Can you believe one of the world's most recently acclaimed roller coasters is located in the wetlands and jungles of Tampa, Florida? That is a bit of a stretch, but the attraction's history is fascinating. Before my parents were born, Anheuser-Busch (A-B) built a brewery in Tampa, which opened in 1959. To stand out, August Busch Jr. also built landscaped gardens that opened with the brewery to attract community members. The park was such a hit that it began to add more; years and decades passed, transforming the simple brewery and gardens into a fully functional theme park: Busch Gardens Tampa. In time, A-B built more significant and better breweries, making its Tampa plant obsolete.
As part of an ever-innovating industry, the owners closed and demolished the brewery, building two dueling wooden roller coasters in its place, Gwazi. Each side was named lion and tiger, respectively, representing a (presumably made-up) African mythos of a fabled creature with a tiger's head and a lion's body and its inner conflict. Gwazi opened in 1999, initially received well by the public. In time, the ride became rougher, with one side closing in 2012 and the other in 2015. The roller coaster sat dormant in the middle of the park as an eye-sore for years.
A roller coaster manufacturer business prominently emerged when it sat dormant, transforming old wooden roller coasters into steel behemoths. Rocky Mountain Construction (RMC) began giving life to expired wooden roller coasters, who were soon hired by SeaWorld Entertainment to revive Gwazi. RMC re-used portions of both dueling track support structures and concrete footings to create a single roller coaster. Once having a reputation for two rough, uncomfortable rides became a smooth, fast-paced, and thrilling steel-track roller coaster, Iron Gwazi. The name is uninspired, but after two years of delayed openings, the roller coaster was one of the most well-received attractions because of the drastic difference between its former wooden predecessor and its eccentric elements. The roller coaster went on to be voted as the best new roller coaster for 2022 in Amusement TodaysGolden Ticket Awards, one of the highest achieving awards in the amusement industry.
Having improved the article to WP:GA status, this will be my first attempt at an WP:FA ever. I have completed a peer review but will avoid a mentor to feel the process out. I wish for all constructive criticism/inquiries/feedback, as I know there will be some, and I want to learn from this process. Hopefully, in time, this will be WP:APARKS first roller coaster article to reach FA status in a while and could potentially be the third attraction at the park to reach this status (others being SheiKra and Falcon's Fury). Adog (Talk・Cont) 17:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Adog, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check and a review for over-close paraphrasing to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the welcome! Looking forward to what is next. Adog (Talk・Cont) 00:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WP:FAC coordinators: Per a helping guide, since this FAC is reaching the bottom of the list and is nearing a possible third judgment, I wanted to inquire whether one of the coordinators would be interested in providing a source-to-text integrity/close paraphrasing/another review? Any and all help would be appreciated. If possible, thank you in advance. Adog (Talk・Cont) 00:00, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's nice to see this article at FA, and I'd like to thank Adog for his monumental efforts in improving the Iron Gwazi page. I have seen this page grow tremendously over the last several years (well, at least over the last four years). That said, I'm leaving this as a placeholder because I intend to leave some comments later. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lead:
"The ride, named after a fabled creature with a tiger's head and a lion's body, was built by Great Coasters International (GCI) as Gwazi" - This seems like it should be two sentences Alternatively, the bit about the ride's etymology should be moved to the end of the sentence. But see my next point.
"Named Lion and Tiger, the tracks were 3,508 ft (1,069 m) long and 105.4 ft (32.1 m) high, with trains reaching a maximum speed of 51 mph (82 km/h)." - A few points here:
Am I correct that both tracks had the same measurements?
Perhaps the bit about the etymology and the names of both tracks should be a new sentence, creating three sentences. E.g. "The ride was built by Great Coasters International (GCI) as Gwazi, a wooden dueling roller coaster with two separate tracks. It was named after a fabled creature with a tiger's head and a lion's body, and it has two tracks, named Lion and Tiger. Both tracks were 3,508 ft (1,069 m) long..."
"Gwazi, which was constructed on the former site of an Anheuser-Busch brewery, opened to the public on June 18, 1999." - I'd move this to the second paragraph. Also, can you briefly mention when plans were announced and/or when construction started?
