Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling. 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 10

Results formatting consensus

Consensus generated, posted at WP:CYC-CD. If consensus changes as per WP:CCC please start a new discussion. -- XyZAn (talk) 12:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In light of the recent mass-AfD of a number of cycling articles I have come to seek discussion based upon the formatting of results sections on team pages and palmares sections of cyclists pages. Currently, the most common format is:

1st Stage 2 Tour du Haut Var, Amaël Moinard

1st Stage 4 Volta a Catalunya, Tejay van Garderen

1st Brabantse Pijl, Philippe Gilbert

However some articles have the following formatting style:

1st, Stage 2, Tour du Haut Var, Amaël Moinard

1st, Stage 4, Volta a Catalunya, Tejay van Garderen

1st, Brabantse Pijl, Philippe Gilbert

To me, the second format just has an excessive number of commas in, making the overall list look a bit more messy. I know this may seem trivial, but I'm wondering whether there has ever been a consensus as to the style of these sections, and if not whether we ought to have. BaldBoris, I notice you have had experience of this on the Joe Dombrowski page and wondered what input/suggestions you might have? XyZAn (talk) 17:44, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

When the first editor creates the page he/she chooses the format – selecting which dialect of English to use parallels this debate. This has been the approach for the last few years. Personally I think it's pointless to correct the format, either way, don't we have thousands of pages to expand? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Buzzards I can totally appreciate that an author of a page may initially choose a particular format for an article, either purposefully or as part of their writing style. However, you keep reverting EF Education–EasyPost which seems utterly bemusing - out of the 17 2015 UCI World Tour teams, 16 have the victory format that I propose using and 1 has the system you propose. Whilst there may not be a consensus as the formatting it seems completely illogical to have one article differently formatted to the other 16. Surely you can concede this point and we can move on an improve the quality of cycling articles in this project? XyZAn (talk) 19:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

That's a little deceptive, numerous rider and minor team − CT and PCT − pages use the common method. Don't see the point to change them when multiple pages lack content/sources. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Again, I appreciate your drive to improve qarticle quality, but you've demonstrated why there should be a top-down effort to improve article format/content/media/sources using the world tour articles (teams and riders) and races (like the tour, giro, et al) as broad templates. This would not only improve quality of subsequent articles but would ensure there is continuity across the whole project. If we can improve articles with quality content and make them more uniform then shouldn't we try to do that? XyZAn (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I've no time to edit these days, but I would go for sortable tables. Severo (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, I think it's pointless − at this moment − to go around and uniform every cycling page to a certain format. Why don't we uniform wiki under American English? Because (primarily) it would take quite an effort. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 04:22, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I prefer 1st Stage 2, over 1st, Stage 2,. However in the articles the results are listed under the sections wins. So I think all the '1st' before the results are redundant and look a bit messy. And after removing the '1st' the ',' doesn't matter that much anymore. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 11:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea Sander, we'd just need to make sure the results sections of team articles are either renamed "Team Victories" or something like that, so that it is implied that the below information is essentially a list of win. XyZAn (talk) 12:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I don't like this idea. I think not listing 1st place would confuse reads. Listing 1st etc. exists throughout wiki, eg. running articles. Why differ from all the other projects? Also it doesn't solve overall results, like 4th place. Here's the (S v. G's proposed v. the original) example from Dan Martin:

2013

Overall,

Volta a Catalunya

Stage 4

Liège–Bastogne–Liège

Stage 9, Tour de France

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

4th, Giro di Lombardia

4th, La Flèche Wallonne

8th, Overall, Tour de Suisse

2014

Giro di Lombardia

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

Stage 4

2nd, La Flèche Wallonne

3rd, Overall, Tour de l'Ain

7th, Overall, Vuelta a España

8th, Irish National Road Race Championships

.

2013

1st, Overall,

Volta a Catalunya

1st, Stage 4

1st, Liège–Bastogne–Liège

1st, Stage 9, Tour de France

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

4th, Giro di Lombardia

4th, La Flèche Wallonne

8th, Overall, Tour de Suisse

2014

1st, Giro di Lombardia

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

1st, Stage 4

2nd, La Flèche Wallonne

3rd, Overall, Tour de l'Ain

7th, Overall, Vuelta a España

8th, Irish National Road Race Championships

Honesty, I don't like the (proposed) style. Why change what already works? I still don't see the point in changing results when hundreds of pages are in need of sources. This debate should take place after your house is in order.

If there are results below a section victories, I don't think it's confusing. With the 1st in front of it, it's maybe more clear, but it is redundant.

Secondly, I don't understand the reason hundreds of pages are in need of sources. I think this debate is clear, and is not better after hundreds more articles have been updated. I think it's even better to have a good style before updating the hundereds articles, so you don't have to change later all the hundereds updated articles again. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Buzzards, you're mixing a riders palmares with a list of team wins - what I'm discussing is purely looking at team win sections.. Obviously in a riders palmares you need to indicate the position, unless you were only going to list wins. I agree with Sander. If the section which contains the listed information in is clearly headed such as;

Victories

or,

Team Wins

then I can't see any reader becoming confused by what the list of information pertains to. Again, it seems logical to get a better idea of article format before you start adding hours of work to each one, only to spend even more time finishing of off the style. If the style is pre-determined then it provides a template to use on new articles and on articles which need updating and improving.XyZAn (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I'd rather we stick with '1st' as it makes the victory clearer. Also, I hate commas in palmares. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 17:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't think a section with (solely) wins is justified. Most cyclist (60%-70%) have vary few wins. Having one result section streamlines the article. With that being said, what style do you'll prefer (I've seen all three, comma, half-comma, no-comma):

2013

1st, Overall,

Volta a Catalunya

1st, Stage 4

1st, Liège–Bastogne–Liège

1st, Stage 9, Tour de France

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

4th, Giro di Lombardia

4th, La Flèche Wallonne

8th, Overall, Tour de Suisse

2014

1st, Giro di Lombardia

2nd, Overall, Tour of Beijing

1st, Stage 4

2nd, La Flèche Wallonne

3rd, Overall, Tour de l'Ain

7th, Overall, Vuelta a España

8th, Irish National Road Race Championships

2013

1st Overall,

Volta a Catalunya

1st Stage 4

1st Liège–Bastogne–Liège

1st Stage 9, Tour de France

2nd Overall, Tour of Beijing

4th Giro di Lombardia

4th La Flèche Wallonne

8th Overall, Tour de Suisse

2014

1st Giro di Lombardia

2nd Overall, Tour of Beijing

1st Stage 4

2nd La Flèche Wallonne

3rd Overall, Tour de l'Ain

7th Overall, Vuelta a España

8th Irish National Road Race Championships

2013

1st Overall

Volta a Catalunya

1st Stage 4

1st Liège–Bastogne–Liège

1st Stage 9 Tour de France

2nd Overall Tour of Beijing

4th Giro di Lombardia

4th La Flèche Wallonne

8th Overall Tour de Suisse

2014

1st Giro di Lombardia

2nd Overall Tour of Beijing

1st Stage 4

2nd La Flèche Wallonne

3rd Overall Tour de l'Ain

7th Overall Vuelta a España

8th Irish National Road Race Championships

For the record, I don't see the point in changing the format on solid articles − at this moment it seems misguided. I don't mind streamlining the format on dreadful stubs. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 02:07, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Buzzards, the palmares you have listed is from a riders article, what I am trying to find a consensus for is the formatting of the victory sections in Team articles only. For team articles we currently have three ideas, for ease I'll summarize them below:

Formatting method	Victory section extract with specified formatting	Proposer
#1 No comma	1st Stage 3 Tour of Austria, Thor Hushovd 1st Stages 4 & 5 Tour of Austria, Mathias Frank 1st Overall Tour de Wallonie, Greg Van Avermaet 1st Stages 3 & 5, Greg Van Avermaet	User:XyZAn
#2 Comma	1st, Stage 3 Tour of Austria, Thor Hushovd 1st, Stages 4 & 5 Tour of Austria, Mathias Frank 1st, Overall Tour de Wallonie, Greg Van Avermaet 1st, Stages 3 & 5, Greg Van Avermaet	Buzzards
#3 Omit	Stage 3 Tour of Austria, Thor Hushovd Stages 4 & 5 Tour of Austria, Mathias Frank Overall Tour de Wallonie, Greg Van Avermaet Stages 3 & 5, Greg Van Avermaet	Sander.v.Ginkel

You can see that for the team articles we only list wins, hence there is a possibility that '1st' could be omitted from the list as the section header would inform the reader. As an exercise I've also looked into all the 2014 team articles, from WT, PCT and CT level teams and found the following information:

there are 115 articles for teams which were active in 2014 (i.e competed) and have a result/wins/victories section
of these 115 articles only 2 (EF Education–EasyPost and Jelly Belly) have the comma formatting (number 2 in the table above).

Therefore, to me, it makes sense to make the above 2 articles conform to the same formatting structure as the other 97+% of articles. Is there any chance we can get together and form a consensus for this? XyZAn (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi XyZAn, great research!! 97+% of the 115 sounds a lot. I agree to format the structure of these articles all the same. I'm fine to form a consensus, it makes it clear for everybody. It's 'easy' now to get the 100% with the #1 No comma option and to form a consensus for it. If someone later on contest the consensus a new discussion should be formed before changing all the articles. No time will be lost changing the format, so there is more time to update the articles :). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Your confusing the half-comma (most team pages) and no-comma (some rider pages, like Bradley Wiggins & Chris Froome) formats; per my example. With that being said, since most, almost all, teams use the half-comma method, EF Education–EasyPost and Wildlife Generation Pro Cycling should be changed (to half-comma). I still prefer using 1st. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 06:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Buzzards I don't know how else to stress this, but the above consensus discussion related only to team articles, NOT individual rider articles, but that is something to also bear in mind as well and may need discussing separately. Just to make sure everything is clear I'll add the following as a consensus decision.

Wins should be listed, unbulleted in the following formats dependent on win-type:

Type	Example text
One day race wins e.g, Milan-San Remo	1st [race], [rider]
Overall stage race e.g, Vuelta a Espana	1st Overall [race], [rider]
Stage race stage win e.g, Stage 10 Tour de France	1st Stage # [race], [rider]
Stage win with Overall race win	1st Overall [race], [rider] 1st Stage #, [rider]

XyZAn (talk) 16:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't know why this discussion keeps continuing, I said it's fine to change GRS and JPC to half-comma. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 18:55, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Done XyZAn (talk) 12:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

UCI Point system/rankings change

For the 2015 season rankings (and the points systems) have been revamped - as a result the World Tour points allocation is drastically different. Instead of points goin to the top 10 on GC, they're awarded to the top 60 on GC, plus secondary classification, stages and points for holding the leaders jersey.

