dbratland (talk) 23:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Request key is l8mf988 --Dbratland (talk) 23:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This project doesn't seem to use the standard assessment category system as most projects. This is currently required as those categories are used by the bot to get the list of pages in the project. If you want to have a popular pages list generated, I would suggest modifying the talk page template if necessary to use the assessment categories, then asking for a bot at WP:BOTREQ to populate the assessment field based on what other projects use. Mr.Z-man 00:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Current project tagged articles are about 2,750 but when the template was started it was not considered that assessments would be added to individual articles by the template. Should we decide we now want to add assessments we will need to devise the assessment criteria to be applied. The quality assessments are pretty well decided by general principles but the importance class ratings would need clear guidance for assessors. A good example can be seen at WikiProject Ireland/Assessment. ww2censor (talk) 04:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * WW2C, even if it's hard, it seems assessment and importance is the right thing to do. Even if the template was modified and zero articles had assessment, I believe Z's pop pages bot could then run, and we could start adding importance and assessment as we go. The good thing about that is importance and popularity are somewhat related, and the other important articles are easy to pick out (Honda, Harley-Davidson, etc). Right? tedder (talk) 04:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll see if we can modify the current template or if we need a new one. Most projects use the form "WikiProject ProjectName" as opposed to just the project name as we have. If it is easy enough I will get someone to do it but in the meantime we should try to devise a classification system for people's guidance. Tedder, I doubt just having the assessment code in the template will allow the popularity bot to compile a result. I'll get back here later with any info I get. ww2censor (talk) 04:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I left a note for Z to reply about the assessments/importance. I have little experience with templates, but (a) we can use Template:WPBannerMeta to build a new one, and (b) we could put it in the proper place (Template:WikiProject Motorcycling) and simply redirect the existing one there, right? tedder (talk) 04:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I left a post with someone involved with the Version 1.0 Editorial Team who has assisted me before but on looking around it seems there are some non-standard template names that have assessment code. It is better to avoid redirecting templates if possible so let's see what replies we get. Later! ww2censor (talk) 05:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Assessment (even if they're all categorized as unassessed) is required, importance is optional (for the bot). Mr.Z-man 05:14, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of motorcycling?
Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it would be useful, but also daunting work. I'd also like to see a prioritization of articles needing maintenance, and a lot of other things.  But I can see how an outline would be helpful.--Dbratland (talk) 06:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Self-promotion in Brammo articles
I did a cleanup of Brammo Enertia to try to tone down blatant self-promotional bias; the article Brammo is still in need of attention. Both articles bear the heavy hand of a self-described COI editor in the employ of the company. -- Brianhe (talk) 06:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I started by cleaning up the technical wikification aspects and removing the long list of "reference" external links. I also removed the insignificant eBay auction. It could certainly do with some more eyeballs and further cleanup.--Biker Biker (talk) 07:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Assessment department and the banner
Following the previous discussion about the "Popular pages request" above, I spent a good few hours updating the main project Motorcycling banner, and its documentation page, with the additional parameters that will make assessing easier and more understandable. To this end I have also created the assessment department's own page WP:MC/AS (a shortcut) and the necessary subpages required by the revised banner parameters. As you will see from the transcluded statistics we have no good articles or featured articles which is something we should address.

We can now start to assess the more than 2,700 articles that fall within the project but need to decide on some form of importance guidelines. To this end I started and importance chart that we should agree on before promoting assessments to all. The examples given, and the definitions for each scale, are taken from other projects I am involved in but are in no way cast in stone; they are my initial suggestions and subject to change and consensus. Per some other projects, the top-class rating should only be assigned by agreement of the project and the text boldly states that. Please discuss on the assessment talk page with any thoughts, suggestions, comments or criticisms. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you!--Dbratland (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Great effort, my further comments at assessment talk page. -- Brianhe (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

New category name: Working motorcycles? Motorcycling jobs?  Professional motorcycling?
I want to diffuse the articles in Category:Motorcycling down to an appropriate place, and so I want create a category for Despatch rider and Motorcycle courier, but that would also hold Motorcycle taxi, Derny and Police motorcycle, but would exclude professional motorcycle racers. Basically, any job, type of motorcycle, or group that involves riding a motorcycle as the job. Perhaps might exclude Motorcycling instructor and Motorcycle mechanic because riding isn't exactly the job. Probably would include (maybe in a sub-category) Virgin Limobike, Passenger Bikes Ltd and Freewheelers EVS.

