Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

The article 2011 Astana season, nominated by User:Green-eyed girl as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:2011 Astana season for things which need to be addressed. User:Green-eyed girl asked that you be notified of any issues. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Just put that particular template up over at TfD, with a link back to the Agritubel deletion. Just a heads up for other users. Regards. Craig(talk) 22:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

And for High Road when someone gets round to it. When I find the time, I'll put about deleting them on the consensus decisions page. Severo^TC 13:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Seems like that template has been CSD-ed since 3 January. Craig(talk) 16:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

If that method works, it seems like a better method for doing it in future. Severo^TC 16:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

HTC template deleted this morning, so it appears you may be spot on with that observance. Craig(talk) 15:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Geox's turn now. Craig(talk) 07:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Even though I think it's a bad decision, the results for Mosquera for the 2010 Vuelta have been annulled. I updated his information, and found a source at the UCI site (here) that lists all the recent doping suspensions, and which results were annulled. This may be useful in other situations, that's why I share the source here. Doping-related issues are always a potential BLP problem, so the more official sources, the better.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 10:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

In the next days, I'm going to work on the article of Sylvère Maes. I think a five-time expansion of the prose is not really a problem, and probably I'll nominate it for DYK. If anybody is interested to help (or point out the mistakes I'm likely to make), they are welcome. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 22:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I've just added my first round of additions, the easy ones. Some CE is definitely needed, but I first focussed on getting the content and structure right.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 12:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks like I am too busy in real life to finish this... But at least Maes' article has improved.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Cycling will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in cycling. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 21:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

on the yellow jersey article, there's a line that says that the rider attacking a geographical place. what does this mean? I tried to look for "cycling attack" and "bicycle attack" with no results (one Wiki result was a suicide bomber who had attacked on a bicylce), and was surprised to not see something like a glossary of cycling terms article to look up the information. It would be useful if such an article could be created and we could then link to some terms when appropriate. hbdragon88 (talk) 08:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

You mean Glossary of bicycling :) (I'll make your redlink into a redirect now) Severo^TC 11:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I've just removed the Template:Trapfriis from the article of Joaquim Rodríguez because it seems the owner of the website stopped updating the database in 2008. There's even a message in the main website in which the webmaster says the website has not been uploaded since 2008. A lot of articles are still using this template (see) and I wonder if we should eventually remove the template. Template:Cycling archives is another option if we still want to link a database.Drunt (talk) 20:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

There is a HUGE number of articles in Category:Cycling in the United States but there is no Cycling in the United States article. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

If you're participating or considering in participating in Wikimedians to the Games, you may be interested in attending the events below. They may provide an opportunity to get information to write a Wikinews article or to take pictures for points on Commons. If you're not participating, it would still be great to see people attending these events to take pictures for use on Wikipedia and Wikinews. If you do decide to attend, consider hosting a Wikimedia meetup at the end or the evening of the event, or even just letting HOPAU organisers know you are planning to attend. If you leave a message on my talk page, I can help you promote the meetup. :) If you need help with organising attendance because of transport cost issues or accessibility in terms of wanting press access, again please get in touch. :) --LauraHale (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Cycling in South Australia

• Sunday 04 March 2012 11:00am - 01:00pm Monthly Hand Cycling Ride - South Australia [1]
• Sunday 01 April 2012 11:00am - 01:00pm Monthly Hand Cycling Ride - South Australia [2]

Cycling in Western Australia

• Sunday 18 March 2012 Cycling Super Series Road Race [3]
• Sunday 08 April 2012 Cycling Super Series Road Race [4]
• Sunday 13 May 2012 Cycling Super Series Time Trial [5]

See for example the 1998 Vuelta a España article: it uses {{UCI team code|C.A|1998}}, which does not exist ({{UCI team code|C.A|1998a}} and {{UCI team code|C.A|1998b}} do exist), so the text Crédit Agricole is shown. Is there a way to change the ct template in such a way that these transclusions, where the referred years do not exist in the data template, are added to a (hidden) category Category:CT articles with incorrect parameters (or something similar)? (I realize it may sound confusing, but I hope my question is clear. Otherwise, I'll clarify further.)--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 21:35, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Trying to be more clear: In this specific example I would like the "1998 Vuelta a España" article to be included in that category, not the ct templates.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 21:38, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Perfectly clear to me: I was trying to work out a way to do this, but I couldn't think of how to do it, but I will have another look again soon. Severo^TC 21:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the edit would have to be part of {{Cycling team link}} as this is the sub template that deals with producing the link when we specify a year. I also think the answer lies somewhere in mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions. It probably needs some testing and for that I'd need to find some time :/ Severo^TC 22:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I had a look at it, and the "switch" option, which has a default option, is probably the best solution. Unfortunately, the current method is completely different, and it would take me too long to make a working template using "switch"... I was hoping for an easy way to do this.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:32, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I looked at it another way and made an edit to {{Cycling data C.A}} - basically it will now add a category unless the year specified is one of the years listed in {{Cycling data C.A}}. I've only made the edit in this one data template at the moment as a test but it adds 1998 Vuelta a España to Category:Cycling team data problems (which is not yet a made and therefore hidden category). The only problem I see at the moment is it adds the category to within the piped link which destroys the link but perhaps there is a way around that to preserve a link, otherwise it shouldn't be such a bad problem if we ensure the tracking category is kept empty. Severo^TC 07:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I decided to create this category and also roll out the edit to {{Cycling data THR}} so the next job is to keep an eye on the category and see if there's anything to catch, and if so how effectively it manages it. Severo^TC 07:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks like you did exactly the right thing, well done! --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll roll it out through the rest of the templates using AWB in the next few days. I'm still thinking about doing it a different way because the current solution exploits the software set-up when two identical parameters are used within a template (i.e. the last one is used) but that could change sometime so I'd like to find a more proper solution. But for now, it will clear up the current problem articles :) Severo^TC 18:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I spoke too soon: your solution breaks team names with redirects, for example {{ct|THR|2007}}. I can't see a simple solution for this, but I'm also not sure how serious this problem is...--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

(And I am a bad reader, as this is exactly what you wrote before... Sorry for the stupidity.) --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

In case anyone is interested, User:Vlaam recently uploaded a lot of photos from the first Tour de France races to Wikimedia Commons: commons:User:Vlaam/gallery. Amazing photos from the early days of cycling! Drunt (talk) 18:24, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Cycling for a Signpost article scheduled to coincide with the Tour de France and the start of the Summer Olympics. As part of our special "Summer Sports Series", this publicity could give you an excellent opportunity to draw attention to the project's efforts and attract new members. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 14:30, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

2 issues arising from the Nat Champs weekend, which this has been in most major cycling countries (apologies to any Aussie readers):

• Had we determined that national shirts would not be shown in the palmares section on team articles? I think I recall such a discussion. If we hadn't sought a consensus previously, do we want to discuss it?

• A new-ish editor has been enthusiastically creating national championship sections in team articles, repeating wins already noted in the palmares section under this heading. This strikes me as disproportionate: national championships are rarely the highest goals in a top rider's season (rather a relaxed slightly competitive training run before the tour), they are often not team achievements (often only one rider from a team will be of a given nationality, so the notion of tactics is out of the window), and the rider often has minimal backing from the team (how many resources will, for example, Garmin have dedicated to the South African and Lithuanian victories of Hunter and Navardauskas, or OPQS to the Irish exploits of Brammier?) Kevin McE (talk) 23:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember the discussion, and I am neutral about the inclusion... I see your arguments, but on the other hand, if new editors want to include these things in the team articles, they could end up adding more information to cycling articles. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

• Firstly I'll start by apologising if what I have done has gone against any convention(s) already put in place. In looking for information on this (and previous years) NC's I found myself somewhat thinking that the sections in questions were a bit messed up. Originally I had been interested in SKY's results, but went on to look at how things were shaping up across other teams. I then found that the sections in question were pretty messed up. For example Team Sky's relatively new page had all NC's listed from the teams first season, whilst other teams articles had some - but not all of the NC's listed. In this case I merely finished the job which had only been half done. With the odd one or two teams, there was no section present. As a result it seem necessary to make the alteration. Either all the articles have it, or they don't - not some half way house where some articles have every year documented and some have the 'odd one'. The newest articles had the section, so to me it made sense to add/ finish the others off.As for the degree of 'importance' of the NC's, I personally think they're important and note worthy events, whether or not the team put as much effort into a NC than they would in a world tour event isn't for us to question. All I know is that for the next 12 months those riders are going to be wearing those jerseys at all respective races, and so I think that that information should be catalogued. I think that the national jersey symbol is more important than having the country flag icon - I mean if a rider is a french champion I'd imagine that the person reading the article already knows what the french flag looks like so there doesn't need to be that icon; if there had to be a convention or something I'd get rid of the country flag icon and only have the jersey symbol. Moreover I think its more necessary to put the jersey icon there in place instead - if there had to be a convention or rule - as is done with classification jerseys. XyZAn (talk) 19:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

• I'd also like to note that some articles used the "Palmares start" "Palmares end" function to compress and neaten the victories section, and some didn't. This again should be rectified so that either all or none of the articles use this. My personal slant is that using the function compresses the article and makes looking though easier - as opposed to (in some cases) a horrendously long list that makes searching a bit a pain as well as looking like a mess. XyZAn (talk) 19:18, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I've started a new article that aims to give an overview of doping cases and allegations of riders who have placed in the top 10 in the TdF general classification since 1998 (the year of the Festina_affair). I would like some input on the idea, and possibly help to complete it. Before I go into lots of referencing, I would also like to know what you think of the following categorization which aims to strike a balance between detail and simplicity:

Legend :

Disqualified from race

Tested positive in other competition or out of competition

Sanctioned for doping without positive test

Admitted to doping without positive test or sanction

Doping alleged without proof or sanction

No proof or allegation of doping

Example:

