Jump to content

Talk:Wicked Cyclone

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

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 15:02, 14 January 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Stub" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Amusement Parks}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Inaccuracies

[edit]

The Cyclone is not the only wooden coaster with a restriction of 54". The Colossos at Heide-Park has a restriction of 140 cm which is approximentally 55 inches.

The sentence, "More intense than Thunderbolt (Six Flags New England), it shakes and rattles much more, giving riders a more thrilling experience" violates POV, I believe, and should be substantiated with a reference or removed from this article. robertjohnsonrj 20:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It rattles all right. I wouldn't call it "thrilling", per se. More like "ow." Timetrial3141592 01:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've located and linked to a 2008 review of the coaster, but I've been able to locate little about it after that date.Graham1973 (talk) 02:31, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it ever shook/rattled more than Thunderbolt because I never went on Thunderbolt till last week; but I have a long history with the Cyclone, and I can say that it doesn't rattle nearly as much as it used to now that it has the steel track. However, I noticed that the paragraph that talks about the steel track is written in future tense. The steel track is in place now and the ride has been open for a few months. It appears to be very popular, giving an extremely smooth ride. (I realize all of this is "original research" but only wanted to point out that the intense/rattling statement, which was dubious before, is now outdated anyway.) 24.91.245.200 (talk) 15:04, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]