A name like "Working motorcycles" is like Working dog or Working animal, but it doesn't seem broad enough to include riders and organizations. "Professional motorcycling" kind of works, except it might imply too high a level of education. "Motorcycling jobs"? Something else?

I would just create a category and fix it later but moving category names is kind of a pain; you have submit a CfD request and let it sit there and gather comments and so on so it would be better to pick a good name from the start.--Dbratland (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You might want to review the WP:CfD discussion on the category "Motorcyclists" at Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 19 back in early 2007 before deciding on a new category name. I will give it some more though before making any specific suggestions. ww2censor (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks. That AfD seems to mostly address a category containing biographies -- specific people who ride, mostly as a hobby.  Which would be a terrible category; it's good to note that it's inadvisable.  The new category would be for types of motorcycling jobs (like taxi, delivery, police, military) or for motorcycles adapted to a specific job (excluding racing), or companies/industries/orgs whose work is done while riding. --Dbratland (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't see any problem with the Category:Motorcycle classifications into which some of the articles you list above fit, but trying to find a category into which we could place articles about motorcyclists who use motorcycls for their job could possibly be Category:Motorcyclists by job or Category:Motorcyclists by occupation so long as we specifically only include entries where the motorcycle and job are interdependent such as Despatch rider and Motorcycle courier. But let me ask: are you just trying to empty out the parent category Motorcycling ? Please remember there is little point is creating categories that will never be occupied by more than a small number of articles, unless they are crying out for it, and do not really declutter the category from which they will are removed. Overcategorisation can be a problem too and I wonder what the real achievement will be with a new category. Just my 2¢ worth. Anyone else? ww2censor (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I am trying to find a home for two articles (Despatch rider and Motorcycle courier), but the the total in the new category would be at least five (adding Motorcycle taxi, Derny and Police motorcycle), to begin with, and possibly 8 if the companies/orgs Virgin Limobike, Passenger Bikes Ltd and Freewheelers EVS were included. Is that not enough? Obvious future articles could be the motorcycle tow truck, history of military motorcycles, and the new diesel motorcycle the Marines commissioned.  So it is fertile ground.--Dbratland (talk) 22:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Freestyle motocross riders
Should freestyle motocross riders such as Andy Bell (freestyle motocross rider) and Larry Linkogle be included in, or should there be a separate (sub?)category for freestyle motocross riders? DH85868993 (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A separate category, since there's a dozen or so riders with articles. Motocross riders is under Motocross so it should be under Freestyle Motocross.  It should also be under Motorsport people. It's a good idea to add the following banners to the talk page, so the bio will be categorized with the right projects:

--Dbratland (talk) 15:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've created and populated . Thanks for your help/advice. DH85868993 (talk) 23:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

