Talk:Raptor (Cedar Point)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

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

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

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.
  • I have added a quote box similar to Firehawk (roller coaster) and Nighthawk (roller coaster), is that ok?--Astros4477 (talk) 20:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I'm afraid not. Citing directly from the Manual of Style: Do not enclose block quotations in quotation marks (and especially avoid decorative quotation marks in normal use, such as those provided by the {{cquote}} template, which are reserved for pull quotes). This seems pretty clear, so they will have to come out. I would just use the standard blockquote formatting style... Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
      •  Fixed
• 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.
  • Media Day is a one time event. I think if we put 'A' before it, it would imply that it might happen more than once.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. 'Media day' isn't a term I've heard in the UK and it just seems a bit promotional to me, but I suppose it might be a cultural thing. We can leave this in. Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
• 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.
  • There is no reliable source for it, mostly forums. I'll keep trying though.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:34, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
  • As I said, all I could find is a thread on PointBuzz. I know this can't be used in the article. However, Walt, the person that posted this on PointBuzz is a very reliable source. I contribute to the forum regularly and him and another guy are the ones in charge.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
    • I'm probably about to say that which you expect, but WP:V and WP:Reliable sources dictate the rules on this one. Unless it has been published by a reliable, secondary source, it will have to come out (I've had various problems in my own articles with this type of thing and sometimes curse that wiki-chestnut WP:Verifiability, not truth). Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
      •  Done
• 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)

I have addressed and left comments to everything above.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

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)
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)

Yes, done.--Astros4477 (talk) 01:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

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)

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)