Talk:Incidents at independent parks
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Knoebels info
section needs to be rewritten -- it's copyed directly from the rideaccidents website with no collaborating references. Anyone with additional info is encouraged to make those changes. SpikeJones 05:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Why? Any reason this can not be on the Knoebels page itself? Michael Greiner 20:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well, it needs to be rewritten *anyway* as it's currently a copyedit from the Ride Accidents website. As for why it needs to be rewritten in general, it's because the Ride Accidents website is not an accurate reference (yes, it *should* be in theory, but we've been trying to use actual news articles for all the accident references instead). Besides, if we used Ride Accidents for references in all the ride accident articles, then the reference list would look pretty darn silly and we have to trust that *they* were correct in the first place. But I digress. The reason I pulled it from the Knoebels page itself is that this will consolidate the ride accidents in one place and provide a consistent style and resource for this type of material. Placing it willy-nilly (or placing copies) on each individual parks' pages could lead to bad/missing/inconsistant edits. Doing it this way is consistent with the other summary pages. SpikeJones 20:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- But the parks that will be on this page are/will not be related. This page for the uninformed reader would make them seem related. In my opinion, the incidents should be on each individual park page.Michael Greiner 03:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- You're right - the parks on this page won't be related. They are "independently-owned parks", just as the title of the page says. This matches the related Incidents at Disney parks, Incidents at Busch parks, etc articles for companies that own multiple parks, and this page is an extended companion to them. The idea, as mentioned above, is to have a single set of "Incidents at..." pages devoted to this material so the uninformed reader doesn't have to sift through all the individual park pages to find this information. (an aside -- please don't restructure the conversation when adding your comment to the existing topic; just add to the bottom of the specific topic you're commenting on. Otherwise it makes it hard to follow along. thx)SpikeJones 03:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm sorry, but my original comment was a separate topic that you removed in your first response. All I did was restructure my comment the way I meant it to be. You were the one who changed the structure. Michael Greiner 19:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- The info was pulled directly from the Knoebels page, so my statement of "needs to be rewritten anyway" along with your question of "why is it here instead of there" can certainly be understood as being related. Bygones. Was your question answered? SpikeJones 20:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
