Talk:Iron Gwazi

Untitled
Has anybody ridden Gwazi? The tracks are nearly mirror-images of each other. Neither have any "special" element. Timetrial3141592 02:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Iron Gwazi
Gwazi → redirect to Iron Gwazi

Currently existing article on the matter, insufficient to be itself as of now if only in construction still. Adog ( Talk ・ Cont ) 17:40, 12 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Support – Both articles should be merged into one article. We can turn this one into a redirect that points to Iron Gwazi. This is similar to the action performed at Steel Vengeance when RMC converted Mean Streak. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:14, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – Every page about a converted roller coaster gets renamed, so it’s a good idea to rename this. One section is about the original Gwazi, the other about Iron Gwazi. Davidng913 (talk) 22:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support- Every rmc converted coaster just got moved to new nameDisneyAviationRollerCoasterEnthusiast (talk) 01:12, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support merging the article about the new RMC to the original wood coaster. epicgenius (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – Every old wooden roller coaster is mentioned as a former ride in the same article as its RMC conversion. Mtattrain (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – This would have been an automatic had a separate Iron Gwazi page not been hastily created. I'll assume it was good faith — but poor judgement. Let's get it fixed.— JlACEer ( talk ) 17:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - should we merge this now? This seems to be unanimous in favor of merging. epicgenius (talk) 00:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , yes it can be merged at this point. We should close this discussion citing WP:SNOWBALL. The precedent established in other articles makes it extremely unlikely this one would be an exception. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * On second thought, this could be seen as a potentially controversial move and should be formally requested using the Requested Move process. I'll get that started now so we can get this moving quickly. --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 17 September 2019

 * 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: Page moved. Consensus established here and in previous discussion; already moved by admin. (non-admin closure) GoneIn60 (talk) 05:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Gwazi → Iron Gwazi – Per the discussion in the previous section with unanimous support, Gwazi needs to be moved to Iron Gwazi, which is already a stub article with an editing history. Gwazi's editing history must be preserved in the process, so I've closed the discussion above and opened a formal requested move. After the move has been made, we can integrate recent changes at Iron Gwazi into the article (as an extra precaution, I've made a copy of the article in my sandbox). GoneIn60 (talk) 04:23, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. epicgenius (talk) 12:32, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support previous statement for move. The page right now is more-or-less a copy-paste of the currently larger existing article. If not, they have the same information, and it isn't necessary. One article under the name move would suffice. Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 17:28, 17 September 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Quote close paraphrasing
I did check...as I said in short in the edit summary, the exact phrasing of what was previously present (and somewhat is) appears to be directly paraphrased without quotation or a citation from Coaster 101 and/or the Tampa Bay Business Journal. Quote, ...fabled creature with the head of a tiger and the body of a lion", unquote, appears in both articles and should thus either be re-worded or removed. In my research, there have been several earlier newspapers that describe the roller coaster differently, so I don't know why the recent descriptors from publishers have to be the correct one? Unless you know otherwise and can provide sources, Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 17:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You listed body first, which is not the way it is quoted.— JlACEer ( talk ) 18:07, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hence it was re-worded to avoid close paraphrasing as it seemingly appears copied and pasted and there was no source to begin with. That doesn't address my other concerns, nor the "majority of sources" that was stated. :/ Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 18:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The source was Busch Gardens in 1999. It's a made up fable, it does not need to be paraphrased nor does it need be in quotes. Honestly, I have no idea what your issue is.— JlACEer ( talk ) 18:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there a way to provide the source so we can include it in the article? The problem is it seems copied and pasted from somewhere without proper attribution, and anything like a complete statement found elsewhere is likely a copyvio. Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 18:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * RCDB— JlACEer ( talk ) 19:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you... Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 23:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: English Composition 2
— Assignment last updated by Applegirl1234 (talk) 18:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Edits
Hey everyone,

