Jump to content

Talk:BMW R1200GS

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

Safety issues

[edit]

I propose to remove the following tag on Safety Issues This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. I suspect many readers would be interested and surprised to learn of the plethora of faults on this bike. Any views? Arrivisto (talk) 10:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Last year the Automobiles Project had a unanimous consensus for a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles/Archive 39#Recalls-notability "Recalls are mentioned in articles when they have received widespread attention in the MSM. This does not include single MSM articles mentioning them as they are announced. For instance http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/holden-issues-a-record-13-recalls-including-barina-trax-and-colorado7/story-fnkgdhrc-1227090048958 would not qualify, whereas the Toyota floor mat/throttle issue or the Ford burning cruise control presumably would." I don't think this article should include mention of any recalls except those that have received non-routine attention in non-motorcycling publications, like major newspapers and magazines, and we should try to put that in the context of how many recalls we typically expect for any bike, per WP:UNDUE. We shouldn't call the bike prone to recalls without an expert to cite saying so, per WP:NOR.

The problem is made very obvious by this piece of editorializing and original research: "...the R1200GS has be prone[opinion] to numerous[opinion] safety issues. The UK DVSA has issued nine separate vehicle recalls covering the front brakes". The recall section relies totally on primary sources and uses them to draw conclusions not stated in the sources. We should only be citing secondary sources in a case like this.

The website iSeeCars.com had an analysis of 30 years of data for cars, ranking the number of recalls per number of cars sold. This is better than misleading, context-free statements like "numerous recalls", but it still doesn't account for the difference between relatively trivial recalls, like a leaky final drive versus ABS failure. With voluntary recalls in the US, some brands are more proactive than others; they would undertake a larger number of recalls out of caution, while another brand would wait until they were forced into a recall. The upshot is that no Wikipedia editor has the ability to judge whether a bike had a lot of recalls or a few. We must be guided by our sources. Mention those the mainstream media judge significant, and attribute any opinions about whether a bike was "prone to safety issue" to a recognized expert.

I can't find any evidence in the main stream media that the R1200GS received any notice besides routine announcements. And I can't find any evidence in the motorcycling media that the bike has had an exceptional recall record. So rather than just keep the tag, we should delete the whole section. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taking some of your points on board, I have made an interim edit of the paragraph in the interest of promoting neutrality. I'm still not entirely convinced that deletion is the best option, as the number of recalls is (arguably) notably large. Also, one prominent journalist was killed when riding the bike at its South African launch, and I've heard this may have been the result of a "tank-slapper". Arrivisto (talk) 09:45, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If the number of recalls is arguably large, then you should present that argument. I'm willing to believe it, but not sight unseen. Where did you hear the crash of Kevin Ash was caused by a tank slapper? I know there was speculation (in unreliable sources) that the bike was to blame, but have any facts supported that? At all? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Even though the Briton Kevin Ash died abroad, the UK reserves the right to hold a coroner's inquest. (This happened in the Helen Smith case, and after the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster). However, there appear to be no reports of any Ash inquest either in the UK or the RSA, which is perhaps a little disturbing. Arrivisto (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Disturbing... in your opinion. But nothing we would want to include in a Wikipedia article?

You said the number of recalls is arguably large. If it is arguable, can you please state the argument? What is the expected number of recalls for a new model like this? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(1) "Disturbing... in your opinion." I have now seen that there actually was a UK inquest, with a finding of "accidental death" ( see [23]); but the coroner says that he could not give full reasons "due to insufficient evidence". BMW are keeping schtum. So, disturbing indeed!
(2) "What is the expected number of recalls ...?" Zero would be ideal. Arrivisto (talk) 11:42, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Disturbing to you, I guess. We don't put anything in Wikipedia articles because of one editor's feelings. Motorcycles have been known to fall down. It wasn't like this was the first time Keven Ash had ever gone down on a bike. I'm not saying I know for a fact that head shake wasn't the cause, but I have just as much reason to guess that the cause was an oil patch on the road, or gravel, or a hundred other things that make bikes go down. Had Ash not been hit by the bike following him, he'd be alive.

Asserting that motorcycles are expected to have zero recalls is arbitrary, and totally made-up. It's a personal opinion that belongs on your Twitter feed or personal blog, but it's of no use on Wikipedia. It's just a big waste of our time to even be discussing such opinions. Based on objective sources, *some* recalls are normal for any brand, and early in the release cycle of a new model we expect to see more of them, and then they taper off. I honestly have no idea if 9 is a large or small number. Without comparative data, there's no way to say.

Singling out this model for attention based on a these recalls, when we don't scour primary sources for every recall on all other bikes, is a violation of WP:UNDUE. This is why we agreed in the past to only mention recalls that were given prominent (non-routine) coverage in the mainstream media, not bike magazines.

The current version is a big improvement. It more accurately states that the supposed safety issues were clustered around the launch and have since not led to any known problems with the bike after the initial period. It's very strange to call a journalist's accidental death a "popular culture" event. I think all of these items -- Ash, Neal Peart, and Hairy Bikers -- belong in the History section, mentioned chronologically. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on BMW R1200GS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BMW_R1200GS&oldid=1205441758"