What are peoples thoughts about removing the points section in the "events" section on the 2015 UCI World Tour page? I've included brief explanations for each of the new ranking systems plus the break down of points etc so the point boxes in the table seem a little obsolete and it would look clearer just giving the riders that came 1st, 2nd and 3rd for each UWT event. XyZAn (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Great job you did there on the 2015 UCI World Tour page. Yes, I prefer to remove the points from the events table at the 2015 UCI World Tour page. I see there is a very nice table with points at the bottom of the 2015 UCI World Tour page. But after thinking about it, the article is about the 2015 UCI World Tour, and the points system about all the UCI races. So because it's not a UCI World Tour ranking but an overall ranking, I propose to move all the info about the points system to a separate page. Like for the women's ranking where points can be earned in Women's World Cups, 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and 2.2 events and nationals. See UCI Women's Road World Rankings.

Besides of that a table could be placed on the pages of the cycling race how (many) points could be earned. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 00:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

@Sander.v.Ginkel I completely agree that the explanation is in the wrong place but I wasn't sure where to put it and so as a temporary move I dropped it into the bottom of the 2015 UCI World Tour page. As far as a proper place to put it - maybe in 2015 in men's road cycling? The page needs creating so we could include; World Championships (RR, ITT, TTT), Continental (RR, TT), winners of the Tour, Giro, Vuelta, then the rankings; World ranking, WorldTeam ranking, Continental tours, Pro-continental ranking etc etc - Thoughts?XyZAn (talk) 17:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The 2015 in men's road cycling page would be a good place, but I think the page might become to long and detailed. Maybe a summary of the ranking on the 2015 in men's road cycling page, with a main page something like 2015 UCI men's road cycling rankings. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:09, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, I did think that the rankings/points system could become too long to include - over this weekend I'll begin moving the rankings to their own page then I'll start the 2015 in mens road cycling page where we could put maybe the top one or top three in each ranking as well as the usual info.XyZAn (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Cycling articles by importance

XyZAn has setup the Category:Cycling articles by importance structure. It's currently not working as the {{WikiProject Cycling}} doesn't currently support the paramters. I've logged a note at VPT for help. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Lugnuts, I'm not sure how to get the table with all of the sections in it to display the number of articles of importance at each quality level. I think most of the importance categories are made - a couple could still be red links so we just need to put one article into each of them. Should the table get its data from the importance=low tag in the talk page or from the addition of the low importance category at the bottom of the main page? Thanks, XyZAn (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

No probs. It should auto-populate from the tag on the talkpage. I was looking at the similar project template {{WikiProject Cricket}}, but I'm not sure how the code should work. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:00, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing this is also why the importance isn't displayed under the quality as a coloured box then? XyZAn (talk) 20:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think the two are linked together somehow. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:22, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I think this has been sorted then, only the importance now appears on the talk page of 2015 UCI World Tour. XyZAn (talk) 21:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, looks to all be working now. Nice work in setting up the initial page and categories. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:43, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, it's not picking up mid, low etc in the table - is this another coding issue? or do we just need to wait for it to update? XyZAn (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Country pages for the UCI Road World championships

Hi all, I started creating country pasges of the the UCI Road World Championships, see 2013 UCI Road World Championships#Participating nations. I'm planning to make all these pages of the last >10 editions. However, before creating about 1000 of these pages, my question is: are these pages notable enough?

Some reasons pre

From other sports these pages exists of the main championships. See for example:

2013 World Championships in Athletics#Participating nations

2013 World Aquatics Championships#Participating nations

2013 World Weightlifting Championships#Participating nations

2014 FEI World Equestrian Games#Participating Nations

2014 European Athletics Championships#Participating nations

See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/France at the 2014 European Athletics Championships

Some reasons against

The UCI Road World Championships has less events, compared to the above mentioned championships
UCI Road World Championships also includes under-23 and junior events, which are less notable

Thanks for your comments, Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 13:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm all for it. This is the top level of the sport, and we have similar pages for World Championships in Athletics, European Athletics, the Olympics, etc. WP is not a paper encyclopedia, so these pages can be built to cover all the results and have articles for lesser nations too. Seems like a good starting point for the most recent years and then it's setup in good sted for future years too. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

As Lugnuts has already said, they're are numerous other sports pages following similar ideas so I'm more than happy to support this idea and help when/where I can. As another potential idea - and to make less work in th short term - maybe set up pages such as "Spain at the UCI Road World Championships", rather than a separate page for ever year,being that these are annual events the number of pages needed would be colossal. The at a later date it may be wise to split those articles down by year, thoughts? XyZAn (talk) 16:35, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

If you're going to create all those articles, I suggest starting with XyZAn's proposal: setup main sections/pages, like "Spain at the UCI Road World Championships". Creating solid/well cited pages are better than nonreferenced stubs. That's my opinion anyway. Good luck. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies! I finished making all the country pages for 2013 and 2014, including under-23 and junior results. I did not do it the way you proposed, I made pages specifically for 2013 and 2014 and not pages like "Belgium at the UCI Road World Championships". If all the results of the championships will be in one page, the page of several nations might become verry long, and I prefer to have the set up for all the countries the same. Besides of that I made the templates Template:flagUCIRoad and Template:flagUCIRoadathlete, so all links of nations are linked to the UCI nation page of that year. The pages like "Belgium at the UCI Road World Championships" I save for overall summary pages, like I did with the nations below.

Cheers,Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 08:57, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Fernando Gaviria

Hi. I'm a new-ish editor of Wikipedia. I recently created the article Fernando Gaviria, but I'm having trouble with the infobox. I can't get the medal table to work: when I include it, it makes the "updated..." section go over to the left side of the page. I've commented the relevant code out – could someone help me to fix it? Many thanks. Relentlessly (talk) 23:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Relentlessly, I've looked at the info box and it all looks fine, if you are concerned about the text moving under the image when the medal box is open then maybe move the image? XyZAn (talk) 16:34, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi XyZAn; thanks for replying. The problem is that "Infobox last updated on 7 February 2015" appears before the introduction rather than as part of the infobox. Compare my last edit to yours and you'll see the text that should be part of the infobox has moved. Relentlessly (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Ahh, ok, I've had another look and its fixed now - I used the following template at the start of the medal box: "MedalCountry|COL" instead of the other one and its solved the issue.XyZAn (talk) 17:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

You're a star, thanks. Relentlessly (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Template:2015UCIProTeams

I copied the following over from WT:WikiProject Tennis#Draft:Template:2015UCIProTeams. —PC-XT+ 21:20, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Could someone take a look at this please? If it's liked, I think the best procedure would just be to move it to template space, DGG ( talk ) 20:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

It could possibly be useful in List of 2015 UCI ProTeams and riders#Teams overview and 2015 in men's road cycling#UCI ProTeams, but I'm not sure how it would fit into UCI World Tour. WT:WikiProject Cycling might be the place to ask. —PC-XT+ 21:20, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

So do you folks want this template or not? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:00, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Dodger67, yeah we might as well. XyZAn (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Done, it's now at Template:2015UCIProTeams - use it, don't use it... BTW this project seems pretty close to dead if it takes more than a week to get a response to a simple question. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

cheers Dodger67 I'd say no one is particularly bothered - hence a lack of response. The project is far from dead. XyZAn (talk) 22:16, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Missing articles

Sander.v.Ginkel created this great page. I was going to be bold and add it to the project's homepage, but I've come unstuck due to not knowing how the hell that works! I was going to add a link for missing articles under the heading "Important pages". Anyone know how you do this? I'm assuming no-one minds adding there either... Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea how to add it, but it would be really useful! XyZAn (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Added. For future reference, you need to edit Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling/leftpanel JudoonCyclist (talk) 20:13, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Brilliant - thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Awesome! I also tried it yesterday on my phone, but wasn't able to manage it quickly. Thanks! Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 21:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

UCI WorldTeam

I've just looked on the UCI website [1] and they're now calling ProTeams - UCI WorldTeams - this does make more sense than ProTeam, but this raises another question. Do we need to update pages which have 'ProTeam' to 'WorldTeam' and is there a quick way to do all this? XyZAn (talk) 16:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

No, has to be done manually... Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Not specifically for this, but a tip if you have to to many things manually. If you use Chrome or Firefox you can install the add-on SnapLink an you can open many links in one go. Saves a lot of time :) Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 21:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

No probs, well thats something quite important so i'll get changing the current world tour teams over - unless someone beats me to it. Thanks! XyZAn (talk) 22:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Primary School invitation

Hi everybody. On behalf of the teams behind the Wikipedia Primary School research project, I would like to announce that the article Bicycle (of interest to this wikiproject) was selected a while ago to be reviewed by an external expert. We'd now like to ask interested editors to join our efforts and improve the article before March 15, 2015 (any timezone) as they see fit; a revision will be then sent to the designated expert for review (please see the article's talk page for details). Any notes and remarks written by the external expert will be made available on the article's talk page under a CC-BY-SA license as soon as possible, so that you can read them, discuss them and then decide if and how to use them. Please sign up here to let us know you're collaborating. Thanks a lot for your support! Elitre (WPS) (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Article at AfD

1988 UCI Road World Championships – Men's road race is currently at AfD. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning it. I did some rewriting and changed the layout. I think now it's good enough to keep it. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Cycling templates

In the month or so that I've been editing Wikipedia, I've been looking enviously at the French Wikipedia's cycling coverage, inevitably fuller than ours. It's also much prettier than ours. Compare, for example, 2015 Omloop Het Nieuwsblad and fr:Circuit Het Nieuwsblad 2015, and in particular the results tables. The French one is nicely laid out, whereas ours is quite clunky. Could we copy their formatting to some extent?

They have:

The last of these seems fairly unimportant to me, but the other three seem useful. Similarly, they have fr:Modèle:Maillot to make use of jersey images simpler. We could also duplicate this (though sadly {{jersey}} already exists).

I've done a mock-up of the results of Het Nieuwsblad. This one (example) follows our current pattern of using {{flagathlete}}, while this one (example) formats it in a style closer to the French manner.

Would this kind of template be useful? Is this the kind of formatting we want?

Relentlessly (talk) 20:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The French template looks good to me. Both use the same basic layout and aren't too difficult to create. The trick is now getting the included in the articles! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I have a template to start with. A while ago I started making a template for creating the results section. To make it easier, but also to make it possible to change the layout. Read about it Template:Cyclingresult. The style is as it is now, but this can be changed easily. Pages I made with this template: 2009 Rabo Ster Zeeuwsche Eilanden, 2010 Thüringen Rundfahrt der Frauen, 2010 Tour of Chongming Island Stage race. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Easy :). With one change see here, and the pages I mentioned are in French style! Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

That looks good, Sander.v.Ginkel. I like the separate template invocations for each position, rather than one big template call. Much less code to invoke and much clearer to read. There's one particular problem with it, which is that it doesn't allow linking to cyclists' articles that have disambiguation in the names (e.g. Michał Kwiatkowski (cyclist)). Based on your work (and before your edit!), I've created User:Relentlessly/Cyclingresult and User:Relentlessly/Cyclingresult start, which look like this in action. This is my favourite version so far. Relentlessly (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I continued working on it. I gave the start template the parameter title, so now the title can be changed (left empty gives Result). And also changed it in you userspace template. See the difference between stage 1 and 2 on 2010 Thüringen Rundfahrt der Frauen Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I see the problem with the disamb cyclists. An option is to not include '[[' and ']]' in the template, but to have them on the pages. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel, I have updated the template to match the colours in the infoboxes we use and I have removed the wikilinking. The templates seem good-to-go to me, so I have put it into 2015 Omloop Het Nieuwsblad and it looks fine to me. Relentlessly (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Nice Relentlessly, looks good! Now it is also possible to change former articles, by only(!) replacing the top section of the table. See for instance the code of 2014 Omloop Het Nieuwsblad. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 00:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

You need to be careful with the formatting of the results. For example in the 2015 OHN article only riders tied with the time of the winner should have the 's.t.' notation, not other riders - Van Avermaet and Demare should be altered to show the actual time behind they finished. This is the same for GCs in stage races, i.e, s.t. should only be used for people with times tied with the leader. Looking at the french article I'd only really suggest tabulating the participating teams, rather than having a bulleted list. Sander.v.Ginkel have you got a table we could put them in. XyZAn (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

XyZAn, that's interesting what you say about "s.t.". I've been using it in mimicry of other cycling pages across Wikipedia. My personal preference would be to leave the cell blank if the rider finished on the same time, rather than adding more times to the table. What do you think?

