Talk:Utility bicycle

message: I've never heard the term Ute bike.  Is it an Australian term?  A play on words?  (a Ute is an Aussie term for what's known in North America as a pickup truck)  Maybe an Aussie out there could clarify that for me.  I'm going to request a citation, and if one doesn't come, and if no one can at least give some explanation on the talk page, I think we should remove the term.
--Keithonearth (talk) 22:37, 3 December 2008
:OK, I'm taking the term down, it's been more than long enough.  --Keithonearth (talk) 04:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ute?

message: Hi you all, after further research, I would start organizing by listing the following at the end of actual Design section, linking articles witch would remain independent! Commentaries please!
=== Design ===
===== Types of utility bicycles =====
Designed for commuting, errands, delivery and general urban transport.
*English roadster bicycle
*Dutch bicycle
*European city bicycle
*Folding bicycle
*Cargo bicycle
*Porteur bicycle
===== Technologies =====
*Internal Hub Gearing
*Hub dynamo
*Lighting systems
∞  Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly, some organization if necessary, and perhaps some mergers as well. The above looks like a good start. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and within utility bicycle,  should'ent we combine Present day use and  Use? ∞ Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 14:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of contents sample: 

message: ===== Types of utility bicycles =====
Designed for commuting, errands, delivery and general urban transport.
*English roadster bicycle
*Dutch bicycle
*European city bicycle
*Folding bicycle
*Cargo bicycle
*Porteur bicycle
===== Technologies =====
*Internal Hub Gearing
*Hub dynamo
*Lighting systems
∞  Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly, some organization if necessary, and perhaps some mergers as well. The above looks like a good start. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and within utility bicycle,  should'ent we combine Present day use and  Use? ∞ Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 14:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Design 

message: *Internal Hub Gearing
*Hub dynamo
*Lighting systems
∞  Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly, some organization if necessary, and perhaps some mergers as well. The above looks like a good start. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and within utility bicycle,  should'ent we combine Present day use and  Use? ∞ Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 14:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technologies 

message: I find it very difficult to accept that "The vast majority of bicycles can be found in the developing world" [Herlihy] when, in my experience, most first-world households have bicycles. I see Herlihy uses the name "clunker" to describe these cycles, and that's what I remember from my times in Holland. I'd add mention of it myself except I'm unsure of the difference between the utility and the rather particular Dutch utility cycle and this article doesn't help me. MalcolmMcDonald (talk) 20:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clunker bicycle 

message: I propose that Utility bicycle be merged into City bicycle. I think that the content in the Utility bicycle article can easily be explained in the context of City bicycle, and the City bicycle article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Utility bicycle will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. João Pimentel Ferreira (talk) 16:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: A not unreasonable proposal, but perhaps a merge in the reverse direction is broader, in part because the term 'utility' is broader and without the connotations Joao distantly hints at. It is also the older article. Klbrain (talk) 21:52, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

text: I support the proposal as a City bicycle is a type of Utility bicycle and a Utility bicycle is, "Designed for commuting, errands, delivery and general urban transport." I agree that Utility bicycle is a more appropriate target. Based on discussion here, it appears this revised proposal would work for . ~Kvng (talk) 16:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 22:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I find this very confusing. Is a utility bike unsuitable for traveling more than this, or if you hit 4 miles suddenly it doesn't count as a utility bike? In general, the intro is somewhat discouraging. Almost it sounds like it was written by a road bike manufacturer.
:I believe this to be the result of bad faith edits undertaken by a user of another site using this page to support an argument. As a user of a utility bike for distances of up to 40 miles a day I don't think this is at all correct! Ed1993 (talk) 16:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: "no more than 3-4 miles a day"