Jump to content

Talk:Peloton Interactive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 14 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SpartyZag, Mcooley509. Peer reviewers: Jessicawhita, The Social Experimenter.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a photo of a Pelaton bike

[edit]

Hi, just checking to see if anyone has a photo of a Pelaton Bike or Bike+ they could upload? It would help the article. Thanks! BethewordSmith (talk) 21:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 March 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Peloton (exercise equipment company) (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 06:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Peloton (company)Peloton Interactive – The current title is ambiguous with Peloton Technology. feminist (talk) 03:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Weight in KG

[edit]

Anyone have a clue as to the weights of the bikes and treadmills in KG as they already have the LBS listed Lunacats (talk) 14:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

[edit]

Hey John Cummings, The recent edits regarding the recall and change to the subscription fee seem a bit sensationalized and lacked the company's claim that these are temporary.

On the former, I'm not sure that we need to repeat variations of killing and injuring children over and over again. Also, "killing and injuring children" it's technically incorrect because only one child died (not trying to downplay that tragedy but just stating facts) that a more factual statement is "injuring children and killing one" or something of the sort. This topic has a whole section dedicated to it, I'm not sure that we need to duplicate that information in multiple different places.

On the latter, I added a statement from the company clarifying their stance that the fee is a temporary measure due to the passcode feature. I don't know that we need to cut us out in the lede but it might be helpful to clarify that peloton does require a monthly subscription for you for most functionality. Ew3234 (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ew3234 thanks very much for the feedback, I'm struggling to know how to write about it in a way that give it due weight, it seems like a large number of the references are about the machines that killed a child and injured dozens more. I agree the wording needs some work to be clear that 'only' one child was crushed to death, however I think we should not take the company's claims about fees ($480 per year per customer to use a 'premium' safety feature) at face value, especially since they initially resisted the investigation and recall and have done other things that negatively impact their customers. Maybe something like 'the company claims the fees of $480 per year per customer are temporary'. I feel like the recall should be mentioned in the first section since its now a large part of the coverage of the company, but not sure how. This isn't my normal area of writing so I'm not clear on rules around public safety issues. I'll ask around. Thanks again John Cummings (talk) 15:10, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there. Thanks for your reply. I feel like the subject is properly weighted because it has a whole section dedicated to the topic. I agree that we should cover the child's death but it's already covered in the first or second sentence in the recall section. Do you think the subject is covered insufficiently in the article currently? My concern was that your edits emphass the death at each mention of the recall, which felt like undue weight given that the topic is already covered elsewhere in the article.
Regarding the $480 per year, I have to disagree that questioning the truthfulness of this belongs in the article. While you might be right that Peloton is not being honest here, it would violate WP:POV to add that to the article. If you can find a reliable source that shares your concern, we can add it as a WP:INTEXT. But without a source, it's just a uncited POV and cannot be added. It up to the readers to make their own assessment of the truthfulness. Ew3234 (talk) 07:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bricking Flywheel bikes

[edit]

There is some coverage of Peleton bricking Flywheel bikes after the company won a lawsuit. I'm not sure how to write about it in the article.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi John Cummings, there's some information on this in the history section. It's worth noting that Peloton didn't brick the Flywheel bike. Flywheel shut down the product after losing the lawsuit. Flywheel got to exchange their bikes for Pelotons for free. Ew3234 (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Instructor chart/graph?

[edit]

For the amount of media coverage Peloton's instructors get, this article mostly breezes over them. I was thinking some sort of chart of graph listing them with their disciplines and perhaps some other info would be appropriate. At the very least, this would serve as a better target for redirects from instructor articles that fail notability guidelines. Thoughts? Mbinebri (talk) 00:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]