Wikipedia

Talk:Bicycle Network

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Bandmassa in topic Regard the "national reach of Bicycle Network"
Learn more about this page

Regard the "national reach of Bicycle Network"

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As foundation President of Bicycle Tasmania but quite a while retired from active committee duties, what I saw and heard from colleagues and source was Bicycle Network seemed to swan in and claim credit the hard work of Bicycle Tasmania activists and volunteers in the process of getting a bike lane marked on a particularly irksome Hobart street. That "national reach" still only includes Tasmania and I find the subsuming of Bicycle Tasmania and erasure of even a hint of the name of Tasmania's original bicycle transport advocacy organisation offensive.

To recap a little of the history of transport cycling advocacy in Tasmania, Bicycle Tasmania was the incorporation of a loose collective called Fair Go For Cyclists in 1990-91. While I was President and later Secretary, along with Paul Gregory and Rob Beedham, with Richard Brabazon co-drafting the new constitution with me and getting mountain bike racing started not long after (which TCF hadn't been interested in doing.) As the 4 foundation committee members. We became members of the Bicycle Federation of Australia shortly after we incorporated and the mountain biking was so popular TCF negotiated to take it over. An expression of Bicycle Tasmania's moto, "For all cyclists," because even "clubbies" have to train on the roads. I served on committee for around 5 years before burning out from trying to be a volunteer leader of an organisation, family, work and a live band sideline, The Breed. When Bicycle Network rocked up and bold as brass claimed credit for the Argyle St bike line it was barely days after members of Bicycle Tasmania had celebrated the opening of the new lane. As a rank and file member by this stage, I'd been super proud of the organisation the successive committee members and general members had built. Now all trace of the organisation seems to be erased. All of this stuff can be checked in Tasmanian public records and Mercury newspaper archives from the period. TCF would able to verify the mountain bike stuff. The erasure of Bicycle Tasmania seems crass and probably quite typical of how Bicycle Network has become since the conflict of interest sponsorship deal with RACV, the automobile advocacy group in Victoria. Today I live in Victoria and I wouldn't join them if they were the last cycling advocacy organisation on earth. Still "proud as" of what the little group of vollies and around 100 members achieved in the first 5 years and committees beyond that, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandmassa (talk • contribs) 01:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Removal of "Blitzing of Cyclists Without Lights"

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I thought it was worth explaining why I removed the following material from the "Controversies" section.

Blitzing of Cyclists Without Lights

edit

As part of their Light Up campaign[1], Bicycle Victoria has chastised cyclists in the mainstream media and encouraged police in the City of Melbourne to ticket cyclists riding without lights after dark[2]. Some criticise this move, saying that negative messages about cyclists from cycling organisations should be contained to cycling media and that it discourages cycling by creating division within the cycling community. Others believe the move improves safety and reduces accidents. Another option employed interstate, overseas and by some municipal governments in Melbourne Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).. Despite the ability of Bicycle Victoria as a large organisation to negotiate bulk deals on bike supplies, including free bikes for the Great Victorian Bike Ride [3] they have rejected suggestions to adopt the positive outreach/giveaway methodology for their light up campaign.

The section uses non-neutral language -- "Bicycle Victoria has chastised cyclists". Secondly, lots of things are properly cited, except the main premise that Bicycle Victoria encourages police "blitzing" (intensive targeting) of cyclists without lights. The cited article does not support this premise, which is misleading use of the citation. The cited article says that Bicycle Victoria supports penalties for unlawful behavior by all road users, including cyclists. This is quite a different statement and one I don't believe to be in any way "controversial". Stumbles (talk) 04:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]

Great Escapade

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The cited article from BNSW [4] is saying that they will no longer be running the NSW Big Ride. The Big Ride was always run in NSW, and it will not be "outsourced" - that implies BNSW has invited BV to continue running it. As BNSW (for whatever reason) is unable to run the Big Ride any more, they've decided to support BV's annual Great Escapade, an existing event.

Supporting an existing event is very different to outsourcing the running of their own event. Yobau (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bicycle Network. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:21, 2 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Bicycle Network. 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) 19:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bicycle Network. 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) 00:22, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

"Helmet laws and fines"

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"Many cyclists were expecting BV would oppose the steep rise in fines.[citation needed] These and other issues have led critics to conclude that Bicycle Victoria was a mainstream health promotion organisation, with ties to government and major sponsors, and that it was wary of linking itself to any environmental protest or justice campaigns like those that challenge the helmet law."

Two unreferenced assertions. S C Cheese (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bicycle_Network&oldid=1199987573"