1997 Tour de France

Rank	Name	Team	Time
1	Jan Ullrich (GER)	Telekom	100h 30' 35"
2	Richard Virenque (FRA)	Festina	+9' 09"
3	Marco Pantani (ITA)	Mercatone Uno	+14' 03"
4	Abraham Olano (ESP)	Banesto	+15' 55"
5	Fernando Escartín (ESP)	Kelme	+20' 32"
6	Francesco Casagrande (ITA)	Saeco	+22' 47"
7	Bjarne Riis (DEN)	Telekom	+26' 34"
8	José Maria Jimenez (ESP)	Banesto	+31' 17"
9	Laurent Dufaux (SUI)	Festina	+31' 55"
10	Roberto Conti (ITA)	Mercatone Uno	+32' 26"

The article is in my sandbox, for now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TSawala/sandbox

Thanks, TSawala (talk) 15:04, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you better remove the "alleged" category as it will cause BLP policy issues.--Racklever (talk) 15:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I think it can become a great article for a magazine, but not for an encyclopedia. It would just be a combination of information in the List of doping cases in cycling and the individual Tour de France articles, and I don't think that should be in this encyclopedia. I would still read it though ;) As Racklever says: 'alleged' has to go anyway.By the way: Olano was sanctioned after the Vuelta a Catalunia for too much caffeine, and was not allowed to ride for three months. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! Obviously, I think the article has a place in Wikipedia (when it is ready), as it aggregates the information in a much more accessible format. Concerning the "alleged" label, perhaps we should not use a label, but do something like this:

1998 Tour de France

Rank	Name	Team	Time	Notes
1	Marco Pantani (ITA)	Mercatone Uno	92h 49' 46"	Disqualified in 1999 Giro for irregular blood values.[1] Died of cocaiine poisoning.
2	Jan Ullrich (GER)	Telekom	+3' 21"	Implicated in Telekom affair and Operación Puerto. Banned retroactively in 2011[2]
3	Bobby Julich (USA)	Cofidis	+4' 08"
4	Christophe Rinero (FRA)	Cofidis	+9' 16"
5	Michael Boogerd (NED)	Rabobank	+11' 26"	Accused by Floyd Landis of blood doping.[3] Allegedly involved in Humanplasma affair.[4]
6	Jean-Cyril Robin (FRA)	US Postal Service	+14' 57"
7	Roland Meier (SUI)	Cofidis	+15' 13"	Tested positive for EPO in 2001.[5]
8	Daniele Nardello (ITA)	Mapei	+16' 07"
9	Giuseppe Di Grande (ITA)	Mapei	+17' 35"	sentenced to six months imprisonment for antipoding violations in Italy in 2005[6]
10	Axel Merckx (BEL)	Polti	+17' 39"

Although (to my knowledge) Michael Boogerd has never been convicted of, or admitted doping, there are serious allegations. This way, we don't have put him in a "category", but can add the relevant "footnotes". What do you think? TSawala (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I would not add allegations, how serious they may be. It is impossible to define a level of 'seriousness' for when you should include allegations, so it is impossible to verify if the allegations are serious enough; there is a large grey area. A disqualification or ban can be verified, it's a black/white situation.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 10:09, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

And I see you list Mancebo as sanctioned in your list. Be careful: he was later cleared of all wrongdoing, so he should be considered innocent. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 10:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd have to agree: this is magazine, not encyclopaedia, material. Kevin McE (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I would say this is a bad idea. If a rider's results have been stripped, the article should reflect that. Anything else gets into the realm of the salacious, and that is not what we do here. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 22:56, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I think this may be better answered here. There are some individual articles where it gets mentioned, including Sebastian Lang's page where it gets mention of Lang being 31st rider to do so. The link itself doesn't inform that, however this [6] has complete list of the riders. I can see the same link in Marino Lejarreta's page.

The question is whether this should be mentioned in Grand Tour page? And if not complete list, maybe at least those who have done it multiple times? BleuDXXXIV (talk) 20:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Take a gander at the seasons pages and you'll notice I've added a new template to (just about) all of them, for navigation among that particular team's many (or not so many, in hindsight I'm not so sure the GreenEDGE one was a good idea) seasons. The one team I'm holding back on doing is HTC–Highroad. Simply because they have had so doggone many names, and also a lot of midseason name changes (one every year from 2007 to 2009). First off, are we settled on "HTC-Highroad" being the permanent title of that article, and if so, what titles should the articles for 2007, 2008, and 2009 have?

My own thinking, for setting down some potential ground rules for similar cases of midseason name changes.

1. The name under which the team participated in the Tour de France, if applicable.
2. The name under which the team participated in the Giro d'Italia, if applicable.
3. The name under which the team participated in any monument classic, if applicable.
4. For historical teams, the name proven to be more common in reliable sources (this is worthless for such a recent team as HTC, but if anyone ever has a mind to go back in time and write season articles for old teams).
5. The name under which the team competed for the longer duration of time.

in kind of descending hierarchy. What do you think? I'd say that this isn't anything of world-beating importance, but it doesn't look like you guys talk about much here anymore :p so here's a topic. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 20:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

We should also figure out the permanent title for the Saunier Duval–Prodir article. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 20:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

In principle it looks good, my only concern is that #3 is a little ambiguous - what if a team competed in one at the start of the year under one name, and a second at the end of the year under a different name? It could be amended to the name used in a plurality of monument races it competed in, and if there is a tie, then #5 comes into play. As for the permanent titles: for HTC-Highroad, it's difficult because "Highroad" and "Telekom/T-Mobile" are equally recognisable names, just for completely different times in the team's history, so I can't pick one over the other, but to use something like "T-Mobile/Highroad cycling team" sounds a bit stupid to me, as it was never known by that name. Geox, well, it's even more difficult, but Saunier Duval is the most commonly recurring name in the team's history. Severo^TC 16:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Right, that's sensible. Also a certain bit of IAR-ish case-by-case should be borne in mind – I would say the proper title for Bjaarne Riis' team in 2008 would be "Team CSC" even though that was not their name at the Tour de France. It remained a relatively common name for them, and it was part of their new name anyway, which is why I'd say it's a reasonable title. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 21:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Year-by-year, especially in the past ten years, should be easy enough to decide by the usual WP:COMMONNAME methods, which I think your original criteria would arrive at more often than not. Severo^TC 08:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

You say that "Telekom/T-Mobile" and "Highroad" are equally recognizable names for totally different eras, well, what about splitting the article? There's precedent for that with other sports. The Seattle SuperSonics and the Oklahoma City Thunder are different eras of the same franchise, and have different articles. So too the Montreal Expos and the Washington Nationals. There are even examples that predate Wikipedia (which should have obvious reasons to bear mentioning), as Buffalo Braves and Los Angeles Clippers are separate articles, as are Quebec Nordiques and Colorado Avalanche. The only problem I could see with that is it would make {{ct}} damn awkward. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 16:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Franchises changing with little obvious continuity probably seems more run-of-the-mill to those who follow US sport: it is a very foreign concept to most European sports fans. Frankly, so long as a) there is a redirect from each of the names a team has ever had, b) the text in the link from the various pages that send readers to the article is appropriate, c) the various names, or at least the main part of them, is prominent in the lead, and d) the contents of the infobox are not year specific, I would suggest that the name at the top of the article matters very little. I certainly think it is more important to maintain the integrity of a team's history than to be overly concerned about the wording on the top of the page. Kevin McE (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi. For the 2012 Summer Paralympics, two Wikipedians (myself and Hawkeye7) are going to London to cover the Games with press credentials acquired through Wikimedia Australia. Covering these Games successfully on Wikinews and Wikipedia provides a fantastic opportunity to use this as leverage to get the Commonwealth Games and the Olympic Games in the next few years. The more successful we are at doing on the ground Original Reporting that coincides with Wikipedia article improvements and getting pictures in advance, the better we can use it to get additional access because Wikipedia and Wikinews will have a track record of success. In order to do this, we need your help on Wikinews. The Wikinews part is being organised as Wikinews:Paralympic Games. The main focus needs to be writing Original Reporting. We need people to help copy edit, to take original reporting notes and write them into Wikinews articles, who can hunt down acceptable licenses for pictures to use on articles. (IPC policy only allows a CC-BY-NC kind of license at the events. Not sure accreditation wise we'll be good to go with getting our own images in any case.) We also need people who can help with reviewing. Any assistance you can provide would be very much appreciated. Please sign up at Wikinews:Paralympic Games. :) --LauraHale (talk) 22:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

When I went to updating the relevant palmares at the end of the Tour, I noticed that someone had beaten me to Chris Froome's, including stage placings (2nd on stages 9 and 19) and

::Held Polka Dot Jersey on Stage 8

That second one came back after I removed it. So I'll ask the project - do we really want this? It strikes me as equivalent significance as finishing fourth on a stage or something - possibly worth mentioning in prose, but not in a list. I could grudgingly accept this for Grand Tour leader's jerseys, but even then, do we need the icon? What purpose does it possibly serve? Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 09:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't include them myself, but I see some merit. Froome received a prize for leading the mountains classification, both symbolic (the jersey) and financial. If somebody would add in the palmares of FC Barcelona that they lead the Spanish league between rounds 10 and 13 (just making this up), I would remove it 100%, as there is no prize or ceremony connected to that, but in cycling there is.

But just having a prize associated does not make it automatically notable for inclusion. No cycling ranking system that I know gives any value to the number of days that a cyclist lead a secondary classification, and that suggests that it is not considered important. On the other hand, the mountain classification rankings after a tour stage receive more press attention than many other races that we do include in palmares.

