Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Team templates

We have a small number of team templates in WikiProject Cycling, which can be found at Category:Cycling team templates. For the sake of consistency, I feel that they should all look the same, but there are three different examples (compare Template:TMO, Template:Team CSC and Template:C.A). WikiProject Football has developed a template system whereby all the parameters (for example width) are consistent and can be controlled by just changing one template. The discussion on how this came about is here. I am proposing a similar version for cycling teams. The templates can be viewed from here, with an example template here (compare to the existing one here). Please leave your thoughts as to whether you think this is a good idea, and if you have any specific points regarding formatting, here. I am keen to get this and other templates going now so that it will be ready for the team presentations in the new year. Thanks, Mk3severo 01:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I created the two cyclo-cross team templates. I think it's a great idea. Go for it. I don't have any comments on formatting but the beauty is we can always worry about that later, right? Will.law 21:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

All done for the 2007 ProTour teams. Hurrah! Mk3severo 16:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Team pages

There has been a number of occasions where the names and content of team pages has been questioned and debated. I feel it would be best if we came to consensus on how to format these pages. Firstly we have to recognise Team CSC as a kind of model: it is by far the best cycling team article on Wikipedia. A lot of credit to Poulsen and Per Abrahamsen for that one. Bear in mind that what is below is my opinion: please comment either way!

The problem we have with article name is that team names keep changing, even though it is merely the sponsor or even just the brand changing. Other sports do not have this issue. A second problem is the short lives of many cycling teams. This is accompanied by teams merging. I believe that where a team has directly continued with a new sponsor (such as CSC did between MemoryCard-Jack & Jones to CSC-World Online), then the article should be the same with the prose stating the sponsor and hence name changed and the infobox reflecting the new name and the historical names. For current teams, the current name should be used: for historical teams, the most recognisable name should be used, for example Comunidad Valenciana will shortly be a historical team, but the more recognisable name for this historical team is Kelme. Using the current team name isn't straight forward either: should the UCI registered name be used, or what the team calls itself (an example is Gerolsteiner: Gerolsteiner with the UCI, Team Gerolsteiner on their website)?

As for format of active teams, I would like to see a short opening paragraph explaining their status, base and possibly previous team names, if it is important (it is important that Discovery were previously called US Postal, but learning that they were called Mongomery-Bell in 1995 can wait). Following this, as a minimum, should be a current squad list, a current notable staff list and famous ex-team members. There should be an infobox detailing the important information (which should be in the prose), and a navigation box at the bottom to the other teams of the same status.

What does everything else think? Mk3severo 01:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, not a huge deal, but I thought I'd point out that the image of the team jersey on the Quickstep-Innergetic page actually shows Tom Boonen's jersey (with the rainbow cuffs of a former world champion) and not a generic team jersey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.223.2.6 (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Team rosters

I've designed a new template (another!), this time to help with keeping team rosters consistent. I've entered it into use at Rabobank, for the 2007 ProTeam - please take a look and tell us what you think! Mk3severo 23:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Portal

Admittedly, I neglected the Cycling Portal after starting it way back when. Anyway, thanks to Jahiegel for updating the portal. However, Anne-Caroline's article is still pretty short and lacks the information added to the selected bio template on the portal. Isn't the idea to expand the article, and then take the key points from there to the template, so that readers click-through? --Christopherlin 20:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we could make the portal better and less work by slimming it down. Take a look at Portal:Cricket, which is featured status. Very little prose whatsoever. Other featured portals have a bit more prose, but they're not as pose heavy as ours. Mk3severo 20:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly! The heavy prose can go into the articles that need expansion. Anybody want to do that transfer? --Christopherlin 21:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Continued at Portal talk:Cycling#Layout of this portal (Mk3severo 15:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

2006 National Cycling Championships

Im sorry if this is the wonr place, but I just created this page: '2006 National Cycling Championships' and I dont know how to make '2006 National Cycling Champions' automatically link to it. SO if someone could do this or prefferrably tell me how to do this, then that'd be great! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SportingNonsense (talk • contribs) 00:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

A direct link is achieved like this: [[2006 National Cycling Championships]]. A piped link, like this, [[2006 National Cycling Championships|Danish National Champion]], would create this: Danish National Champion. There is no way to automatically link plain text to the article, you just have to go through them all! --Mk3severo 00:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thats not quite what I meant - ive already done what you said anyway. Ive worked out what to do for my actual question, see 2006_National_Cycling_Champions for an example of what I meant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SportingNonsense (talk • contribs) 00:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Images

Id like some help with the licensing of some images I have acquired. I have recieved permission to use some images from KennedyImages. I want to use 4 of them for: British National Cycling Championships 2006, and 1 each for Jeremy Hunt (cyclist), Steve Cummings, Hamish Haynes and Russell Downing. Id also like some help about a photo taken from inside the Manchester Velodrome, to use on the Manchester Velodrome article. My problem is that I dont fully understand the image rules and tags to use.