With regard to the lists of teams, I deliberately didn't put them into tables, because they take up more vertical space. {{colbegin}} is a much nicer solution, IMO. Relentlessly (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The layout of teams is as broad as it is long so it's probably not a serious point of discussion. Again it's probably an aesthetic thing but I think it's easier to see who came where and how far back (especially if the reader isn't au fait with cycling terminology). Also, looking at GA articles post-2011 in the project e.g; 2011 Tirreno–Adriatico, 2012 Critérium du Dauphiné, 2012 Paris–Nice, 2013 Critérium du Dauphiné they all use the figure rather than s.t. Now I don't know if this is down to the individual editor or whether there has been discussion on here before. XyZAn (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree with XyZAn (own preference) for only having 's.t.' tied with the leader. In stead of s.t., +0" is also possible, this is what the UCI does. I don't prefer havind cells empty, as it's less clear and with many empty cells below each other it's not clear what the time behind is. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 18:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

XyZAn and Relentlessly, regarding to the teams, maybe there can be created a standardized option with a merged table and bulleted list. I'll think about it :) Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 18:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

See here what is possible: User:Sander.v.Ginkel/Team-table-list. To make it easy to make it such a way, I can create a template for it.Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel I think we should go with the UCIs style - thats also my preferred option. As for the table, that's exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of. XyZAn (talk) 20:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree fully with +0". It's more consistent and much more comprehensible. Relentlessly (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

New cycling team list template

I started making the template. Now it is sooooo easy to make a cycling team list. No ct template anymore and seperate rows, you only have to put the cycling codes and once the year. All in one template :). See Template:Cyclingteamlist. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 21:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Lovely stuff. ~~Can I suggest making an optional title parameter? That way we could have separate tables for separating WorldTeams, etc., if desired?~~ You already did this. Relentlessly (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I placed the template in the 2015 Omloop Het Nieuwsblad article. See also the difference in code length. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 21:45, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I just did the same with 2015 Tour de Langkawi, showing off the full range of syntax! Relentlessly (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

that's exactly what I was thinking of Sander. How does the template deal with cycling teams who we have no tri-code set up? XyZAn (talk) 22:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

XyZAn, see the source of 2015 Tour de Langkawi, or indeed the documentation page. It's {{cyclingteamlist|team1=[[Unknown team]]|team2=[[Obscure team]]}}. Relentlessly (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The only problem is that first all the teams with the tri-code are listed and than the other teams. However, is that a problem? Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Updating the Notability Guidelines for Cyclists

New notibility guide generated. For any new comments, please start a new discussion. -- XyZAn (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I've been creating articles on WP since 2007, initially working on film related articles, but branching out into biographies of sportspeople. These have mainly focused on Olympians and cricketers. Both of these groups have broad definitions of notability at WP:NOLYMPICS and WP:NCRIC respectivly. In more recent years, I've began work on creating biographies for missing cyclists. This has included many cyclists who've ridden the Grand Tours, track cyclists and road race cyclists. Compared to the other two areas I've been working on, I think the cyclist notability to be a bit lacking.

For example, this Olympian competed in a one Olympic event more than 100 years ago. And this cricketer made a single appearance for his club in the 1850s. For both individuals, I doubt anything more will be written about them (I'd love to be proven wrong) and if they were taken to AfD, both would end in snow closes, per the previous cited policies as many similar AfDs have done.

Recently, I stumbled across this list which had alot of redlinks. I went through it and created about 40 basic stubs, including this one which was then taken to AfD (still open as of typing this, hopefully closed as keep...). I think that pretty much any (professional) cyclist who has been active in the last 10 years will probably meet WP:GNG with coverage more likely on the internet, as apposed to someone who was active 20 years or more.

Now I would like to believe any cyclist (male of female) riding professionaly for a top-level UCI team would be notable. Currently, that's not the case. The current notability guide states the cyclist has rode at the Olympics, a UCI World Championship or finished on the podium at a UCI World Cup. There's then a further set of criteria for male cyclists only. As a minimum, I feel this additional criteria should be updated for both male and female cyclists.

I posted on Sander.v.Ginkel talkpage about this, and he along with XyZAn have come up with some updated criteria. I'd like to get the view of the project to gain a consensus to expand and clarify the current notability guidance. I agree that not everyone who's ever gotten on a bike should get an article (I rode a bike once...), but I don't think the current guidence is fit for purpose. Here is the draft from Sander's talkpage (I'm sure he doesn't mind me pinching it!) :

Male or female (elite) cyclist is notable if;

Have competed at world championship/ olympic games / paralympic games / UCI World Cup or,

~~Have won a medal~~ Top 10 at Continental ~~games~~ championships (euro/africa/oceania/ etc)/ other major international games (Commonwealths, Asian, Universiade, etc), or,

Have won a medal in at least one event in one national championship or,

Have won a UCI ranked race

Have won a medal at smaller international games/championships (world university cycling championships/Pan Arab Games/Southeast Asian Games etc) or

Is the current/former national record holder in a cycling discipline

Male;

Have ridden in at least one GT or,

Ride for a WT Team

Female;

Ride for a UCI Womens team or,

U23 & juniors;

~~Have ridden~~Top 10 in world championships or Youth Olympics‎ or,

Have medalled continental championships or,

Have won a UCI ranked race or,

Have won as an U23 rider an event in their national championships (note: there are far too many junior categories)

Hopefully we can come up with some agreement and update the policy accordingly. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

First thing off I think the project as a whole needs to thank you, Lugnuts, for all of your contributions you've made this far. As for the notability guidelines I think what is above hits the nail on the head - maybe just tabulate the information. We need to have a overarching - generalized set of notability requirements - as well as more critical gender specific criteria. In an ideal world a female cyclist would be on the same equal standing as their male counter-parts, but this is not the case. What seems plain to me is that non- WP:CYC members, may be even non-cycling fans don't actually understand the differences in womens cycling vs mens cycling and as such I think the above clearly states what is notable and therefore will help reduce the unnecessary AfDs which have been generated recently. XyZAn (talk) 19:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Great work for starting this discission Lugnuts. I totally agree with your statement and really appreciate your work on the cyclng articles. With the above criteria all main road cyclists are included but nopt cyclists from other cycling disciplines. So I included the mayor competitions for these cycling disciplines, the UCI World Cups.

And apart from this discussion to reply on your point about the older notable athletes, I think these stubs pages are more valuable than some people think, here a few reasons:

The Olympian/athlete can be found by searching by the name and via the categories.
If all Olympians have a page in the end, the Olympic categories are complete, which would be very useful. For instance to know how many Olympic sport shooters there have been from Germany, the exact number of athletes at certain Olympic Games, etc. as many sources have different numbers.
You can find out he only competed in 1 event, it's hard to get the answer otherwise
There will probably be more info about these athletes in books, and could be add easily
Different versions of the name are linking to 1 article Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 10:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I started a page to find (and keep track) of notable cyclists red links by different topics. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling/Missing articles. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 10:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Great work Sander.v.Ginkel! This also raises questions which I've been mulling over the last couple of days; whilst updating the notibility guide for cyclists, should we create/update notibility guides for teams and races, as well as giving a bsic framework for each of them (i.e, minimum number of references, specific resources to use- PCS, Cycling archives etc)? I'm not aware that there are any currently - if there are please point them out. In theory they should be a lot more simple than those for cyclists, e,g;

Races:

Are or have been UCI classified in their history

Teams

Are currently or have been ranked at WT/Womens, Pro Conti and Conti level

Realistically I dont think we should have red links to races in the continental tours or to any of the teams which compete in them.XyZAn (talk) 12:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Haha XyZAn, I had the same thoughts over the weekend regarding to the cycling races :) I agree we can make notability guidelines for races and teams. For races I think it should be divided into guidelines for the race in general (like Tour de France) and a pages subpages about specific years (like 2015 Tour de France). With the above criteria from XyZAn some pages that are on this Wiki are not covered, but in my opinion notable enough. Secondly I think we can say that in general top-10 results should be displayed with a few exemptions.. I stated below that full results are allowed for all championships, so including national championships like in subcategories in Category:Dutch National track cycling championships and pages in Category:Dutch National Time Trial Championships. Also full results for non road cycling UCI World Cup races like the pages in subcategories in Category:UCI Track Cycling World Cup Classics.

Below some critrea to include all pages on this wiki.

General race event page:

Are of have been UCI classified in their history
Have (had) coverage in main national media (like Parel van de Veluwe and Template:Post–Tour de France criteriums in the Netherlands)

Sub pages for a single race:

UCI classified race (with in general top-10 results. Full results allowed for Championships, International Games and World Cup races for: Track cycling, mountain biking, BMX and cyclo-cross)
Non UCI races with international media coverage (like races of the Amstel Curaçao Race and World University Cycling Championship)

Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 14:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok so to summarise the above, from Lugnuts, Sander.v.Ginkel et al into an easy to follow formula;

Notibility guide	Classification	Guidelines (Must fulfil 1 or a a number of the following)
Cyclists (Elite)	All	•Have competed in the Olympic Games •Have competed in the UCI World Championsips •Have competed in the UCI World Cups •Have scored a top-10 at Continental Championships (e.g, African, Asian, Oceanian etc) •Have scored top-10 at major international games (e.g, Commonwealths) •Have won a medal at one of their respective national championships *Have won a UCI ranked race (.WT to .2) •Have won a medal at a minor international event (e.g, Southeast Asian games, Pan Arab games etc) •Is the current/former world/national record holder in a cycling discipline
	Male	•Have ridden at least one Grand Tour •Ride for a world tour team
	Female	•Ride for a UCI Womens team
	Under 23 (U23)	•Scored top-10 in World Championships/Youth Olympics • Have medalled in Continental championships •Have won a UCI ranked race •Have won an U23 event at their national championships
Teams	All	•Team is notable if it has been ranked with the UCI, either; Pro team, Womens team, Pro Conti or Conti at some point in its activity
Races	UCI ranked race	•Notable due to it being UCI ranked •Summary pages e.g, Tour of Oman, include a list of the winner of the race each year and the team they rode for • Annual race subpages include at minimum top-10 per stage and top-10 overall
Races	Non-UCI ranked	•Has had significant national media coverage (e.g, Parel van de Veluwe and Post–Tour de France criteriums) •Summary page includes a list of winners per race per year.