Summarizing my view: I am 80% for removal, and 20% for inclusion. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 11:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm earmarking the Froome article for some fairly serious abbreviating once the hype dies down a bit. Compare description of his third place on stage 11 of the Tour to that of Boonen's Roubaix win. Kevin McE (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

@EdgeNavidad - I understand that, and just like "2nd on stage 9," it bears mentioning in the article prose (which no one ever seems to want to write). Such results are not commonly included in riders' bios unless they literally list every result the rider has ever gotten (and there are some sites that do that). I'm not arguing that it should be eradicated from the article, just that listing it with actual wins is a bit silly (and including the icon is downright nutty and cartoonish). Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 15:04, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Prose fine, list probably not, icon definitely not. It would be great if more prose writers could be found, but where do we find them? It's the age-old question, no? Severo^TC 21:42, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm taking at least a year off from it. Probably more like two. I gave what I could :) Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 21:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I am German and I wrote this article. I am not acquainted with the rules in the English WP, so I want somebody to review the article. Thank you, --Six days fan (talk) 18:44, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The GA review for the 2011 Leopard Trek season has started. I certainly do not have enough time at this moment to even look at it, but I hope others are aware of it. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Neat, thanks for pointing this out. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 21:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi guys, Olympics are starting and maybe we can try bringing the road races to FAs, just as we did in 2008. Also, I've suggested the 2008 Women's race for TFA on Sunday, when this year's event takes place. --Tone 12:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Notwithstanding my limited participation these days, I can't bring myself to write a good article about that race. My hands would be shaking too much (with rage and disgust). Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 15:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll work on bringing the women's race article up to a reasonable standard as I have time. I've never had any real interest in the Good/Featured Article processes, but who knows, i might get motivated enough on this one. More likely if I get some help! Qwfp (talk) 10:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

another transfers page for this season to next. Feel free to help me update it and/or consult it for mainspace article updates come the turn of the year. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 20:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I've proposed splitting off "Deaths during training or another reason related to cycling" section from the main article at Thoughts on splitting off Deaths during training or another reason related to cycling. Would appreciate other interested editors thoughts on this. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 19:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Looking for input on this proposal. Shearonink (talk) 16:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Anyone? Shearonink (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you can assume that there are no objections to split. And I'm (positively) surprised at the sourcing in that article! --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 08:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Since there have been no objections, I will go ahead and split it. I just have out figure out what to call the offspring list and see if anything needs to be changed for its new location. I'll also have to see what to do about a histmerge (or whatever), to preserve the edit-history. And I am starting to think that there could even be a "Professional cyclists killed in automobile accidents while training" article since I figured out how many of these car accident-deaths (more than you might realize) there have been in the past 25-30 years.

And thanks for the kind words about the sourcing. This is what the article looked like when I started: in July 2010. I think I was looking over recent changes or something at the time and came upon the article and thought "these names aren't just words...they were people and they deserve something a little better." Nicola54 has done a lot of work on it too, he has access to German cycling sources and maintains a related list: Liste von tödlich verunglückten Radrennfahrern - List of fatally injured cyclists (German Wikipedia) on the German Wikipedia. --Shearonink (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I've also been thinking the title of the main article should be changed from "List of..." to "Professional cyclists who have died while racing" or "Professional cyclists who have died during a race". The offspring article would be called "Professional cyclists who have died while training or from other cycling-related reasons" or something similar. Any objections or thoughts? Shearonink (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

This could use some help. It's now at AfD, where some particularly belligerent complaints are being made about it from the AfD nominator. I've already expanded it a lot from how it was initially, but they're still adamant. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Any comments on this: Talk:Future_plc#Controversy_section ? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Because of multiple conflicting edits about Armstrong's status, I have started a discussion on how we should report his results on Talk:1999 Tour de France. Please feel free to join this discussion and give your point of view. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 15:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Not sure that is the best place for the much needed centralised discussion, but I've said my bit there. Such discussion should also be notified to, at least, the talk pages of the articles on Armstrong and USADA, which have seen plenty of polemic. Kevin McE (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

You're probably right about the location; I didn't think about where to put it, but just started it when I reverted the 1999 Tour article. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 18:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I have made a series of edits to medal infoboxes regarding medals won in this event. The athletes in question did not represent their country in this event, and the infobox is clearly able to handle the correct information. The most comparable Olympic case is the mixed teams of the past, e.g. Stan Rowley, Ramón Fonst and Albert Corey. I am not comfortable adding medal infoboxes to the athletes not already having one. I may have made some errors; I am sure there are some rules for which order to use for competitors competing for two "countries" in one sport, or for two "countries" in two sports (track and road). Feel free to review the edits and add the remaining medal boxes. 80.212.143.86 (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Good call: I would draw parallels to UK riders who might have some medals for GB in Olympics/Worlds, and for their constituent country in the Commonwealth games. Kevin McE (talk) 16:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. There are some guidelines about how to order them but it really depends upon the situation. While we are on this topic, a similar one is adding nationalities to trade teams as on 2012 UCI Road World Championships. We've talked here before about removing the routine use of flags to represent trade teams (see WP:CYC-CD) but an editor has reinserted them on this article with the edit summary that national anthems were played. I'm not sure how to proceed with this one. Severo^TC 21:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I (original poster, my IP jumped) have completed the men's event and started the women's. I don't think the flags are suitable for the teams even though the NOC field is filled out here. I think your previous consensus is better, but direct the other IP to the past discussion and to start a new discussion here if neccessary. I didn't see the medal ceremony, but if they in fact used the flags of the nations where the teams are registered for the top three (and the anthem for the winner) then I see the point of the other IP. One case that could be made against it is that there are probably UCI rules against cyclists competing for more than one nation (normally a quarantine if you change, I think), so the UCI can't really be counting it as competing for the nation where the team is registered by their own rules. 85.167.109.51 (talk) 16:34, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I have done all team medallists except the three redlinks: Chantal Blaak, Lucinda Brand and Jessie Daams. 85.167.109.51 (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input (and feel free to stick around)! Even with a country code (we already know teams are registered somewhere) and even an anthem, it doesn't really matter unless their medals are counted towards a medal table. But I can't find an official - or even unofficial - medal table anywhere. Anyone help with that one? Severo^TC 22:11, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I think this is an example of a medal table for the Road World Championships. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I did a major revison of the Cycling in Copenhagen article, and would appreciate if members of this group could give it a once over and suggest any improvements, do take note however, that I've had to strike a balance and avoid content better suited for Cycling in Denmark and Segregated cycle facilities. Also, while I believe my English is fairly good, I am not a native speaker, so if you encounter any mistakes, please help me correct them --Sertmann (talk) 09:25, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Would appreciate some eyes on this one. The recent edits relating to a dispute with Trek and Lance Armstrong all seem a bit WP:UNDUE to me.--ukexpat (talk) 01:59, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

The template: cycling classification template is missing classifications for cycling that are not para-cycling. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Just posting here to highlight some proposed changes to {{Infobox cyclist}} as there's usually not so much traffic there. Basically, it is proposed that we change the teams part of the infobox to the structure used in {{Infobox football biography}}. Possibly this change could be achieved by bot. Thanks, Severo^TC 22:49, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

We had a discussion about overview of top 10 tour finishers and possible links to doping, started by TSawala. I believe the consensus was then that this is not appropriate for wikipedia.

Since then, Micax has added this to the Doping at the Tour de France article, without aking or notifying TSawala. (See the talk page). Should we redo the discussion, inviting Micax and other users who have edited the list since? --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:24, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:Cycling classifications has been nominated for deletion, please see WP:RFD. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 07:50, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

A couple of us are trying to bring the LeMond article up to A grade. The other editor is a former professional cyclist and has the connections to bring in some new photos of LeMond, which have been pretty great. We would like to split off a portion of the current page but are unfamiliar with the mechanism of doing that. If anyone could stop by and help with the article it would be greatly appreciated. Gunbirddriver (talk) 03:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

An RfC discussion about the MOS:FLAG restriction on the use of flag icons for sportspeople has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. We invite all interested participants to provide their opinion here. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The question of whether Sheldon Brown (bicycle mechanic), who is cited in many technical articles about bicycles, is a reliable source has been raised at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Sheldon_Brown.27s_personal_website_for_bicycle_related_topics. Your opinion may be helpful to the discussion. - AndrewDressel (talk) 04:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Resolved. - AndrewDressel (talk) 23:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps not a clear cut as Brown, but if you have an opinion, please chime in: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#www.slowtwitch.com.2F_and_Technical_Editor_Greg_Kopecky - AndrewDressel (talk) 23:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Adding {{User WikiProject Cycling}} to my user page did not automatically list me in Category:WikiProject Cycling members, as the Project's pages say it will.
Suggestions?
Perhaps membership is understated for this reason -- or I am just uniquely dim. Transonic Crayon (talk) 16:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

No, you did it correct, the template was wrong. I fixed it, and now the category is listed at the bottom of your user page. (At this moment you are not yet listed in Category:WikiProject Cycling members, but this can take some time to get up to date.) Welcome, by the way!--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have noticed this week that the infoboxes of Chris Froome and Alejandro Valverde have had the Major wins field 'enhanced' with the additions of Tour of Oman and Trofeo Serra de Tramuntana respectively (CQ and Cycling News both report it as Trofeo Deía that he won in Majorca). I would contend that both are early season conditioning events that would not be a major focus of anybody's season. If not major races, victory in them cannot be major wins, and should not be noted in the infobox. They should, of course, be in the palmares section of the article. Should we have maybe a 'World Tour level only' rule, and a similar note as a non-display element in the template? Kevin McE (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Maybe we should even consider removing the "major wins" field? Or make the description completely non-subjective, only including word championships and grand tours (general classifications)? That would mean that most cyclists would have no victories mentioned in their infoboxes, but I don't see that as a problem. (World Tour level only would work for current cyclists, but I prefer a method that works for cyclists of all times.) --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I was assuming that overenthusiastic addition is a problem for current riders: older articles tend to be stable. If retained, I would suggest GTs and Monuments only, which avoids historic issues (WT suggestion above was compromise given that some editors want to extend to 1.1 races.) Olympics and World Championships can go in the medals section. National Championships, I propose, are not really important enough to list in the infobox: some might be prestigious, but many are not much more that a pre-Tour display in front of a home crowd, and some are so far from competitive that they do not merit attention (Do we really want Sergei Lagutin's infobox to claim 5 Uzbek nat champs as major results?).Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I would like to see some limiting factor, although I wouldn't be opposed to World Tour-level races (and predecessor season-long competitions). Olympics, World and continental championship medals should go in the medalbox and not be duplicated in the major wins field. Tour of Oman (2.HC) and Trofeo Mallorca races (1.1 races) don't qualify as major wins here for me. Severo (talk) 13:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

UCI appear to have achieved one of their characteristic cock-ups again, this time by issuing Bardiani with a trigramme BAR that they had previously given to Barloworld in 2006-09. Presumably we cannot now use the {{UCI team code|BAR|2013}} as we would expect to be able to. Over to the template wizards among you... Kevin McE (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, two options:

1. Re-assign Barloworld to {{Cycling data Barloworld}} or {{Cycling data BRL}}, move all links to new template (less likely to cause confusion in the future) and use {{Cycling data BAR}} for Bardiani.
2. Put the Bardiani temlate at {{Cycling data Bardiani}}. Possibly also insert code in the {{Cycling data BAR}} template to cause an error for 2013 and use a tracking category to monitor this.

