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
No, not all bicycles are portable because they can be extremely heavy - cargo bikes, tandems and Boris bikes, for example.
Warden (
talk)
11:29, 10 July 2011 (UTC)reply
Speedy Keep The nomination does not propose deletion. As for the topic, a portable bicycle is one that can be carried. This is a separate concept from folding as there are bicycles which can be carried which do not fold. Some of may simply be lightweight; others may break into pieces like the modern Moultons. The
Bickerton was explicitly designed and named as "portable". That was especially lightweight and came with a carrying bag so that you could actually carry it. For a good example of a source which covers the topic in detail, please see Bicycle: The History.
Warden (
talk)
11:29, 10 July 2011 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep--you could presumably merge both articles, but my first instinct would be that
portable bicycle is the main article, with
folding bicycle as a sub-article if there's enough material. At any rate, the place for this discussion is the respective talk pages, not AfD.
Meelar(talk)18:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep. Folding bicycles are one approach to making bicycles portable, but as a topic notable and substantive enough to have their own article. --
Lambiam11:14, 11 July 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.