Talk:Floorless Coaster

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Floorless Coaster article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Floorless Coaster 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
Date	Process	Result
September 9, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Amusement Parks: Roller Coasters High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Amusement parks 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.Amusement ParksWikipedia:WikiProject Amusement ParksTemplate:WikiProject Amusement Parksamusement park articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Roller Coasters task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Floorless Coaster definition

this page needs more of an explanation of what makes a floorless rollercoaster; I understand that, obviously, it is one without a floor, but Oblivion and Air (at alton towers) seems similar to some of the ones on this page, which still seem to have tracks. I don't fully understand the difference. Saccerzd 11:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC) edit: is it just one where your feet are free, with nothing under them? how does Air differ from this? thank you Saccerzd 11:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A floorless roller coaster is defined as a coaster with trains that ride above the track and allow the passenger's legs to dangle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.80.234 (talk) 16:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A good thing to add would be information on safety and maintenance. What makes them so reliable? And are their height restrictions in place against people who might be TOO tall and thus could risk getting their legs or feet caught? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.110.250 (talk) 04:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional picture(s)

Perhaps it would be good to have a photograph from the point of view of a rider, looking down at the legs and showing the absence of a floor, with the track beneath. Of course, the photograph would have to be taken with the ride stationary or at least not going very fast. 108.16.192.234 (talk) 02:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Floorless Coaster/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: John F. Lewis (talk · contribs) 20:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
The Lead section should summarize the article and not introduce new topics and be weighty. Also move the Quote in 'Design' to the bottom and expand on the quote. In addition could anything regarding Safety and Mechanics be moved into their own independent section?
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Seems mostly reliable, Could there be any alternatives to YouTube videos? They are not a major concern, but one thing I would like to raise in this case.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Captions to the images are not that good, Please expand them according to WP:CAPTION. Also if possible, Add WP:ALT to images.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Solve the issues above and the article should then be a good fit for GA.

All issues addressed. Passed.

Capitalisation

As I understand it, "floorless coaster" is a generic term, not a brand name, so the article should be titled "Floorless coaster", without the capital C, per WP:MOSCAPS. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:08, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is actually the name of a model manufactured by Bolliger & Mabillard. See their site. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying that. However, the 'Design' section uses the term "floorless coaster" without the capitalisation. Also, the article mentions that such roller coasters tend to have a number of inversions: does this really have anything to do with it being a floorless coaster"? Other types of roller coaster also have inversions, and there's no intrinsic reason a floorless one has to have them. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the capitalisation error. Also, the reason why the inversion thing is mentioned in the article is because currently all the coasters under this model have a number of inversions; it is not saying that only this model has a lot of inversions.--Dom497 (talk) 22:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Floorless Coaster. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060825055856/http://www.bolliger-mabillard.com/products/floorless_en.aspx to http://www.bolliger-mabillard.com/products/floorless_en.aspx

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) 12:17, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proper noun?

I understand that "Floorless Coaster" is a type of roller coaster by B&M and Intamin. However, it appears that this is talking about the floorless coaster type as a whole, not the specific models by B&M & Intamin. If that is the case, I think this page should be moved to Floorless coaster, to harmonize it with other articles about general coaster types. epicgenius (talk) 19:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You probably want to read User talk:Parsecboy#Recent page moves. There was an extended discussion there regarding several recent moves. Intamin isn't even mentioned in this article, by the way. We can discuss further, but catch up first and then post back here. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We will want to see instances of floorless coaster being used as a generic term. Seeing as only B&M makes a Floorless Coaster, I tend to treat it as the name of a model and therefore a proper noun, which should remain capitalized.—JlACEer (talk) 03:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not realize that this was such a tricky issue. My bad - I swore I saw Intamin or another company mentioned. I don't think this should be moved anymore. epicgenius (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Yes, there is another company mentioned, Maurer AG, which developed a prototype that never entered production. I think the tipping point on when it becomes a category is when reliable sources are commonly referring to it as such. Not one or two sources, or even a handful of sources, but a significant number of them. Out of the recent moves that happened and were reverted, Wing Coaster is probably the only one that truly exists as a category. It could exist as two articles (one that covers the B&M model, and one that covers the category). But right now, that article is 90% focused on the B&M model. I saw you recently moved it back, but you may want to read that discussion I linked to above. I spent time redoing its lead, and it looks like that was undone. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your post on Talk:Wing Coaster. We can continue the discussion there if needed. I'm not worried about it at the moment. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This type of roller coaster has never been manufactered by Instamin and it has only been manufactured by Bollinger & Mabillard. You are saying that you under stand that this type of roller coaster has been manufactured by Bolinger & Mabillard and Instamin. But this type of roller coaster has never been manufactured by Instamin. 2001:569:BC17:C100:745C:C5AD:8ABB:AE69 (talk) 02:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the article

The tile of the article used to be "Floorless Roller Coaster" and now it is changed to "Floorless Coaster". 2001:569:BC17:C100:745C:C5AD:8ABB:AE69 (talk) 02:33, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]