Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Tour_de_France FYI Turini2 (talk) 13:01, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Following a conversation with @Kiwipete at Template talk:Cycling data BCS where I inferred regarding this, we are starting to see a lot more UCI team codes being re-used, whether it be for equivalent men's and women's teams – e.g. Lidl–Trek (men's team) and Lidl–Trek (women's team) both using LTK (with Lointek, now Sopela, previously having used LTK) – or Alpecin–Premier Tech now using APT, having previously been a code for the XDS Astana Team when the team was known as Astana–Premier Tech.

Category:Cycling team data has almost 1000 options available, which are a combination of UCI team codes, team codes with gender differentiation, and team names. I know I have previously moved the team code pages as and when the teams have changed codes, but in hindsight, page moves may well be reduced as a result of the team code data categories being names, rather than being a combination of the two. It avoids any potential edit wars, as seen on {{Cycling data EFC}} with @Martijnvdam97 and myself, and would avoid any potential issues with editing such templates, as @Turini2 had identified here last year.

Just an exploratory thought from myself to see what other people's thoughts are? Craig(talk) 22:06, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Craig, thanks for bringing our conversation to a wider audience. An initial thought - I think the overall aim of the {{UCI team code}} template is a good one, allowing for team names to change over time. This does assume, though, that the UCI code remains the same. But that assumption now seems to be the problem. We could adopt the practice of using the team's name (presumably its initial name) rather than the UCI code as the key for the template. Even if the name changes over time, the key would stay the same, and new entries, as now, just get added to the relevant {{Cycling data}} template.

@Turini2 - what particular problems did you have that led you to request a change to those two templates? Is anything that's being suggested here likely to solve those problems?

Cheers, Kiwipete (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the tag - I've tried to follow what the UCI calls the teams when making edits. Usually the team codes are not visible in wikipedia, apart from in tables like in UCI Women's Team or UCI WorldTeam.

An issue with using the team's name for the code could still run into issues and confusion. An example - Visma–Lease a Bike (men's team), Visma–Lease a Bike (women's team) and Visma–Lease a Bike Development have very similar names and the men's and women's team have identical UCI codes... Turini2 (talk) 23:03, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

@Kiwipete: The original name for the template (ct) certainly allowed for greater flexibility for the options, but with the change to {{UCI team code}}, it is more likely to restrict. Turini2's query related to TFS, which was the former code of the now Lidl–Trek teams when the team was Trek–Segafredo, and TFS2 was initially used for the women's team. These have a large number of transclusions if memory serves me correctly, which has resulted in the redirects not being removed to date. As a consequence, this has resulted in the FDJ United–Suez team remaining at {{Cycling data FSF}}, which was its 2022 code when known as FDJ–Suez–Futuroscope.

@Turini2: Visma men, Visma women and Visma development/Visma DT would be three logical options, but then again, that could change soon with the media reports regarding Visma potentially stepping back their title sponsorship.

The names would certainly mean less repurposing of redirects, but even then, I don't think it is 100% perfect. Hence the exploratory thought! Craig(talk) 20:44, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

I have nominated all templates in the category "UCI Women's Team navigational boxes" for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Kiwipete (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2026 (UTC)