"The park operated both tracks until 2012, with the closure of the Tiger side." - The first part of the sentence is slightly redundant. This can be rephrased as "The Tiger side closed in 2012."
"with various replacement attractions considered by the park" - I'd put this in active voice, i.e. "and the park considered various replacement attractions".
"In 2018, the park indicated it would refurbish the wooden structure, with Rocky Mountain Construction (RMC) listed as the roller coaster manufacturer [...] RMC was hired to retrofit the existing layout using portions of the original structure." - So RMC was hired in 2018 and was hired again in 2019? Or is the latter sentence merely referring to what RMC was contracted to do (as opposed to the fact that RMC was hired and that it did these things)?
"passholder members" - Why not just "passholders"?
Ideally, the lead should have a sentence or two about reception and legacy, since one of the page's level-2 sections is devoted to the topic, but the lead doesn't mention any reception at all.
Hello Epicgenius! Thank you for the comments so far and I appreciate another familiar face! Split the sentences into two, both tracks should be clarified from previous edits, and added more about debut, award, and construction plans. Rephrased Tiger track, active voice, and removed RMC mention to clarify their role. Keep them coming if there is more and let me know how it looks! Adog (Talk・Cont) 14:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
History:
"In October 1995, Anheuser-Busch announced the closure of its Tampa brewery located in the middle of Busch Gardens Tampa Bay, which had operated since the park's inaugural year in 1959" - Presumably you mean the brewery operated since the park's inaugural year, but right now the sentence is structured as though the park has operated since its opening year (which needless to say is a self-definition). I'd rephrase this as "In October 1995, Anheuser-Busch announced the closure of its Tampa brewery in the middle of Busch Gardens Tampa Bay; the brewery had operated since the park's inaugural year in 1959." Also, "located" is redundant in this context.
Great suggestions for History but just wanted to offer an alternative for this item: "In October 1995, Anheuser-Busch announced the closure of its Tampa brewery, which had operated in the middle of Busch Gardens Tampa Bay since the park's inaugural year in 1959." Accomplishes the same without a semi-colon or stating "brewery" twice. --GoneIn60 (talk) 20:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point. I'd go with your alternative instead. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"freeing up the land" - This might also be a little redundant if the brewery was demolished.
"The park wanted to differentiate itself from other Florida theme parks with modern ride technology" - Did BGT have modern ride technology, or was it the other parks with such technology? I assume it's the latter, so I'd change it to "The park wanted to differentiate itself from other Florida theme parks, which had modern ride technology".
"after touring several amusement parks over 17 days" - There's a missing period.
"Washington University in St. Louis helped name the new roller coaster, selecting Gwazi" - I was trying to figure out why a university in the Midwest would help name the roller coaster, but it seems that Washington University merely did the research, while A-B named the ride based on WashU's research.
"In early June 1998, Busch Gardens Tampa Bay considered on-site expansion for a resort " - I'd rephrase this in active voice, e.g. "In early June 1998, Busch Gardens Tampa Bay considered adding a resort on the site" or something like that.
"Busch Gardens announced it that day" - What is being announced? The groundbreaking, the ride's existence, or the name of the ride?
"with the tracks themed as a Lion and a Tiger" - If the tracks were merely themed to a lion and a tiger, these should be lowercase. However, these were the actual names, so I'd clarify this too.
Thank you Epicgenius for the comments/questions/concerns! Addressed all these points with edits for clarification, addition, or subtraction of statements. Let me know how it looks! Adog (Talk・Cont) 12:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't forgotten about this nomination. I'll look at it tomorrow. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is all good from my standpoint. I attempted to get a better image of the roller coaster for this article and relatively succeeded in the mean time! Adog (Talk・Cont) 02:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Operation:
"of the 5,700 tickets sold, 3,500 tickets went to passholders" - BGT passholders?
"Approximately 500 guests from American Coaster Enthusiasts were in attendance." - ACE members, I presume, rather than random folks who were invited by ACE
"The last part of the renovation" - Was this after the Lion and Tiger sides were retracked?