RfC started to discuss replacing Criminal Org Infobox with Org Infobox
Please comment on an RfC to replace Template:Infobox Criminal organization with Template:Infobox Organization for active motorcycle clubs. Thanks! --Dbratland (talk) 20:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Template "Infobox motorcycle specifications" nominated for deletion
I have just nominated Infobox Motorcycle Specifications for deletion. I would appreciate it if members of this project could take a look at it and decide whether they agree or disagree with me that it is redundant, just duplicating much of what is done by Infobox motorcycle and should therefore be deleted. (Deletion discussion) --Biker Biker (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * b.t.w The template is only used on three stub-class KTM articles. --Biker Biker (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Vintage bike photos, no ID
I uploaded about 100 photos at Flickr from the Vintage Bike Enthusiasts' Isle of Vashon poker run. There are some decent looking examples that might be useful in an article missing images, licensed attribution only. The catch is you have to identify the bike; I didn't collect info on them. --Dbratland (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Minor issue with US MotoGP article
I think the table at Talk:United States motorcycle Grand Prix is missing Indianapolis results. See Talk:United States motorcycle Grand Prix for details.--Brianhe (talk) 02:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation
As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Auto templates nomiated for deletion
Discussion here: Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_September_5 --Dbratland (talk) 03:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move State Motorcyclist's Rights Organization → ABATE chapters
Discuss.--Dbratland (talk) 22:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkheader templates removed
I think having talkheader in place proactively heads off questions on where to buy motorcycle parts and other off-topic or inappropriate use of the talk pages. I can't prove it but I think it has helped. Discussion here User_talk:Magioladitis --Dbratland (talk) 16:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

New VFR1200 article
An editor has recently created the article Honda VFR1200. As it stands it has many significant issues in tone and content. Since the bike hasn't been officially announced, it's inherently speculative, so I'm not even convinced that a start article is appropriate yet. Can members of this WikiProject help to salvage it? — Brianhe (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything worth keeping in the sources given. For now Honda VFR1200 should redirect to Honda VF and VFR, where a short section can be added at the end saying Honda has announced a new VFR with a V5 and a new type of automatic shift.  The rest belongs on a blog.--Dbratland (talk) 16:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree. WP:BOLD - JFDI! --Biker Biker (talk) 16:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, with a pointer in the edit summary to this talk page. --Biker Biker (talk) 16:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am the author of the article removed and I have been quite surprised that you decided to remove my article on your own without asking me to modify it first WP:CIVIL. Tone and content may have to be improved but my access to Honda's press information allows me to use information that you seem to ignore, such as the fact that the bike is officially announced : The new VFR large-displacement sport bike equipped with the new transmission will be released in Europe and North America in 2010, with sales to commence in Japan at a later date. [Extract from Honda's article "Honda Announces the New Dual Clutch Transmission for Use in Large-displacement Sport Bikes — a World’s First"]


 * I would be glad to work over the original article to improve it with your help, but I can't find a reason to continue if you may trash my writting again without notice.
 * Thanks for reading this. Hope we could continue to work together.Ocarton (talk) 19:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Everyone who edits on WP should expect to have their work "mercilessly edited" by others, to quote Five pillars. There is nothing in WP:CIVIL that demands prior notice, in fact BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is the norm.  The fact that a discussion appeared here prior to editing your work was really going the extra mile. Your version isn't gone -- it still exists in the history.  For convenient editing, I've copied it to a Workpage at Talk:Honda VFR1200/Workpage where you are free to work on it.  Hopefully you won't move it back to Honda VFR1200 until it is more appropriate for an encyclopedia.  You should at least wait until Honda makes an official announcement, or better yet, wait until it ships.  We don't even know if the name is going to be Honda VFR1200 or something else. Blogs are most appropriate for rumors and pre-release speculation; Wikipedia is more attuned to definite information that has a degree of solid certainty, citing not blogs as sources but less up-to-the-minute publications like books, newspapers and magazines (in most cases).--Dbratland (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, this press release does announce a new VFR with a dual clutch, but it doesn't say for certain it is a 1200 cc, or that it will be called the VFR1200. This could change.  And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it got delayed for a year or three years or more.  They make vaporware announcements like this all the time.--Dbratland (talk) 20:12, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ocarton: I appreciate your enthusiasm in creating the new article; however as noted above it's probably premature to do so before the name of the bike is even known! One thing to remember is that Wikipedia doesn't have to react to breaking news.  The announcements that have been made certainly could be used to flesh out some existing articles. For example, there are some interesting aspects of the dual-clutch transmission that could be discussed in dual clutch transmission. — Brianhe (talk) 20:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand I need to wait to own the bike to write about it (if everything goes fine I should be among the first lucky owners). So is your choice and I respect it. Riding will probably leave me less time for writing at that time but I'll try to continue.
 * Dbratland: 'Vaporware announcements' occurs in blogs, but rarely from Honda's sources. By the way, new pictures are, again, all over the web.Ocarton (talk) 06:07, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you may have missed a nuance here. Waiting to own the bike yourself is not the issue, as you are (ideally) not contributing original research, but rather information from reliable sources. Waiting for reviews from reputable magazines (as an example of a reliable source) would be a good idea. -- Brianhe (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You are right Brianhe : I missed the nuance. It will be harder for me to contribute though as I am currently living outside the US/UK. So I don't have access to subscriptions and low access to books in English. Take care.88.184.1.43 (talk) 06:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