It's more work, but I'd favour the first option because I'd like to see current templates as regular as possible to make it easier for any editor to get involved. The leg-work can be done through AWB with 96 current transclusions of the template. Severo (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

This is a courtesy message to inform the members of this project that I have nominated Portal:Sports for featured portal status. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sports. The featured portal criteria are at Wikipedia:Featured portal criteria. Please feel free to weigh in. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:33, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

At the request of a non-Wikipedian, I have added a stub article on Ronnie Stringwell, British National Hill Climb champion 1950, and 1951. Note that I don't know one end of a bicycle from the other. --Langcliffe (talk) 19:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

That was kind of you in relation to the request, but this guy does not seem to come even close to meeting the notability threshhold for having an article here. Kevin McE (talk) 21:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

You may be right, but his non-existent page was dabbed on British National Hill Climb Championships, so someone evidently thought so once. --Langcliffe (talk) 22:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The presence of a redlink (even if a dabbed one) doesn't imply notability. All that has happened is that links have been created for all the names and someone has dabbed a articular name so it does link to the dab page. Severo (talk) 09:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Point taken, Severo. Either way, I have no axe to grind on this issue. --Langcliffe (talk) 10:50, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I should read what I wrote: *someone has dabbed a particular name so it doesn't link to the dab page*.

Notability would be difficult to prove: in one like this, if there are multiple reliable third-party sources, they're likely to be in written not online sources. Severo (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I got the gist, thanks! --Langcliffe (talk) 11:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I've looked around WP:MOS and through the archives here, but have found nothing on whether to pipe a link to hide the year. For example "Wiggins entered the [[2012 Tour de France|Tour de France]] as one of the favourites to win it." in the section 2012. What's the correct way, [[2012 Tour de France|Tour de France]] or [[2012 Tour de France]]? I reads better piped, but isn't honest. BaldBoris 09:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

If the context is Wiggins' 2012 season, it is tautological to tell the reader that it is the 2012 TdF that he participated in as a favourite, so the link text that differs from the article title is entirely justified.

Approaching the matter from the other angle (your honesty concern): if, in the context of Wiggins' 2012 Tour participation, you believe that the reader is more interested in knowing about the 2012 edition rather than the historical development of the race, then you do them a service by linking to the 2012 article.

In short, this is precisely when and how piped links should be used. Kevin McE (talk) 11:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I've had Bradley Wiggins reviewed for good article status, but before the reviewer (GAtechnical) wrapped it up, they were banned. So is anyone prepared to finish off the job. It shouldn't take long as I believe I've covered most of their suggestions. BaldBoris 21:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't have the time for it... (I could give it a ten-minute review, and promote it, but if I do a review I prefer a serious one.) I will put a notice on the GA nominations talk page. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 18:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I do feel that reviewers are not taking it on as they have no idea about cycling, unlike GAtechnical. If you do have the time to do a review, that would be great. I do have some more to add, if you do. Cheers. BaldBoris 16:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment is sought at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Bicycle_Helmet_Research_Foundation on whether the website of the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation can be considered a reliable source for the purposes of WP articles about bicycle helmets. Your opinion may be helpful to the discussion. Tim C (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I've been busy at work writing the history for the Giro d'Italia page and just doing a facelift of the page as a whole. I've completed pretty much all of what I set out to do. I was wondering if you guys could take a looksy at the page and give me some feedback on what you think needs to be added and whatnot, what you like, or what could be removed. I feel like I've covered what I should. I do wish to take this to GA by the way if you even care. Stay frosty, Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 22:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:1947 World University Cycling Championship and 8 similar categories, all of which are within the scope of this WikiProject, have been nominated for merger to Category:World University Cycling Championships. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

We have the articles Bicycle racing and Road bicycle racing, categories Category:Road bicycle racing and Category:Road bicycle races, but Category:Cycle racing, Category:Cycle races etc. I think that all such articles and categories should use either "bicycle" or "cycle" in the name; and "cycle" is probably the word with widest current use. Would there be any objection here if I move the main articles over the longstanding redirects at Cycle racing and Road cycle racing, and nominate the "bicycle racing" categories to follow suit? – Fayenatic London 23:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought about this at some point but never got round to looking at it so it all sounds fine to me. Severo (talk) 22:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

The page Consensus decisions states that:
Trade cycling teams do not represent the country in which they are registered. As such, nationality should not be implied in tables through the use of flag templates (for example {{flagicon}}, {{flagathlete}} etc). (July 2009).
But what about the trade teams in the men's and women's team time trials for trade teams? The team time trials are included under the UCI registration country of the team. See for instance the 2012 UCI Road World Championships. Or this exception should be added to the Consensus page, or the flags should be removed on the appropriate pages. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 08:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

There was some discussion about this at that talk page and here (in archive 11) about this. I feel that the flags should be stripped from the teams and these medals not be included in the medal table, although the editor who inserted them only seemed to communicate via edit summary so there wasn't much of a debate. It's also worth nothing here that cycling was brought up as an offender at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons for overuse of flagicons (unfairly in my opinion, which I stated there at the time, but the case of cycling wasn't pursued by any editor as cycling is not the biggest offender). Such icons would, in my opinion, amount to overuse of flagicons because the trade teams do not represent the nations where they are registered. Severo (talk) 12:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

In my opinion (that is different than the consensus), cycling teams do have a well-defined nationality: the one listed by the UCI. This can change every year. As such, I would have no problem to list the nationality of the trade teams, also because relevant sources do this.

If this nationality should be added with a flag is a different issue. An issue that I prefer to stay away from... But I think that for example in the Final classification table from 2012 UCI Road World Championships – Men's team time trial, it is better to have 32 flags for the teams, than 192 flags for the cyclists. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 16:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm working to improve the entire section on Los Angeles Bike Paths, starting with the List of Los Angeles bike paths page and spidering out. I'm really not sure what else there is to write, but it said on the Talk page to come over here and say something if I were planning to work on any part of the WikiProject Cycling pages, so - here I am, saying something! Rednikki (talk) 22:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

In many articles on wikipedia the See also section has the template: {{portal| portal name}} for its (most important) portal(s), but I notice that most cycling articles don't have this template. I propose that all cycling articles get this template. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 13:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

We have:

• List of Tour de France general classification winners (which is exactly what the title claims)
• List of Tour de France winners (which also includes winners of secondary classifications)

This is a bit strange, I think. I suggest that we rename the second article into List of Tour de France secondary classification winners, and change the content (by removing the content that relates to the general classification). Does anybody have a problem with this, or does anybody have a better solution? --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

To be honest I don't think we need those articles for any of the Grand Tours. I know I moved the one for the Giro to List of Giro d'Italia classification winners to be more specific. But I still don't see the need for the articles when they are usually mentioned in the infobox where the links to the other classifications already are. But that's just me. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, seems pretty redundant. Isn't all of that information on the articles about the races themselves? If I want to know who won the points classification in the 1972 Tour de France, the article I'm gonna pull up is 1972 Tour de France. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 01:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It is only redundant if you only want to know the 1972 points winner. If you want to see the bigger picture, and understand why I always liked Jalabert, it becomes less redundant ;). Besides, other sources have similar lists: [7][8][9][10].

I'll go ahead and move the list to List of Tour de France secondary classification winners, that will at least reduce the redundancy of the general classification winners. If you think this article is still redundant, AfD is probably the way to go. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 07:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

From a completely outside perspective, it's a shame that the List of Tour de France secondary classification winners is now utterly bland and unappealing. Removing all images for instance has really detracted from the list. Still, if that's what this project agreed to do, I'm not here to argue. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

All the images were about winners of the general classification. I would not mind pictures of winners of secondary classification winners, I just didn't have the time yet to collect them. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 13:18, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, pretty much 95% of the links in the skeleton article you've left behind are dead. And the lead is too short. In brief, it's now a disgrace. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

And the use of flag images as their own column is a pretty big no-no. If that article is to be kept, {{flagathlete}} should be implemented. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 23:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

But it is still kind of redundant, isn't it? Articles like points classification and points classification in the Giro d'Italia have lots of the same information. I'm not sure what the need for general articles like points classification or King of the Mountains are, considering every race (not simply the 3 GT's) has different rules for how they're governed. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 23:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

(point being that this adds to the redundancy) Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 00:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I see there are some concerns. Allow me to summarize them in my own words, and reply to them:

• Almost all of the links are dead: True, but this was also the case before the change. I suspect that this is a mistake on the side of the letour.fr webmaster, and that these links will come back to life again (maybe on a slightly different URL). Is it acceptable to wait until the end of the Tour of 2013, to see if these links come back alive?
• There are no images: That is because all images related to winners of the general classification, and we already have a featured article about that. I am open to additions of images of secondary classification winners, would this solve this issue?
• The article is redundant: Yes, it contains information that is in other articles. The list of points classification winners in the Tour is on three different articles. (It has been for quite a while, my recent change did not affect this at all.) So, what to do with this? Keep it on all three? Remove it on one, keep it on two? Remove it on one, delete one article, keep it on the other? For me the best solution is not obvious... --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

There's a problem. I was going to go do a final update for 2013, but the wording in the lede has struck me as problematic.

