Talk:Twisted Timbers

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (I intend to expand the article to include information about Hurler and and will be working to expand the article).--MitchellLunger (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Steel Hybrid
Why does twisted timbers have steel hybrid in the first sentence and it's ok? Hawkeye75  (talk)  23:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The quick answer is that it hasn't been there long. Not enough editors have noticed it yet that feel the need to remove it. That's one possibility.Another possibility is that this roller coaster was touted as a "steel-hybrid" in several articles covering its press release. This marketing strategy does not apply to all roller coasters that fit the same description. If there are other roller coasters marketed the same way, then as long as you cite the term in the sentence it appears in, then making the change at other articles would likely be accepted. However, I would still discuss on the talk page if anyone reverts you. Handle it on a case-by-case basis. We shouldn't be going back through all roller coaster articles that have wood track on steel structures (or vice versa) and changing their descriptions to "hybrid" without a proper reference to go alongside the change. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:24, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I mean firstly, when you say "not enough editors have noticed it to remove it", you just noticed it and you haven't changed it, so that is pretty biased and for your second point, just because an article describes a roller coaster as something does not mean it should be put in the article. Should larson loop articles have the word "roller coaster" in them? Hawkeye75   (talk)  01:31, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm fine if you want to remove it, as I have no strong preference in this article. The term "hybrid" is becoming more prominent now in press releases and newspaper articles, and while geeks in the industry may still prefer to avoid the term, Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. As reliable sources evolve, so should corresponding Wikipedia articles that cite them. There is a reasonable argument against removing the term. Perhaps the opening line isn't appropriate, but it should likely be mentioned somewhere in the article.As for your Larson loop comparison... Are there a significant amount of reliable sources referring to them as coasters (and not in just marketing material)? Keep in mind that each article on Wikipedia stands alone, and what might be accepted through consensus in one does not necessarily impact or dictate how another is written. If you want to impact multiple articles with one discussion, take it higher up to WT:WikiProject Amusement Parks or one of the available forums listed at WP:Q. --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)