Talk:List of rides

Removed suggested future ride dates

• Olympia, WA 10 Jun 2006 (no evidence that ride took place)

DLJ 17:22, 20 May 2007 (PDT)

removed rides

Maybe we should have a link on main page to removed events.DLJ 10:57, 7 August 2009 (PDT)

Keeping all rides' statuses updated

(Discussion originated on users SomeHuman and Nsayers' talk pages, though moved here on 2010-01-04 for it might concern more editors)
Hi. Thanks for your contributions to the wiki. I appreciate your wish to clarify the status of rides on the List of rides page – it has a lot of questionable information about smaller or non-English-speaking ride locations. However, I'm concerned that your lengthy, red-letter, inline notes have made the page more cluttered, less reassuring for potential riders, and more confusing for editors to work out if rides were mooted but abandoned, or rumoured to have actually taken place. I've edited the sections I know the details of (UK etc), and I would like to tidy things up more. Please can we discuss a tidier way forward?
Nsayers 17:15, 10 December 2009 (PST) (originally posted on SomeHuman's talk)

Hi, you're doing a good job on this WNBR wiki. I'm afraid your note on my talk page remained unread till today. I had no intention to perpetually maintain all the red comments etc.

1a. But your idea that my edits confused editors about which events might have been intended and which were actually held, strongly focuses on the editors that have been maintaining the page. For myself, the true status of a very high percentage of rides was as clear as London's fogg a century ago. And most likely many other potential editors might have been scared off by such. I had hoped, and apparently not idly, that the ostentative markup would cause a proper verification, in particular for events that after my edits remained dubious or incomplete.

1b. Your work and I assume for research especially that of Marte, have helped a lot. But there were still a number of places with a status outdated by at least half a year. Apart from some further general tidying up, I corrected these, mainly by introducing 'previously suggested ride' (outdated status less than Newly planned) and 'previously planned ride'. The few past dates with an outdated 'Committed to ride' status, were with the benefit of the doubt placed amongst 'previous rides' but with a footnote reference.

1c. Hence, one can now also for those places introduce a 2010 date if this becomes appropriate. I think it might be best to remove a 'previously suggested ride' as soon as for that specific place a more recent ride was truly held, though 'previously planned rides' could be kept. (There were already lines indicating planned but cancelled rides.)

SomeHuman 2009-12-29 22:22 / 22:59 (GMT) (originally posted on NSayers's talk)

2. By the way, are you still familiar with Previous rides data - it has only a fraction of the ride locations, of which some are still being maintained well. I added the Brussels rides. You might know editors specializing in missing locations...

3. Are there instructions about using the categories? For Brussels, only its main page is categorized, none of its Brussels_200n_history pages that are linked from that main page. Although such helps preventing enormously long lists of categorized pages, the categories 'Brussels sub-page' and (the potentially enormous) 'Ride location sub-page' seem to be appropriate. These latter are found on Brussels_2007_Planning_Art_Mobilization.

SomeHuman 2010-01-01 16:50 / 18:15 (GMT) (originally posted on NSayers's talk)

Hi again. Thanks for your diligent, enthusiastic work on the wiki. However, I'm sorry to say I'm about to revert the recent edits you've made to the List of rides page. I think the changes you've made make the page more convoluted and confusing. I would prefer that the following changes are not made again in future:

• "Future" ride dates that have passed without clarification on whether they took place:
  

These should be left as they are, for local experts or people with evidence of the rides' status to correct accordingly. Adding the text "(Previously suggested rides: ...)" and footnotes just adds clutter to an already busy page. The current set-up isn't ideal, but without sufficient dedicated local wiki editors to verify and maintain ride info, I think it's the best way to maintain a reasonably easy-to-read and accurate list of rides.

• Footnotes, if they are added (I'd prefer not), should be formatted like citations so they're linked properly. There's some way to do this with wiki mark-up, but I'm not sure how.
• Please don't add spaces before ?s (eg: "June 2010?", not "June 2010 ?")
• Please don't pluralise previous ride dates if there has only been one (eg: "Previous ride: 14 Jun 2009", not "Previous rides: 14 Jun 2009")

Thanks mate. I'd be happy to discuss this with you by phone, Skype or instant messaging (message me for details) - it might be easier and quicker to come to some agreement on how to move forward. Sorry if I seem harsh, but I want to keep the rides list tidy.

Nsayers 21:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC) (originally posted on SomeHuman's talk)

(Reply on 1.) I think this makes the page unnecessarily cluttered. If a "future" ride date has passed then it still shows that the ride status is unclear, without having to write this out in full. The best we can do is do a Google search or other research to ascertain if a ride has happened.

