Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Shot (Ride)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was no consensus (kept by default) - Nabla 16:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Double Shot (Ride)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Doesn't seem to be a notable type of amusement ride, fun as it sounds. Possible spam or COI at work here too. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep As the author of this page I can assure you I am not a spammer. This page is just as relevant as other ride model pages. There are a total of 15 Double Shot rides around the world - as can be seen on the S&S website linked to in the article. Ridleym (20:34, 23 July 2007 BST)
 * Delete . Might consider a keep if there were reliable sources confirming notability. --Fang Aili talk 19:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Keep after edits by Sawblade05. Notable enough for me, and the sources are a good start. --Fang Aili talk 17:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I am currently working on getting notable sources for this right now as I don't want to see this one deleted. Sawblade05 23:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No real notability at this time.  -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 21:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong KeepSpeedy Keep I have happened to be around this type of ride and know about it tell me how to fix it so It wont be deleted. Sawblade05 22:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I have all lines Referenced on the article even though some are liinking to the same page over and over again. I think I got this one where it can be kept on Wikipedia without deletion. Sawblade05 23:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete The references in the article is not whats in question here.  To be notable, something must have "significant coverage from independent sources".   This could be reviews of the ride by reliable sources.   Anything from the parks or the manufacturer wouldn't qualify as they wouldn't be independent sources.   However, these sources can be used to cite the article once notability is established Corpx 02:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't know why you don't consider Amusement Park Websites to be a realible source on notiability of the ride, they are indpendant from the Manufacture of the rides and the page is not about a specific park at all, only mentions where some of these are located. IF I have to I would list all 15 instalations to prove it but this would violate the Wikipedia is not a List policy. Anyway I feel that the page meets some of the requirements here at WP:Notability in which the original proposer was looking for. Sawblade05 04:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Amusement parks have a definite conflict of interest because they own the ride, so of course they'll only say the good things about it.  Corpx 14:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sawblade05's sources. At least two of these are reliable independent sources, the sites nojespark.net and theme park insider, which are providing reviews of the ride for people who might install it. JulesH 10:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * nojespark.net gives a directory listing and the other one is a user-submitted review. Corpx 14:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Corpx. The sources aren't very reliable. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 14:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't agree to the fact of you referring to nojespark.net as a just a directory it is also a independent review of each of the different types of Tower Rides built by S&S. Sawblade05 15:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldnt a 1 line "review" qualify as a trivial mention? Corpx 17:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge&rarr;Drop tower (ride). I did some hunting and was not able to find reliable secondary sources for which the primary topic is this ride; that does not mean they don't exist, of course.  Some of the existing references are good for fact verification, but not as reliable secondary sources, unfortunately.  The specifications can go into a new table in the Drop tower (ride) article and merger would facilitate the compare-and-contrast which provides context to this class of rides. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 02:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.