Come to think of it, we both know what retracking is, but I don't know if the public may be familiar with it.
"included the installation of four GCI-designed Millennium Flyer trains to replace the trains originally supplied by Philadelphia Toboggan Coasters (PTC) in 2011" - I would move up the "in 2011" part, or else it sounds like PTC designed new trains in 2011. I.e. "included the installation of four GCI-designed Millennium Flyer trains in 2011..."
"Following the 2012 season, the Tiger side closed, and soon after, the park built a bridge across its loading platform" - I'd rephrase this slightly so there are fewer commas, e.g. "The Tiger side closed following the 2012 season, and soon after, the park built a bridge across its loading platform"
"that the termination of Gwazi's operation was in the near future" - I would also rephrase this to active voice, e.g. "that Gwazi's operation would be terminated in the near future"
Refurbishment and relaunch:
"Within three years of the closure" - Was there no news about Gwazi for three years? If so, I'd just say "Three years after the closure..."
"Busch Gardens revealed the roller coaster's name as "Iron Gwazi" the following month, being 206 feet (63 m) tall with a 91-degree drop and a maximum speed of 76 mph (122 km/h)" - The second half of the sentence is a bit awkward, and the first sounds like it can be rewritten in a more direct manner. I'd go with "Busch Gardens revealed the following month that the roller coaster would be named "Iron Gwazi" and that it would be 206 feet (63 m) tall with a 91-degree drop and a maximum speed of 76 mph (122 km/h)"
"RMC completed track work on March 8" - March 8 of which year?
"construction halted at the testing phase after a week." - Was it structurally complete and just testing, or was construction still going on when the ride was being tested? I assume it's the former, in which case you can just say "testing halted after a week".
"In September, the park said it scheduled to open Iron Gwazi in 2021,[60] releasing a point-of-view video of the roller coaster two months later" - I similarly would rephrase this as the second half of the sentence is also awkward, in the sense that the POV video is mentioned basically as an afterthought. I.e. "The park said in September that it scheduled to open Iron Gwazi in 2021,[60] and it released a point-of-view video of the roller coaster two months later"
"The park hosted a media day to preview Iron Gwazi" - Should this just be "The park hosted a media preview" or something similar?
Awesome, after some technical hurdles addressed these lines for clarification, re-wording, or omitting. Let me know how that looks! :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 18:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Three years after the closure..." – The source talks about rumors that had been circulating, indicating over the course of the three years. Not sure how you want to rephrase that, but they didn't just start happening 3 years after the closure! --GoneIn60 (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I didn't actually check the source, but now that you mention it, I would suggest "In the three years after the closure" if the plans for Gwazi's replacement/refurbishment/retracking/etc. had actually been ongoing since 2015. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:10, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The speculation probably wasn't directly tied to actual plans, not sure, but "In the three years..." sounds good to me! -- GoneIn60 (talk) 16:30, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick update - I've looked through the article and have mostly found only syntax/grammar issues. I will post these remaining comments over the weekend since I'm currently at work. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! Awaiting further corrections when ready. Hope all is going well! Adog (Talk・Cont) 22:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As an added bonus, I did find two more articles and added them into the "Refurbishment and relaunch" surrounding the ride's history if you want to glance at that. Adog (Talk・Cont) 17:26, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I had a very heavy workload this past week. I promise this time that I'll finally leave my remaining comments by this weekend. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:25, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No problemo. I am reading books in the mean time and researching the bits and pieces that might still be out there. Adog (Talk・Cont) 14:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ride experience:
Before I get into the grammatical nitpicks for this section, I notice that in the paragraphs about the Lion, Tiger, and Iron Gwazi's respective ride experiences, all the references are clustered at the end of the paragraph. This might cause problems with regards to verification. For example, the YouTube video doesn't really have height and speed statistics, while the RCDB source only lists statistics. I would instead just put the sources immediately after the sentences that they're supposed to cite.
I also notice that the Iron Gwazi paragraph has five sources. I'd spread them out to prevent WP:CITEKILL.
