Talk:Nitro (Imagicaa)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNitro (Imagicaa) 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
DateProcessResult
May 14, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 30, 2014.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Nitro (pictured) is a roller coaster that features five inversions during each cycle of two and a half minutes?

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Nitro (Adlabs Imagica)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BrandonWu (talk · contribs) 01:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC) This article should be interesting! I will try and finish this article within a 7 day time frame, if you don't mind Dom! (I see that Dom is currently on a wikibreak, so I will not start the review until he is off his break, and I will not be like myself most of the time, quickfailing the article if the nominator doesn't address the comments I make within 7 days) WooHoo! • Talk to me! 01:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@BrandonWu: You may review the article :) . --Dom497 (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    I will begin a separate prose review.
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    Lead could be longer, but it looks good for GA.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Good job!
    B. Focused:
    Fantastic!
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    No bias because its a roller coaster :P.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. 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 if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    Unfortunately, there is only 1 image, so I can't pass this criteria.

Sorry, rushed through the review. 1 image is okay, as even only no images is okay as of this page.

  1. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    See below for a source and prose review. Passed! Great job!


Prose Review[edit]

  • Lead

Could be a bit longer, but it seems good for GA.

  • History

Good job!

  • Ride experience

"Once the train is loaded and secured, the steel floor separates drops and the gate in front of the train opens."

Is it supposed to be "...the steel floor separates and drops..." or something else, because I unfortunately know nothing about roller coasters. :P

"The train then makes a banked turn the left leading into the first of the interlocking corkscrews. After a banked to the right and slight turn to the left, the train goes through the second corkscrew."

Shouldn't this be "...the train then makes a banked turn to the left..." and "After a banked turn to the right..."
  • Characteristics

Good job!

  • Reception

Looks good, but is there any awards like on this page?

Nope, roller coaster is brand new so it has not been ranked yet.--Dom497 (talk) 03:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall great job!

Source Review[edit]

  • After spotchecking the sources, they are good on my terms.
Per the first two paragraphs under the "References" section here, YouTube videos can be used a references case-by-case. Videos by Theme Park Review are generally reliable because all he does is sticks a camera on the roller coaster and records...nothing unreliable about that! You should also take note that almost all roller coaster GA's use YouTube as a reference for the purpose on describing the layout (as well as RCDB). YouTube is even included in a Featured Article, SheiKra.--Dom497 (talk) 11:19, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Will pass the article in about 2 or so hours! Great job on the article! WooHoo! • Talk to me! 22:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

@BrandonWu: Ok, I understand that your fresh out of the gates with GA reviews so I'll help you out a bit. I'm going to recommend you read this essay as it will really help create an understanding for what the criteria is and what it isn't. In this case, criteria 6b should be a pass. Just because there is one picture, it doesn't mean the article can't become a GA. An article with NO photos can still be promoted to GA. As long as someone has made an attempt to find pictures (searching for pictures under a free license) it's a pass.--Dom497 (talk) 23:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dom497:Oh, I'm sorry. I was rushing to write this as I was on the bus to school :P. WooHoo! • Talk to me! 01:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just remember not review article's half fast (You can review articles on the bus just make sure to do it like you've been trained). It will only get you into trouble down the road. As long as you take your time and review the article properly, everyone will love you. :P --Dom497 (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments addressed. :) --Dom497 (talk) 03:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I've been busy in real life studying for tests and taking tests (I'm in Grade 7), so I haven't done much work on this review. Hopefully I'll continue with the source review on Thursday/Friday. WooHoo! • Talk to me! 21:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. :) --Dom497 (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube[edit]