I have 2 things I would like to edit. One of them is the inversion count. Busch Gardens markets Gwazi as having 3 inversions and in the overbank curve after the barrel down drop, you are at an angle of about 120 degrees which is inverted. Another thing I would like to edit is the layout section. I feel as though its very vague and doesn't represent the ride fully. Gcgxrvtj (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello I admire your eye for the article's material. Unfortunately, I would advise against these additions.
 * According to the Roller Coaster DataBase (RCDB), the element featured on Iron Gwazi is an overbanked curve. Generally, an overbank becomes an inversion once it exceeds 135 degrees, where riders are more inverted than sideways (a helpful infographic). This is, more-or-less, the best we have on what becomes an inversion because manufacturers have introduced nuanced elements to their roller coasters in recent years that are not as cut and dry as the vertical loops of ye-olde days. While, yes, Busch Gardens does officially state as a fact that Iron Gwazi has 3 inversions, there has been no official statement on the banked angle of this element or further synthesis produced by reliable secondary sources that could confirm this interpretation. We often rely on indepdent sources to clarify if a statement is true. From what we have gathered, those who do provide the interpretation have cited this element as an overbanked curve, not an inversion (e.g. American Coaster Enthusiasts, Theme Park Insider). Although RCDB is not the definitive source of all roller coaster information, it is probably the best reliable database for statistical information on roller coasters (see further discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks).
 * As for the layout, I would not add additional information for two main reasons: conciseness and lack of reliable sources. On the books (or our webpages), we strive to have articles that are easy to understand for readers of all knowledge ranges, that are "straightforward, succinct, easily understood language and structure articles with consistent, reader-friendly layouts". Too much detail of the ride's layout generally would have little interest to a broader audience, and likely only for individuals who really like roller coasters. Unless a reliable secondary source has information about the theme, station, details of the ride experience, etc. we tend to leave them off the Wiki. Though, I know of specific information that might be pertinent to the article, such as steel supports being used to hold up parts of the wooden structure, there have not been published reliable sources that would verify my observation, and I, therefore, cannot include such information.
 * I state such not to discourage you from editing or researching this topic further, but to explain why the article's information is currently the way it is. I do hope this helps a bit. If you would like, feel free to drop by our WikiProject, as we have more resources that may assist you in your editing journey. :) Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 15:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking time to reply.
 * I understand concerning the number of inversions
 * I have to disagree with you regarding the amount of detail in the layout section. Providing a detailed layout section will allow people who are curious about the sensations and forces to "feel" the ride for themselves. Also, if people are on Wikipedia researching this ride, the layout section is crucial in informing unknowing people about the elements present. Currently, after the overbank turn, the true layout is extremely hard to picture due to the use of extremely vague phrases like " a series of banked turns" and "small hill." Someone who truly wants to learn more about Gwazi will have a very hard time in understanding the elements included. I have ridden Gwazi myself various times and can also comment on the ride experience based off my own experiences (I'm even going to Busch Gardens again next Sunday and can . I would like to reassure you that if I were to edit the layout section, I would make sure to keep it as concise as possible while still painting a vivid description of the ride.
 * Thank you for your consideration Gcgxrvtj (talk) 20:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * In that case I think that may suffice, added with reliable sources.
 * As a guide, we usually keep the layout to simple descriptions based on what the roller coaster train traverses (e.g. simple turns, climbs, descent, banking). Generally, the reliable source is the official POV that is non-copyrighted, but the APARKS WikiProject may consider to depreciate this source in the future (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks). The reasoning being, simple descriptions can be verified by anyone with any knowledge if they watch a video or go on the ride. The train will always follow its exact layout of banking left, dipping, or climbing. Anything more in detail, such as statistics, specific elements, or surrounding environment would need reliable sources that provide commentary for the observations (RCDB, a review from a newspaper, a reliable enthusiast news page) (see WP:PRIMARY #2 & #3). These descriptors are what individuals not so familiar with the ride might not know, so a source that details this information is important.
 * I would advise against descriptors about sensations or forces riders feel as those can vary between ride experiences, and are generally considered original research as sensation is subjective, not an objective detail of the ride's layout.
 * Feel free to take a crack at it! Ride experience sections are my tricky spot to write. I have seen some ride experience sections written like a two-five paragraph essay (please, no), which is always my concern haha. For reference on how ride sections are written, you may consider looking at APARKS Good Articles or Featured Articles. My forte is mainly history on these topics, but we do implore members to go out and experience the parks and rides to better understand the topic (a personal favorite roller coaster). If you would like additional help, feel free to reach out to any of our APARKS members. We'd be happy to help! Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 00:53, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Awesome,
 * Glad I can contribute to my Favorite roller coaster's wiki page. Also, no worries about the forces. Forces and sensations vary even from morning to night so I really just wanna clean it up and avoid general sayings like " it goes through some banks and hills." Gcgxrvtj (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey! I just submitted my edits for the Ride experience. Thank you for letting me take part in this! Please let me know if there's anything else you may like me to edit. Gcgxrvtj (talk) 18:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No need for thanks, Wikipedia is open to everyone. I hope I was more guiding than dictating. If you have any interest in helping improve our project feel free to continue editing and maybe joining WP:APARKS, as we are always seeking new members. If not, we hope you continue on with your successful education. Happy editing! Adog  ( Talk ・ Cont ) 23:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)