(Reply on 2.) Yes, I set this page up. It hasn't been edited by many people though, which is a shame

(Reply on 3.) The Ride location sub-categories (eg: 2009 ride locations) should only be used on the primary ride location page (eg: Belgium). The sub-page categories should only be used for sub-pages (eg: Belgium history). This category is automatically included with the 'Ride location sub-page breadcrumb' template. There's a list of help pages here, which you're welcome to add to: http://wiki.worldnakedbikeride.org/index.php?title=Special:AllPages&namespace=12

Nsayers 23:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC) (originally replied within SomeHuman's comment on NSayers's talk)

Nick, about your concerns of 21:37, 3 January 2010:

• Any 'next ride' must not be followed with a past date. It may be clear to you that it needs later attention (see your reply of 23:54, 3 January 2010 on 1.), but with a conspicious number of these, everyone else is going to conclude that the entire page is badly maintained en utterly unreliable. Knowing that this is one of the first pages all readers come to, one should assume all data to be suspect - even perfectly updated and verified data (helped by those locations' continuously attentive editors). Thus the page must appear well maintained, simply expressing its known uncertainties.

• I'll look into the footnote links soon. Meanwhile, readers will have no problem in finding the note that a clearly recognized footnote indicator refers to.

• Unfortunately, e.g. "Jun 2010?" [never 'June' etc on that page, remember] may be questioning the year, not the month of the ride being planned. Obviously, in most cases it will be the date as a whole, hence: "Jun 2010 ?", "21/22? Jun 2007" (uncertain day of the month), "17 Aug 2008 ?" (uncertain ride), "2009 ?" ( whereas "17 Aug 2008?" or "2009?", especially in a series of previous rides with a few years skipped, can be interpreted as 'Was the ride in that year or perhaps the former or next one ?' though in fact the ride is questioned.
  

A blank however, can cause wrapping the '?' to the next line, which looks sloppy or might not be spotted by a reader. Therefore, I now replaced such blanks with 'non-breaking spaces'. (It can also facilitate an editor's searches for specific types of uncertainties.)

• Done. Please note that before my edits, there were several plurals in front of single ride dates. Having it in correct English that does not cast doubt about a ride that might have been forgotten, does require a bit of our attention to pluralize when a new date gets added. But it is a minor burden and it's worth that.

Nick, in particular about your reply on my 1. : There is very little additional cluttering: most 'Previously suggested ride' or elsewhere 'Previously planned ride' tags occur for locations without actually cycled rides. For the few other locations the extra 'clutter' is not so much a hindrance as to lose the information for those few, and then unavoidably also for all locations' previous activities by organizers. I do intend to do some more research and that will get rid of some of the assumed clutter - Your revert had destroyed several updates that already reflected some of my research. And I will soon put the two forementioned tags in grey colour, ensuring readers' easy recognition of actual rides.

A major concern is freeing up room for the next ride: For a location that had a ride suggested, planned or even committed to, the people involved last year (or even earlier) may well stay away from this wiki. New potential organizers however, used to see a 'next ride' being planned etc and could well hesitate to introduce their intended or planned next ride date. It might even deter them from organizing the ride. That's why we definitely must keep the 'next ride' open, with a clear invitation to 'Kickstart this ride'. The page is more important for rides to come than for those that might or might not have happened in the past [and only in that part of a line can there be a little clutter].

I appreciate your introduction of templates instead of direct image calls.

SomeHuman 2010-01-04 07:35 / 08:38 (GMT)

Using a ccs class only from within a single template, causes a double lookup (technically perhaps a bit sloppy) where the template itself can address the main css definitions directly. The inline css also allows differentiation between elements of the text shown from the template.

I tweaked the templates, demonstrating the much richer possibilities of inline css from templates, and now arriving at a point that hopefully satisfies your concerns for the List of rides as well as mine. Note: We should maintain the narrow letter-spacing for the dates part of each template, and the smaller characters for 'Planned' and 'Suggested'. Now, small characters occur also for (Previous ride (s): 13 Jun 2009) these might however become either perhaps (Previous ride (s): 13 Jun 2009) a little less small or even (Previous ride (s): 13 Jun 2009) normal size [for text and/or dates list, the samples here are mere approximations that depend on one's browser]. For templates that hardly ever need updating, intricacy is their reason of existence.

