Talk:Krake

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Krake article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Krake has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 17, 2013. (Reviewed version).

Amusement Parks: Merlin Entertainments / Roller Coasters Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Amusement parks 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.Amusement ParksWikipedia:WikiProject Amusement ParksTemplate:WikiProject Amusement Parksamusement park articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Merlin Entertainments task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Roller Coasters task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

A fact from Krake appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 May 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Krake (pictured) was Germany's first ever Dive Coaster?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Krake.

Wikipedia

Units

Whats with the odd units? speeds in km/h, distances and heights in feet? Especially given germany's use of the metric system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.210.174.23 (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Krake/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: QatarStarsLeague (talk · contribs) 21:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC) I have had good experiences with Operation B&M. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 21:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2] and

(c) it contains no original research.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	See below.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	See below.	Pass

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Excellent.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Superb.	Pass
(c) (original research)	None.	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	Absolutely.	Pass
(b) (focused)	Very much so.	Pass

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
Yes.	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
Seems to be stable.	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	Yes.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Passes here.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	A quality nomination.

Discussion

Please add any related discussion here.

Lead & Infobox

Fine here.

History

Pass.

Ride experience

Please convert 700 tons into metric tons.

Tried to use the convert template but I can't figure out what parameters to use (do you know?).--Dom497 (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been done. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Also, the trains for the roller coaster were manufactured in Switzerland." Is it possible to determine the company of origin as well?

I could be B&M themselves but its hard to know for sure...there is no reliable sources that gives an specifics.--Dom497 (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Fine here.

Conclusion

All in all, this is a GA quality article. A few issues need to be mitigated; once this is done, I will pass this article. Congratulations! QatarStarsLeague (talk) 17:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Notes

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Krake. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]