Any help will be appreciated.--SportingNonsense 21:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Flags

There is currently a discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Flag icons - manual of style entry.3F regarding how flags should be used in articles which you may be interested in reading and taking part in. Mk3severo 00:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Bicycling Wiki

WikiProject Cycling members may be interested in: Bicycling Wiki (formerly Cycling Wiki), as a place for developing and publishing cycling-related content which may not be sufficiently encyclopedic for inclusion into Wikipedia. Cyclists have lots to say, but much of it fails one or more of Wikipedia's stringent criteria such as WP:ENC, WP:NOTE, WP:CORP, WP:WEB, WP:CSD; for more see WP:CUTS. Examples:

• User:Tom guyette ran into some difficulty trying to determine how to develop articles about bike paths, without having them speedily deleted while still in stub stage (see: User talk:Tom guyette, User:Redwolf24/Archive32#Original research question).
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 2#Category: Cycling Club? discusses criteria for notability of cycling clubs, but without clear reference to Wikipedia's well-developed concept of notability.

Wikipedia is the world's largest and most popular wiki, and a common search engine result; therefore, many cyclists who use computers will have their first introduction to wiki editing here (I did). However, Wikipedia's stated aim is not to function as a general-purpose information appliance for cyclists. Cyclists need to share lots of information that isn't suitable for Wikipedia, or is harder to share when we have to prove that it is suitable. (For example, we cannot simply write what we know about our local clubs, shops, and rides, without also providing evidence of sufficient notability.)

Wikipedia seems to have more articles about bicycle racing and racing cyclists than about utilitarian and recreational cycling (the two most common varieties). This may be partly a result of Wikipedia's notability criteria: the proportionately tiny minority of cyclists who are elite professional racers have their accomplishments widely publicized, giving them a sure claim on notability. In contrast, the millions of undistinguished cyclists are generally not notable, except when they agree to mass in numbers sufficient to attract press coverage.

While I enjoy reading about Lance Armstrong as much as the next cyclist, that isn't the type of information I really need to enable and enhance my own cycling. The information I need is mundane and obscure: stuff about clubs, shops, rides, routes, etc., in my locale. Not much of that would be very notable, and lots would be or seem like original research, because either it hasn't already been published, or references for it are hard to find.

I consider Wikipedia to be one of the greatest human achievements, so I'm not complaining about the editorial restrictions that keep the quality high here. I'm simply pointing out that cyclists have lots more information to share, that isn't appropriate for Wikipedia, or would require lots of time and work to get it to Wikipedia's level (and could be speedily deleted while sitting around in stub form waiting for someone to come along and improve it). Sharing this information via the wiki model has obvious advantages, and we should all be aware that Wikipedia is not the "only game in town."

Having a wiki specifically for cycling allows cyclists to document the most obscure yet useful details of our local cycling environments: clubs, shops, routes, paths, advocacy groups, locations of specific road hazards and closures, organized group rides (start locations, times, distances, speed levels), and so on. (Perhaps someday every cycling club will have at least one wiki. Maybe cyclists will log the location and status of every pothole, and carry GPS receivers that guide them safely around them all.)

Bicycling Wiki runs the MediaWiki software, so it functions similarly to Wikipedia, minus the Wikipedia user community and all the amazingly intricate organizational trappings they have built up. Thus the site is a bit bare-bones if you're used to using infobox templates and so on. But we can adapt whatever we need from Wikipedia. As of early 2007, Bicycling Wiki's content and layout are still a bit misleadingly regional, but the proprietor says he welcomes cycling-related content from anywhere.

