Talk:Bicycle transportation planning and engineering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Cycling (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Fair use rationale for Image:Bicycle transportation.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Bicycle transportation.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Confusion[edit]

The bike lanes discussed in sections 1.3 and 2.1 seem to be the same thing. There's a separate article Bikeway, but perhaps it should redirect to this. Confusion. PamD (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

title of article seems like original research[edit]

To me, this is a very technical subject and there should be a lot of technical information published to show that the article title is correct. A quick internet search does not show a lot of information on "Bicycle transportation engineering" as a sub-discipline of engineering. (I searched the web, google books and amazon.com for the subject) One name (John forester) shows in the web search as a "bicycle transportation engineer". I don't think that one could get a university degree in this sub-discipline. To me the article should be titled Bicycle facility design. There are ample books and technical publications on this subject. Does anyone have any comments before I formally propose a move? - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 22:30, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Bicycle transportation engineering encompasses but is not limited to facility design. There is a book on the subject. WP:OR refers to original research done by WP editors. This title just reflects a name used in the outside world. That said, we have a lot of "OR" titles on WP - there is no prohibition of it. Almost every "List of..." title is arguably OR, so even if a title is OR, that's not a reason to change it. --В²C 20:52, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I may be wrong terming it as OR. Maybe it is more of WP:COMMONNAME. One book (and one author) using the term 'bicycle transportation engineering' doesn't make it the common name. To me, the term should be widely used in the very technical field of engineering if that is what we are going to name the article. I guess that is why I am thinking the title should change. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 21:20, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I agree with ¢Spender1983. "Bicycle planning" is much more common than "Bicycle transportation engineering" which was a title that was created by one cycling activist, John Forester. "Bicycle planning" turns up 44,000 hits for me; "bicycle transportation engineering" turns up only 3900 hits, with many of the top ones either related to Wikipedia or to John Forester's site ("bicycle facility design" turns up 10,000). And if Google results isn't enough to convince you, even government agencies refer to bicycle planning (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/pedestrian_bicycle_handbook/). Some of the professionals who do bicycle planning might be engineers, but many are not even though they are helping to create cycling infrastructure. Given the context of the article, the title will be more neutral to call it by its most widely used name and add a note that bicycle transportation engineers are transportation engineers who specialize in bicycle planning. The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals in the US (http://www.apbp.org/?page=About_APBP) includes a wide range of disciplines including "transportation planning and engineering, urban design, landscape architecture, public health, active living, and Safe Routes to School". In fact, I think the best term that incorporates both sentiments would be to call it bicycle transportation planning and engineering. Nubeli (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)