As per rolling this out maybe be cut "red-link expansion" into a number of easy to roll-out phases; start by making team articles and race pages for the majority of red-links, then expand other sections. I think cyclist bios, team pages and general race paes should be our top-3 priority. XyZAn (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

This isn't strictly speaking a notability question, but it is relevant to the above discussion. I've set myself the task of creating articles for certain road races this season. I set my criteria as 1.UWT, 2.UWT, 1.HC, 2.HC and 2.1 category races. All of these should have enough coverage to do more than simply list results (I'm quite proud of my efforts at 2015 La Tropicale Amissa Bongo, which has more English-language content about the race than exists anywhere else on the Internet). This isn't exhaustive (some European 1.1 races, for instance 2014 Kuurne-Brussels-Kuurne will also have significant coverage, but I think my list is a reasonable target. You can see it at User:Relentlessly/Cycling 2015. Relentlessly (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly I've been keeping up to date with your Amissa Bongo page and its great! Real great work! Really, the way I'm looking at the notability update is to protect the articles we create against potential deletion nomination by non-WP members and possibly people who aren't as informed as us/cycling fans and see a short stub article and assume it should be nominated. XyZAn (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the overview Lugnuts! I added the UCI World Cups. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 18:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel It was me ;) haha! XyZAn (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind comments. Great work in putting the summary table together. Hopefully this will get some more input from the project and we can move it to the notabilty page for sports in due course. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

This looks great people! Could we also add that cycling season articles for UCI ProTeam, ProConti and Women's teams are notable as well. JudoonCyclist (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, sounds reasonable to me. XyZAn + Sander.v.Ginkel - thoughts? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't think athletes competing in the Olympics, World or Regional Championships warrant their own pages. I think notability should be: rides/ridden on 1st or second tier teams. Numerous riders, like Liu Hao, have no notability outside of the one race. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Anyone who competed at the Olympics is notable. I'm not even sure why you exist on here TBH. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:36, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

What about the additional criteria #2 and #3 with the words "post-World War II"? OK as it is? Relaxed for pre-World War II for the Grand Tours? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Point 1 - As for season articles I would say; YES they are notable enough to be created (so we need to add it to the above table), but not a necessity, i.e; if an editor wants to make one then the project as a whole is happy that there notable enough to be made, but in the grand-scheme of what articles we need I would suggest it as a top-priority. If JudoonCyclist wants to make them then great - they are notable for inclusion.

Point 2 - the Olympics and Worlds are the pinnacle of the sport, so I strongly believe that they have to be critical criteria for riders who are lucky enough to have ridden them - ergo those riders should be notable - sorry Buzzards-Watch Me Work

Point 3 - Lugnuts I'd get rid of it - anyone who has ridden a GT is notable in my eyes, those dudes that did it in the 20s and 30s were badasses, definitely notable!

XyZAn (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Just as an FYI - I've slightly altered the table heading - (Must fulfil 1 or a a number of the following )XyZAn (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

1) I'm compiling a list over at User:JudoonCyclist/Cycling seasons and will tackle some of it whenever I feel like it. 2) Agreed 3) Agree, someone like Carlo Galetti is absolutely notable. JudoonCyclist (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Point 1 I only starting season articles if I would update the content. I think the articles are only notable with content, not with only a few sentences like with an atlete.

Point 2 People who competed at the Worlds and Olympics are notable, as they represtented their country at the highest level of sport competition. In my opinion you can argue the other way around, people for a specific team could have competed in minor races only, so not al the people in a team are per default notable.

Point 3 What is the reason for the distinction with the pre-WWII races? I would think all cyclists at the grand tours are notable. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 21:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

How is someone who meddled in a national championship notable? I could meddle in Andorra or the Virgin Islands... I think winning is notable.

I don't think athletes are notable when they complete a championship; smaller nations get passes... These athletes have no news coverage, and their articles read: 'Joe Smith finished... in ... place.' That's it.

With that being said, it's unfortunate when expression is condemned. I thought wiki was about free speech? Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine changing the national championships from meddled to winning. However I don't agree with the Olympics/World Championships. Yes they might be selected, and yes their articles might be short. But first they represented their nation in the most important sports competition. Secondly because they are chosen, they must be the best athletes from the country. For countries in which the sport is not popular, the athlete have a certain level to compete in that sport and must have a great story to compete in that sport. These stories are less known, as the winner is highlighted, but these stories are notable. Think about the Jamaican bobsleigh team. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

And what about critera for nation at championships pages. There are now overview pages, with sub-pages for specific years (like with the team pages, team season pages), for World championships as wel as European championships for the different cycling disciplines. I would give some examples from the Netherlands articles.
- Example overview page for the UCI Road World Championships: Netherlands at the UCI Road World Championships, example year page Netherlands at the 2013 UCI Road World Championships.
- Example overview page Track World Championships: Netherlands at the UCI Track Cycling World Championships, example year page: Netherlands at the 2011 UCI Track Cycling World Championships
- Example overview page Road European Championships: Netherlands at the European Road Championships, example year page: Netherlands at the 2009 European Road Championships
- Example over page European Track Championships: Netherlands at the European Track Championships, example year page: Netherlands at the 2012 UEC European Track Championships

1st question: are these pages notable for European Championships?
2nd question: should these pages be merged as there would be many of them in the end?
- In the case of merging I would prefer keeping the overview pages and making NATION at YEAR cycling world Championships & NATION at YEAR European cycling championships or
- keeping the overview pages and making NATION at YEAR cycling championships

The point about only including post WWII cyclists for the Grand Tours, etc, seems to hint at the amateur status of those riders before the war. Again, I go back to my original point about Olympians and cricketers. Cyclists at the 1900 Olympics could hardly be considered professional! I think they should be included to keep a level playing field for similar criteria in other sports. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:08, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Great work JudoonCyclist - if you're happy to write, update and generally maintain those season articles then I think the project should support that. My point was just that I think we have things which are greater in priority but that's not to say we don't want season articles. Buzzards-Watch Me Work it's highly likely that the cyclists who medal in national championships will already be notable under something in the table I wrote above, so the number of short stub cyclist bios with just "x finished 3rd in y national" championships would be fairly minimal. This would also help us address the lack of coverage for track cycling for example. There's very little info on who won what event in each national championships each year - giving some notably out for this might help increase coverage. Same with cyclocross and Mtb disciplines.

Come on guys let's keep it all civil

Sander, I'd say there obviously notable but I'd structure them;

x nation at y championship, then within that a table of all the yeas which link to all the articles you've created.

XyZAn (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

XyZAn sorry I should have been more clear I don't disagree with you, and I agree with Sander that something like 2014 Team Novo Nordisk season is currently useless (compared to 2009 Astana season). And I won't be writing 1985 Lotto season anytime soon. But I do hope to get around to eg 2009 Team Katusha season at some point. JudoonCyclist (talk) 22:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

This might sound a little crazy, but I think it should be discussed. Why not create a size requirement for new articles? Like, 20 words, 4 references and 3 external links. Anyone who meets the requirement is notable; I mean 4 citations conform standing. Under this guideline, articles would never receive AfD. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

JudoonCyclist Yeah I totally see your ooint - the Novo Nordisk article is essentially pointless, it just copies stuff from their own team page. Buzzards-Watch Me Work I think that having a minimum number of references is a good idea - but shouldn't be a rigid rule for notability. I.e, its an auxiliary guideline which can be used to help inform subsequent decisions. I think the table-guide is fairly comprehensive and covers riders, teams and races - the three most important topics IMO. As for references I think we should have a database/list of places where we can easily get references from -to my knowledge an AfD nominator should also check for extra refs for an article as part of the process.

My list of references places would be (for those that aren't aware I've included the URLs):

Pro Cycling Stats - [2]

Cycling archives - [3]

Cyclingfever - [4]

Cyclingfever women - [5]

Dopology - [6]

Cyclingnews - [7]

Cyclingweekly - [8]

The UCI - [9]

UCI doping site - [10]

CQ Ranking - [11]

XyZAn (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

If you have 4 references, the person must be notable. In that case all these criteria are not neccesary. But these criteria are good to have a definition for notable cyclist, so it's easy to find notable cyclists and to create the articles without ending in AfD. Should with your criteria all articles with less than 4 references be put up for AfD?! (as many creators would include less than 4 refs). That would demotivatie people to create articles!! I'm creating all the Women's articles who participated at the world championships, but if I have to find many references I'll stop creating Cycling articles. A better way is to have good definitions what is notable by default. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel - I think you're right, a 'minimum number of refs' should just be there as a sign post, not a requirement. With the articles I've been creating, I've been giving 2 refs, that should be enough to keep the article out of AfD. I'd continue with what you've been doing, so far its been great work! XyZAn (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

There's no minimum amount of references for any article. As long as it meets the relevant notability guidelines, it's notable. There are 1.8 million+ stubs on WP, the vast majority containing a single ref. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok taken on board what Lugnuts has said above let's rewind a bit and look back on the summary table I wrote earlier on. What changes do we want to make to the contents of that table, only it seems reasonably comprehensive to me and would cover issues we've had with the last couple if cycling related AfDs. If we do want to make a/some changes can we get an explicit list then we can move forwards with updating the notibility guidelines for he projects. XyZAn (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, how about this:

Men (at least 1):: Professional (UCI World Tour),; Grand Tour finisher,; Olympian,; Competed in the UCI World Championships
Woman (at least 1):: Professional (UCI Women),; Olympian,; Competed in the UCI World Championships
Teams: Men's: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd tier; Women's: UCI.
Races: Being ranked with the UCI (WT, 1HC, 1.1, 1.2, 2HC, 2.1, 2.2, and WE); Has significant media coverage (e.g, Parel van de Veluwe and the People's Choice Classic)

Simple and concise. The world's best are included. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 01:56, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Nice and concise. My only question is on Grand Tour finisher. Surely starting a Grand Tour is notable enough. Many riders never complete the whole event, including ones who win early stages. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I like the simplified guide, but I have 2 questions.

do we expand men's notability to all pro continental teams , only they ride proteam events and also contain a large number of ex- proteam riders - it seems logical we should.
under the Women's section I'm assuming 'professional' means they ride/have ridden for a uci women's team