"in which the two roller coaster trains pass each other in opposite directions at high speeds, giving the false impression they will collide" - I would change "pass" to "passed" and "will collide" to "would collide". Although I understand that the "fly-by" as a concept still exists, they are not on Gwazi anymore, so they should be in the past tense for consistency.
Word, heard. I will note GoneIn60 suggested a change to the source layout for the "Ride experience" sections where the sources appear at the end. I am ok with either and have reverted it to the cited inline layout. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 01:28, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, the original problem was that there was a mixture of sentence and paragraph citations. Either are fine, but you typically don't want to mix the two, as it makes it harder to figure out which sources support which statements. Moving them all to the end of the paragraph would have been fine ONLY IF every citation supported the entire paragraph. Epicgenius seems to have identified that wasn't the case, so changing to sentence-only citations is the better option here. --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late response. GoneIn60 precisely identified what I was alluding to. If the citations support every detail in the paragraph, it's the editor's choice whether to put these citations after every statement or only at the end of the paragraph. If the citations only support certain details, they generally should be placed directly after the statement that they're supporting. Epicgenius (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. I did interpret the suggestion wrong at the time. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:47, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Characteristics:
"Gwazi's footprint covered eight acres" - I'd just say Gwazi covered eight acres, or Gwazi had an eight-acre footprint.
"Gwazi was given a sealant coat instead of being traditionally painted" - Was this done for a specific reason, e.g. hurricane protection?
"arranged with two seats across in two rows" - I'd suggest "arranged in two rows of two seats each" to be more concise.
"12 cars with a single row that was two seats across" - Similarly I'd say "12 cars, each with a single row of two seats". This gets the point across more concisely.
"Gwazi's theme depicted the struggle between two territorial wildcats; the African lion and the Asian tiger." - this should be a colon, not a semicolon, since "the African lion and the Asian tiger" can not be a standalone sentence, and since this sentence isn't a list. Furthermore, I'd say "Gwazi was themed to" rather than "Gwazi's theme depicted", as generally, themes do not depict something on their own; they contain motifs that depict something.
"using the same loading station from Gwazi" - I'd say "using Gwazi's loading station"
"Director of Design and Engineering, Andrew Schaffer" - I recommend either removing the comma or adding another comma after Schaffer. Also, his job title should be lowercase, per MOS:JOBTITLES. Epicgenius (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reception and legacy section looks all good to me.
Incidents:
"In 2022, a guest riding Iron Gwazi during its preview hit their hand on a beam, prompting Busch Gardens to remove two beams. The guest refused medical treatment" - I'd mention that the guest refused medical treatment before mentioning that the beams were removed. Otherwise it sounds like Busch Gardens removed the beams before asking the guest if they wanted medical treatment.
Overall, this is a very good article, and I only had a few relatively minor issues with the article, which I think could be resolved quickly. After these are fixed, I'd be happy to support. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again and I appreciate the review! Fixed the last remaining bits, tell me what you think and let me know if there is anything else that should be changed or checked! Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:48, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - everything looks good to me now. If I find anything, I'll bring it up, but so far I don't see any more major issues. Epicgenius (talk) 17:47, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to FAC. Nice article, and I had the same mentor-avoiding thought process when nominating my first FA last year. As always, these are suggestions not demands—feel free to decline, with adequate justification.
As a first-timer, you'll have to go through the spotchecks and source review, so I won't comment on that front.
Some questions about the article's adherence to MOS:LAYOUT, keeping in mind I generally don't think much of single-paragraph sections. What do you think of making the comparisons section a subsection of the characteristics section, and similarly incorporating the incidents into the history section? I think that would help the article's flow.
On a somewhat similar note, if I were you I would remove the lion and tiger subsection-headings from the ride experience section. As it stands, it feels a bit disjointed, and smoothening the layout is a great way to make the prose seem more professional (FA criterion 1a).