Participation on Bicycling Wiki is still a bit thin, particularly from people with advanced wiki editing skills, and we need to design a suitable collection of templates, portals, categories, and so on to organize the site content by geographic regions. Nonetheless, already the site is fine for writing about your own cycling clubs and events, no matter how non-notable. If you like wiki editing, and have something cycling-related that doesn't work on Wikipedia, check it out. The overall quality of the site is quite a few notches down from Wikipedia, but a few dozen well-wikified cyclists could change that. --Teratornis 04:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Goals

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cycling#Goals currently contains only a question mark. Let's discuss something meaningful to put there. Here are my starting suggestions; feel free to hack and slash as you like:

• Goal #1: determine our goals.
• Improve the consistency and organization of cycling-related articles on Wikipedia.
  • Standardize terminology.
  • Place every cycling-related article in at least one consistent categorization scheme.
  • Identify all cycling-related articles that are in a series, and insure they have a consistent layout, use consistent infoboxes and other templates, etc.
  • Label the talk pages of all cycling-related articles more clearly (with {{cycling project}}) as being part of WikiProject Cycling, hopefully to direct more of those with an interest in cycling to this project. Many are already so-labeled.
    • We could use more navigation banner templates for cycling articles, with each one mentioning WikiProject Cycling, or somehow linking back. Ideally, every cycling-related article should have some sort of navigation template that guides the user easily to the rest of Wikipedia's cycling-related content. Different article types (racing, teams, bicycle parts, etc.) should have their own navigation templates (I see two such templates at the moment).
• Clarify the impact of Wikipedia's editorial policies (e.g., notability, no original research, neutral point of view) on cycling-related articles.
  • Insure that our guidelines for article suitability are consistent with the views of the larger Wikipedia community, by submitting our guidelines for review.
  • Write explicit guidelines, so each wikified cyclist who wants to edit here can easily determine when his or her content conforms to Wikipedia's editorial policies. (That is, do not require each newcomer to re-interpret Wikipedia's general guidelines as they apply to cycling-related content.)
  • Identify and promote alternative publishing outlets (e.g., Bicycling Wiki) for cycling-related articles deemed unsuitable for Wikipedia.
    • Explicitly list the types of cycling-related articles better-suited to alternative publishing (local training rides, routes, shops, mail-order outlets, not-so-notable clubs and riders, etc.).
• Work toward attaining good article and then featured article status for as many cycling-related articles as possible. See: WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ.
  • When/if we get some featured articles, feature them on Portal:Cycling.

That should do for a start. If the Goals statement needs to be more concise, rather than turning into a long to-do list, perhaps we could have a concise Goals section along with a detailed To-do section. --Teratornis 18:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think those are excellent! I would add that we need to promote this Project more, and that in addition to interpreting editorial policies, that Manual of Style guidelines should also be interpreted. Otherwise I think they are excellent goals! Mk3severo 22:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I agree we need to promote WikiProject Cycling more. Let's edit a list of ways to do that, which are in keeping with Wikipedia's policies. I started a new section below so we can edit a list more conveniently. --Teratornis 20:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:PROJGUIDE describes a number of things other successful WikiProjects have done. Some WikiProjects appear to be much farther along than we are. We will advance faster by emulating rather than inventing, wherever possible. --Teratornis 22:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

How to promote WikiProject Cycling

Please add your ideas to the following list. I typed some ideas to start with. Feel free to insert, edit, delete, whatever makes it better. --Teratornis 20:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Find all cycling-related content on Wikipedia (and continuously monitor for new articles). Place WikiProject Cycling templates on the talk page of every cycling-related article that does not already have one.
  • If a cycling-related article is already part of another project (for example: Cycling at the Summer Olympics is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports Olympics; see the notice on Talk:Cycling at the Summer Olympics), ask the "owners" (actually, on Wikipedia nobody owns an article) if we may add our notice to theirs. Asking first should reduce the chance for edit wars.
• Check the edit histories of cycling-related articles. If any editors have not already joined WikiProject Cycling, invite them to join. (Although one does wonder, how far would a Wikipedian with an interest in cycling get before finding out about WikiProject Cycling on his or her own? Maybe we already have enough promotion.)
  • Design an invitation template to copy and paste to the user talk pages of editors who have not yet joined.
  • Cross-checking edit histories against the list of WikiProject Cycling members could be very tedious. Perhaps a bot could do it.
  • Actively inviting people we don't already know might border on SPAMming. We might not want to do this. The best form of active recruiting might be to invite people we know, who aren't already editing actively on Wikipedia, which segues to the next item.
• Personally invite the technically-inclined cyclists we know in real life to try wiki editing and join WikiProject Cycling.
• Make some real-life promotional items imprinted with WikiProject Cycling logo and URL. WikiProject Cycling jerseys? Caps? Socks? Shower curtains? Drawback: this would probably require actual work beyond what we can do by sitting comfortably at our computers, as well as money changing hands with all the nuisance that entails.
• Write press releases or articles about WikiProject Cycling for mainstream bicycle publications.
  • Make a list of cycling journalists who have written on similar topics; send our material to them.
    • There might be a human-interest angle in profiling a few WikiProject Cycling members from countries around the world, to illustrate how distant strangers found their way to collaborate on a common goal.
  • Maintain a project sub-page with references to all our press coverage.
• Make dead tree brochures or business cards that introduce WikiProject Cycling, and place them for free distribution at cycle shops. (Many cycle shops have kiosks to distribute cycling club literature, organized ride announcements, etc.) Again, this would involve work and money. Just tossing ideas out there.
• Make our own collection of tips, Cycling tip of the day, functioning similarly to Wikipedia:Tip of the day, with each tip having an unobtrusive "Brought to you by WikiProject Cycling" endnote.
  • If our collection of cycling tips becomes really good, it could receive wide publicity. For example, on group rides, the knowledgeable experienced riders routinely tell new riders all sorts of tips and tricks. New riders might like to start each day at the office by reading another useful tip.
  • If Cycling tip of the day violates Wikipedia's content policies, we can implement it elsewhere (e.g., Bicycling Wiki).
  • Similar tip collections exist; see: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cycling+%22tip+of+the+day%22&btnG=Search