XyZAn (talk) 09:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to include all pro continental riders in the notability guidelines. Many, if not most, will be sufficiently and demonstrably notable (e.g. Jef Van Meirhaeghe, an article I created yesterday) but I don't think they are ispo facto notable. If the rider has ridden a World Tour race (especially a Grand Tour) or previously ridden for a ProTour team, they are notable anyway. If there are sufficient sources to write a decent article, they are almost certainly notable. Relentlessly (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Relentlessly, 2nd tier riders aren't necessary important. However, most pass notability. XyZAn, changed wording. Lugnuts, winning a stage, but not finishing is still notable. I mean, the achievement and media buzz is huge. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Great. So are we close to getting a consensus on updating the notability guide? I don't see any obvious issues of what has been proposed so far. Correct me if I'm wrong! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:26, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah i'm happy with what we have proposed XyZAn (talk) 21:01, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Great! I think we're almost there. One more thing - riders in the Monuments too? I suspect most of these will also be in the Grand Tour squads, but just to close any loopholes. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we should - seen as most of the monuments are quite old and in some ways more prestigious XyZAn (talk) 11:39, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, concede finale point. Time for voting. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I thought we already determined that "finisher" was fine. DNF a Grand Tour/Monument don't signal notability. I conceded adding Monument finishers so we could conclude. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposal

Cyclists are presumed notable if they

Men (at least 1):: Professional (UCI World Tour);; Rode in a Grand Tour or Monuments~~finisher~~;; Competed at the Olympics or the UCI World Championships.; Won an elite UCI category race or a medal in international Championships/Games (added by Sander.v.Ginkel on 2 March)
Woman (at least 1):: Professional (UCI Women);; Competed at the Olympics and/or the UCI World Championships.; Won an elite UCI category race or a medal in international Championships/Games (added by Sander.v.Ginkel on 2 March)
Teams: Men's: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd tier; Women's: UCI.
Races: Ranked with the UCI (WT, 1HC, 1.1, 1.2, 2HC, 2.1, 2.2, and WE);; Holds significant recognition (e.g, Parel van de Veluwe and the People's Choice Classic).

Support

~~Good compromise. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)~~
Support all, with the proviso of removing the word "finisher" from the GT/Monument criteria. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:18, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Support all, with the same proviso as Lugnuts XyZAn (talk) 16:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Support all for road cyclists. It is not covering many cyclists from other Cycling disciplines. For other cycling disciplines I would add competed in World Cup races because that are the ony main races besides of Worlds and Olympics and these Cycling disciplines do not have main trade teams. Many articles of cyclists must otherwise be deleted. For instance: Rigard van Klooster. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

note 2 And I would add medalists at international championships/games and winners of National championships and elite UCI races. Why are they removed from the initial proposal? Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

van Klooster meets notability; look at the media coverage. National Championships were excluded because winning in some nations, like Andorra don't equal notability. With that being said, the scope is pretty big; every qualifier at the Olympics and Worlds counts. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 23:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

I've linked some keys terms, per the current guide and crossed out the word finisher. Sander.v.Ginkel - have your concerns been addressed? Is there anything outstanding? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I added for both men and women: Won an elite UCI category race or a medal in international Championships/Games Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 08:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Question If people don't fall within these critea and do not have broad coverage, should they be deleted? Examples: A professional cyclo cross cyclist: José Antonio Díez. And with a quick search of Commonwealth cyclists I found many articles, here a few: Dave Rand, Sion Jones, Clare Greenwood, Chris Williams (cyclist), Will Wright (cyclist), Alun Owen (cyclist), Roger Pratt (cyclist), Eddie Smart, John Dyer (cyclist). Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

No, not at all. The general notability guidelines still apply for anyone not covered by the specific guidance. If a neutral, independently-sourced article can be written, they are probably notable, even if they don't meet the guidance. Relentlessly (talk) 09:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I think all participants at the Commonwealth Games are notable, and ditto for similar high-level events, such as the Asian Games. They're pretty much regional Olympics under another banner. The test would be to take a Commonwealth cyclist to AfD and watch it get speedy kept! ;-) Commonwealth participants are mentioned under athletics, cycling, rugby, etc on WP:ATHLETE, but not on its own, per the Olympics. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 14:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

CG is not the Olympics; the best riders from the UK, Bradley Wiggins, Chris Froome, and Mark Cavendish, didn't compete. CG athletes are not notable by themselves. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

Regretfully. This is getting ridiculous. I compromised by adding GT and Monument finishers, but the solution was overturned; DNF isn't notable! Winning a UCI event isn't notable; numerous CT riders win a 1.2 or 2.2 event and disappear. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposal & Compromise 2.0

OK people - last time I check this I thought we were going to have a consensus by Sunday. Having read all of the above what about the following compromise and proposal (Buzzards-Watch Me Work I've taken your proposal as my basis):

Cyclists are presumed notable if they

Men (at least 1):: Professional (UCI World Tour);; Rode in a Grand Tour or Monuments and at least finished (DNFs do not count).; Competed at the Olympics and/or the UCI World Championships.; Won Gold at an international games (also including races such as World University Cycling Championship, Universiade); Won an elite UCI category race (minimum classifincluding ication is 1.1 and/or 2.1, including Continental championships, excluding national championships)
Woman (at least 1):: Professional (UCI Women);; Competed at the Olympics and/or the UCI World Championships.; Won an elite UCI category race (including Continental championships, excluding national championships); Won Gold at an international games (including World University Cycling Championship, Universiade)
Teams: Men's: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd tier; Women's: UCI.
Races: Ranked with the UCI (WT, 1HC, 1.1, 1.2, 2HC, 2.1, 2.2, and CDM);; Holds significant recognition (e.g, Parel van de Veluwe and the People's Choice Classic).

The main bones of contention seem to be coming from the mens side but I'll summarise what I've added to compromise:

Only cyclists who finish a GT or monument will count, i.e, DNFs do not count whether it be a DNF on the first stage or the last.
Cyclists who have WON GOLD at an international games count
Winning a UCI race counts as long as its a .1 race or above - this should remove those crappy .2 races won by randomers

If we have a cyclist who doesn't conform to the above guide then we should create the page, if it is AfD'd we can then discuss the merits of whether or not is meets the guide or what interpretation and exceptions should/should not be made.

Thoughts; Sander.v.Ginkel, Lugnuts, Buzzards-Watch Me Work, Relentlessly, JudoonCyclist?

XyZAn (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Saying a DNF isn't notable for a GT/Monument is ridiculous. Being good enough to be selected to start one of those races gives some notability. I recently created this bio for a rider in the 1947 Tour de France. Guess what? One and only GT, with a DNF. This is based on the current WP:NCYC guidelines. There must be dozens, if not hundreds of current cycling biographies for post-WWII cyclists who raced in GT/Monuments who had one start and a DNF. To make a comparison, this guy competed at the 1912 Summer Olympics in the individual time trial, over a distance of 196 miles. Guess what? DNF. That's it. Zip. Zilch. Nothing. There's no extra qualifier to say that if you're an Olympian, you must finish your event. Even more so, that this guy was almost certainly an amateur, so we keep him, but not some DNFs from the 1970s and 1980s in the Tour de France? I think we've come a long way to updating this, esp. on working on the (current) gender imbalance, and I just think it's incorrect to say x rider isn't notable, because they were a DNF. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

To put it into context, I myself, am not bothered which way we go with it. Put it to a vote; those who vote for including DNFs vs those who vote to exclude DNFs - then go with the majority. I'm all for increasing the coverage of cycling on WP and if this will then I'm for it. XyZAn (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not going to get excited either way on the DNF issue. My personal opinion is that riders who've started a GT/Monument are probably notable. They're pretty much equal in status with the world road race championships. Otherwise, I'm fine with the above proposals. Relentlessly (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I also agree with Lugnuts that starting is notable. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 20:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I made two small changes in the proposal: 1) as continental championships and national championships are UCI category races I placed them behind UCI category races. 2) added behind games: (also including races such as World University Cycling Championship, Universiade) Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 20:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Descent proposal... Still against DNF. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 06:35, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I think the consensus will show starting is enough to meet notability. Further to the updated criteria, it states "Won an elite UCI category race (minimum classifincluding ication is 1.1 and/or 2.1, including Continental championships, excluding national championships)" (my highlight in bold). Are we saying National Champions are not notable? And if so, why? Are all the red link winners on this list not notable? Or the 2014 Men's Elite Road Race Champions? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I would say all national champions are notable. Even the ones from the 'small' countries. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

WP is strongly focused on countering systemic bias. While Murwin Arumjo probably isn't the most recognized name in cycling(!), he is the National Champion of Suriname. That in itself would pass WP:GNG. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps Lugnuts has hit the nail on the head with the above comment - we need to remove Western bias. Who are we to decide which countries are notable or aren't notable with respect to NCs? I'd strongly be in favour of keeping in NC wins. Just becuase one country may not be as prolific in cycling terms when compared to another country shouldn't dictate whether its included or not. At somepoint someone has to make the first article in subject which has been deemed 'not notable' in order for it to become notable as time progresses. With the increase in cycling coverage in Africa riders who have, for example, won the Suriname NC would become notable. Further, if someone who has won a NC is included on websites we use heavily for references such as ProCycling Stats then I'd say it should pass any WP cycling notibility guide. Arumjo has a PCS profile [12] and Cycling Archives profile [13] which for me would mean that he should be notable enough for WP. XyZAn (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

And just by including National Champions in the criteria isn't suddenly going to open the flood gates and make lots of editors target those articles to create them. They'll probably stay red-linked for some time. But if/when they do get created, it removes the need for a prolonged AfD debate that ends up wasting alot of time to end in a keep after 2 relistings! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Lugnuts I think that someone coming across a list of redlinks might even encourage contribution - some editor might make that their own mini-personal project. XyZAn (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Winning in smaller countries isn't notable. Their are CT riders in the U.S. that aren't notable, but could beat the National Champion of Monaco or San Marino. However, if the champion has media coverage, he/she is notable. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 01:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

But why are the not notable? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:28, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Notable is not a word for being one of the best worldwide, but can be within a certain area like a country. Notability is the property of being worthy of notice. As that cyclist is the best in his/her country he/she is notable by winning the title, even if that cyclist is not as fast as a person from another coutry that is not notable. If you win an event at the Universiade you're notable by being the best student, but this doesn't mean you're one of the best athletes worldwide. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Sander. Saying one country (champion) is notable, and another isn't goes quickly into WP:OR. Is Slovakia no longer a "smaller country" now that Peter Sagan is a well-recognized name? Is Albania more notable that Suriname? It's a slippery slope! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:36, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Compromise 2.1

OK, to update this - wish to include anyone who started a Grand Tour or Monument and to include National Champions. Nearly there! Thoughts/comments? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Completely against; exclude all national champions. My hometown is larger than Monaco, San Marino, etc. Becoming the champion of my town isn't notable. Most of these 'champions' haven't accomplished anything else. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Buzzards-Watch Me Work objectively speaking, we can't exclude all NCs, as the UCI no longer has a "B" world championships we cannot distinguish between 'greater' and 'lesser' cycling nations. Therefore, if we are to include countries such as the UK, France, Spain etc we must include all of the others - as there is no plausible way of splitting them. Buzzards-Watch Me Work your opinion on which countries are/aren't notable might not reconcile with Lugnuts or mine. As I've said before - if they're notable enough to be published on cycling race result aggregation websites such as PCS then they should be notable enough for WP. XyZAn (talk) 18:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, there is a way around it. You simply say that national champions are not ipso facto notable and need other factors to establish notability. If all we can say about a person is their name and the fact that they once won a bike race (e.g. the Surinamese champion mentioned above), I'm not convinced that person is notable. Relentlessly (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly do you know/have any specific other factors which we can use? The more water tight this is the better for future AfD discussions. XyZAn (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

XyZAn I suggest we omit any mention of national championships. Some probably make a rider notable (even some junior championships might), but many do not. I don't see how we can determine which do or don't in the abstract. I suggest we rely on the other agreed principles (WorldTeam, GT/Monument, Olympics, gold medal, elite win or notability established in some other sense). I can't see many (any?) riders who should be considered notable being excluded by these principles. I don't think totally watertight guidelines are possible here. Relentlessly (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Buzzards-Watch Me Work has yet to say why these people are not notable. So what if your hometown is bigger than Monaco? Explain to us all why someone who is a champion for their country isn't notable. How do you decide if one country's champ is notable and the next country in the list isn't? I don't hear any good arguement presented by you to exclude them. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:17, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm speaking to children, exclude them all. The Andorran TT Champion, David Albós, is notable, because he competed in the UCI World TT Championships. However, other Andorran champions aren't; they haven't competed in any relevant event (e.g. UCI World Championships and/or Olympics)... I agree with Relentlessly's assessment. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean I'm speaking to children, Lugnuts, XyZAn and I (if you mean us with childeren) are reasoning our opinion. I must say, writing your opinion in bold doesn't sound like an adult. Please, let's keep this discussion friendly.

