Talk:Velodrome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Overly technical?
IMHO this article is too technical for average readers. Should something be done? Also, the length of paragraphs makes it difficult to read. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 17:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't see what makes it overly technical. The article describes the length of the track using metric measurements, bank angles and the purpose of the painted markings (4th paragraph). Thewalrus 22:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
practical suggestion: a world map with melodromes locations
-
- see http://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_velodromes.html Thoglette (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know how to do this so could someone please add to the Australia velodrome list: Launceston, Tasmania. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.74.220 (talk) 05:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Could you get some one with strong physics to check this. It has force being balanced by acceleration, and I think the use of 'centrifugal' is incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.9.147.18 (talk) 10:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] List of Velodromes
Not every velodrome is listed here, for example Tempe velodrome in sydney, its an actual banked track 333m round, does that mean it should be on the list also? just wanting to know what classifies and what doesnt. thanks! Urbanique —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.192.2 (talk) 05:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Someone's added Tempe, but there are a lot missing. Thoglette (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