Also see: WP:PROJGUIDE#Recruiting. Note to self: search for what's already written before re-inventing the wheel. --Teratornis 22:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Invitation templates

I think that invitation templates are especially useful to those people new to Wikipedia. As you say, experienced editors have probably heard of the project, and have decided to focus their energies elsewhere. We could easily adapt the standard welcoming templates to add a sentence about WikiProject Cycling, fulfilling wider community obligations and practices (that WP:Wc promote) whilst flagging the project. I think it is important to build the portal to a high - even featured - status so those people just reading about cycling will be impressed with the content and read more, and some people will choose to edit. I'll try to knock up some templates in the next few hours. Mk3severo 00:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Ta-da! {{subst:CyclingWelcome}} and {{subst:CyclingWelcome-anon}}. Mk3severo 00:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Those look helpful. I squeezeed them into a table on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling#Welcome templates. Please check my code to see if I did that properly. --Teratornis 03:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like another WikiProject had the same idea earlier: Wikipedia:WikiProject Mortal Kombat/greetings. They also have a category for their project: Category:WikiProject Mortal Kombat, for their WikiProject style guides and templates. Perhaps we should have one of our own: Category:WikiProject Cycling. --Teratornis 04:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

We could also use a welcome template for someone who is obviously past the new user stage in editing skill. I've been browsing around the cycling-related categories, and I'm seeing some competent edits done by various people who clearly have an interest in cycling but make no mention of WikiProject Cycling. However, WP:PROJGUIDE#Recruiting says directly inviting people is not as effective as simply leaving a project banner on article talk pages. So I've been slapping {{cycling project}} on cycling-related talk pages that need it, and there are lots. --Teratornis 01:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:PROJGUIDE#Recruiting says something about ensuring all pages within certain categories can have the project banner using bots - would be useful. In addition to an invitation to experienced editors, it would be useful to have one for inexperienced editors who have already been welcomed, making the Welcome template inappropriate. I'll see if their are any existing ones to copy. Mk3severo 11:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I've created {{subst:CyclingGreeting-new}} for new and already welcomed editors, and {{subst:CyclingGreeting-exp}} for experienced editors who have recently made some edits to cycling articles. They are copied from the Uruguay's project greetings. Mk3severo 12:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

About the page

I started Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Categories to use as a shared scratchpad for understanding and improving the cycling-related category scheme. Feel free to add your category insights here. --Teratornis 22:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

{{cycling project}} - bot requested

I have requested a bot place the {{cycling project}} banner on all the talk pages of articles in Category:Cycling and its sub-categories at Bot requests - then we just have to ensure all cycling-related articles are in that category or a sub-category, which is definitely human work! Mk3severo 14:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand is kindly using his bot for us now, and as I type over 1700 articles have been tagged! --Mk3severo 13:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

On the off chance this creates an influx of curious (or perhaps irate) folk browsing to WikiProject Cycling, I added a second paragraph to the lead section which greets them. --Teratornis 18:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Rearranging the list of templates

I edited the lists of templates on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling a bit:

• Edit tables to use the wikitable style class.
• Break the long table into smaller tables, by template type.
• Insert separate section headings for each template type, to make a better hierarchy, for faster access from the TOC, and to make adding new templates easier.
• Add another section for templates from related WikiProjects.