I merged the comparison section since that is not officially covered by Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Standards#Roller coasters. I am a bit reserved about incidents and accidents merging since we try not to gloss over these happenings and to serve some equal weight regarding the history. I also went ahead and removed the subheadings and added some words in each paragraph to clarify each course. :) Let me know how this looks. Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
General prose
The first paragraph could be streamlined, especially the four short sentences at the end. How about: "Iron Gwazi (formerly Gwazi) is a steel-track hybrid roller coaster at Busch Gardens Tampa Bay, a theme park in Tampa, Florida, United States. The ride, named after a fabled creature with a tiger's head and a lion's body, was built by Great Coasters International (GCI) as Gwazi, a wooden dueling roller coaster with two separate tracks. Named Lion and Tiger, the tracks were 3,508 ft (1,069 m) long and 105.4 ft (32.1 m) high, with trains reaching a maximum speed of 51 mph (82 km/h). Gwazi, which was constructed on the former site of an Anheuser-Busch brewery, opened to the public on June 18, 1999." or something.
Standardise whether the article uses capitalised (Lion and Tiger) or uncapitalised (lion and tiger) for the two sides.
"Following" repetition in second paragraph. Similar streamlining needed there; six sentences in one 3.5-line paragraph is a bit bullet-pointy.
Were refurbishing plans announced in 2018 or 2019? Lead is very unclear.
I have no clue what "I-Box track" is, and I doubt many readers do either. Is that detail needed in the lead?
"The refurbished attraction was marketed as the tallest, steepest, and fastest hybrid roller coaster in North America." ....... is it the tallest, steepest, and fastest hybrid roller coaster in North America?
I suspect that with many of the events in the Refurbishment and relaunch section occuring recently, there might be slight WP:RECENTISM bias in the weighting of the history section. What do you think?
Bit too much "Gwazi" in the first paragraph of the characteristics section. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:31, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the comments so far! Addressed lead concerns regarding points 1, 3-6. Switched to capitalization as the names were proper nouns when cited in sources. Decreased Gwazi instances in characteristics. I see what you mean by the recent policy and went ahead to reword or add content for postponement. I also added some additional content from two sources for clarity in "Operation" and "Wooden roller coaster". Let me know how this looks so far! :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I like what you've done, Adog. I think the WP:RECENTISM in the history section could still be tightened. I'm seeing stuff like "A crane was seen at the site in January 2019", "Permits filed in March 2019 indicated the height of the new roller coaster would be around 210 feet (64 m) ... Iron Gwazi was reported to be 206 feet (63 m) tall", etc. I can imagine that as construction progressed, each new rumour/report/release was added to the article, but now, like a plant that's been allowed to grow out of control, it does need to be selectively trimmed a little. Other than that, I have not much more to comment. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what you mean. I took some clippers to the shrubs so hopefully it looks a bit cleaner around the edges. Namely removed the aforementioned sentences or merged them with clarification. Includes instances of the sentences with "crane," "media event," "permits," and "media tour". Adog (Talk・Cont) 17:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First, just want to thank Adog for all the hard work maintaining and improving articles that fall under the scope of WP:APARKS. Iron Gwazi is no exception, and I look forward to reviewing it. Here are a few things I've noticed so far:
Lead
Overall length of the article is approximately 18k characters. That puts it at the low end of 2-to-3 paragraph expectation for the lead per MOS:LEADLENGTH. Three paragraphs are fine, but I suggest reducing the length. The second paragraph seems like a good candidate to trim significantly. I would drop the first 2 sentences altogether and combine the last two into a much more concise sentence.
I would remove track length from the first and last paragraphs and just focus on height and speed. Track length doesn't typically warrant lead inclusion unless it sets some kind of significant milestone or ranking. 4075 feet wouldn't even crack the top 50 among roller coasters. Plus, it's an additional conversion that adds more parenthetical clutter.
"replace the wooden attraction into" – Seems a bit awkward to me. Maybe swap replace for convert?
"named after a fabled creature with a tiger's head and a lion's body" – Optional: I'm thinking this should follow the term Gwazi instead of appearing before. Maybe restructure so that you mention it was built by GCI first, followed by the name Gwazi and what it means.