I changed your new text about handling past rides, now showing the * or ** that (should) correspond with the links in the list. I intend to try and get rid of my earlier footnote [1], which I assume may often become a ** (Planned) instead of a remark amongst 'Previous rides'. The plural (s) had looked sloppy but I did reintroduce it in a way that is just a notch better readable (no longer draws one's attention). And I avoided those (nearly always superfluous) for Planned and Suggested rides.

SomeHuman 2009-01-06 09:52-17:33 (GMT)

Hi. Again, I'm impressed by your dedication to editing this wiki. I think we're getting closer to agreement on some of the issues you're trying to resolve on the List of rides page. However, as a professional graphic designer, I take issue with many of the stylistic and content changes you've made:

• CSS classes are far better for the purpose of repeated styling than inline styles, and are less of a drain on resources and bandwidth. The main purpose, it seems, of your styling is to make the brackets smaller around "ride(s)". I think this is superfluous – "rides" will suffice for the majority of ride locations. As this differentiation is difficult to automate with templates, I'd rather sacrifice pedantry for a cleaner-looking page.
• Negative letter spacing cramps words and looks ugly. If anything, smaller text should be slightly more widely spaced to aid legibility. I strongly insist that letter spacing is not used.
• The differentiation of "planned", "suggested" and past unconfirmed rides is superfluous. If a lapsed "future" ride date is unconfirmed, then we just need to point people to the explanation of lapsed ride dates below. We need to get more people involved in updating their city's page, rather than second-guessing the status of rides around the globe ourselves. I'd be much happier for such rides to be simply marked as "Unconfirmed*", with a single asterisk linking to the explanation at the bottom of the page.
• Question marks: I understand your logic because you've explained it to me, but I'd much prefer not to have spaces before question marks as I don't think it's obvious what this means and it goes against standard typographic practice.
• Colouring of Previous rides lists: I coloured these grey so they're less visually cluttering. Thank you for setting up a template for this, but I think its benefit is that they can be styled less obtrusively than the rest of the page. We should primarily be promoting future rides – information on past rides is useful but secondary.

Again, I appreciate your diligence in editing the wiki, and I think we have a similar attention to detail. I think a lot of these issues could be more quickly dealt with if we communicated by phone, instant messaging, Skype, email etc. Email me at [removed from article space by SomeHuman upon moving the discussion here] to let me know how we can get in touch by these means. Best wishes, --Nsayers 21:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Nick:

• Euhh... are you serious about css for the list of rides "putting a drain on resources and bandwidth" ? And in the same paragraph "rather sacrifice pedantry" ? I have known a hex keyboard controlled computer of which I could count the number of physical memory bits by the naked eye. Meanwhile, memory and communications capacities and speeds evolved exponentially in a same direction as the size of things I can distinct on sight :-(
  

Anyway, css classes make sense only if called from different places, not if only once from a single template. Your style arguments being what they may be, we should differentiate between text as '(Previous ride[s]:  )', my '(Suggested:  )' and '(Planned:  )' or your '(Lapsed:  )' on one hand, and their [lists of] date[s] on the other - or at least keep that option open by inline direct css calls from such template.

• Negative letter-spacing is highly questionable for texts, and indeed quite a few graphicists will for a smaller font increase the spacing (relative to the font-size, though the space in points will not, I think). My argument however, is that comma+blank separated dates especially with three-character abbreviated months, fully maintain readability with a decreased letter-spacing. And precisely our series of dates are growing every year... I hope. The word-wrap that can be seen for several locations even on a wide screen, had already got me dreaming about a 'show'/'hide' of each location's series of 'Previous rides', but I think readers wish to compare theirs with other locations quickly.
• I do not want a differentiation of "planned", "suggested" and past unconfirmed rides. Only between the first two: I had stated in bold to get rid of my earlier footnote [1] that had become superfluous! And with my simplifying your explanation from three types towards two with (your great introduction of) * and ** matching the only two lapsed date templates, readers and people involved in updating their city's page alike (and we) will know how to update and when. Do not assume those people to steer clear from 'our' list: it's a wiki. So let's inform them correctly. I wish someone had bothered to do that for a visibly well-kept list when I arrived here for Brussels.
• A blank between questioned item and the question mark may go against "standard typographic practice" only where the item is clearly defined. Questioning [an event having taken place at all on] an entire date however, is not done by plastering the question mark death smack to the year alone.
• Your remark about the colours bedazzles me: Following your earlier modification, I had set the colours for the two types of lapsed dates to grey and near-grey green, both much lighter than the newly suggested/planned/assumed to repeat/confirmed/ date. Moreover, I had later on brought the dark blue 'Previous rides' towards a light near-grey blue so as to get that next ride date really stick out.
  

