Talk:List of teams and cyclists in the 2010 Tour de France

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Tour de France task force.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Um

Isn't Contador going to wear bib number one? Somewhat irresponsible to put numbers in when they can't possibly be known yet. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 02:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the numbers to prevent confusion Racklever (talk) 21:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meaningless

As per the official tour site, "The starters are not yet known". Something like the Dutch page might be justifiable, if team announcements can be sourced, but this is just incorrect at present. Multiples of ten aren't used, for a start, and as Nosleep points out, Contador will be #1. Someone's just copied this "cyclingnews" site which itself is completely unsourced (and implausible). The official list should be released in the coming days. --Aioth (talk) 10:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page is styled differently than past teams/cyclists pages

That's not in itself a bad thing, but it leads me to question what, if any, elements from lists such as the FL on last year's Giro should be retained in this one. This page has the big table from that article, but not the little ones. It also leaves out national champion jerseys. What revisions, if any, should be made to this list? Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 03:23, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list should be closer to the FL - that's the standard to match after all (even though I'm not a big fan of the small tables). Severo^TC 13:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There really needs to be some sort of consensus on the style of these pages. There is no need to have the same information twice. While I am a fan of having one large table, such as the one found in the second half of the page, I understand the series of small tables is the standard for these pages.

As I said, I would prefer a single table with the same information become the standard, with a secondary table, perhaps, for the various team information, which wouldn't fit into the rider table. Of course, changing the template for teams and riders pages would require changing all of them. I'm not sure how many fully-detailed pages there are at this point, which would need to be changed, so unless someone or a group would volunteer to change them, we would probably be better sticking with the current template, in my opinion. mpbx (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about the team order?

It appears that the order of teams is decided as follows by the results in the 2009 version:

Contador won the Tour, so his team gets the numbers 1-9.
Schleck was second, so his team gets 11-19.
Armstrong was third, so his team gets 21-29.
Wiggins was fourth, so his team gets 31-39.
F. Schleck and Klöden's teams (5 and 6) already had numbers, so they are skipped.
Nibali was seventh, so his team gets 41-49, even though he was not in the race himself.

And so on. So far, this is "original research" by me. Does anybody know of a source that supports this? --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 17:37, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your conclusion, and it can be observed going several years back, and we can assume (after today's news) that in 2011 SchLux team will be 1-9, Geox at 11-19, Euskaltel 21-29 etc. But as to a reference that declares this to be the numbering system, I'm not sure. And some doubt as to how far back down the ranking it applies: comparing 1997 Tour de France#General classification with List of teams and cyclists in the 1998 Tour de France yields the pattern for the top three, but Olano came 4th and Escartín 5th in 1997, yet in 1998 Olano's Banesto wore 61-69, and Escartin had number 171. Kevin McE (talk) 17:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]