From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
_pictogram.svg/50px-Cycling_(road)_pictogram.svg.png) |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling. WikiProject Cycling is an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the discussion. |
| Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Uniforms
Can't wait to see the new Discovery Channel cycling uniforms! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.194.23.182 (talk) 02:58, October 26, 2004
- me too , where will find the discovery channel cycling web page and news about cycling? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.162.154.65 (talk) 12:25, October 26, 2004
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed merge - where the decision was taken to merge. If you wish to make further comment, please start a new discussion here, or invoke a wider discussion at WikiProject Cycling
This page should be merged with the US Postal page as they ARE the same team, just with a different sponsor. Aussie King Pin 10:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- I slightly (not strongly) disagree, they are the same team; I believe that the test of time and the growth of Wikipedia will allow separate articles. And, that there is value in having the Category:Historical cycling teams category and its list of former primary sponsors. To some degree the lineage is: Discovery Channel > U.S. Postal > Motorola > 7-Eleven (I could be wrong), but there is value in keeping these "periods of time" and sponsorship separate. For example, I like that the Postal article as a listing of (most) all past team members and their years of service. Personally, I would have like to see us have a separate ONCE-Eroski article (from Liberty-Segurus and Astana-Wurth) [past-to-present teams] or separate Phonak Hearing Systems vs. iShares (present-to-future) articles. I know that this is not always the norm (e.g., American football teams that move from one city to another, usually only have one article). So if we merge, I would at least like to see a 1-2 paragraph reference to the accomplishments of the US Postal squads over time and not simply 1-2 sentences that same (and this team was onced named US Postal). djharrity 15:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Well if we were going to merge the articles we wouldn't just ignore the former history of the team if we were going to treat the team as a continuous team. Aussie King Pin 09:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support the merge, edit in the US Postal info as a 'History' section. This is just like the Montreal Expos and Washington Nationals, which also needs merging. Tromboneguy0186 08:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
So far I have 3 editiors supporting the change and 1 against it. If I get 5 or more supports without another objection I will begin merging the pages onto the Discovery Channel one. But be warned, i'm a new editior and I will probably do it poorly Aussie King Pin 11:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
- Who are the 3 editors?; I only see comments from you and me. djharrity
Sorry, the other two are on the US Postal page. Aussie King Pin 23:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, agree; if done in a similar fashion as Team CSC. djharrity
Actually the lineage is Discovery Channel > U.S. Postal > Montgomery Bell > Subaru-Montgomery
Who wrote the above? Aussie King Pin 11:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree they sould be merged as they are the same team but with a different name and sponsor but, with the same riders.(-Lance)
I agree w/ djharrity. No sports team is really the same from year-to-year, and football teams maintain a lineage by being bought and sold as companies. If you want to define the team by the money, you have to define the team by the title sponsor. If you want to define the team by Lance Armstrong, it's (I believe) Motorola->Cofidis->US Postal->Disco. But that's just silly. If it's by following around the majority of teammates and the DS, Illes Baleares and Banesto should be merged, etc., etc., etc. I personally think users (especially those not familiar with the team lineage) will be least confused if the pages aren't merged. --Nbrahms 23:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Which is why we would mention US Postal riders and team history in the article so people wouldn't get confused. Aussie King Pin 07:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- I've done a lot of work towards including all that is in the current USPS Cycling article and any/all MAJOR wins that are associated with the Postal history. In addition, I've included an area on 'Early history' with Montgomery-Bell and Subaru-Montgomery. If no one has an objection, I believe we can delete all the content from the US Postal (cycling) article and switch it to only a redirect by adding "#REDIRECT: Discovery Channel Pro Cycling Team" into the page. djharrity July 6.
[edit] Contradiction?
On February 10, 2007 Discovery Channel announced that it will not renew its sponsorship of the team at the end of the 2007 season.[1] The decison to end its sponsorship is believed to be related to the sacking of Discovery Networks president Billy Campbell by David Zaslav, the new president of Discovery Communications the same day. On August 10, 2007, for reasons that have not been made clear, the team announced that it would cease operations at the end of the year.[2]
It says that they aren't renewing sponsorhip. So why is it reasons not made clear why they are ceasing operations? ĞavinŤing 12:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- The article doesn't really make it clear, but the question is to why and how a team with 8 victories in the last 9 Tours de France couldn't attract a new sponsor. SeveroTC 16:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DiscoveryTeamLogo.gif
Image:DiscoveryTeamLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