Let's think for a while (and perhaps have another good look at the list of rides after a [temporary] revert by yourself to my latest versions of the templates). One of these days, I might have to do such revert or re-edit of templates myself because that's the only way to see their effect on the List of rides - then not intended to enforce my style or preferences for a considerable duration, though. If you happen to spot such and need to do some urgent work yourself, I'll be online and try and keep an eye on my discussion page and/or watchlist.

I prefer keeping a discussion in writing (not enough room in my memory) for later purposes, and entirely open for others.

SomeHuman 2010-01-07 00:51-02:06 (GMT)

Instead of our nitty gritting about the 'List of rides' layout or exactly how much information we deem necessary for its readers, the heading of that page also directs the latter to the badly kept Previous rides data and - with now just ONE ride between 2006 and 2010 - Past events. Moreover, the WNBR official global site's main page links only to precisely that utterly outdated 'Past events' page. If you have permission on that intro page or know who has, one could change the link's target to the better maintained 'List of rides'. We should drop probably needless repeats as 'Past rides', and get the practically sortable 'Previous rides data' up-to-date.

We might think about creating a single database (xml?) that allows being perceived in two [or more] ways... In that case, what is this wiki's potential or policy (javascripting for user side, server-side programming [I'm not yet familiar with php but my experience e.g. in js and VB for asp servers might help me get something done here])? A database on a wiki also requires at least a form for user input. All in all a bit of an overkill provided we can limit the data to only two pages.

SomeHuman 2010-01-07 02:46 - 2010-01-12 06:09-07:21 - link update 2010-01-19 22:30 (GMT)

Some work has been done by Nsayers and myself. As the 'Past events' discussion page' states, 'Past events' became a redirect to the improved and [more] completed List of rides. Previous rides data is getting a little better too.

SomeHuman 2010-01-19 22:30

Placeholders '?', capitalization, and a missing template

Nick, you keep removing '?' behind a location wherever a lapsed ride occurs.
To me it is very obvious that a '?' occurs if a date for a next ride is not yet set. The locations at which a ride had been planned or ridden earlier, can just as well get a next ride - even by other organizers who do not wish to update the 'Lapsed' info. There is no reason to depict those locations differently from those that still have to get their first ride or that have a well maintained list of previous rides. At the contrary: by setting a '?' behind some locations but not at others with a missing next ride date, it appears as if the ride location itself is questioned (what else?).

I would appreciate your arguments on talk pages before undoing my improvements, in particular where I went through the trouble of explaining mine (either on the talk page or as an edit comment), not only for the List of rides (see also the here above section) but for instance also for Talk:Past events#New purposes.

There is a problem with the capitalization of the content of the template Previous rides:

• The dates with a capitalized 3-character month are inconsistent with all other 3-character dates, hence sloppy. It is also a highly uncommon date format. It gives a bad example and may instigate editors to place a next ride date in that format, making the page even more sloppy.
• Sometimes the content includes more than just a list of dates, e.g. "Unconfirmed 9 Jun 2007, Unconfirmed 10 Jun 2006" that gets shown as "UNCONFIRMED 9 JUN 2007, UNCONFIRMED 10 JUN 2006". Compare with "Cancelled" or "Rumoured" for lapsed rides. Sloppy and rather ugly.

I think it is best to capitalize the 'PREVIOUS RIDES' title but not what follows. The narrower character however, could best be maintained for the whole especially because the date format remains very readable and the very few occasions with some included term will have only a very short and easily recognized term. Another, minor, argument against capitalization follows hereunder.

We're short of a template: We ask to update 'Lapsed' dates, e.g. by calling these 'Cancelled'. But if one does that, it still stays flagged as 'Lapsed'. See at present Canada: Nelson and France: Nice & Toulouse. Instead of another template, we might put the 'Cancelled' into the list of Previous rides even if for some locations, there would only be a 'Cancelled' in that [extremely short] 'list'). And only if the Previous rides template would no longer capitalize its content: I would hate to see "CANCELLED (PROJET ABANDONNÉ) 10 JUN 2006" for French locations. In fact, proper French does not allow accents on capitalized characters. For the French translation of the title that so far capitalized "/(Précédente manifestations)" with two É, I took care of that by correctly capitalizing that template argument directly in the page.
SomeHuman 2010-02-21 02:04-03:08 (GMT)

User:SomeHuman: The purpose of the list of ride page should be to present a clear, uncluttered list of forthcoming ride dates, and – discreetly – of past rides that have definitely taken place. Also, given it's a long page that should quickly direct interested parties to the ride page they're interested in, the less visual/typographic clutter the better. So, with this in mind...

