Talk:Tall bike

Image Request

I know I've seen an image of the 1800s tall bike used for lighting lamps, but I cannot find it. Its age should make it public domain, so if someone can upload an link a copy, that would help the article a lot. Phidauex 20:20, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See: http://www.johnnypayphone.net/tallbikes/ Johnnypayphone 18:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've added one image, and will add a few more to the wikimedia commons as I get time, and verify dates for licencing purposes. This is exactly what I was hoping to find! Phidauex 17:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misnamed

I haven't ever heard the term "tall bike" used to refer to bikes like this. Boston, where I live, has S.C.U.L, an active "chopper" club, and "chopper" s eems to be the most consistent word for this kind of modified bike.

The diction of the original article and its poster's IP address suggest that the original poster spoke Dutch; I wonder if this is a term that is peculiar to the Netherlands. I suggest that the article should be renamed chopper (bicycle) with "tall bike" listed as a regional term. Tim Pierce 04:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Portland, Oregon, I've always heard "chopper" used as a general term to describe modified bikes (esp. those with extra long forks). "Tall bike" is the correct term to describe these extra tall bicycles, and its usage is widespread here. (In fact, 3 "tall bikes" were for sale at portland.craigslist.com about 2 months ago.) See this video of some local "tall bike" jousting. Quaternion 06:11, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In Chicago we also use chopper specifically for those with teh long forks. The tall bike pictured here is common here as well. The general term here might be "freak bike". See the rat patrol site for more pictures and such. Tedernst | talk 06:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling me in, folks! Tim Pierce 13:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Naming of this sort of thing is pretty sporadic and localized. Some call any bicycle that isn't in stock form a 'chopper', where others use chopper to describe extended fork bikes only. Chopper is a very broad term, and the tall bike, even if considered a type of chopper, could then be considered only one of many types. If a 'chopper' page is built, it could either link here, or this could be merged as a type of chopper. But without a tremendous amount of additional article material, this page should not be renamed 'chopper'.

Also, don't forget the significance of the historical 'tall bikes' used for lamp lighting. These raised frame bicycles are similar in design to modern tall bikes, and are certainly not choppers, since they were intentionally built that way for a purpose. Phidauex 05:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided an external link to my website on the history of the tallbike. There are many pictures of vintage tallbikes there including actual lamplighters. Please feel free to use those pictures to fulfill the image request (I'm not sure how to do this). I'd suggest that the highwheeler pictured should be replaced with a vintage, first-generation tallbike.

On semantics: The concept of this bicycle as being "tall" at all is a product of this century. At the time of their invention all road travelers were at that height, on carriages, horseback, or pennyfarthings. Bikes that tall were called "Ordinaries". It was the modern shortbike that was unique and called a "Dwarf Safety". Shortbikes at that time even had a mounting peg on the rear stay because it was simply how bikes were mounted.

The lamplighter itself only arose after the previous bike for the job, the pennyfarthing, fell out of favor and was often outlawed. The term "chopper" (referring to a part of the stock frame being chopped or cut) arose in motorcycle culture out of the "bobber" (which emphasized streamlining and minimalism). In years of visiting mutant bike clubs in America and beyond, as well as full-time commuting on a tallbike, I have never ever heard the term "chopper" used to refer to a tallbike unless it was a tall-chopper. That terminology is the result of the unique bicycle hacker culture of Boston, which mainly focuses on long-fork bikes with other shapes being rarer. I've heard tallbikes referred to as "upside-down bikes" (because of the 1964 Popular Mechanics article featured on my page), "clown bikes", "bicilocos", "highbikes", "treebikes" (because you needed a tree to get on one), "double-talls", "double (or triple etc) stacks", but the use of "chopper" to refer to anything besides a chopped-fork bicycle is only used in its archaic (though technically correct) sense in the Boston area.

Note: An assistant is not needed to dismount or mount these bikes, unless they are of such a height that the freemount is not possible (and even that ceiling has been overcome by Atomic Zombie's Project Skywalker). JohnnyPayphone

Thanks for the perspective, Johnny. I'll try to work more of this history into the main article as I get time. The name 'tall bike' seems the most appropriate to me, because of wide usage, and a general understanding. I don't think any living person would, when viewing a tall bike, claim that it was a regular size bicycle, because it was similar in size to a pennyfarthing. The relationship to pennyfarthings and 'dwarf safeties' should be noted, however.

On a personal note, I find riding a pennyfarthing to be a distinctly different experience than a 'tall bike'. Tall bikes geometry and mechanics mean they behave very much like a regular bicycle, even at extraordinary heights. Pennyfarthings, however, are a whole different beast, handling, in my opinion, more like a giant unicycle than anything else.

Thanks again for the images and historical information, it'll help improve this article quite a bit! Phidauex 17:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the name has been settled. Let me add anyway: I know I saw Cyclecide using double-frame tall bikes in a 2000 show, and I'm pretty sure they called them "tall bikes". By contrast they had an extra long bike that they called a chopper. I'm curious if anyone knows the history of the double-frame variety tall bikes. It might also be worth noting that tall bikes have become something of a bike-culture icon. A friend told me about and showed me a picture of a bicycle store in Brooklyn vandalized after using a tall bike in a promotion. The vandals had written "Bike Culture Not For Sale" on the store window. --Elijah 17:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No specifics

The "tall" aspect of tall bike is not quantified in any way. Height figures would be good. -Rolypolyman 04:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notable? Merge?

If we can't find sources that meet WP:N, then should we look at merging the article into Bike? --Ronz (talk) 17:35, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately we don't have to look far, there's a convenient list of them at the foot of Tall bike. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None that meet WP:GNG. The problem is lack of significant coverage. --Ronz (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What utter rubbish. Do you claim the BBC isn't independent? That the Minneapolis story, of a city looking to enact specific legislation against tall bikes, isn't significantly relatd to the topic? Andy Dingley (talk) 19:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not saying any of that.

WP:GNG: "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material." --Ronz (talk) 19:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you only discovered this article by stalking me, so that you could revert even more of my edits, but which of the three main references cited do you think aren't presenting the subject as their main focus? Did you even read them? If you insist that tall bikes are so non-notable, then I suggest that you take it to AfD, so that you can be properly trouted in a public forum. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:19, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please focus on content.

To me, the tcdailyplanet.net is the closest to WP:GNG. I don't think it suffices. --Ronz (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://del.icio.us/tag/tallbike
Triggered by \bicio\.us\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]