There's a lot of interest in classic lightweights at the moment so it seems sensible to set up a page describing them. However, there's a lot more that could go here, for example:
- More on the history of classic lightweights
- Details of interesting aspects of construction, e.g. lugs.
- A few photographs
- More examples of modern builders.
The sky's the limit - please expand this page as you are able.
Parsonscat (talk) 21:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- This page has been marked for 'speedy deletion' by someone who thinks classic lightweight is a neologism. I disagree. If you carry out a Google search for classic lightweight bicycle, this term comes up a lot.
- Parsonscat (talk) 21:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- Spatulli (talk) keeps trying to have this page deleted but hasn't yet posted to this discussion page. If you are (User:Spatulli), please could you explain your reasons here.
- Parsonscat (talk) 23:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hello, my reasons are (Were) in the prod summary and are now in the AfD, see [1]. Cheers, Spatulli (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Spatulli. The term classic lightweight isn't a neologism - a Google search for 'classic lightweight bicycle' brings up lots of relevant hits.
- Also, the article isn't promoting a particular brand - Hetchins and Mercian are simply the best-known manufacturers of bicycles of this sort. I hope editors will be able to add many more brands.
- Before you try to delete articles, please could you discuss them on the relevant Talk pages. I'm sure you've got the best of intentions, but it's important to gain consensus.
- If you really feel this page is inappropriate, where would you suggest that the information it contains goes?
- Parsonscat (talk) 23:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC)