Author Topic: "WHIP" the HAM'R  (Read 19271 times)

Re: "WHIP" the HAM'R
« Reply #100 on: December 19, 2017, 11:21:50 am »
I checked the history of the deletions; reason given is that 'record is a age-category only therefore doesn't belong on this page'. Well, some of the 'records' are only there because they are recognised by one body, they aren't absolute records.

Yeah, it is petty.

I think I'll go and reverse the deletion.

[edit] I checked the page - the page is supposed to be a list of records certified by (list of bodies - including HAMR). Alicia's record is certified by HAMR.

<i>Marmite slave</i>

grahamparks

  • London N19
    • My Instagram
Re: "WHIP" the HAM'R
« Reply #101 on: December 19, 2017, 11:59:14 am »
The omission of Alicia is probably justified given she's never held an overall gender record (has she?) and the page in question ("List of Cycling Records") is meant to summarise major achievements only. I think the solution to this is to make a proper Year Record page that can cover everyone that's had a go.

(Also the sentences about Alicia appear to have been added by a user named Alicia and re-added by a user named TarzanRides. Editing pages about yourself is generally considered bad form)

dogtrousers

  • Pantaloon
Re: "WHIP" the HAM'R
« Reply #102 on: December 19, 2017, 02:42:53 pm »
I hope this gets sorted out.  I think a little bit of text about the splurge of records (KT, AS and AC) is justified. 
However the section beginning "If not for a freak encounter with a dog which broke her collarbone, she would have ..." seems to be a rather out of place piece of dog-ate-my-homeworkism.  I'd delete that if I had any interest in/knowledge of Wikipedia editing.  Which I don't.

Re: "WHIP" the HAM'R
« Reply #103 on: December 19, 2017, 05:57:31 pm »
dogtrousers, I agree with you - but total removal of her record is not justified - not if you read the description of the page at the top.

<i>Marmite slave</i>

dogtrousers

  • Pantaloon
Re: "WHIP" the HAM'R
« Reply #104 on: December 21, 2017, 03:05:46 pm »
Yes, I think that all of those records that came so close together should be mentioned.  Alicia held (holds?) an officially sanctioned record, as does (did?) Kajsa.  So an explanation of that rather fertile period is warranted.  But leave out the bit about the dog.