YouTube is not a reference. I cannot believe I am even having to come here and say this. YouTube is a video sharing site. It is not a reference. --John (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@John: I'd appreciate if you showed proof that supports of your opinion (you know, showing proof that something isn't a reference or at least proof that would lead to your opinion is a lot better than just saying it's not a reference). First of all, per the second paragraph here (under the reference section), YouTube IS a reference. (The entire "reference" section in that article is actually a good read). Videos by Theme Park Review are generally reliable because all he does is sticks a camera on the roller coaster and records...nothing unreliable about that. You should also take note that almost all roller coaster GA's use YouTube as a reference for the purpose on describing the layout (as well as RCDB that usually supports the video; all in turn, meets Wiki guidelines.). YouTube is even included in a Featured Article, SheiKra. If you are still really against having YouTube as a ref, I'll just put it as an external link.--Dom497 (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@John: So you came online today but posted no response. I'm going to take it that you have nothing else to say and I will go ahead and soon remove the tag you added.--Dom497 (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am still against using a YouTube video as a source. --John (talk) 05:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@John:, @Dom497: If you guys don't mind me jumping me into this conversation, I was the GA reviewer for this article. Dom, being the nom, stated that "Per the first two paragraphs under the "References" section here, YouTube videos can be used a references case-by-case. Videos by Theme Park Review are generally reliable because all he does is sticks a camera on the roller coaster and records...nothing unreliable about that! You should also take note that almost all roller coaster GA's use YouTube as a reference for the purpose on describing the layout (as well as RCDB). YouTube is even included in a Featured Article, SheiKra. Articles are allowed to contain YouTube as a ref and sometimes they are your best bet. Hope this settles the conflict. WooHoo! • Talk to me! 01:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 March 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nitro (Imagicaa) → Hot Wheels Nitro – The ride name seems to be Hot Wheels Nitro since it was renamed in 2018. According to https://blooloop.com/theme-park/news/imagica-hot-wheels/, which is a reliable source according to discussion, the park partnered with Mattel in 2018 to rename the ride. The name is also used on the Roller Coaster Database, which is a reliable source which has survived GA and FA reviews. I just am not sure if the Hot Wheels name is still in use, though there does not seem to be evidence to the contrary. ReedyTurnip (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Skeptical: The new name seems forced, motivated by some sponsorship deal rather than common usage. In the absence of evidence of a different common name, I suggest we stick with "Nitro", which is the distinctive part of the sponsored name anyway. On the other hand, the proposed title would provide WP:NATURAL disambiguation. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Amusement Parks has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – After doing some research, it appears the ride was briefly named Hot Wheels Nitro. The entrance signage was updated by 2020 as shown here, along with the park map and seat padding that featured the Hot Wheels logo as shown here. I also came across another blogger video that still shows the seat padding logo in 2022. But by early 2023, the park map (link) and ride's entrance sign (link) both had the Hot Wheels branding removed. In addition, a careful eye will notice that the patches on the seat padding are faded to the point that the logo is hard to read, seemingly on purpose, at least that's my take on things. Unfortunately, I was not able to find anything reliably published about the Hot Wheels partnership ending, though the partnership itself was name-dropped in several 2023 interviews by the park's CEO, including this one. Another nail in the coffin is that the park's own website entry fails to mention Hot Wheels anywhere.
    At best, the Hot Wheels affiliation is on shaky ground and doesn't appear to be associated with the ride anymore. Unless an updated reliable source is found, I can't support the move at this time. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll just add that RCDB.com is indeed a reliable source for many roller coaster statistics used on Wikipedia, but we use it with caution and prefer to cite it as a complementary source. RCDB is a database run primarily by one individual, Duane Marden, that absorbs information from a variety of credible sources in the industry. On rare occasions, the entries contain outdated information and/or incomplete details, which is what I suspect has happened here. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 21:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good research, thank you. I agree after looking deeper, it does seem that the name is no longer is in use. Thank you for the advice regarding RCDB, I am still pretty new to editing Wikipedia and WP:APARKS, I will make sure to keep that in mind in the future. ReedyTurnip (talk) 22:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nitro_(Imagicaa)&oldid=1215501880"