Addressed the first point by eliminating the first sentence of paragraph 2 and merging the last sentences with the preceding sentence. Though, kept the part of the first side. Track length I am a little hesitant about excluding in the lead of this article because of the comparison of both Gwazi and Iron Gwazi. Though, I would agree otherwise if it were about a single roller coaster. Completed the last two points! Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work so far! Definitely an improvement, no doubt! For track length, I completely understand. Mentioning the comparison is probably needed but perhaps consider if the actual numbers are. For example, maybe just state that the track length increased by X number of feet (since the actual lengths don't really matter), which would reduce the two distance conversions down to one. Just a stylistic suggestion and not a deal-breaker either way.The reduction in length also looks good. I did notice a small grammatical glitch in the last sentence of the 1st paragraph following the recent addition of "and". Gwazi is the subject and hasn't done anything yet in this sentence, so a comma works better there. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Done and done for this part of your review. Adog (Talk・Cont) 18:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and made these changes, since it appears you agreed to remove the track length statements and combine them into one statement about the increase. I removed "that" in the third paragraph, since leaving it in would have required another comma after 2020. I also added back the link for RMC. If you have any issues with any of those changes, feel free to modify further. I'll reply to the other sections below here shortly, thanks! --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! :D Adog (Talk・Cont) 14:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
History
As shown in this example of MOS:BODY, prose typically follows each header before drilling down into a lower subsection. The main level 2 header (History) is followed immediately by a level 3 header (Development) with no prose in between. Consider removing the Development level 3 header and just let that portion of prose be the introduction to History.
The same thing happens under "Ride experience" and "Characteristics", but since there aren't any good solutions in those, they may have to remain unchanged. This isn't a hard & fast rule we have to abide by; it's simply a minor suggestion to improve when possible.
The brewery – The fact it was located within the park should be mentioned sooner. When was the park's inaugural year? Would be helpful to provide readers a frame of reference.
Date approximation varies and sometimes gets too detailed. The month and year should be sufficient unless you are mentioning more than one event in the same month. Examples:
"early June 1998"
"late April 1999"
Under Operation, reduce the use of "Gwazi". It appears in almost every sentence.
Under Refurbishment, same thing with "Iron Gwazi", specifically in the last two paragraphs.
Phrases like "was considering" and "were discussing" when written in past tense should just be "considered" and "discussed". I didn't try to spot them all, so I'd suggest combing through the entire article and clean that up as much as possible.
That's all for now! I'll move onto the other sections soon. I also plan to comb through with some light copyediting, mainly in regard to punctuation. --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello GoneIn60! Good to see another APARKS personnel in the comments, questions, and concerns. Took care of the header for history, and understanding about characteristics. Rearranged brewery factoids and date approximations. Reduced instances of Gwazi were noted. I am going to attempt to remove most if not all, passive voice structure momentarily. Gonna go section by section. Let me know about further CQCs and how it looks! :) Appreciate it! Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Much improved, nice work! I made a few more light copyediting changes, and it seems really close now. One thing is the use of "passholder". Most reliable sources I've seen have this as one word, so might be worth looking into further. I could be wrong. This article mostly writes it as "pass holder", but there is at least one instance of "pass-holder". Minor concern overall. The other remaining concern is the claim of tallest coaster in Florida. Do we really feel that's worth mentioning? It just comes across as promotional in nature and not really a statistic anyone is tracking (other than Busch Gardens' advertising dept and local newspapers).I'll comb through the other sections by this time tomorrow. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Made the word more consistent with reliable sources. The claim of its height (regarding Florida) I think could be worth mentioning, considering height is a general statistic/matter of fact and not an attempt of going-out-of-the-way-to-find-a-record-to-claim by the park. I changed the wording of the sentence, but can always be changed or removed. Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it may be a statement of fact, but its relevance could still be questionable. I mean, if I build a roller coaster in Montana, chances are it's going to be the tallest in Montana! It happens a lot at roller coaster articles, with claims like "tallest in Texas" or "fastest on the west coast", but regional statistics really matter very little in the grand scope of things. Marketers can shrink the region as small as they want to so they can make a claim of some kind to draw publicity and attention. I usually remove those on sight if it's not a category recognized in reputable publishers of statistics, such as Amusement Today or RCDB.Other recent changes look good. Would just point out that "overtime" should be two words, "over time", in the context of how you're using it. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha! Went ahead to remove and merge supplemental sentence with current one. Let me know how it looks! Also added spacing. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:37, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"largest and fastest dueling ... in the southeastern United States" – Similar to the tallest in Florida claim, this may not be significant and leans promotional in nature. Were there even a significant amount of dueling coasters in the southeastern US (did anyone outside of Florida recognize this)? Consider omitting or at least moving to a more appropriate section such as History (how it was marketed) or Reception and legacy.
