Talk:Roller coaster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
1 |
Contents |
[edit] Inventor
Today's birthdays include LaMarcus Adna Thompson, who is credited on this page as being the first to patent a roller coaster. However, the wikipedia page for Thompson claims that John G. Taylor was the first, and this claim is backed up by the material at http://www.toledosattic.org/details_item.asp?key=369&did=34. I think this needs to be sorted out; it appears that, while Thompson may have built the first roller coaster, his patent may not have been the first. Doug (talk) 14:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New York Times article: "When Brain Trauma Is at the Other End Of the Thrill Ride"
Interesting article from the New York Times (free registration required): http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02E6DB1F3FF936A15755C0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1 Although it was originally published on June 25, 2002, this NYT article might be useful for this WP article but unfortunately I do not time at the moment to integrate it. Hi There (talk) 03:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your helpful suggestion, but we already have an appropriate article from 2003 linked up - one from the Brain Injury Association of America - which probably carries a little bit more weight. However, if there is a specific piece of information in the NYTimes piece that you would like to present as missing in the WP article (or the one at Amusement park accidents, then feel free to point out the section to us. SpikeJones (talk) 13:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Roller Coasters February Collaboration
The biggest issue with this article is that there are only ten references supporting it and much of the article is unreferenced. We need to find books and websites to support the unreferenced statements.
I have only had time look over the lead and history sections and have found issues with both of them. The following are issues that should be corrected:
- Lead section is too short per WP:LEAD. The lead section needs to be three to four paragraphs, but the current version barely has two.
- Ares I "first practical application of the roller coaster" needs a reference
Etymology sub-section should be upgraded to its own section. It really is not appropriate in the History section.
- Done Coaster1983 (talk) 23:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- The Innovations and Steel Roller Coasters subsections do not have any references supporting them.
Coaster1983 (talk) 00:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] History section used to start History of the roller coaster article
I've used the history section here to start the History of the roller coaster article, and have added to that the "firsts" section that was formerly included with List of roller coaster records. In order to differentiate between the history section in this article and the new history article itself, we'll have to add to that article, and also whittle down the history section in this article if we can. --Skylights76 (talk) 13:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mitch Hawker's polls re-added as external link
The external link to Mitch Hawker's roller coaster polls was removed in the past, probably because it violated WP policy for excessive advertising. I think his poll is important, so I emailed him and told him I wanted to add a link to his polls, but he has too many ads on his page. He agreed to remove one of the blocks of Google ads. I think it looks better now, so I've added the link back. I also want to start an article on his polls (which in case you didn't know are well known in the roller coaster enthusiast community and regarded as more sophisticated and valid than the Golden Tickets), and I'd like to add his poll results to individual coaster articles, much as we currently do with the Golden Tickets data. --Skylights76 (talk) 10:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Before you go too crazy, you may need to provide non-blog, unbiased 3rd-party references to his polls to show that it meets WP's notability requirements. So while it may be well known in the RC enthusiast community, it may not be well-known outside of that circle enough to qualify for inclusion here or as its own article. SpikeJones (talk) 11:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)