Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adventure (motorcycle)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Dual-sport motorcycle. Kurykh (talk) 08:45, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure (motorcycle) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is original research and deviates from the accepted types of motorcycles developed through consensus reached by editors and members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorcycling. Motorcycles of this type are adequately covered by the existing Dual-sport motorcycle article. Biker Biker (talk) 22:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - While the article might currently be WP:OR, a cursory search in google shows that the term exists, is used by manufacturers, and looks like a notable class of motorcycle. While more research should be done for the article, it seems like the article could be cleaned up to pass our deletion criteria.

• Redirect to Dual-sport motorcycle per Biker Biker's reasoning. Lithorien (talk) 23:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree the current article is original research (I tagged it as such before it was nominated for deletion); it is also unreferenced. However, I think the subject matter is notable. A quick Google search threw up a number of reliable sources referring to adventure motorcycles: [1], [2], [3], [4] and so on. Its clear that "adventure bike"/"adventure motorcycle" is an accepted term in the wider world, and as such is a valid subject for a Wikipedia article. All that said, the current version of the article needs swift and substantial improvement so it is written based on proper sources, not on what one editor believes. Sparthorse (talk) 22:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to both Lithorien and Sparthorse - the issue is that the list of motorcycle types has been arrived at by discussion and consensus reached over time. Adventure motorcycle is simply another phrase for dual-sport motorcycle and the topic is adequately covered in that article. To be honest I think the best solution is to drop the AfD and boldly redirect the article to the dual-sport article ensuring that any unique and useful content here is carried across. In summary, we don't need two articles covering the same topic. --Biker Biker (talk) 23:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'd support that - it makes sense. I don't nessicarilly agree with having an appropriate list of bikes when new types could be made at any time, but I suspect consensus would be changed to reflect that if it happened. And if this class is already covered by another article, there's no reason not to just redirect to it. Lithorien (talk) 23:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect I agree with Biker Biker's proposal to redirect to Dual-sport motorcycle, perhaps a mention of the semi-synomym Adventure touring would be appropriate there. We should also clean/tighten up Template:Types of motorcycles as necessary (i.e. remove the redlinked Adventure touring. Brianhe (talk) 23:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. The (real) topic is interesting: it is a well established practice in motorcycle marketing to invent new categories for old bikes. "Crossover" and "adventure" are the hottest trends these days. If you look at the definitions of yesterday's darlings, "streetfighter" and "naked bike", in types of motorcycles, you'll note that the supposed differences that make these unique are indefensible. Casually, yes if you don't think too hard, you can believe they describe characteristics that exist, but cross examine the definition and you come up with the plain fact that they're synonyms for "standard". Some day we might want to write an article on the practice the marketing of motorcycles to the wealthy, urban, first world rider, and redirect there, but for now "adventure" is simply a flavor of dual-sport motorcycle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect -- The article is too poor for me to belive there is anything to merge. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:43, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A large percentage of Adventure motorcycles do not have significant or in some cases any off road capability so are not ideally represented by the dual sport categorization. The "Adventure" categorization of motorcycles is in general use in the motorcycle press. Eg. [5], [6], [7] The dual sport categorization is normally applied to smaller displacement motorcycles that have a 50/50 mix of off road and on road capability, not to heavier Adventure bikes with large displacement engines and no or limited off pavement capability. --Versys guy (talk) 00:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you cite a source that says "dual sport" means 50/50 mix of off road and on road capability? Ever source I've looked at says dual sports have always varied along a spectrum. There are also dual sports at the other end of the scale that, while road legal, are very slow and uncomfortable on the road, yet we don't put them in a special category. Wikipedia:Content forking explains the fundamental principle at issue here: forking off "adventure" bikes because they approach the subject with a different point of view undermines neutrality. Placing adventure bikes side-by-side with other types of dual sports in the same article allows the reader to look at them in a balanced context. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cycle World award for best dual-sport of 2010 was given to KTM 990, probably the definitive Adventure bike, if such a thing exists. I think this is good evidence to support article merge as discussed below. — Brianhe (talk) 02:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The International Journal of Motorcycle Studies has a broad, scholarly survey of adventure motorcycling: Adventure Motorcycling: The Tourist Gaze. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Dual-sprt motorcycle.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:21, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. The useful article Dennis has linked makes it apparent Adventure motorcycling might be a notable phenomenon. Based on the sources and the arguments above, Adventure as a subclass of motorcycle seems a content fork of dual-sport motorcycle. BusterD (talk) 23:42, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.