"Since the first Giro d'Italia in 1909, there have been 1,804 stages, up to and including stage 20 of the 2013 Giro d'Italia."

I don't think that's actually true. I've been updating the article during this Giro, and I was busy doing other things the last several days, so I added 5 jerseys for Nibali at one time. But there weren't five stages during that time. There were only four. Unless that's the first time a Giro stage has ever been cancelled, we've got a bit of a problem here. Because I suspect that first figure refers to something like days of competition (but then, how does that apply to split-stages, such as in the 1937 Giro d'Italia?)

How do we reconcile this? Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 00:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

About the split stages: "In previous Giri d'Italia, sometimes a stage was split in two. On such occasions, only the cyclist leading at the end of the day is counted."

About the cancelled stage: I think it is a "tradition" to not count these cancelled stages. Examples in the giro: stage 12 in 1946, stage 9 in 1956, stage 19 in 1967, stage 20 in 1969, prologue in 1983, stage 11 in 1988, and stage 16 in 1989. This may help to see what we did in those cases. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Do those cancellations count toward that number in the lede though? (the number was 1,784 before this Giro). There were 20 stages in this Giro, but one pink jersey each for Cavendish, Puccio, and Intxausti, four for Paolini, and 14 for Nibali, which equals 21. Right? Or is it only 13 for Nibali? That's why I'm wondering how this is reconciled, and whether previous cancellations were taken into account with the old number. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 22:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I can't imagine that Nibali will be considered to have an extra day in pink on account of a cancelled stage any more so than he would on a rest day. Stage cancellation is quite different from neutralisation. Kevin McE (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

OK. But that's only part of what I'm asking. I'm also wondering if this was taken into account with past cancellations. Did Laurent Fignon get 9 pink jerseys in 1989 (and oof, his run also includes a split-stage) or only 8? And likewise with the other more previous examples. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 02:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

There's a rather confusing article section called Mike King (BMX rider)#Introduction of clipless pedals that presents one of several competing histories of how clipless pedals became common in BMX. It isn't wholly about Mike King, and so it should probably be moved to the history portion of BMX Racing or BMX, and it needs better sources than online forum posts.

I just helped prod Clipless pedals in BMX, which was essentially talk page commentary disputing the Mike King version, though pedals in BMX the contents might be helpful in sorting out the story. I don't mean to say I agree that it's important who gets credit for popularizing clipless pedals. I do think it's worthwhile to describe the reasons why they became popular, and if there are riders who still use platform pedals, why that is.

On a related note, this discussion, Talk:Bicycle pedal#Additional power on the upstroke, is about better coverage of the "myth" of power on the upstroke from clicking in. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

We seem to be missing an article on the Atlas (Atlas,Atlas). -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

We seem to be also missing an article on "Da Vinci III" -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

If you think it should have an article, you are free to make one! --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 09:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I looked around for a Bike Commuter userbox and couldn't find one, so I made one. I thought people at this project might be interested. If you'd like to use it, put

{{User:Wine Guy/BikeCommuterUBX}}

on your user page, which will create:

Happy cycling. -Wine Guy~Talk 18:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I want to nominate the 1988 Giro d'Italia article for FA eventually and I know a problem I will run into will be on how the combination classification was calculated. From the Pez article (here) it says that is was a " a combined “best score” in all disciplines of the race"; which doesn't provide much help. I then emailed the Hampsten bike company about the classification and got in touch with Hampsten himself and he said "As I remember it the combination jersey was a total of one's standing in the catagories. GC, mountains, and finish line points. " I assumed he meant the points classification as finish line points. And thats how I thought the classification would be calculated as well and he should have 5 pts - which is what Tour-Giro-Vuelta also has listed as the final tally. But the El Mundo source (here) I have for the final standings has him at 8 points. I mentioned that to him and he checked the official race book for the '88 edition and saw nothing about the combination classification calculation and referred me to Mike Neel but I haven't been able to find his email. Any thoughts on this? I feel like that the final tally should be 5pts but I have no support... Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 20:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I have tried to find this information a few times, but... no results... :( --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I had a feeling nothing would show up since this is pretty scarce... Disc Wheel (Talk + Tontributions) 02:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Almost all active riders has a Rider on template on their page such as:

At the end of each year all these templates have to be changed (or removed), and the templates has to be removed form the cyclists pages. And actually, who don't we keep the templates? Is it not better to have a template for each team for each year, so Riders on 2013 Astana in stead of Riders on Astana!? This will look like (in which each team has to be another year):

Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think cluttering the bottom of a rider's profile with these boxes is beneficial in terms of navigation. What would be better is if we had season pages for all top level teams going back some time, which we could like to from rider's bios and which would have team lists in context. Severo (talk) 23:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I think that is a great idea. What I did, I moved all the team squads from the UCI ProTeams to a template and created List of 2013 UCI ProTeams. Just have a look and hopefully you like it! Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

You need to be careful about duplicating information and getting it presented at the right point. We have season articles for each ProTeam (eg 2013 Team Sky season) and we can navigate through these from the footer {{2013 road cycling season by team}}. Changing the title of {{UCI ProTeams}} to List of 2013 UCI ProTeams suggests to readers that that template is the best one to use to navigate around 2013 teams - which is confusing if it's 2013 they are interested in. List of 2013 UCI ProTeams contains team rosters, but these are better presented in the team's season articles. My view is it would be better to create a single list article that listed all 2013 UCI registered teams (ProTeam, Professional Continental and Continental) and it wouldn't be too difficult to create these going back to 2005, when this format of team classification was introduced (it also wouldn't be difficult to continue with earlier years, since Div I, II and III were roughly equivalent, but I previously couldn't find the history of these classifications and when it goes back to). Certainly it would not be difficult to create pages for all ProTeam seasons from 2005 on, and list of teams from 2005 on, and I think such list articles would provide a useful source for readers and good navigation to the structure of pages in place. Severo (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A bit I'd add to this is List of UCI ProTeams doesn't exist (but List of UCI Professional Continental and Continental teams and List of UCI Women's Teams does and UCI ProTeam links to UCI World Tour#List of current UCI ProTeams (since June 2013) and before that linked to UCI ProTour#List of current UCI ProTeams, where a table of ProTeam history going back to 2005 is maintained even though the UCI ProTour as a concept and licensing system was last used in 2010. To add to the mix of season-based articles from my previous post, there's 2013 in men's road cycling to add into the mix. You can probably see why in my 125k edits I never really got this all figured out (but it's better now than it ever was, I think, if the people who create a lot of the content can be persuaded to keep doing so). Severo (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I see what you mean with duplicating information and template directions. I see I made a mistake when changing the name of the {{template:UCI ProTeams}} into List of 2013 UCI ProTeams. I reverted the edit and named the 2013 template: {{Template:2013 road cycling season by team}}, this way. (Because only the current teams and current UCI events are listed in the {{template:UCI ProTeams}}, I thought this was the 2013 template!! Maybe it would be nice to add the former UCI ProTeams in this template.)
I moved all the team rosters to a template because with doing that (I think) it becomes easier to create (with less edits!) more pages that are easier to maintain. For instance, the {{template:AST2013riders}} should be used in 2013 Astana season, List of 2013 UCI ProTeams, List of Astana riders and in the current season in Astana Pro Team. And if something changes, only one page (the template) has to be adjusted. Together with the format that we are getting now with year pages (List of 2013 ProTeams, List of 2013 UCI Professional Continental and Continental teams...) pages doesn't have to be overwritten every year.
I think it's nice to have an overview of all the riders of the current year (as now in List of 2013 UCI ProTeams, could be moved to List of 2013 UCI ProTeams riders if you would like combine the list ProTeams and the list of Continental teams pages). But as you say, the rosters are better presented in the team's season articles. This could be indicated with adding the the {{template:main}} for every team on the List of 2013 UCI ProTeams page. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I also want to to add a bit :). Now I see what you mean with the rosters are better presented in the team's season articles! I thought it was about the Riders who joined the team for the 2013 season and the Riders who left the team during or after the 2012 season tables, but now I see the roster is more complete with the riders who joined of left during the season! That info is important so I'll add this to the templates (and will also appear on all the other pages).Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I get what you mean by creating a List of 2013 UCI ProTeams and riders but the way you would present the information is different in this article to how you would present it in List of Astana riders so I'm not sure a template like {{AST2013riders}} is incredibly useful. I would link on List of 2013 UCI ProTeams not just to the teams but to their season articles: this should make it nice and clear that there's further information a click away. Severo (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it's better that the List of 2013 UCI ProTeams links to the 2013 season teams. About the templates, the disadvantage of having them is that the template has to be edited in stead of an article, but I think this is not a big issue. The advantage is that all the articles with the template (4 pages have the {{AST2013riders}} template for instance) are all accurate after one edit. The same thing is done with Olympic team rosters (see for instance Basketball at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's team rosters).

Some of you may have noticed, as I have, that there is a new list of cycling topics article. This is in addition to previous efforts to facilitate navigating the hundreds of bicycle and cycling related articles, we have

• categories: Category:Bicycles and Category:Cycling
• outlines: outline of bicycles and outline of cycling, and
• a navigation box

At this point, however, the list appears to be a content fork with respect to the outlines, and I'm not sure that it is helping. For example, of the approximately 100 entries, it includes Big Wheel (tricycle) and Tweed Run. I've already asked on the talk pages of the new list and its creator about the inclusion criteria of the list, but have not yet seen a reply. Without some criteria it will end up being just a hodge-podge of items individual editors want to insert.

Since it pertains to the whole project, I thought I bring the issue up here to see if anyone else sees issues with this new development, or if I'm in a panic about nothing. If we keep it, I'd like to see it pared down to just a dozen or so entries. I don't see how an alphabetical list of more articles than that can be helpful. Something similar to the articles included in the navigation box seems about right. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Please take a look at Talk:2013 UCI World Tour#Sources' formatting, about how to format sources for the rankings. Thank you - Nabla (talk) 22:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The article for the upcoming Tour of Alberta (Sept. 3-8) could possibly use some work, if any are interested. Some big names in this one. – Connormah (talk) 03:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I wanted to let you know that the 2013 Vuelta a España is listed as a candidate for In the news, and there seems to be a consensus to post this on the main page if the article is expanded and improved. Anyone willing to help out on this one? Mentoz86 (talk) 09:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I made the page UCI Track Cycling World Ranking, but I can't find the Track World Rankings before the 2008-09 season. Does someone know where I can find them? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 20:14, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, AndrewDressel and everyone. I uploaded an image of a Colnago head badge, & then updated it. While I was checking --again-- for copyright information I realized that most of the images of head badges are fair-use &/or derivative, or otherwise non-free, but are tagged as Share Alike/etc. The page which AndrewDressel created, head badge, is useful and has potential, but if we don't fix the head badge licensures, which will include getting them off of Commons and onto Wikipedia, then the head badge article will be decimated. I tried to start by re-uploading my Colnago head badge image to Wikipedia, to then delete from Commons, but I cannot, for unknown reasons (I tried using a different name, & ensured all fields were filled) . I am willing to help, of course, but I am running into (the above) issues which look like they will cause massive technical issues. Grye (talk) 01:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I started making the page List of women's road cycling transfers 2014‎, however I’m totally not sure it falls within the scope of Wikipedia. But because there are so many articles about football transfers (who minds for instance the Trinidadian footbal 2013-14 transfers or the Uzbek football transfers 2013 ;) ) I just started making the article and I will see what happens. I don’t mind if you nominate it for deletion (I think an interesting discussion will follow ;)). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear cyclists: The above Afc submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Knowing nothing about cycling beyond getting to the corner store, I can't tell if this is a notable cyclist or not. Can anyone help? There are over 43,000 of these abandoned drafts. If you would like to see the ones that will be deleted next, here's the link: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/G13 rescue. —Anne Delong (talk) 15:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I would say he is not notable. His biggest achievement is winning a 2.1 race, that is the third level of cycling races. (WorldTour races being the highest level, 2.HC being the second level.) His highest level cycling team was a continental team, this is also the third level. (ProTeams the highest, Professional Continental the second.) Continental teams do not need to be professional, so he was not competing on a strictly professional level. Lastly, as far as I could see, he did not compete any senior world championships or olympics. I did not look for information beyond the current article.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, EdgeNavidad; I guess I'll let it go, then, —Anne Delong (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Melbourne to Warrnambool Classic is a notable race (which he won) and he rode for DFL in 2007 which was fully professional so I feel he may be marginally notable. However; there are many cyclists more notable without articles so I'm not motivated to hold on to this one. Severo (talk) 22:15, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, if anyone does want to save the article, a single edit of any kind will delay deletion for six months. —Anne Delong (talk) 15:32, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I have requested a peer review for Tom Simpson. If anyone has a chance, could you please head over and give some feedback. Cheers, BaldBoris 00:55, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

The teamname of the women's team Hitec Products UCK is Hitec Products as of 2014. But because this title has been protected from creation, I can't move the page. Can someone with special rights do this? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 16:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

The process to do it is at Wikipedia:Requested moves - I would do it but I'm just checking in for a minute. It's a technical uncontroversial move :) . Severo (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I've now added it. I haven't see the problem of page protected against creation holding up a cycling team article move before! Severo (talk) 19:15, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! But sorry that it's a bit more complicated than I thought..! Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Some admins have got involved as it's a more complicated one and the discussion is at Talk:Hitec Products UCK. Severo (talk) 17:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi folks. Just wondering if I could get your opinion on something, please? I've noticed recently that Emma Pooley's article has had a number of amateur and semi-pro athletics events (e.g. 10km races, triathlons, etc.) added to her palmarès list. This seems odd to me, as many of them seem to be the sort of thing she's doing for recreation rather than as part of her front line competition career. However, not being an expert in these things and not knowing how your Wikiproject handles the Palmarès lists I thought I'd pose the question here: should they be included? Thanks. Pyrope 18:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Some of hers would be notable results for a notable runner/triathlete, even though they are fundamentally recreational for her (eg 1st Lausanne Marathon 2013) but some of the others (eg 1st Neujahrsmarathon Zurich, 10k run 2009) are not so I don't think should be included. Severo (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps these results are better off in a second smaller palmarès, so as not to be confused with cycling events? Mango101 (talk) 23:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi all. Those of you that watch many cyclist biographies will know that I do a lot of work in categorisation and place of birth categories. Recently I have been working on completing the splitting of biographies into the relevant male/female category. At the same time I've taken the opportunity to tidy up infoboxes, amongst other things ensuring that the place of birth, if known, is detailed in the field in {{Infobox cyclist}}.

I've also been trying to keep things simple and keep these places of birth to City, Country. However, User:Buzzards-Watch Me Work has changed a few to include country sub divisions. These include edits to André Cardoso and Thomas Dekker (cyclist). I want to bring to discussion here as I don't think including most country subdivisions is appropriate in infoboxes. Now there will a discussion to be had about whether they are appropriate for some countries in particular (eg the UK, US, Australia or Canada) but I think, in the main, this adds a level inappropriate to infoboxes. In these two examples in particular, I think that Porto, Porto, Portugal and Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands don't add anything for the reader.

As such, I have brought here for discussion if there are any thoughts about what might be preferred as a general rule. Severo (talk) 17:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

At first, great work you've done! Thank you for creating all the categories! Regarding to your question, in my opinion the city and the country is enough. If you want to know where the city is located you can click on the wikilink. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

It seems that the only argument against listing country subdivisions is that it will confuse the readers. I find that hard to believe.

If I was going to tell someone where I was born, I would say Silver Spring, Maryland, not Silver Spring, United States. I think in many of these case cyclists born in a particular provinces - for example - would use the provinces's name when referring to their place of birth.

For the record, you changed the country subdivisions - I simply returned it to its previous state. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:55, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Saying Silver Spring, Maryland would be appropriate if you talk to somebody from the USA. If you would say it to me, I would not know where it was. OK, I would guess USA, but I honestly did not know that Maryland is one of the 50 states, and it would confuse me, where Silver Spring, United States would not confuse me. The alternative Silver Spring, Maryland, USA would not confuse me at all.

This discussion must have been done before on Wikipedia, but I could not find anything on it. I would say that normal usage should be City, Country, with perhaps exceptions of City, Subdivisional entity, Country for US States, the countries of the UK and the republics in the Sovjet Union. Not for districts in Portugal or provinces in the Netherlands. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 19:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

The point I'm trying to make is why not list the city, highest order subdivision and country (e.g. Silver Spring, Maryland, U.S. - Dover, England, U.K. - Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands - Victoria, British Colombia, Canada, est.) in the info box? I see no explanations why it shouldn't be listed. Just like I say Silver Spring, Maryland for someone in the U.S. - I think people in the Netherlands - for example - would do the same with Dutch provinces. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Im born in the Netherlands and when I tell someone where I live I just say the city (Woerden) and sometimes I add 'near Utrecht'. Not in particular the province. Thats the way how most people tell it in the Netherlands. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 16:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

From another Dutch editor: it is quite unusual to add the province that you live in, the only exception I can think of is if several different towns share the same name. It may be normal USA behavior — that's why I agree with an exception for the USA — but in most countries of which I know these habits, the subdivision is normally not mentioned. "Most countries of which I know these habits" is clearly a minority of all countries, so I am not an expert on this. I can say for sure that Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands is not normal, and I am 80% sure that Porto, Porto, Portugal is not normal. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I'm wrong about the Dutch. But I'm 100% certain that Americans use states, Australians use provinces/territories, British use kingdoms, Canadians use provinces/territories, Spanish use autonomous communities, and Swiss use cantons when referring to their birthplace or residence. So how do we distinguish when to list the highest order subdivision? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 18:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

By keeping things simple: City, Country except for the US, UK, Australia, Canada and - historically - the USSR. Severo (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Making exceptions for selected countries rather than applying a universal rule does not sound like "keeping things simple". —sroc 💬 12:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

An(other) option to prevent that the lines will become long is the use of abbreviations (see List of U.S. state abbreviations). So for instance: Silver Spring (MD), United States. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 10:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Strong oppose using state abbreviations, which assume the reader knows what the abbreviations mean, which they probably won't unless they're from that country. Two-letter US state abbreviations are a prime example and a sign of US-centrism. —sroc 💬 12:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I have asked at the Manual of Style if there is anything MoS-related to this.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

If we're going to abbreviate - we should abbreviate the country not the subdivision. Personally I don't think we need to abbreviate anything - I mean Silver Spring, Maryland, U.S. isn't that long. Also, should we list Flanders and Wallonia when writing about Belgium? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 21:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

No. There's very few examples where we should include subdivision. I don't think anywhere in Europe outside of the UK is appropriate. Severo (talk) 21:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

One of my friends is from Wallonia - according to him it's more common to identify with your region than with the Belgium state. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 21:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

So is one of mine and firmly calls himself Belgian. This gets all very anecdotal. Severo (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The documentation at the general infobox template for people, Template:Infobox person, offers this explanation for the birth_place parameter:

Place of birth: city, administrative region, sovereign state. Use the name of the birthplace at the time of birth, e.g.: Saigon (prior to 1976), Ho Chi Minh City (post 1976). Do not use a flag template.

