Talk:Cycling in Chicago

Illinois Low‑importance

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

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cycling

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

Untitled

Removed a lot of non-factual information but also added as much factual information as I could. The article is now two steps closer to being a quality Wikipedia article. Would anyone like to get started on fixing the Active Transportation Alliance's website? Stevevance (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like an Advertisement

The first paragraph (in particular) reads like an advertisement or public relations copy. I think it could be edited to present a more neutral POV. Furthermore, according to this: http://ctpp.transportation.org/production/Chicago%20city,%20Illinois.htm the "one of the most common transportation methods in the city" bit is either misleading or factually incorrect.Astonzia (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this statementStevevance (talk) 03:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still reads like an some boosterish ad copy "Since the advent of the bicycle in the 1860s, Chicago has been distinguished as one of the premier cycling locations in the United States" really? ugg premier is one of the most generic words. Fancy condos and resorts are premier. "Advent" is needlessly fancy too. Are bicycles religious now? Why not the simple "invention"

How about an opening line like "Chicagoans have a long history of widespread interest in bicycle riding," something about manufacturing. Then "One of the earliest recorded use of bicycle use is [blank]" this can lead into the history of manufacture and use.

Of note here is that some of the first paved streets in Chicago were for bicyclists. I think this was noted in Pacgya's book.

Onto Mayor Daley.

"In the 2000s, Chicago has seen an increase in the amount of bikers traveling throughout the city. This can in part be attributed to the current mayor." I don't know. Later on "Under the current Mayor Daley, cycling in Chicago has seen huge increase in participation" come on mention it once.. It seems like a campaign ad. He may have been ahead of the curve on bike paths, but many major cities has seen huge increases of cycling in the 2000's and did not have Daley as mayor. Such things are hard to demonstrate. Better to note "Mayor Daley is an enthusiastic supporter of bicycling" and list instances of official action which is supportive of biking where appropriate. not right mentioning the mayor's name. The new zoning ordinance requires new developments to set aside bike racks, for example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.214.83 (talk) 23:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

67.175.214.83 (talk) 23:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link to "Chicago Bike Trails" web site

I was wondering if it would be possible for someone to add a link to my "Chicago Bike Trails" web site to Cycling in Chicago. The site started as a school project and is now in its third year. It is the 9th suggestion for the Google search 'chicago bike trails' and ironically shows up right under the link for Wikipedia Cycling In Chicago. It is the 3rd suggestion for the Google search 'chicago bike paths'.

The link can either be to:

 www.chicagobiketrails.net
   or
 chicagotrails.netfirms.com

Thank You, Joe Lewis SpotALoony (talk) 10:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Chicago, Illinois category

The category is used to demonstrate how the Chicago Project categorization scheme would use the distinguished category feature - please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Categories/Categorization scheme#Each article within "Chicago, Illinois" category. Pknkly (talk) 05:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Cycling in Chicago. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]