Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Wing Coaster/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 23:38, 5 January 2013 [1].
Wing Coaster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Dom497 (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured article because I believe the article meets all the FA criteria. Dom497 (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delegate's comment - I suggest you read this because there is an ugly fused participle in the second sentence of the Lead, and there is "where...where" in the first sentence. There are redundancies later – as in "around the world" and "Due to the fact that" – and clichés, as in "not only...but also". There are Manual of Style issues such as "above/on", and bad grammar as in "The design of a Wing Coaster is different to many traditional steel roller coaster around the world." This candidate has little hope of promotion until the prose (and I suspect the comprehensiveness) receives a great deal of attention. Graham Colm (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I fixed the structure issues.--Dom497 (talk) 15:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sorry, the prose is not at the "professional standard" required of a FA-level article. I would expect an article this short to have been immaculately proofread. Samples only:
- "The design of a Wing Coaster differs from many traditional steel roller coaster."
- "Also, because there is nothing on top of the track and only steel beams holding each ends of the train together,"
- "a restraint that sits on the riders waist"
- additionally, I doubt criteria 1b (comprehensive) and 1c (well-researched) been met. A Google and Highbeam search reveals several sources that have not been used:
- Popular Mechanics article
- Investment Business Weekly, April 15 1992, "$20 Million Wild Eagle Takes Flight at Dollywood; First Wing Coaster in the U.S. Soars to Rave Reviews"
- Manufacturing Close-Up, March 31 2012, "$20 Million Wild Eagle Soars at Dollywood"
- The News Sun - Waukegan (IL), May 11 2012, "X Flight takes wing"
- The News Sun, May 12 2012, "Test riding the steel beast"
- nothing useful to add from Steve Alcorn's 2010 book Theme Park Design?
- aren't there any writeups or mentions in Funworld, Amusement Today, or RollerCoaster! magazines?
- I would expect the ride summary table to have more information like track length, ride time, max speed, features, or, if not convenient to fit in a table, to be discussed somewhere in the article.
- what's the weight of a train? What g-forces are typically experienced by riders?
Oppose, for two main reasons. First, much of the article reads like an advertisement for Bolliger & Mabillard. Second, the article is clearly incomplete. Roller coasters are not just machines that are designed and installed. They are ridden by people, a concept which is entirely absent from this article. Is this design comfortable? Is it fun? Is it safe? I expected to see a Reception section or something similar, and I was disappointed to find it absent. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 19:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delegate's closing comment - Clearly, there is more work to be done before this article is ready to be featured – it would be best to do this away from the pressures of FAC. Graham Colm (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.