I see no reason why specific infobox templates (e.g., {{Infobox cyclist}}) should stray from this. That said, I'm sure examples abound of exceptions to this general rule:

• Margaret Thatcher — born: "Grantham, England"; died: "London, England"
• Stephen Fry — born: "Hampstead, London" (omits the country)
• Stephen Hawking — born: "Oxford, England"
• Julia Gillard — born: "Barry, Wales, United Kingdom" (also includes UK
• Flume (musician) — born: "Sydney, Australia"
• Silvio Berlusconi — born: "Milan, Italy"

I would suggest that the administrative region should be included in an infobox. It's statistical information so there's no awkwardness to avoid like there is in prose. —sroc 💬 21:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I saw this but couldn't quite understand it - given there is not widespread adherence to it nor could I find a discussion that led to it? (Finding discussions in the archive there is pretty difficult though so there is quite possibly some discussion.) I'm concerned that including this is connected to Systemic bias as it's more important in some English-speaking countries than elsewhere. Severo (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I might add that I don't think the relevant consideration is "What would I say if someone asked me where I was born?" The answer may depend on context (we might omit the state/province/region and/or country depending on where we are when we say this, where the other person is from, what information we expect the other person might need to know what you mean) and may take a more fluid style (e.g., "Woerden, near Utrecht"). This is not indicative of how data should be presented in an infobox, which is designed to be helpful. I see no harm in stating city, state/province/region and country (and any other pertinent sub-divisions, if applicable) in the infobox, and doing so consistently across Wikipedia. The prose can be flexible, of course. This would also promote consistency for cases of ambiguity, e.g.:

• Perth, Western Australia, Australia
• Perth, Tasmania, Australia

If we omit the state, a reference to "Perth, Australia" becomes ambiguous. If we include the state only when needed for disambiguation: (a) this leads to inconsistency; (b) this requires checking to see whether there are any other cities/towns with the same name in the same country, which leads to more effort. —sroc 💬 12:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

{{infobox person}} and {{infobox writer}} both use the Nationality field which typically displays American, Australian, British, Canadian (perhaps linked but some editors systematically unlink them). There is some discussion and widespread practice omitting the country from birth/deathplace when those places match the nationality. (Frequently I add the country--but never United States or United Kingdom spelled out--to one of the place fields when there is a nationality match, and always add it when there is a mismatch.) At a glance I conclude {{infobox cyclist}} gives no nationality, not even membership of a national team that mismatches the birthplace. Perhaps it should and I think the oft-deprecated FLAG may be a welcome part of it.

The miscellaneous examples given here are dangerous. For example, Margaret Thatcher uses {{infobox officeholder}} with caption that identifies her by a national office. Flume (musician) uses {{infobox musical artist}} whose field label is 'Origin' not 'Born'. I suppose it means musical roots.

Anyway I see no reason for WP Cycling to depart from the persons norm that supports "North Holland" Thomas Dekker (cyclist) as well as "Maryland". I don't recommend linking or fully-spelling so many place names, however. --P64 (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Julia Gillard also uses the {{Infobox Officeholder}} infobox as Prime Minister of Australia but she was born in Wales. George Orwell uses {{Infobox writer}} to indicate he was born in India although he was English. What's your point? We shouldn't assume that a person's birthplace (or place of death) corresponds with their nationality or the country where they held office. What's the harm in including this information for consistency? —sroc 💬 02:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Flags in infoboxes have been deprecated for a long long time (see WP:INFOBOXFLAG). That's really not going to get anywhere although you're more than welcome to propose it at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. I would still like to see the discussion that led to the guidance at {{Infobox person}} if anyone can find it. Severo (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't think there was any discussion, as far as I can see from the page history and Template talk:Infobox person/Archive 1. User:Zyxw wrote some documentation for the parameters on 14 June 2007, including "Place of birth: city, state, country (or other location info, depending on local usage)". The next day The Enlightened amended the birth and death location documentation to its current form "to be less US-centric". Qwfp (talk) 10:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The Enlightened's action had the side effect that in some sense it became more US-centric, since the depending on local usage clause was omitted... If I would have to write the documentation, it would include the depending on local usage clause, and ideally would refer to a list of countries that use subdivision, and a list of countries that don't. Is it a wise idea to stop the discussion here, and go to Template talk:Infobox person?--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 14:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Qwfp. I had a look but wasn't getting anywhere. I think it is time to move to Template talk:Infobox person. It's a whole bigger issue than I first envisaged and one which should be treated on a much wider scale. Severo (talk) 14:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Since there is also a famous cyclist named Li Na, I just wanted this project to be aware of a move request at Talk:Li Na (tennis). Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Can anyone answer the question I posted at: Talk:Bardiani-CSF#Country info? If so please respond there. ww2censor (talk) 22:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Linkidy link. Seems team pages are handled differently than I remember from back when I was more active, so I'm not sure what the appropriate edit to {{LTB2014riders}} is. Is Kaisen simply removed, or is a footnote added? That'd be why I'm leaving this notice here. I took care of Kaisen's own page as well as {{Lotto-Belisol riders}}. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 22:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Taken care of. Craig(talk) 11:56, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Can someone made a article of Ronda Pilipinas the biggest cycling tournament in the Philippines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikbert16 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

It would be hard to justify this on the grounds of WP:GNG, but if you can find the sourced material,knock yourself out. Kevin McE (talk) 21:19, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear cyclists: This old abandoned Afc submission is soon to be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable topic, and, if so, does someone here know where to find reliable sources? —Anne Delong (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, I guess not - gone now. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

All; considering we have list pages for days in the leaders jerseys at each of the Grand Tours, I have been thinking about implementing a similar list page for the riders to have won stages at each of the Grand Tours, since 1935. I believe there are around 80 riders that would feature on such a list, but it is whether or not I can find the requisite sources in order to create a list to a high standard. If I do decide to start, it'll be in my sandbox awaiting assistance, if I don't have the strength to do so myself. But, I've brought it to the project's attention first, before even starting. Just to seek further opinion. Craig(talk) 02:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear cyclists: Should this topic have its own article, or should it be a section in the Cyclosportive article? It's an old draft that will soon be deleted as stale unless someone takes an interest in it. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't see that it would even be a distinct section within Cyclosportive: it is simply another name for the same thing. There might be some info worth adding, but the draft is very US focussed. Already exists as a redirect. Kevin McE (talk) 10:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

When I first found this article, I added some sources to it. The first four news articles I found were all about Canadian events (Gran Fondo Rockies, Gran Fondo Whistler and Gran Fondo Banff), but Canada isn't even mentioned in the Cyclosportive article or in the draft above. Would it be appropriate to add these to the "Examples" section with a citation? right now that section only lists event that have their own article. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:46, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

A discussion has begun to outline usage of flags on sports articles and to review their usage. Sports articles have long diverged from what is stated in the manual of style. Please comment on the proposals and add suggestions by contributing at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. Thanks. SFB 13:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Is the Category:Tour de France cyclists appropriate to put on the article of every single person who has rode in the Tour? There are cureently only about 40 biographies using this. I think it's defining, but I wanted to guage opinion before either populating it or taking it to WP:CFD. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I've never quite got my head around the best way to go with this one. A single category would be very large so perhaps it would be appropriate to divide it in someway - but which way? Era? Nationality? Then we need to consider which other races merit similar categories. Severo (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I think it's about the same as with Olympic cyclists, see Category:Olympic cyclists, although there is a Tour de France every year with more cyclists than in an Olympic race. Because some cyclists have ridden many Tours I think the best option is sorting by nationality. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 08:48, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks both. So something similar to the nationality structure of Category:Tour de France stage winners? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:19, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I currently have the 1988 Giro d'Italia page up for FAN and I was just stopping by to see if anyone could/would want to look over it? Any feedback really would be nice on the page. Thanks, Disc Wheel (Talk + Tontributions) 05:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Great job! Nice you uploaded (with some effort I see :) ) and added pictures! Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 08:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I have created a page for your project under the deletion sorting Wikiproject. A bot will automatically populate this list with articles containing your talk page project banner, which have been nominated for deletion. You might like to incorporate the {{Topic}} template or a link like this Articles up for deletion on your project page to list any candidates. Hopefully, there won't be any entries but this provides a mechanism to alert you if there are.  Philg88 ^♦talk 08:32, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 15:12, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

There's some content needs developing at Smart highway, and some older related discussion at US Company Talk:Solar Roadways. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:55, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Would somebody kindly provide some feedback on Klein Bikes? I'd like to get it to GA some time, but there aren't many sources, or other bike manufacturer articles with which to compare it. Thanks, James^x12345 20:15, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I come from the french Wikipedia. I realise since march a big number of photos about cycling. You can see these pics by going on fr:Utilisateur:JÄNNICK Jérémy/Cyclisme. JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi there,

I believe from my mother, that the inventor of this bike is MY great great great ... grandfather. Her mother's maiden name is PRESS. Ethel Elizabeth PRESS was born in Watchet, Somerset England.

Where do I find ths authenticity of this belief.