You say you would not include the national champions because they don't meet one of the other two criterea (Worlds/Olympics), but you're not reasoning why national champions are not notable itself. Is a national title only notable if you have competed at the Worlds? And if these national champions are not notable, they should not be listed on pages like 2014 national road cycling championships. You say other Andorran champions than David Albós aren't notable. After a search, I can find only one other natioal champion from Andorra, so with your example you must mean Guy Diaz. I took a look around if I could find more about him. There is a source about him here, and here and he competed at World Cup races cyclingnews, Pedalmag. He participated at the 2013 Games of the Small States of Europe (finishing 7th). He defeated many times David Albós, examples: 1, 2, 3, 4. However these last two arguments are no a reasons for inclusion, but shows he is not a nobody. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Another thing that came up in my mind, UCI races (which the nationals are), must have a minimum amount of starting cyclist. If a country only have a few cyclists, no nationals can be held. Besides of that, organizing the nationals are not free The races have to follow the UCI regulations (fee to come on the calendar, commisaires, time keeping, neutral car for road race etc.) nations without real cyclist would because of that not organize national championships. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm all for free speech and opinion... When I have to repeat myself numerous times –exclude all national champions– then I'm speaking to children; adolescents don't listen. That's why I boldfaced my statement; it's pointless to spin-wheels on one point. With that being said, it's hypocrisy to get offended by an observation, but dismiss a swipe; "I'm not even sure why you exist on here TBH" - Lugnuts.

"You're not reasoning why national champions are not notable itself" - Sander.v.Ginkel. Because it's very uneven; some countries have 30,000 people others 300,000,000, international events are the only level-playing field. If Guy Diaz rode a UCI World Cup, he's notable. However, championships requiring minimum participants is ludicrous. The UAE had three participates in the TT and RR in 2014. Andorra had five; although two appear notable. The UCI don't regulate national championships; each individual country has its own body. Also, finishing seven at the GSSE isn't profound. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 02:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

You're the child, Buzzards. As I've said before - I don't really know why you are here. You opinion about excluding them is a lone voice. You've provided no rationale on why we exclude one nation, but not the next one. As no guidelines/policy ever gets 100% support ever, we go with the majority. Therefore, we include them. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

"You've provided no rationale on why we exclude one nation", we exclude them all. I've said it numerous times, one country doesn't equal another country. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Final draft

Below is the final draft. Add support/oppose, below, and we'll go with the majority and update the WP:NCYC criteria.

Cyclists are presumed notable if they

Elite Men (at least 1):: Professional (UCI World Tour);; Rode in a Grand Tour or Monuments;; Competed at the Olympics or UCI World Championships or UCI World Cup;; Won Gold at an international multi-sport event (games) (also including races such as World University Cycling Championship);; Won a UCI category race (minimum classification 1.1 / 2.1, including Continental and national championships)
Elite Woman (at least 1):: Professional (UCI Women's team);; Competed at the Olympics or UCI World Championships or UCI World Cup;; Won a UCI category race (including Continental and national Championships);; Won Gold at an international multi-sport event (games) (also including races such as World University Cycling Championship)

Teams are presumed notable if they are

Men's road: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd tier;

UCI team (UCI women's team, UCI track team, UCI mountain bike team, UCI cyclo-cross team, etc.).

Races are presumed notable if they

Ranked with the UCI (WT, 1HC, 1.1, 1.2, 2HC, 2.1, 2.2, CDM, JO, CM, GT, CC, CN);

Races at international multi-sport event (games) (also including races such as World University Cycling Championship)

Holds significant recognition (e.g, Parel van de Veluwe and the People's Choice Classic).

Support Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:53, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Support Lugnuts, I'm not much bothered either way, but in the section above you say we're including national championships; here you say we're excluding them. Which is it?! (Support either version, though.) Relentlessly (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Including. Now fixed - thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Support And added competed at UCI World Cups, because we agreed on it (and Buzzards-Watch Me Work said: If Guy Diaz rode a UCI World Cup, he's notable). As I mentioned before it makes no difference for road cycling, as these rider are riding for the highest tier teams, but also covers riders from other cycling disciplines. Also added Olympics, Worlds, GT, CC, CN in races. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 10:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Sander, could you demystify CDM, JO, CM, GT, CC, and CN, please? I know what some are, but not all. Relentlessly (talk) 10:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  - I copied them from the page UCI race classifications: CDM = World Cup; JO = Olympic Games; CM = World Championships; GT = Grand Tour; CC = Continental championship; CN = national championship; HC = Hors category Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 11:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Note I added some wikilinks so it's clear what it is about. Is there a wikilink what the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd tier teams are? I also changed the name games to international multi-sport event as that is the name of the related category. Also I added some things that are obvoius notable, but where not named (UCI track teams, cycle races at international games). Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 12:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Support XyZAn (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Completely against – Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll leave this running for a couple more days, as I think the majority of the active members of the project have now had an input. If all goes well, I'll update the current criteria at some point on Sunday morning (UK time). Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I posted a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports, so that might give some more votes. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 11:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Sander. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment These guidelines should make it easier to identify when cyclist are typically able to pass WP:GNG. I am not convinced that a cyclist that rides one of the Monuments once would automatically get sufficient coverage to be notable. I would consider reworking the non-win criteria for men and women to be professional and having competed in a at least N of the named races or finished in the top 10 in any of them. CRwikiCA talk 15:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone - I've now updated the relevant section based on the above consensus. Happy editing/cycling! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:34, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I'll archive this, then any future discussion can start as a new thread. XyZAn (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cycling races infobox

Several races, Tour of Flanders, strade Bianchi, omloop het nieuwsblad and many more have a Women's and a men's race. Shall I make for the infoboxes apart parameters (first edition, first winner, last winner, numer of editons) for the two different editions? Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 13:26, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Could you give an example of what you mean? I don't understand what "apart parameters" would be. Relentlessly (talk) 16:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

See the infobox of for instance Omloop Het Nieuwsblad, with men and women making it not very clear. I was thinking of the history section to -> Men's history (if necassary), and an additional Women's history. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

To get an idea see: User:Sander.v.Ginkel/sandbox/Cycle race infobox Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Yhea you could do Sander.v.Ginkel - it looks good!

Project homepage right panel

Anyone know why the right-hand panel on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling is broken? Didn't it once have a picture of some skeletons on bikes? Not sure how you fix it TBH! Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:22, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

If you edit the page and hit "preview", you get a message saying "Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included." I've no idea what this means, though. Relentlessly (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I know that if many articles are created, the right panel is not displayed. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

You mean there's some sneaky bugger around here going around creating articles? BURN HIM. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I just thought it was my Mac! XyZAn (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I think I fixed it by moving the new articles from the rightpanel to the main page. JudoonCyclist (talk) 19:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Brilliant - thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Cycling results

A while ago I started creating Template:Cyclingresult, to make it easier to make results tables. As for a given cyclist the team in that year is the same, I'm now improving the template with Template:Cyclingresult2. While using this template, you don't have to put the nation and the team of the cyclist, that info is in Template:Cyclist data 2015 (only women's cyclists at the moment). Also you don't have to know if the cyclist is a disambiguous page. If the cyclist is added to Template:Cyclist name, never disamb links anymore! So for instance this code (including disamb Sara Mustonen):

{{cyclingresult start}}
{{cyclingresult2|1|Jolien D'Hoore|2015|3h 03' 16"|{{Cjersey|yellow|General classification}}{{Cjersey|green|Sprint classification|}}}}
{{cyclingresult2|2|Chantal Blaak|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|3|Sara Mustonen|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|4|Coryn Rivera|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|5|Janneke Ensing|2015|+ 0"|{{Cjersey|red|Mountain classification}}}}
{{cyclingresult2|6|Sheyla Gutiérrez|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|7|Lauren Kitchen|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|8|Amy Pieters|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|9|Chloe Hosking|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|10|Tatiana Guderzo|2015|+ 6"}}
{{cyclingresult end}}

gives:

{{cyclingresult start}}
{{cyclingresult2|1|Jolien D'Hoore|2015|3h 03' 16"|{{Cjersey|yellow|General classification}}{{Cjersey|green|Sprint classification|}}}}
{{cyclingresult2|2|Chantal Blaak|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|3|Sara Mustonen|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|4|Coryn Rivera|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|5|Janneke Ensing|2015|+ 0"|{{Cjersey|red|Mountain classification}}}}
{{cyclingresult2|6|Sheyla Gutiérrez|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|7|Lauren Kitchen|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|8|Amy Pieters|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|9|Chloe Hosking|2015|+ 0"}}
{{cyclingresult2|10|Tatiana Guderzo|2015|+ 6"}}
{{cyclingresult end}}

Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Wow - impressive! How would it handle someone who was to change teams mid-year, if that scenario arose? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes that's a good one. I was thinking about the same and for that I have to make an optional extra paramater, such as teamchange=yes. Also I'll make a parameter to input the team manually, in case the cyclist is riding for the national team or as a guest rider for another team. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

