Talk:McDonald's Cycle Center

McDonald's Cycle Center is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 19, 2014.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 22, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
October 9, 2008	Good topic candidate	Promoted
August 5, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
August 25, 2009	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
October 31, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted
June 19, 2021	Featured article review	Demoted
January 25, 2022	Featured topic removal candidate	Demoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 14, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that McDonald's Cycle Center* in Chicago, Illinois provides lockers, showers, a snack bar, bike repair, and bike rental to bicycle commuters?*
Current status: Former featured article

Environment: Green vehicle Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Green vehicle task force.

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cycling Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:McDonald's Cycle Center/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Just one issue with prose that will not preclude the article from passing:

Details "Awnings produce shade for the interior." This seems to be stated a little matter-of-factly. If something can be explained about how the awnings work or why they were needed this would help.

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Very well done and informative article. No vital improvements necessary at the time of review. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 22:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Priorities[edit]

So there is an extensive article on a cycle centre but no Cycling in the United States article. Balanced content in WP overall is probably more important than acheiving FA status for this article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't work on Cycling articles. I am the director of WP:CHICAGO and work on Chicago articles. If you would like to bring Cycling in the United States to FA-status you are free to do so. I will continue to work on Chicago articles and as they benefit other projects, I hope those projects will assist.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia cannot make editors work on certain topics. Editors will work on topics in which they take an interest. Also, it is harder to write articles about broader subjects. For example, we have 124 Featured articles and 32 Featured lists on video-game-related topics, but the article Video game is in a shoddy state. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:44, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit[edit]

Should these be in quotation marks as they sound like direct quotes: Pro-cycling and environmentalist journalists in publications well beyond the Chicago metropolitan area have described the Cycle Center as "exemplary", "impressive", "unique" and "ground-breaking".[2][12] Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was trying to paraphrase the passages. If it is over the top, feel free to rework it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image request[edit]

Checking refs for the copyedit I saw a photo of the Cycle Center in the dusk, lit from within. It was a really nice shot and I imagine it would not be too hard to duplicate (need a tripod). Would something like that work for the Critical review section (where it is described as gem-like)? I would need to hunt to find the picture, but can if it is needed. Just an idea, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS It is the bottom most picture here Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Torsodog (talk · contribs) is a much better photographer than I and he lives a block or two away from the location in question. I'll make sure he knows about your wishes.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - just to be clear it is no hurry - just saw the area without an image and thought it would be a good shot. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is something I can definitely do. I'll try to replicate the photo ASAP (and since this is actually a photo at dusk, I can take it after work instead of having to wait until the weekend like usual!). I'll probably wait until this rain finally clears up though, so give me a couple of days. --Torsodog^Talk 21:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much - as I said it is no hurry, but I look forward to seeing the image. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:40, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't replicate the photo exactly (I'm not really sure how that got that angle, actually), but I did what I could. Is this what you had in mind? Also, I moved around the images a bit and removed the aerial view that really didn't add anything to the article. Thoughts? --Torsodog^Talk 04:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks great - both the new image and the layout. I just thought it would be nice to have an image of the center lit from within at night. I like it better than the one in the website I originally saw - more focus on the center itself. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification requested[edit]

"it has served as a demonstration location for efforts to lobby for further bicycle accommodations ..."

The link goes to demonstration (protest), but probably what's really meant here is 'model' or 'example' or 'demonstration project', isn't it? Colonies Chris (talk) 09:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

I have marked the "If McDonald's is serious, menu needs a makeover" reference as being a dead link. I checked the Wayback Machine, and it doesn't look like there are any archives of the relevant page. The link will need to be removed, but then the citation information for the reference will be insufficient, so the page number in the physical copy of the article in the newspaper will need to be retrieved and added. Do you have access to the physical newspaper, Tony? Neelix (talk) 02:56, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Thanks, ZeroInfluence! Neelix (talk) 16:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on McDonald's Cycle Center. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 12:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on McDonald's Cycle Center. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 00:55, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FA concerns[edit]

After reviewing this article, I am concerned that this article no longer fulfils the featured article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:

There are lots of "when?" templates from September 2019 that need to be resolved.
There are four citations in this sentence, which should be reduced: "The city and its Cycle Center are considered exemplary by other cities in pursuit of covered, secure bicycle parking near public transportation."
The article has lots of WP:PROMO material. Some examples are:
- "Repair services are deeply discounted."
- "Showers and lockers were initially available to non-members for a $1 fee,[33] but by 2009, the fee had been raised to $3."
- "The bike tour travels to Barack Obama's home in the Kenwood community area, the place of his and Michelle Obama's marriage and other culturally related destinations."
- "By supporting cycling as an alternate form of transportation, it will help reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality and promote the health benefits of cycling."

Is anyone interested in bringing this article back to FA standards? Z1720 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, I just came across this now, even though this is long after the FA demotion. It seems @SnowFire has removed most, if not all, of the {{when}} tags last September. For promotional material, I agree most of these are promotional, but the second sub-point just seems to illustrate a drastic increase in fees, rather than being promotional. A greater concern is the sentence The city and its Cycle Center are considered exemplary by other cities..., which does seem to be a little weasely to me (which other cities have cited Chicago and its Cycle Center as exemplary?). Another issue of note is that part of the article seems to be coatracking of tangentially related topics, such as cycling in Chicago and cycle centers in other cities.

This seems like it's B-class, and perhaps it can become a GA with some tweaks, but I agree with the decision to demote this as an FA. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:31, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closed, becoming police facility[edit]

This facility has been closed since September, and it is being converted into a police facility.

https://chi.streetsblog.org/2023/03/24/confirmed-millennium-park-bike-station-will-now-only-serve-cops-instead-of-commuters/ YAOMTC (talk) 03:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I finally just edited it myself. Still needs work though. YAOMTC (talk) 04:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]