Talk:Clothing-optional bike ride

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

Cycling

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Nudity Low‑importance

	Nudity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of nudity and naturism 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.NudityWikipedia:WikiProject NudityTemplate:WikiProject Nuditynudity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sydney Body Art Ride

Note: The Sydney Body Art Ride is not a clothing-optional bike ride, a minimum amount of clothiing is required. It is already correctly categorized under the Topfree category. Thanks. Dandelion1 18:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article assessment

I'm a little surprised it falls under anyone's <<B>> criteria: it's mostly just a link farm with little prose. I give it a <<Start>> as it suggests some title headings with which to work but has very limited content. Severo^TC 18:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Revising. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 13:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burning man 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Burning man 2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Clothing-optional bike ride/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

* Too many links, not enough text.

Last edited at 13:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 11:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clothing-optional bike ride. 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:

Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091008010209/http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_06.02.05/op/wanderingeye.html to http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_06.02.05/op/wanderingeye.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:38, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Needs more sources

The article contains only one inline citation, which failed verification when I checked it. The article has been tagged accordingly. SunCrow (talk) 02:52, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]