Signed: Julie Elizabeth Hince . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.218.96 (talk) 03:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

See Category talk:Olympic sports#Olympic cycling categorization. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Not a regular here so please forgive my dropping in out of the blue. The article Bicycle culture was proposed for deletion. I'd rather it was AfD'd properly so I am removing the PROD but ... is it a real thing, is this a salvageable article, or what? Your comments/help would be welcome. I'm not up to saving it on my own but you probably know stuff that I do not; or else you may recognize immediately that it is a dead duck and should just be knocked on the head. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Please don't all shout at once. :) DBaK (talk) 00:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Please note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:20, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, the article has been vandalised several times and that table is all wrong. Can you fix it? Thank you! --179.25.176.197 (talk) 23:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Please check my addition to that article. This location is obviously not in my hometown Nordhorn or my second home Münster. It is not conceiveable in either of these cities. Unfortunately I live currently in the very street I depicted. I have seen minor accidents with cyclists there. Some pedestrians jump onto the cyclepath and in the way of cyclist when they recognise that there is a private street and that a car or a bicycle approaches from behind the wall. Some cyclists jump onto the street when they see an approaching resident or they just do that by habit even without waiting for residents. I consider it an unacceptable carelessness to not even try to control the danger by taking care of the plants. I also think this shows how danger is sometimes accepted out of miserliness or lazinessor whatever else the reason. NordhornerII (talk)I am not a number! I am a Nordhorner. 18:26, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, all. I'm the engineer who designed "Flying Rider," the suspended rider bicycle, which is under development. A U.S. patent has issued. One proof-of-concept has been built and demonstrated. A manufacturable prototype is in the works. Should I enter it into the bicycle wiki now or wait until it is in regular production? See http://www.flyingrider.com David (talk) 00:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)David Schwartz

You should not put it in this wiki at all, never. You, as the designer, have a conflict of interest. If this bicycle needs an article on this wiki, somebody else will make it. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 21:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I created this article, but I'm struggled to find enough reliable sources and information to make it more than a sub-stub. Can anyone help? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 17:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I've added his date of birth from his cyclingarchives page, but there's not a lot of other info there. Qwfp (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Qwfp. Boleyn (talk) 16:39, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I created Template:Cycling team list of riders, so if a team has a list of riders article (see: Category:Lists of cyclists by team), it could be added in Template:Cycling team. Read about it on the updated documantation page: Template:Cycling team/doc. Please comment if you don't agree with the change. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 12:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

For the ones who don't know what I'm talking about, with the Template:ct you get with the code of the team and the year a wikilink with the (former) name of the team that links to the current teamname.

So {{UCI team code|RAB|2012}} gives Rabobank (name in 2012 was Rabobank, links to Belkin Pro Cycling team how the team is named nowadays)

But now my request. If teams has a pages about their season for that year, I think it would be better that {{UCI team code|RAB|2012}} not links to Belkin Pro Cycling Team, but to 2012 Rabobank season, because on that page is all the info about that year of that team. But if that page for that year doesn't exists it should link to Belkin Pro Cycling Team.

So in my opinion:
{{UCI team code|RAB}} should give Belkin Pro Cycling Team (as it is now)
{{UCI team code|RAB|2009}} should give Rabobank (as it is now, 2009 Rabobank season does not exist)
But:
{{UCI team code|RAB|2012}} should give Rabobank
{{UCI team code|RAB|2013}} should give Belkin Pro Cycling Team

It's the same on pages about the Olympic Games. I you click for instance at Great Britain on a page about the 2012 Summer Olymics it links to Great Britain at the 2012 Summer Olympics and not to Great Britain at the Olympics.

I think this can be done by making at the the Template:Cycling data RAB an extra variable called team season-YEAR. As example:
| team season-2008 =
| team season-2009 =
| team season-2010 = 2010 Rabobank season
| team season-2011 = 2011 Rabobank season
| team season-2012 = 2012 Rabobank season
| team season-2013a = 2013 Belkin Pro Cycling season
| team season-2013b = 2013 Belkin Pro Cycling season
| team season-2014 = 2014 Belkin Pro Cycling season
And somewhere should be stated if team season-2011 exists link to 2011 Rabobank season otherwise link to the current team name.

Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 16:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Major change template:ct

From now on it's possible to add the season pages so the template:ct can link to it. See for example updated Template:Cycling data SLU.

{{UCI team code|SLU|2006}} gives Team T-Mobile Women (link to Specialized-lululemon, no season page)
{{UCI team code|SLU|2009a}} gives Team Columbia–High Road Women (link to 2009 Team Columbia-High Road Women season)
{{UCI team code|SLU|2009b}} gives Team Columbia–HTC Women (link to 2009 Team Columbia-High Road Women season)
{{UCI team code|SLU|2012}} gives Team Specialized–lululemon (link to 2012 Team Specialized–lululemon season)

Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 21:58, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Please see the discussion here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 06:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Question: should people who are a member of Category:Tour de France stage winners and/or Category:Tour de France winners be placed directly in Category:Tour de France cyclists as well? I think they don't, as that only duplicates the information (every stage or tour winner is by default a competitor), but User:Nickst thinks they do, citing WP:DUPCAT (which is a rather good argument, Ihave to admit). Some third opinions on this would be appreciated. Not a terribly important discussion of course, but it's always nice to have some agreement on these things. The same obviously applies for the Vuelta and the like. Fram (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• I think it must be non-diffusing subcategories, see WP:DUPCAT: Not all subcategories serve the "diffusion" function described above; some are simply subsets which have some special characteristic of interest, such as Category:Best Actor Academy Award winners as a subcategory of Category:Film actors. That people must be marked as cyclists and winners simultaneously. WP:SUBCAT is not applied here. We must have a full list of TdF cyclists without exclusion of somebody here. I put {{Non-diffusing subcategory}} into subcategories. NickSt (talk) 08:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Please take a look, including the talk page. Your opinions might help resolve a disagreement. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:55, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

Sorry for my bad english. It's not my native language.

Yesterday evening I was in Granges for the record of Jens Voigt. You can find some pictures in Commons : Commons:Category:Hour Record - Jens Voigt. Some others will upload later.

Regards.

Ludo29 (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

For info, Mattaidepikiw has nominated the Jens Voigt article for a GA. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 06:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

There were many of you that contributed to these articles. Consider this a collective barnstar that is meant to honor each of you for your effort. In cycling, Jens Voigt sets a new hour record, riding more than 51 kilometres (31.7 mi) in an hour.

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Jens Voigt and Hour record on the Wikipedia main page. And great editing made it all possible. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Jens Voigt view statistics. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:13, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

As of today, the article had 59,586 views in the last 30 days. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 09:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I hate to be a deletion monkey, but what do others think of this article? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it's only notable in France to win on 14 July (it's not an official prize). Besides of that the article is now only a short list. Overall I think the information is valuable, but not to have its own article. Maybe it can be merged into: Tour de France records and statistics? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 21:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Or a it should become part of a new wiki page; 2 options:

It could become part of a new wiki page: Tour de France stage wins statistics. A great page like this exist on the French Wiki: fr:Statistiques des victoires d'étapes du Tour de France.

Or a Wiki page List of French Tour de France stage winners could be created (and this becomes a section of it), like the Dutch: nl:Lijst van Nederlandse etappewinnaars Ronde van Frankrijk and nl:Lijst van Belgische etappewinnaars Ronde van Frankrijk. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 13:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I recently refactored the tracking used by ct template and its data subtemplates. there were a couple problems (1) the data templates were adding articles to Category:Cycling team data problems, which is a reasonable approach, except that this doesn't work when the data is used to generate a wikilink. you can't have a category inside of a wikilink. the solution was to move this up to the Template:Cycling team link and Template:Cycling team nolink. those templates will check to see if a result is returned, and if not, then will add the page to the tracking category. (2) the method used for detecting a missing year was very clever, but was adding articles to Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls, which already has over 50,000 entries. the upside is that the complexity of adding the tracking category to every single data template has now been reduced to adding it to only two meta-templates. let me know if there are any problems, or if you want to help with cleaning up Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls :) Frietjes (talk) 15:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited! Becky Sayles (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

September is gone and the article still annouces this event. --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Eingangskontrolle, thanks for letting us know. It's fixed. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 16:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

For making it easier making tables of a bicycle races I created a template. To read about the template see Template:Cyclingresult/doc. Please respond if you think this is helpful or if you have any comments.

Example

{{Cyclingresult start}}
{{Cyclingresult|1|Ellen van Dijk|NED|[[Boels Dolmans Cycling Team]]|2h 15' 30"|[[File:Womens World Cup leaders jersey.png|20px]]}}
{{Cyclingresult|2|Evelyn Stevens|USA|Boels Dolmans Cycling Team|+ 30"}}
{{Cyclingresult|2|Marianne Vos|Netherlands|{{UCI team code|RBW|2014}}|+ 35"}}
{{Cyclingresult end}}

gives:

Result

Rank	Rider	Team	Time
1	Ellen van Dijk (NED)	Boels Dolmans Cycling Team	2h 15' 30"
2	Evelyn Stevens (USA)	Boels Dolmans Cycling Team	+ 30"
2	Marianne Vos (Netherlands)	Rabo–Liv	+ 35"

Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 13:47, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sander, the template seems like a good idea, although I'm not au fait with that many templates. If it makes it quicker and easier to generate result tables then I'm all for using it and trying it out. How would we get two tables of results next to each other, like how we have the stage result on the left hand side and the GC result on the right? How easy would it be for new editors to pick up - those who have no made/edited/created a page and have had no previous experience in race result data? XyZAn (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

XyZAn, thanks for your response. The two tables side by side is not a problem, because in fact these tables are always two apart tables. To show it I created two articles with these template, see 2009 Rabo Ster Zeeuwsche Eilanden and 2010 Thüringen Rundfahrt der Frauen.

If a new editor understands how the wiki language he/she will always start copying. With this template it looks more compact and it is shorter, but I don't know if it looks easier. This is the main difference:

|-
| 4 || {{flagathlete|[[Ina-Yoko Teutenberg]]|GER}} || {{UCI team code|TCW|2009}} ||align="right"| +11"

and

{{Cyclingresult|4|Ina-Yoko Teutenberg|GER| {{UCI team code|TCW|2009}} |+11"}}

Besides of that the begin of the table is much simpler. Compare:

Regular {| class=wikitable |- ! !Rider !Team !Time

This template {{Cyclingresult start}}

Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 21:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

I've just looked at 2010 Thüringen Rundfahrt der Frauen and the wiki-code looks a lot neater when compared to the current method. So for me its a definite improvement and I guess we should see how well it works then! XyZAn (talk) 20:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

For info Buzzards-Watch Me Work has nominated a ton of cycling teams for deletion (see pretty much everything south of this). The majority offer no real rationale for deletion. I'll look at sourcing a few, as few extra refs can't hurt. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)