Talk:Remco Evenepoel

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group.

Belgium

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Cycling Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Football Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merckx comparison[edit]

@Fram and Raleigh80Z90Faema69: As the editor who originally added this sentence, I must say, I agree with Fram that it should remain as it is for now. Simply due to the fact that we don't have any sources to back up a claim of "unfair". Neither are we allowed to make such a statement ourselves. I will point out however that the opposite of what Raleigh80Z90Faema69 suggests might actually be true. GCN had a show a while back where they quite convincingly pointed out that so far, Evenepoel is actually better than Merckx was at the same age. You can find that video here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:53, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough but it's happened so many other times where comparisons to the greatest of all time.... I actually just found an article where Merckx is showing his support.... It seemed relevant so I added it but if it gets removed being as there won't be a Giro this year anyways I won't complain Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Raleigh80Z90Faema69: I am very unsure if it is relevant enough, especially in the lead. Also, you need to pay more attention to how you enter the sources, the one you have there is not formatted properly at all... Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When you say broken source did you mean it does not work? I just copied and pasted this: https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/eddy-merckx-backs-remco-evenepoel-to-shine-at-giro-ditalia/

and I understand on the formatting which is a pain to do from my phone but I thought it at least went to the article but if it didn't then I apologize and thank you for removing it.

As far as relevance within the lead of the article it seems irresponsible to say atop an article that a rider who has won zero Grand Tours is comparable to the greatest cyclist to ever participate in this sport.... If anything that should not be in the lead and if it is included in the lead then something more should follow it such as why it is unfair to Remco to say such things (the comparison to Merckx's early career doesn't matter because being a dominant junior doesn't always mean he'll be as dominant on the top level) But idk, at the very least including what Merckx has to say about the kid is worth including if you're going to have the lead of the article claiming 'hey this guy is going to be one of the all time greats' when he hasn't proven he can beat Kruijswijk, Bernal, Pogacar, Froome, Thomas or Dumoulin..... Yet.... But if anything the Grand Tours this year should be fun to watch if they even get raced Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 16:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Raleigh80Z90Faema69: Yes, you should use proper templates for sources, with title etc. Obviously, that is hard to do on a phone, so I can only recommend not editing on a phone, but at the very least on a tablet or a laptop. Also, try to pay more attention to grammar, the sentence you added had several mistakes in it. As to the content: We can only write what is backed up by sources. The fact that he is compared to Merckx a lot can be found often. If that is fair or not is not our job to determine... Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ha... Good point.... The comparisons to Merckx have been numerous over the years and exactly zero riders can legitimately be 'compared' to Merckx.... And I'm a novelist so I generally don't make many grammatical errors within an edit on Wikipedia, elsewhere I could care less but I'll go and re-read that deleted post to check.... if so it was likely because I was in a hurry which is obviously something you don't want to do while editing Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was my post Zwerg: In fact Merckx himself has even commented on Evenepoel's prospects for winning Grand Tours saying he doesn't see why he can't handle three week race, "Remco has what we call a 'big suitcase', so there is a lot of power in that man....

The only error I found was that I forgot the 'a' in the section 'he doesn't see why he can't handle (a) three week race.... Aside from that it's not really crude as all that big suitcase stuff was the quote from Merckx..... Though it also could have been worded better and I'll take more time re-reading before I publish an edit in the future Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 22:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Raleigh80Z90Faema69: No worries, it wasn't that bad. Please keep in mind though that we are not supposed to use abbreviations in Wikipedia prose, so it should be "does not see". Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zwerg Nase - true story as encyclopedia language certainly is not common prose or even intelligent conversation... Where I always question is the when paraphrasing from an article trying to keep the language and demeanor as legitimate as possible as half of that was taken from the article without quotes... And hopefully with this worldwide pandemic going on some serious improvement can be made to the TDF's up until the Armstrong era....the modern era Tours are written brilliantly and are close to flawless by whoever is contributing but 1969 was one of the most important events in Tour history and it's barely 6 chopped up paragraphs loosely piled atop one another....as are several others as I'm certain you are aware. Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 10:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Raleigh80Z90Faema69: Yes, this is an ongoing project, but it takes time. 1998 was promoted to Good Article recently and I will probably nominate it for Featured Article today. 1989 became Featured last year and was on the main page in July. My next project is 1990, which I am currently working on. After that, I will most likely turn towards 1985 and 1986 next. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zwerg Nase - yeah the 1998 is a good article... I remember maybe 2 years ago 96, 97, 98 and the Armstrong years were all blank and I briefly added some content to a few of them and then I saw that someone really took the time to re-write all of 1998 and it's what every 'Race Overview' article should look like.... I then added to some in the late 70's and rewrote all of 1984 (which was as informative as the 1969 article at the time) as well as 1976 and 1990 which I thought were exiting Tours... I remember 1989 being featured maybe a year ago as well and was impressed with it.... Strangely it is arguably less historic than 1986 yet clearly more time was taken in the content and detail of the article. Imo 86 is like 69 for these Wikipedia articles, a lot went on in these Tours aside from the dominance of 1 in 69 and the dominance of 2 in 86, yet both of the articles fall short of telling most of the story Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 11:12, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ZwergNase Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 11:13, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Strade Bianche[edit]

He didn't take part in this race and so he did not place 12th. On August 1, 2020, he was busy winning the 1st overall at Vuelta a Burgos by placing 3rd on stage 5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:B530:5090:2018:AF3E:82EA:EA1F (talk) 22:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vuelta España Controversy[edit]

I removed edits that speculated that the flat was planned, but the videos cited need sources. Has anyone seen these, and are any sources claiming verification? KJoroworo (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]