I preserved all existing content. --Teratornis 20:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Navigation templates

While we are on the happy subject of templates, I noticed we don't have a comprehensive set of cycling navigation footer templates (suitable for placing at the bottom of each article in WikiProject Cycling, i.e., each article which is primarily about cycling). It might be interesting (warning: ugly verbal description impending) to make navigation footer templates with several horizontal bars. The top bar or two would be the same for each template. The top bar would list the top-level topics in our cycling hierarchy (the cycling portal, the cycling article, the WikiProject Cycling page, ?). The second bar would list the major subdivision topics (racing, touring (recreational), utilitarian, equipment/parts, (perhaps) media, ?). Now for the fun part. Each major subdivision topic in the second bar could have its own distinct background color, so the bar would be a row of multi-colored cells. Then the third and following bars would be in the color scheme corresponding to the major subdivision topic cell which the template expands into subtopics. For example, the navigation footer template for racing would have its bottom two or three bars in the color scheme of the racing subdivision topic in the second bar. That way the various navigation templates would look like expanded menus for their respective topic areas. Taken together, the set of templates could look smart, and would visually indicate what part of cycling an article is "in." How does that sound? If my description doesn't make sense, and nobody beats me to it, I might try playing with some prototypes. --Teratornis 04:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking of something like this recently actually. Check out what WikiProject Football have done with standardised football box templates: take a look at how these work at FIFA, UEFA Champions League and Arsenal F.C.. Mk3severo 11:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I have made a fair bit of progress on standardised nav footers, which is all explained at a new templates sub-page. However, before they have a chance to establish themselves in any way, another user, Cbuckley, has changed some to a completely different format with limited comment. To me, it seemed a bit abrupt but there you go! There are still many nav boxes to make anyhow: I have converted a few over and added a handful more, but there's still a lot to do. I just hope I have helped with the structure :) Mk3severo 16:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

That's pretty cool. --Teratornis 19:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

To add to this, I'm relying fairly heavily upon the Hierarchy definition for topics I'm not so great at so do please have a quick check of these and add anything that should be there! Severo 23:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Media entry in the article hierarchy?

I noticed the article hierarchy definition has no subdivision for cycling-related media (books, videos, films, magazines). There are many such titles, some of which have Wikipedia articles, and some are in WikiProject Cycling already. For example, Talk:A Sunday in Hell is in WikiProject Cycling; Talk:Breaking Away is not (as I write). It would be useful to find all the existing Wikipedia articles about cycling-related media; add them to WikiProject Cycling (by adding our project template {{cycling project}} to their talk pages); and categorize them suitably (for example, a cycling-related book could go in Books about cycling, or Cycling books). I see there is already a Category:Cycling magazines subcategory of Category:Cycling, but I don't see subcategories for Cycling books, Cycling films, nor Cycling videos. Once we have catalogued all the existing cycling-related media articles, then we could start articles for all the cycling publications that lack them. It's relatively easy to write articles for books, and they easily satisfy WP:NOTE. It would be nice to have a comprehensive guide to the cycling literature on Wikipedia. --Teratornis 05:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Categories

I am trying to make sense of the cycling-related categories. There are some cycling-related articles about books, magazines, and films for example that do not consistently tie into Category:Cycling. We also didn't have a category for this WikiProject (we do now --Teratornis 21:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)). I don't see that we have a WikiProject page to work on categories yet, so I started: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling/Categories and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Categories. --Teratornis 21:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Bicycle manufacturer articles at AfD

Two articles about bicycle manufacturers are at AfD. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seven Cycles and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Industry Nine. Both articles need third-party references, which I couldn't easily locate. --Eastmain 00:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 3#Case study in constructive dispute resolution. If Wikipedia rejects these articles, please trans-wiki them to Bicycling Wiki. --Teratornis 20:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Backpacking

Hello,

As part of the Cycling WikiProject, You all may be interested in the newly formed WikiProject Backpacking, an effort to increase the quality of Backpacking related articles and media on Wikipedia. I hope that we may work together with other closely related WikiProjects (this one included) to make camping and packing articles the best they can be!

Regards,

-Leif902 13:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You may want to identify some backpacking-related wikis to suggest as outlets in case Wikipedia rejects some of your backpacking-related content as nonencylopedic. WikiProject Cycling uses Bicycling Wiki in an analogous role for unencyclopedic cycling-related content. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such it has goals which overlap the goals of many different enthusiast groups, but do not maximally serve those groups' interests. Which is to say, Wikipedia does not want lots of content which is useful to participants in activities such as cycling or backpacking. Having a safe haven for our articles takes the sting out of seeing our work land on WP:AFD. A search of WikiIndex yields: HikingWiki and FreeTrails, among others. FreeTrails might be a comfortable resource for your WikiProject members because it runs on MediaWiki, same as Wikipedia. --Teratornis 03:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)