Talk:Scorpion (roller coaster)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 10:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Scorpion roller coaster in 2011
Scorpion roller coaster in 2011
  • Comment: Though under the 5 QPQ requirement, will review another nomination soon. To disclose, the article Python was recently featured on DYK, though I'm not sure if there is a rule to disallow its reappearance in another nomination.

Improved to Good Article status by Adog (talk). Self-nominated at 05:30, 26 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Adog: You don't have to do a QPQ. Do you want to include an image? Corachow (talk) 19:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Corachow: Added an image found in the infobox of the article, will do a DYK review in my off-time then as not required in this nomination. I appreciate the review! Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:49, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Adog: The image is freely licensed, clear and used in the article, therefore it is approved. You can do a QPQ you insist. Corachow (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, but all of these hooks tell me everything I need to know; there's no reason to click on the article to learn more. Especially for an image slot, you want to "reel in" the reader with some interesting, surprising, or otherwise well-worded "hook". Yoninah (talk) 20:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT 3 ... that Scorpion at Busch Gardens Tampa Bay is the oldest roller coaster in Florida to feature an inversion? (RCDB - Florida's roller coasters aligned by opening date)
ALT 4 ... that a lawsuit filed against Busch Gardens Tampa Bay alleged a model was falsely imprisoned after not being allowed to get off the Scorpion roller coaster (pictured)? (via Newspapers.com)
  • Hello Yoninah, the DYKN could be used without the image, I only did it off the consideration of the nominator. Though if you're looking for alternative hooks I may also supply them. These facts can be added in the article thereafter if of importance. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:15, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Adog. Yes, please add the ALT3 and ALT4 facts to the article and I'll re-review it. Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Adog: thank you. ALT4 hook ref is verified and cited inline. But I don't see the ALT3 hook fact in the source given. Where does it say it's an inversion rollercoaster? Yoninah (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the RCDB table is arranged by opening date, Scorpion is the second-to-last to appear to open in Florida that is still operational. The oldest operating roller coaster being that of Space Mountain at Walt Disney World, which does not feature any inversions. Adog (Talk・Cont) 21:24, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yoninah forgot ping. Adog (Talk・Cont) 21:54, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Adog: but you can't expect me to look up Space Mountain and figure out that Scorpion is the oldest inversion rollercoaster in Florida. The source you use needs to say it. Yoninah (talk) 22:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Adog: OK, I'm striking ALT3 and also removing the source from the article because it doesn't verify the fact. Please add another source or remove that sentence from the article. I tweaked ALT4.
  • Pinging reviewer Corachow to review ALT4 after the sourcing issue is taken care of. Yoninah (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT4 looks good to me, but there's still a citation needed tag. I'll approve it once the issue is dealt with. Corachow (talk) 17:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Corachow: I believe I already removed the Cn tag with the statement. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry about that, I was looking at an earlier version. ALT4 is good to go. Corachow (talk) 19:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Corachow: All good, I skimmed the article and questioned if there was a Cn tag myself because there's a lot of times I overlook the smallest of tags. Thought there might've been another. Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Yoninah: Also I appreciate the input you've given and dedicated towards my lengthy response time. Thank you both kindly. Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents[edit]

There are a number of problems with the "incidents" section.

First, the title of the section is plural, implying that there were more than one incident. Yet the text only describes one.

Second, the incident described was at least 26 years ago (the lawsuit was filed in 1994). That's plenty of time to resolve the suit, no matter what various detractors of the American legal system might say. But the description stops with the complaint (the plaintiff's claims). What happened? Was the suit dismissed? Did the plaintiff win at trial? Was there a settlement (seems likely, but...).

--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 18:28, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Piledhigheranddeeper: Thank you for your concerns. According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Standards, notable incidents are covered within their own section in roller coaster articles or amusement parks denoted by "Incidents" or "Incidents and accidents", similar to that of individual airlines or airport articles. The denotation of pluralism I think comes from the potential for there to be other notable incidents or accidents that lay within the subject area, but I'm not entirely sure.
As for your concerns in terms of updating, I've attempted before the GA nom and thereafter when nominating for DYK to find any information that follows the lawsuit on Newspapers.com or individual newspaper websites, however, it appears that such was just a one-and-done story and the outcome is lost to history unless otherwise known. I can attempt to research such again in the meantime.
The importance of the section is to highlight any notable incidents or accidents (as in accordance with the see also section) that is newsworthy towards the subject either by guest's failure to comply with safety guidelines, negligence by the park, underlying health conditions that adversely affect a rider, or an act of God. There are hundreds of incidents and accidents that happen at amusement parks and on roller coasters each year, but examples such as this highlighted show notable incidents that have (or alleged to have) occurred in a neutral perspective. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:11, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite possible that there was a settlement whose terms included silence on the part of the parties; thus, no mention in newspapers (another possibility is that the suit went nowhere, but a grandstanding lawyer issued a press release when the complaint was filed). A quick review of the court file index for the county where the park is located might show what happened, however cryptically (dismissed for lack of prosecution, dismissed by mutual agreement, etc.). --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 19:23, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Piledhigheranddeeper: Thank you for the guidance, as I hadn't actually thought about that. I think I've found what you make have been seeking in the Hillsborough County Court search. It appears within the 12-page transcript (unknown jargon to me) that the court findings were dismissed and no charges were due. I'm not sure if there is a policy against posting publically available information on the wiki in terms of the court system, but if not, I could link you to the case number to verify my observation. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: Also link you towards this conversation as you may have some relevant input regarding the tag placed. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Adog: Congratulations on your search! You can try using {{cite court}} to cite the transcript. GoingBatty (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: Oh I meant to verify that my observation was correct for the findings. Thank you for providing that piece of information as well. Irregardless I will add the reference into the article, sorry for the confusion as I'm also busy studying. All the best, Adog (Talk・Cont) 00:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if done correctly, but the statement is now verifiable in the article. Please take a look when there is time, if the issue is resolved, I appreciate your collaboration as I've learned a couple of new things. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 01:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Scorpion_(roller_coaster)&oldid=1195606931"