 ?s before lapsed ride dates are superfluous, messy, and add to the impression that there are a lot of completely uncertain rides – it is quite clear that a question mark means a completely unknown future date, and a lapsed date is just that (with a handy, short, linked explanation below). There is no need to mix the two.

Lists of past rides dates that have been cancelled, abandoned or banned are unnecessary and cluttersome (they should be moved to that ride location's actual page). Uncertain past dates could be suffixed with a ?, or likewise moved to the ride location page.

Non-English translations of simple labels (eg: 'PRECEDENTE MANIFESTATIONS', 'projet abandonné' etc) are extra clutter too – what would happen if we translated every country's language/s on this single English-language page?! If you're really bothered, set up a Fr:Liste des locations page or something.

Capitalisation: I don't understand what you mean by 3-letter capitalised date formats being inconsistent. I set the style of the past rides list to be in pseudo small-caps, to make them less prominent compared to the past dates, more "blocky" and more legible given their smaller size. Please just accept that's the way it's staying for now. I took a lot of your other suggestions on board with this (colour, size, templating).

Missing template? This is just another level of complication this page doesn't need. Add these details on the ride location page.

As to why I haven't replied to your lengthy messages, well, to be frank, life is short and you haven't exactly enamoured yourself to me. I don't get paid for doing this and there are only a few really active editors on this wiki (probably no more than 3-5!). I was quite annoyed at the way you barged in unannounced and decided on a completely new format and purpose for this (and other) pages, changed a lot of ride statuses, and made dates historical without checking them out properly. Marte and I had to do a lot of time-consuming reversions of your early edits. I've given you my contact details and asked to discuss these complex matters with you via telephone, email, IM etc, but you ignored this attempt to communicate in these other, more productive, ways. In short, be nice and I'll be nice in return. --Nsayers 00:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Nick, a '?' before a lapsed ride is no more superfluous than one before a list of previous rides or at a location that had nothing either planned or ridden: it simply indicates that a 'next ride date' still needs to be set [and where to put it in our page]. It does NOT question any ride. Hence, instead of eliminating –to my insight arbitrarily, and at anyone else's first appearance even randomly– one or two kinds, you might consider not using a question mark. It might look prettier and indeed less questioning, less uncertain, if we'd replace the '?' with for instance '...' (these dots might be typed normally, or we could use a template {{DateNotSet}} that produces a series of three perhaps thicker dots close together.

This would also make the really questioning questionmarks stand out, which could better instigate readers to provide the answers.

One does not "mix" a 'not yet set next ride date' with a 'past date without confirmation of its ride' because these are unrelated: the organizers or perhaps riders of the latter will have to provide that information. If they don't, it must not prevent someone to start organizing the next ride. You can't force the new organizers to first clean up the mess their predecessors have left. They need to see just as well as for any other location, that a next ride is to be set. And let's hope they will do just that at the appropriate mark ('?' or '...'). Hard to do if it is not there.

SomeHuman 2010-02-24 23:25 (GMT)

I modified the 'Note to editors' so that the less informed have an idea how to respond, instigating them to mention for instance an url in the edit comment, allowing verification by the habituals and their easier further handling: "Please move any such date for which you have evidence of a ride having taken place, into the location's 'Previous rides', or on the other hand mention it being Cancelled, Abandoned, Banned, or Postponed. Your edit comment may mention e.g. an url as a reference.""

We can't expect that any editor who happens to find a good reference about a past ride date (already flagged 'Lapsed' or not yet), will go and modify the History section of the location's page. Unless e.g. you would like to take care of that all the time, I think it better to leave that most recent (non-)event where it stands. That corresponds with your valid concern about the main purpose of the List of rides: The most recent information –be it a ride, cancellation, abandonment, ban, or postponement– is likely to be very useful for anyone interested to organize a next or first real ride there. In fact, seeing e.g. 'Cancelled' will entice people far more to kickstart one, than merely another empty location or its mere list of previous rides.

Of course, only one exception date may occur for a location, the most recent one. And that has to disappear as soon as a later real ride is verified and put into 'Previous rides'. Thus there can be no clutter in that list. The removed exception needs to be mentioned in the location's History section. But with a more recent real ride, it is very likely by then to have been taken care of by a regular editor for the location, saving work for those maintaining the List of rides.

SomeHuman 2010-02-25 21:02 (GMT)

Once again, I'll come back on the other topics within the next 48 hours. And I still can't agree with you more, about one. Please, be patient. – SomeHuman 2010-02-25 21:02 (GMT)