Talk:Urban cycling

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Should we tell people to wear them? Well let's just put it thus: mandating it by law is an incredibly bad idea. And if cyclists are supposed to wear helmets why not pedestrians? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Over here biking helmets helmets are said to be quite effective, so until convinced otherwise I think telling people to use them is useful advice. The primary reason not to have legislation mandating their use is that it tends to decrease biking, which is far worse than not using helmets (for the one not getting exercise, for fellow cyclists being fewer and thus more surprising at the intersections, and for the pedestrians run over by a to be biker instead driving a car). Why are helmets bad, except for defining you as an outsider? My biking helmet has no blinders. --LPfi (talk) 22:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In any case, that is WV:OBVIOUS. This article should assume that the reader already knows the basics about cycling, and wants advice for how to get around on a bike in a city away from home. /Yvwv (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, so should we mention helmets? I now watched the Youtube presentation and I buy the argument: we should not scare people. In Amsterdam they mark you as an out-of-towner, according to our present wording, while in some countries they are mandated by law. My conclusion is our readers could turn up somewhere where helmet use is different than at home and the subject thus is worth a few words. I think we should not warn people not to use them. --LPfi (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If and when you are in some specific types of accident, a helmet might help. But cyclists aren't the only people who can get into this kind of accident (and helmets are rarely actually tested for those accidents). But helmets increase the risk of accidents as many drivers act more recklessly towards cyclists with a helmet. Plus wearing a helmet or even more "cycling clothes" means that the time advantage of cycling inner-urban distances evaporates as you have to get them on and off and put them somewhere. Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:04, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is the other kind of test, analysing accidents that did happen. The 2/3 figure is from such research (about 60–75 % if memory serves, but no need to be specific). I suppose the recklessness or drivers, and the things making them reckless, vary by locality. Here I have not noticed any difference in how I am treated; I suppose drivers give way or do not based on other factors, and I'd be surprised if a helmet provokes truly reckless driving. Carrying a helmet along is an issue, but the protection it provides is not changed by that. I use my helmet when I have it handy, which does not hinder me from biking when I do not. --LPfi (talk) 11:17, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should there be a section with cities renowned for urban cycling?[edit]

Or would that be a needlessly long list that can never be complete? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At first glance it seems like a good idea to me, but I don't know whether it would be manageable. We could try adding one and see how it goes. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]