Jump to content

Talk:Raptor (Cedar Point)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Good articleRaptor (Cedar Point) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 28, 2012Good article nomineeListed

Image

Someone keeps changing the image to a version which was taken on a cloudy, rainy day, from behind a raindrop-splattered plastic window, with poor lighting. The effect when thumbnailed is a big gray blob in which absolutely nothing is distinguishable. I have tried to explain this in edit summaries but it keeps getting reverted, so I'm going to try here. Does anyone have any reason why the other image should be preferred? (ESkog)(Talk) 19:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming they think it shows the layout of the entire ride better. But like you said, everything else with that pic is bad. I support sticking with the one you like. --Rehcsif 21:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second of its kind?

By that, does it mean the second inverted coaster? I know that's wrong, as 2 versions of Batman - the ride as well as Top Gun came out during or before 1993, a year befor raptor.

Awards section

I edited the awards section so it better matches the Amusement Today award boxes on other coaster pages. Rpachico 15:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia sections

Please read WP:TRIVIA for our Manual of Style guideline about long lists of random factoids. It doesn't belong here. Take it to a fan blog or something. (ESkog)(Talk) 03:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this page listed on 3O. There hasn't been any discussion here, so there's really no reason to give a third opinion. Nevertheless, I'll just say that although you're right that trivia sections are discouraged, it'd probably be best to turn the items listed into paragraphs rather than just eliminate them outright. — HelloAnnyong [ t · c ] 04:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the trivia and facts section of listed bullet points. Lists should be avoided at all costs and they facts have been on here for years and remained uncited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TPOLMike (talk • contribs) 22:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ride Time

Ride duration is indeed 2:32.

Raptor opened in May 1994 with a ride time of 2 minutes and 16 seconds. In 1999, the ride duration was extended to 2 minutes and 32 seconds, after the ride maintenance department slowed down the chain speed of the lift hill (the stats on the official Cedar Point web site still reflect the opening statistics). It currently takes approximately 30 seconds to ascend the lift hill. This is also the basis for the drop in ridership in 2000. The fact is, the ride moves slower.

To verify, call Cedar Point Park Operations at 419-626-2301 direct. Ask for Rides Manager Matt Ozosky (although Wiki does not like Trivia sections... here's a tidbit: Ozosky was on the opening Raptor crew in 1994. He knows the ride well).

What a CP manager says and what is verifiable are two different things. You MUST remember that everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable by a reliable, proven source. CedarPoint.com is an accurate source. If you can locate a different verifiable source, then the issue is debatable. Until then, this discussion is mute, as the ride time is 2min 16sec. RCDB and UltimateRoller Coaster also list the ride time at 2:16. TPOLMike (talk) 04:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Image

I would like to change the image to the one I recently added to the gallery, effectively switching them; however, I wanted to get other opinions the matter. The image I would like to change it to is the one of the Raptor passing over the Cedar Point midway. Thoughts? Roar888 (talk) 05:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Raptor (Cedar Point)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Meetthefeebles (talk · contribs) 15:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review. Give me a few hours to get something together... Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll make a start:

  • Disambiguation: none found
  • External links: No obvious problems.
  • Image check: the infobox image is fine, so is the smaller image in the first section. The Thompson image is from flickr and is correctly licensed and the stratosphere image is also fine.
  • Quick fail issues: no obvious tags or cleanup banners, images are fine, references evident, no evidence of edit-warring...

I'll leave comments as I read through:

  • Small grammar nitpick: 'Inverted' is capitalised in the lede for some reason.
    •  Fixed
  • "Instead of featuring a short layout designed to fit in a compact space like Batman: The Ride, Raptor was designed with a unique 3,790-foot (1,160 m) layout ": this sentence is a word-for-word copy of the text in source one and should be rewritten to avoid any possible WP:Copyvio issues.
    •  Done
  • Rest of the lede seems fine. Ditto the infobox.
  • Might be worth adding the name of the source to give the quote announcing the building of Raptor? "Park management said during a press conference..." or similar, just to prevent any potential WP:NPOV issues.
  • Carrousel, in English, should have one 'r' I think (I seem to recall that it has two 'r's in French). Might also be worth blue linking this.
    •  Done
  • Is 'Midway' this? If so, suggest blue linking as I don't know what a midway is?
    •  Done
  • Suggest Adding 'A' before 'Media Day'– I can see that 'Media Day' is a term from the source but I'm not sure it really means a lot. I would also suggest changing the 'then' in the sentence to 'before' as it would read a touch better.
  • Take the word 'Jamming' out of 'Jamming DJ's': this is a marketing term and is not encyclopedic. In fact, I'd just stop that sentence at "used on the weekends."
    •  Done
  • "In 2007, the park added On-ride video cameras where riders could purchase a DVD of their ride at the photo booth. However, this has since been removed." Do we have a reference for this sentence? I also think that 'on-ride' shouldn't be capitalised.
  • Suggest changing 'negatively affected' to 'adversely affected'?
    •  Done
  • Suggest adding the convert template to the minimum height requirement (54 inches (1.4 m))?
    •  Done
  • Is there a reason why the word Raptor in the operation section is italicized? It isn't elsewhere in the article. Suggest removal of italics to maintain consistency.
    •  Done
  • I'd suggest adding a comma between 'day' and 'reopening' in the incidents section.
    •  Done

Reference check: I've checked about three quarters of the references and they all seem fine.

Overall, there are a few small issues listed above but this one isn't a million miles away. I'll place on hold pending the response of the nominator. Meetthefeebles (talk) 18:18, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed and left comments to everything above.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the slight delay in getting back to this– work took an unexpectedly busy turn over the last couple of days and time has been short. This one is almost there; just a couple of remaining issues to consider and we're done. Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just re-reading prior to a final review and I have one last quibble. In the lede, we have "Raptor was designed with a larger, 3,790-foot (1,160 m) layout making it the tallest, fastest and longest inverted roller coaster." Should this sentence end 'in the world', perhaps? At present it lacks context. Meetthefeebles (talk) 23:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, done.--Astros4477 (talk) 01:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A well written, well-referenced, well-illustrated article.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

My only concern, as indeed I have with all of the roller-coaster articles I've come across, is that they seem rather short on content, but I am not entirely sure what more can be realistically added. With that in mind, I've assessed this article against the requirements of WP:WIAGA and, in the light of improvements carried out, I'm awarding GA-status. Well done! Please consider reviewing an article against the GA criteria. Meetthefeebles (talk) 19:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And yes I know they can be pretty short. However just like you said, there's not much to be written.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:59, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Raptor (Cedar Point). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 10:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Height requirement

I am a Cedar point historian and I know for a fact that the raptor was the first ride in Cedar point history to have a 54 inch height requirement. In the past, majority of their rides had height requirements with a maximum of 48 inches.

If this Ozosky user was part of the Cedar point opening crew, then he could indeed verify this. 2600:1009:B07D:7D65:3D8A:9DA8:7061:B11E (talk) 01:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Raptor_(Cedar_Point)&oldid=1206027671"