Talk:Drachen Fire
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Drachen Fire article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Close Date edit
Did it close in 1998 or 1999? Page is inconsistent.--RexRex84 05:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Rumors edit
A lot of the content here is not verifiable. All of the stuff under "History" is speculation and popular rumor and should not be included in the article. The story about B&M being originally contracted has never been confirmed by a authoritative source, and the author goes way into the realm of rumor mongering and myth telling. Mdrobinson00 12:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome to WP! My own opinion is that the article clearly states these are unconfirmed rumors. There should probably be cites to some sources of these rumors (e.g. RCDB or some of the coaster forums, or more preferably, a more legit news source or trade publication). But as long as the article states they are rumors, they are prevalant enough that I think they belong in the article. Thanks. --Rehcsif 17:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- It is clearly stated in the article that Drachen Fire could have been a B&M but has not be verified with "although verification of this has never been established by the park itself". On another note, if you look at the ride's layout it clearly has element's, such as the Cobra Roll, that hint it to be of B&M design. No other Arrow coaster has a cobra roll in it. Montu Man 1011 22:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I went ahead and Stuck a Unrefernced tag on the page to note the problem.Sawblade05 16:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure this is necessary or correct. As noted above, the fact that this is only a rumor is well-established in the article, AND it's referenced. Since this hasn't been discussed here for three weeks (and there wasn't much debate to begin with) I'm going to remove these maint tags for now. They make the article look terrible, and this isn't exactly controvertial... --Rehcsif 04:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, it's not referenced; saying "so and so said so" is NOT a reference. And implying that there was basis for personal injury lawsuits certainly is controversial without a solid citation to back it up. I've replaced the refimprove with an actual unreferenced template and removed some of the more inappropriately formatted text, such as incomplete sentences, unsupported legal claims, and inline external links to photos. 71.200.138.188 (talk) 03:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure this is necessary or correct. As noted above, the fact that this is only a rumor is well-established in the article, AND it's referenced. Since this hasn't been discussed here for three weeks (and there wasn't much debate to begin with) I'm going to remove these maint tags for now. They make the article look terrible, and this isn't exactly controvertial... --Rehcsif 04:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I went ahead and Stuck a Unrefernced tag on the page to note the problem.Sawblade05 16:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- It is clearly stated in the article that Drachen Fire could have been a B&M but has not be verified with "although verification of this has never been established by the park itself". On another note, if you look at the ride's layout it clearly has element's, such as the Cobra Roll, that hint it to be of B&M design. No other Arrow coaster has a cobra roll in it. Montu Man 1011 22:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
"The steel was then formed into the supports of the Griffon, continuing Busch's conservation efforts." Citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.198.66 (talk) 08:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Drachen Fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060429204908/http://history.amusement-parks.com:80/drachenfire.htm to http://history.amusement-parks.com/drachenfire.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)