How will this work for TTTs? XyZAn (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

it is not made for TTTs, than you have to use Template:Cyclingresult. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 18:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

ah okXyZAn (talk) 19:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel I've used your results template in 2015 Acht van Westerveld - its really good, nice and simple. However it's thrown up a bunch of errors - how do we clear them up? XyZAn (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi XyZAn, thanks for the compliments and for using it. I'm now added all UCI women team, pro continental and worldteam riders, so that problem is solved. The teams are working with the {{UCI team code|TEAMCODE|2015}} template. Because they don't exist for all Women's teams they might give errors. When I finished debugging the template I'll also write a page how to add riders, change teams, etc. Maybe I can also expand it with older years, so it would be possible to create in a blink of an eye former race pages as may don't exist pre-2014. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 08:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sander.v.Ginkel I've used the template again on 2015 Novilon EDR Cup and it's thrown up a couple of errors again. XyZAn (talk) 17:33, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes I see, one name had an e instead of an é. And for the Women's teams, not al the ct templates exist yet. Will create these a bit later :). Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 17:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Burnaby Velodrome

If someone has one good reference, this article (Draft:Burnaby Velodrome) can be created! Would be a shame if not... Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 15:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

A quick Google news search brings up this and this. I'm less sure about the first one, but the second one looks quite good. Relentlessly (talk) 16:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I added some references and resubmitted the draft. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 16:30, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

CT template and UCI code re-use

Not sure what the procedure here is - Wikipedia has the BOA code linking to the Portuguese team Radio Popular Boavista - who are now coded RPB. The BOA code should, for 2015 be linked to Bora Argon. Is there a straightforward way of solving this, or do we need to shift the old BOA template to RPB and find any article using BOA code to refer to the more obscure Portuguese team and correct it? Average Earthman (talk) 12:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Average Earthman, thanks for reporting the problem. What I did on Template:Cycling data BOA I added Bora-Argon 18 for 2015 and kept the rest the same. I furthermore created [[Template:Cycling data RPB]] for Rádio Popular-Onda. So former years for this team can be used with both BOA and RPB. Because Template:Cycling data BOA is about 2 teams, you can't use Template:CT without year ({{UCI team code|BOA}}), because it's not clear which team should be displayed. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 16:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel I think that's quite confusing. Could we not migrate any uses of the code to refer to the old team to use a different code? The use of {{ct}} is that it is constant for a team even when the team's name is changed, so you don't need to worry about getting the team's name correct. That's disrupted if we follow your approach. Migrating the old template in this case would be trivially easy: there are very few transclusions. If there were more, I imagine we could get a bot to do the work. Relentlessly (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly, I agree it's confusing. But let's formulate it different. [[Template:Cycling data RPB]] is the (new) template for Rádio Popular. Template:Cycling data BOA is the template for Bora-Argon 18. But if someone is using the template Template:Cycling data BOA for a year before 2015, it must be for Rádio Popular, so I kept these names on the template. This is how I did it for several other templates, 3 examples of them:

The code for Gewiss-Ballan (1993-1996) was GEW. Now Orica-AIS is using the code since 2012. I created for Orica-AIS the template Template:Cycling data GEW2, but I also added the names of Orica-AIS on the Template:Cycling data GEW because it will otherwise link to Gewiss-Ballan.
Template:Cycling data ALE was a redirect to the defunct team Template:Cycling data ALB. I created Template:Cycling data ALE for Alé-Cipollini-Galassia, but also added the names of the defunct team.
BankGiroLoterij (2000-2004) had the code BCT. As Bigla Cycling Team is using the code since 2005, I moved [[Template:Cycling data BCT]] to Template:Cycling data BCT2 to make place for Bigla Cycling Team. But I kept for the older years on the template the names of BankGiroLoterij. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not convinced your approach is right Sander. Say I'm writing about a 2013 race and want to mention the Tinkoff team but can't remember what they were called that season, I do know that the current UCI code for the team is TCS so I write {{UCI team code|TCS|2013}} for easy linking and when I hit save it links to some Italian Conti team from 2007? Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of the template, easy use when writing, saves us time to check things and fix links? If I can't remember what Bora where called in 2012 and use {{UCI team code|BOA|2012}} and it links to some Portuguese team then the template is completely useless. JudoonCyclist (talk) 14:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

CT template linking to season pages

Bald Boris asked on my talk page why the CT template is linking to season page (see old topic: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 11#Change request 'ct' template). As it becomes more or less a general discussion I post it here.

I don't know how I've missed this one, but can you explain to me why have you changed the workings of the Template:Ct when no discussion has took place here. Changes of this scale can't be done without an overall consensus. I don't think it should have been done and recommended you revert all the changes. Perhaps bring this discussion up again. Bald Boris 02:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bald Boris, I requested it on the talk page of the Wiki Cycling project in July 2014. On 22 July 2014 I requested the change and made the changed in August 2014. You can see it Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 11#Change request 'ct' template. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:37, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

This is also done (without a template) on the French wiki, see for instance fr:Circuit Het Nieuwsblad 2015 Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 22:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I just wonder why you've changed something that has worked fine for years? No one replied to you proposition, which didn't give you the green light to go ahead with it. For me it's obvious that it doesn't work. The user clicks the link Team Sky, expecting Team Sky, but is taken to 2010 Team Sky season. How can this be an improvement? It's messed up so many pages. On Bradley Wiggins I've linked the first mention of teams, now that means nothing as it goes to the season instead. This issue must be the same on 1000s of pages. Users want to go to the team's main page, not sub pages which mostly have a list of results. Also I've had to fix Template:UCI ProTeams as the links no longer went to the teams' main page. Bald Boris 00:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bald Boris, the template with a year indication says something about the team in that season. By clicking on the link you want to know more, most of the time about the team in that year., With going to the season page you find direct all that information from that year, or it's easy to go the general team page. On Wikipedia many links goes to the page that is the most dirct page for that link. If you click on the page 2015 in men's road cycling at the Tour Down Under link, you go to sub page 2015 Tour Down Under and not to Tour Down Under. If you click on a country link at a page about the 2012 Olympics, it's not linked to the COUNTRY at the Olympics page but to the subpage COUNTRY at the 2012 Summer Olympics page. I don't see the problem in Template:UCI WorldTeams. I see the problem you're mentioning is in the infobox of rider with the team listing, for that I can make a parameter such as seasonpage=no. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

It's primary function it to allow the team's name to be changed with according to the year, now that has been destroyed. You can't see the problem with Template:UCI WorldTeams because I fixed it. It is used for navigation between the teams, but because you change the ct temp it was links pointed to the 2015 seasons. Trade teams are not the same as national teams. Can you give me an example of a sports team the links to the season. You've forgotten the main reason for this template and made it too complex. Adding a parameter to allow the season is the correct way this should've been done. Bald Boris 17:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

It still has the primary function that allow the team's name to be changed with according to the year. It is not destoyed, it is improved!

I think the reason you don't like it, is because you like the overall page and not the season pages (as you call them sub pages which mostly have a list of results). But what if these pages become better and better (many more people are editing the main page than the season page in a specific year)? The season pages have sometimes not more than a list of results because the season page can't be found easily. Where can I find the season pages on Movistar Team? It took me a long time being active on Wikipedia that I found out the existence of the season pages. While other season pages are much better than the overall page. I think the reason that some season pages are great (see for instance 2011 Team Sky season) is that they are good linked from the overall page. So what my point is, if people find the page, they will improve them. If the season pages becomes more important (what they diserve) they will become better. And because there is on the season pages more room for details, it will be from a certain year more detailed than on the main page.

Pages in other nations are doing the same. See for instance fr:Circuit Het Nieuwsblad 2015.

I will never agree with this change and continue to stand by my opinion that it needs to be reverted. Bald Boris 00:14, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

when adding |noseasonlink=yes to the template, it will not be linked to the season page. See for instance the infobox of Bradley Wiggins. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I was talking about the linked first mention of a team in the prose. So are you now expecting people to add |noseasonlink=yes to the 1000s of cycling pages just because you want to send people to season pages?? I'm sorry but this is now beyond a joke. Bald Boris 20:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

1000s? I think you don't understand. There might only be a few infoboxes that links to the season pages. There are only season pages from the recent years and besides of that they have to be put in the CT data templates. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 20:45, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

The year is used in a lot of ct templates within the prose of bio pages. I believe only only solution is |seasonlink=yes rather then |noseasonlink=yes, so it stays as it always has but now you can have it linked to the season if you want. Bald Boris 23:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I think Boris has a point, any prose mention of a team I would usually want the template to point to the team and not the season. And if I use the template to link to the team from a season page it just goes bold (see for example 2007 Astana season) and doesn't link the team at all, which is frustrating and defeats the point of the template (convienience when writing, and no need to relink stuff when the team changes name). I also think a |seasonlink=yes or |s=y would be preferable. JudoonCyclist (talk) 14:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Pages using infobox cyclist with deprecated parameters

Does anyone have anymore info on why this category exists? I've dropped a note on Frietjes talkpage, who created it, but I wondered if anyone here knows more about it. It populates when teams are added to the cycling infobox on biographies. I would have thought this would be useful and not something to tag as deprecated. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:37, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand fully, but it's caused by Module:Infobox cyclist tracking. I think it's added when <br /> is added to the proyears or proteams parameters. Presumably it's recommended that we use proyears1, proteams1, etc. This seems like a decent suggestion to me, though I rather think the category could do with renaming. If we're really bothered about it, I imagine a bot could be written to do the migration. Relentlessly (talk) 11:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Ahh yes, it is the br parameter that trips it up. Makes sense now. Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 14:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I've just been looking at this and trying to make it work. I can't manage to make an infobox using the recommended proyears1=. Does anyone have an example of what the wikicode should look like? @Lugnuts? Thanks. Relentlessly (talk) 23:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

you can find the template syntax in Template:Infobox cyclist#Usage. Frietjes (talk) 23:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

My last edit on Rossella Ratto uses the proyears parameter and seems to work. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I was using proteams1 rather than proteam1. Is this something that we care particularly about? There are 1750 pages in the category. I've been looking at WP:BOTS recently and I'm sure I could whip something up to sort this out fairly quickly. Relentlessly (talk) 08:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Is the UCI joking? Who is J.F. Kennedy?

