81-year-old becomes oldest woman to cycle from Land’s End to John O’Groats

When they're not simply using the terms interchangeably, most sources seem to consider the [publicity] 'caravan' to be a subset of the 'convoy', which starts with the police riders ahead of it. A couple even consider there to be multiple 'caravans' within the 'convoy' (the publicity caravan, a caravan of race-related vehicles ahead of the race, another caravan of race-related vehicles behind the race). Given that the words are roughly interchangeable in English ('convoy' just having a slightly more 'organised' connotation to it), plus the element of translation across languages, it's perhaps not surprising if there's no hard and fast rule about how they're applied.

I cannot edit my post; the need for a clear distinction between the two is not for semantics, but for those of us who are convoy drivers, who are licensed for that role. We take it very seriously and can incur fines and punishment from the UCI for wrongdoing. Those in front, in the caravan, are just normal everyday drivers and do not have the experience of driving in a race convoy, sometimes at speed, with riders all around us. Therefore, should not be taking risks on any part of the route.

Your wording on this needs to be clear, you've mixed up two different parts of the race. The vehicle was from the publicity caravan (Out in front of the race), similar to what you get at the Tour de France, they throw out merchandise to roadside fans, but later in the article, you say "Tour du Rwanda’s official convoy". The convoy on a UCI race is the vehicles which travel behind the race "in convoy" which include the team cars, officals cars, neutral service...etc. You need to have clear distinction between the two. This was not a convoy vehicle, it was a caravan vehicle.

“when the government confirmed that Nottinghamshire County Council will receive £6.7 million for active travel over the next four years, with part of this funding to be used to repair the greenway” Wow - 6.7 million for the WHOLE council for a WHOLE four years for active travel. And once this one shared route has been repaired and the barriers paid for, there could be a WHOLE five million left for the rest of the county. For four years! Astonishingly generous. Imagine how much excellent infrastructure they will build.

Standard journalist protection against any possible action for libel or defamation when mentioning any accusation that hasn't been proven in court. Obviously it's pretty unlikely that an unidentified person (it doesn't even say in which country the incident occurred) would be taking legal action over this but it's good practice always to include it. While there is no reason to believe Swenson has made up the story there are always different perspectives: the driver or passenger might well claim that the door was already open before he arrived and he wasn't paying attention. Unless/until a case is proved in court or by admission it remains an allegation and so it's safest to add the "allegedly" proviso.

Swenson was hit by "a motorist’s car door, which was 'allegedly' swung open into his path." Allegedly swung open? Is there some reason to believe Swenson is making up this story?

And to show the sleeves with the dummy in the riding position.

The people who would listen to them aren't much of the problem. What're needed are for [insert high profile sportsball people of your choice] to do this.

Get some help you tedious fool.

No, now everybody can see the space after your opening bracket!