(Resetting indents) Honda announced the name of the new bike: VFR1200F. Is it time to bring the in-progress article alive? -- Brianhe (talk) 04:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally I would wait a while and see what shakes out, but I don't object--Dbratland (talk) 04:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a big press launch tomorrow so a couple of days might provide much more detail for the article. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been updating this today using Honda info and specs. It's probably ready to roll out. -- Brianhe (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, okaaaay. But if Honda suddenly announces it was all a big fakeout and this is really going to a V-4 boat with twin propellers and a folding sun awning, and they're going to name it the Honda VFR1200 Corvette Roadmaster, don't say I didn't warn everyone.--Dbratland (talk) 02:50, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Behold: Honda VFR1200F. If it turns out to be a yacht, I will buy you a donut. -- Brianhe (talk) 03:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Motorcycling to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at WikiProject Motorcycling/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! <font face="Broadway">Mr.Z-man 00:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This should give us some good guidance on rating article Importance. Further discussion on assessment talk page. -- Brianhe (talk) 03:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed- I requested it about a day too late last month, and it's nice to get an idea of what is being viewed, and how the articles are at for importance and bulk. tedder (talk) 03:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Brother Speed motorcycle club
Care to comment on Talk:Brother Speed? I know these drama-filled biker club articles aren't too popular here, but WikiProject Biography didn't want to get involved and they said Motorcycling owned the topic. It's a fairly straightforward question of reliable sources.--Dbratland (talk) 02:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Outlaw mc fact tag
--Dbratland (talk) 16:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Revised edit suggested. Requsting comments.  Thanks!--Dbratland (talk) 03:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Minibike/Pit bike merge?
Should Pit bike be merged into Minibike? I'm not up to speed on this genre but the two articles exist. Note also that "pit bikes" are listed in Minibike. -- Brianhe (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Another option is just to deal with Pit bike through AfD. Awful article! --Biker Biker (talk) 22:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Paging the cleanup team - Motorcycle engine
Motorcycle engine is badly written and unreferenced. It really could do with the attention of some of the good people here. I've just spent a few minutes on the basic stuff but it needs much much more. Have at it... --Biker Biker (talk) 08:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll do some cleanup. I'd like to try to request a diagram made after the one LJK Setright has in his History of Motorcycles, along with examples.    etc --Dbratland (talk) 22:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision of Suzuki Hayabusa
Since Suzuki Hayabusa is our most popular article that's about a motorcycle, I've done a revision and expansion (5x because I like DYKs) which you can preview at Talk:Suzuki Hayabusa/Workpage. It's almost ready: the old sources on the performance stats suffer from link rot so I'm having to track down new citations for 0-60, 0-100 and 1/4 mile times. I didn't do much to improve the Sales section so that could use some touching up. Any help is welcome. See also my notes on the talk page.--Dbratland (talk) 15:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice work. I will make a few tweaks, hopefully before go-live but maybe after. You don't generally wikilink common units e.g. mph, hp. It is common in automobile and motorcycle articles to abbreviate all units of measure again e.g. mph and hp. References should go after punctuation - which can be achieved in the opening paragraph with small rewording. --Biker Biker (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought I read that somewhere in the MOS or FA criteria. For now I'll search and replace lk=on with lk=off so it can be flipped back easily if need be.--Dbratland (talk) 16:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)