On the page World record progression track cycling – Men's flying 200 m time trial, the record of J. F. Kennedy of 20 August 199? was deleted, because it was linked to J. F. Kennedy (president). I reverted it because he is listed in the official reference of the UCI (see here). I wanted to find his real name, but the only American cyclist named Kennedy I can find are John Kennedy Howard (professional untill 1987) who was never active on the track, A-J Kennedy (acitve 1896-1900) and Thomas Kennedy (active 1917). There was a former 1960 Tour de France British cyclist named John Kennedy see here, but he was active untill 1960. (and other J. or F. Kennedy cyclists who won't be this person Johnny Kennedy, Jimmy Kennedy, Jamie Kennedy, Johnny Kennedy, Frank Kennedy)

So is this a joke of the UCI (not that also the date of this record not complete!), or who is this guy? Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 12:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

He might have been a bit nervous hearing the starting pistol go off if he was riding in Dallas! Too soon...? I'll do some digging to see if I can out more about this. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 08:25, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Potential CoI

I've just been looking at Tabriz Shahrdari Team team page and noticed the following user had made a couple of edit User:Tstcycling. Not sure whether looking at their user page this represents a Conflict of Interest and where/whether it needs reporting - just thought I'd give a heads up. XyZAn (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to me to be problematic editing. They're upfront about who they are and the edits don't seem to be promotional in nature. I've watched the page and will keep an eye on it, but I don't think we need be concerned. Relentlessly (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

New cycling jerseys templates

It's raining new templates here :). I just created templates for small cycling jerseys. So you dont have to put [[File:Jersey yellow.svg|20px|Yellow jersey]] anymore behind the name, you can just use {{Yellow jersey}} and gives . To see the discription see Template:Yellow jersey#Jerseys. I just created a few, feel free to add more jerseys! Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 10:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

That's good, but would one template with parameters not be more practical? I've just created {{cjersey}} so you could do something like this:

{{cjersey|yellow|General classification}}

Also, I think the icons would be better not linked. So you'd have a result like

, which has a title attribute but no link. Relentlessly (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly, looks great, much more compact! ~~Maybe including a parameter to change the size?~~ (is already there :) ) If you've completed the template, we can delete the templates I created. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel, yes, I think {{cjersey}} is finished now that I've added documentation and TemplateData. It needs a couple more jerseys adding, I think, perhaps from this list. Relentlessly (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly, looks great! I will put all my templates up for deletion, and add more jerseys! There are also more jerseys on: Cycling jersey. Shall we also add the nation champion jerseys? Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 23:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly, white using the template I found out one bug. However, I don't know how to fix it. The size of the jersey when using {{cjersey|yellow}} is not 20px, it's only 20px when adding some text as third parameter like {{cjersey|yellow|jersey description text}}. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 09:24, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Great work Relentlessly! I think adding the national jerseys would make this template even more useful, that way we don't have to remember the Spanish name of the country to link the jersey pic. JudoonCyclist (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, let's do that, JudoonCyclist. If you can point me to the files, I'll sort the template out. Relentlessly (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Relentlessly I didn't find a comprehensive list of images, but check Cycling jersey, pt:Camisa de ciclismo, nl:Nationale kampioenschappen wielrennen, and c:Category:National champion cycling jerseys and you should get them all hopefully. JudoonCyclist (talk) 19:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel, I finally figured out how to fix this, after a bit of experimentation with Wikipedia's kooky template syntax! Thanks for drawing it to my attention. Relentlessly (talk) 11:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Riders and seasons navboxes at team articles

@BaldBoris: Why did you remove the navboxes added to cycling trade team articles by 37.54.221.20 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) with the explanation of "unconstructive editing"?

For example, Team Sky is the parent article for both {{Team Sky seasons}} and {{Sky riders}}. By normal navbox convention, a navbox goes at the foot of every page that it links to. Lets follow that convention here at Team Sky unless it would be unhelpful to readers if we do.

I searched the project archive for 'navbox' but didn't spot a previous discussion. If I have missed it, please link me to it.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:10, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with Hroðulf. It's a parent article for both navboxes. They must be included in the team article. Thank you for help. 37.54.221.20 (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I can understand why the seasons should possibly be there as they're not listed in the article, but the riders one absolutely no way. Bald Boris 14:45, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a reasonable compromise if someone wants to restore the seasons navboxes, but omit the riders ones. These articles are already long and too much redundant and hidden text adds to any pain that a user of dial-up or 2G internet might feel. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

First, WP:SIZE is not violated by main articles. Second, WP:NAV says: every article listed on a particular navigation template generally has the template placed on its page. For example, similar navbox {{2018 FIFA World Cup stadiums}} included in the 2018 FIFA World Cup and {{Events at the 2016 Summer Olympics}} in the 2016 Summer Olympics. 37.54.221.20 (talk) 16:02, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Merge I prefer making one template with seasons, riders, list of victories link, list of riders link, links to title sponsors. Like the French templates. Sander.v.Ginkel ^{(Je suis Charlie)} 19:46, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Clean up for special:Linksearch/*.62.50.72.82

There are a lot of requests to http://62.50.72.82/ (special:Linksearch/*.62.50.72.82) which seems part of UCI. Some they are dead or problematic and they are in need of a clean up, conversion to a non-numeric domain, if possible, or dead linked. Many of the early urls are simple dead, eg. http://62.50.72.82/UCIBWS/%28S%28umtrsblwhc3k0lvv40meb2rf%29%29/Teams/detail/en/ROA/2996

It would be useful if someone more knowledgeable of this matter could resolve it and put any bot requests to Wikipedia:Bot requests. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Michał Kwiatkowski pagemove

Please see the discussion here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:31, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Recent changes to the graphics for Template: Medal

There is a template talk page discussion regarding the graphics used for medalists in infobox medals tables occurring at Template talk:Medal#‎Changing from gold/silver/bronze to 1/2/3. As this discussion is within the scope of WP:cycling, you are invited to make your comments on the recent graphics changes there. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Palmares and the O word

Is the word "Overall" redundant when used in the Palmares section for a cyclist? Some articles use it for every single result, some articles don't use it at all, and worst of all, some have a mix of using it and not using it. Michał Kwiatkowski is a good/bad example. 2007, 2008 and 2009 no "overall". 2010 uses it for each result. 2011 is a mix and so on. Is there a MOS on this? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I dont think there's a specific MOS, but maybe use the one for team articles - here - as a starting point if not MOS. XyZAn (talk) 16:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I definitely think we should use the word 'Overall', it sorts out stage races and one-day races when a person who is not a connoisseur consults a palmares. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 20:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Great - thanks for the replies. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Tour of Bulgaria

Dear Sir,

Regarding the cycling Tour of Bulgaria, I've got (much) better detailed records to offer. How do you want me to show my records ? How do I do that ? How do I contact you ?

Hoping to hear from you soon, with a positive answer........ I remain, Sir, all yours in Cycling.

Danyel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.122.132.235 (talk) 15:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. You can just be bold and edit the article(s) yourself. As long as your information is reliable then there shouldn't be a problem. Hopefully it's online so it can be verified too. Thanks for your offer of help. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Use a reference, here's a template: <ref>{{cite news|url=|title=|work=|publisher=|date=|accessdate=|author=}}</ref>. After it's filled, place it in the article... Read Wikipedia:Citiations for additional examples. Thanks, Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Giro d'Italia classification winners

Please restore List of Giro d'Italia classification winners. Many articles linked to here. It was deleted without discussion, although similar pages exist: List of Vuelta a España classification winners, List of Tour de France secondary classification winners. 178.92.14.22 (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Good call and thanks for sorting this. I de-prodded the other two, as I thought they were ridiculous requests IMO. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:57, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Ridiculous? They offer no value, I'll nominate them for AfD once I have more free time. Disc Wheel (Talk + Tontributions) 18:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Nominated here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Giro d'Italia classification winners. Disc Wheel (Talk + Tontributions) 04:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Giro d'Italia classification winners for deletion

Please see the AfD here which also includes the articles for List of Vuelta a España classification winners and List of Tour de France secondary classification winners. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Tour of Flanders route

For the past few weeks I have worked on the article about the Tour of Flanders. Originally it was a bold move to make the articles about all the one-day monument classics more comprehensive, seeing that only the Paris-Roubaix article was actually extensive. It was one of my first really elaborate contributions, getting slightly out of hand and taking me a lot more time than I anticipated. I realize some sections need additional or better referencing, but I will work on it and any help in that area is welcome.

One thing that bothers me is that I could not find an image of the route of the Tour of Flanders on the commons page, neither recent or older. I put in a picture of Bruges, which is pretty but not all that relevant. If anyone could help out, that would be wonderful. Thanks. Dr.robin (talk) 15:43, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Stellar work on the article and all the others Robin. At times editing can become painfully addictive. I'll have a go at making a route image. What do you think would be best, an older route or a more recent (which would be easier to find)? Bald Boris 17:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Using WikiData in cycling infoboxes

Hi, the following message was posted on my talk page by Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick:

Hi @Frietjes: I work on the Franch Wikipedia, and more on Wikimedia Commons to illustrate cyclists. I see you create Module:Infobox cyclist tracking. Did you know that it is possible to use datas from Wikidata ? I prepared Module:Infobox/Cycliste. It doesn't applicate on the French Wikipedia because we don't already have the arbitrary access.
For cycling races, Module:Infobox/Descriptif course cycliste is working, but it lacks few properties (example : Tour du Limbourg 2015). Is it possible you start to adapt Template:Infobox cycling race report ? New properties about classification should arrive during the summer. That will permit we will start to work together English/French on Wikidata, and be more efficient. (sorry for my bad English, but we are not good on other languages in France...) Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 09:19, 19 June 2015 (UTC) PS : Module:Infobox cycling race report‎

Basically, the proposal is to enable the cycling infoboxes to pull data directly from WikiData. this will allow editors on "other language wikis" to contribute without editing the English site directly. for examples see d:Q105542 for Miguel Indurain. the typical method is to (1) check for the value within infobox in the article, (2) if it isn't defined then check/get the value from wikidata. from the example posted by Jérémy, it looks like we could be using the following data for cyclists (not all is applicable)

Wikidata Property	Description
P1449	Nickname
P1477	Birth name
P569	Birth date
P570	Death date
P27	Nationality
P103	Native language
P413	Speciality
P552	Handedness
P1340	Eye colour
P1884	Hair colour
P1853	Blood type

for cycling race reports you can see the properties listed in Module:Infobox cycling race report. I could make a similar table as the one above if that's useful. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

For races, I have these examples. It lacks the distance, the average speed and the winners. For the two first, it is not again possible on Wikidata to add data with units (I read we must wait two or four months). For the winners, I need the creation of news properties that are discussed. I precise that infoboxes are the first step. Since three weeks, I can lists the participating teams. A function permits to count them for the infobox, when the arbitrary access will be activated, teams will can be listed in the corpse of the article. Another goal is to centralise the classifications on Wikidata (it will be very interesting). When all will work, it will be very usefull for all the Wikipedians because the can passe their time to write articles instead of loosing time with datas (sorry for my english). Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 22:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Cycling Race Template

I don't know whoever changed it, but the purple portion Infobox cycling race report used to have the text in the purple centered but now its aligned to the left. It's a small change but it's also rather unappealing looking. Could we get it changed back? Disc Wheel (Talk + Tontributions) 00:58, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Disc Wheel:. I don't touch this template, but I can say it will be renewed in few week to take the datas from Wikidata, as we do now for the French Wikipedia. You can see an exemple at fr:Tour du Limbourg 2015. You create 1905 Giro di Lombardia, we have fr:Tour de Lombardie 1905 where I just add datas from Wikidata. I wait again for the English Wikipedia because I need the arbitrary access to find with only the name of the cyclists their countris and their teams. The next step will be classifications. Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 08:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Milan San Remo page move

Please see the discussion here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

ProCyclingStats template

For info, I've created this template - {{ProCyclingStats}}. It's based on the {{Cycling Archives}} template. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Good job @Lugnuts:, PCS is a far better site than Cycling archives. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 17:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Commons categorising

I've recently transferred tons of photos from Flickr to Commons that may need categorising if anyone's up for it. Bald Boris 23:41, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

commons:Category:Etape 20 du Tour de France 2014

Great! I'll see what I can do. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 19:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)