Talk:Ruby Falls

Tennessee Low‑importance

	Tennessee portal Ruby Falls is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rivers: Waterfalls Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Waterfalls task force.

SEE RUBY FALLS

Just wondering if anyone has a photo available to upload into the article of the "See Ruby Falls" billboards that used to line the highways in the 70's-80's; I think it would be a great addition. I remember seeing those signs each year on our family vacation from Cincinnati to Florida or to South Carolina, we used to joke and say that it was really just a fat woman in a bikini that would fall into a small pool and so on. Great memories, a great attestation to the fact that the trip up and down is just as memorable and important as the vacation itself. But back on topic, a billboard photo would be great if anyone has one (we never took one, can't believe it!). Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.42.16 (talk) 07:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haunted Cavern

Anyone around know enough about the Haunted Cavern event to add a section? For example, it seems that the cavern used is not the same one that houses the falls. It seems to be up higher in the mountain. Speaking of which, some diagram may be useful showing all the routes within the caverns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Peppers (talk • contribs) 05:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man-made controversy

I tried to find information that would support the assertions in the recent edit that there is "speculation that the falls have been manipulated by man" and was unable to find anything that would indicate that this is not original research, so I am again reverting the article. If there is a reliable resource that I have overlooked please re-add the information with the appropriate reference.Narthring (talk • contribs) 18:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy around the authenticity section

Ok, I find this as interesting as anyone else if it's true, but we can't cite a reddit thread, a forum post, and a tripadvisor review for a section like this - all three fall under WP:SELFPUBLISH / WP:USERGENERATED, so they're not reliable sources, especially for something that is clearly an exceptional claim. We need to dig up better sources if we're going to have a section on it, not anonymous forum posts. --Aquillion (talk) 11:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt it would be a neat cover-up so I tried to find information too. However, I dug through news articles and books about the falls and nothing indicates they are man-made or unnaturally altered in any way. Incidentally I found some good references to fix up a lot of other problems on the page. But what he have here is a typical popular reddit post where everyone believes a person who "claims" to be an employee of Ruby Falls. He might be - who knows? Still need substantial sources to assert his claims though. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 15:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there no way to include some information in the article along the lines of "There are unsubstantiated claims that..." And if there really is no way to do this within Wikipedia's policies, then aren't Wikipedia's policies slightly broken? Information and controversy clearly exists and has received a lot of attention, and yet can't be included? Howrad (talk) 04:29, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You answered yourself why it can't work. We can't include unsubstantiated claims on Wikipedia if they are not backed up by a source. There are absolutely many controversies included in articles on Wikipedia, but all are backed up by some sort of source that holds merit. There was not a single source I found that called Ruby Falls' legitimacy into question, and therefore we can't go off what a random user posts on TripAdvisor or reddit. I don't think that calls Wikipedia's policies into question either, because if this is how the site worked I could sign up for reddit, make a post claiming literally anything I wanted, and then cite myself on Wikipedia much in the same way people were citing an anonymous reddit user on this article a few weeks ago. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 14:13, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby falls

It’s so beautiful 2600:1004:B112:A765:585A:57BF:66E2:A8EF (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 🤗 2600:1004:B112:A765:585A:57BF:66E2:A8EF (talk) 16:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]