The ride layout descriptions are well written for the wooden coaster version, but they rely on the use of "before" way too often. Suggest removing a few of those instances where possible.
Consider breaking up the Iron Gwazi layout summary into two paragraphs.
Also regarding both ride layouts, there is mixed usage of inline citations, where some appear at the end of the sentence they support, while others appear at the end of the paragraph (#76, #77, #81, and #82). Either approach is fine, but typically you don't want to mix both in the same paragraph. Doing so can make it more difficult to determine which refs support which claims.
Under the steel coaster section, the first paragraph is full of short statements strung together without any real transition. It's almost as if a timeline or list of facts were thrown together into a paragraph. Consider combining sentences, or at least lead with a different subject when going from one sentence to the next. The two sentences that start with "RMC added" and "RMC constructed" are back to back, for example. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reception and legacy
Looks pretty good as is, nice work! If anything, maybe consider saying "The revamped Iron Gwazi" or the "The rebuilt Iron Gwazi" in the opening of the 3rd paragraph; might help the transition from Gwazi to Iron Gwazi, but totally your call. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alrighty! Thank you again for the comments, questions, and concerns! Moved the promotional sentence to the history section as the source cites Busch Gardens and RCDB for that material, most likely coming from BG. Removed excessive words and moved sources for "Ride experience" to back of paragraphs. Added contextual queues to "Steel roller coaster" section. Added words for reception and more content from publishers for clarity on two authors reviews.
I did leave the Iron Gwazi ride experience section in tact, but merged a sentence. With this instance, breaking could have the effect of highlighting two indiscriminate parts of the ride rather than a continuous fluid of the whole.
Again, thank you for the review, and let me know how it all looks now or what could be changed! Adog (Talk・Cont) 06:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Big improvement in the final stretch of the article, excellent work! I give my support to this nomination based on prose and layout. Good luck with any image review and source spot checks! --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update
Just a quick note that I worked with the nominator to further tighten the lead (diff). It has been reduced from 360 words, 17 sentences to 330 words, 16 sentences --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The "Jim Dean" in the middle of citation 1 is confusing.
The YouTube citations appear to comply with WP:VIDEOLINK, but why are the first two defined as (Internet video) and the last one not?
I somehow think citation 90 ("Original Gwazi vs. Iron Gwazi (Sign inside queue area). Tampa, Florida: Busch Gardens Tampa Bay. 2022.") fails WP:V.
Unless I missed something, all references have archive-url's and accessdates.
I don't see any unreliable sources. The issues outlined above are minor, so I think I can pass this source review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want to make sure the source is good so here is my shot. I do not know if this is an argument, but we do have a Template:Cite sign for 90. The sign is in a public area, anyone can view within the queue area of the attraction if one wanted to verify its authenticity. I do have a video recording of the sign (since I thought this might pop up) if that helps in any way for verification. I can upload it to the Wiki if signs are free game from copyright or via email.
As for the actual source itself, I believe it could pass WP:ABOUTSELF. Its not an exceptional claim that is actively promoted by the park, no claim to third party or events, article does not primarily base whole truths on this source, and I do not have a doubt the park would be inauthentic about a statistical fun fact. The sign's statement is used in conjunction with another statement that is accessible by 88. Let me know if this is reasonable! :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:29, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, if you really want to upload that video you can Adog—seems slightly overkill to me, but that would definitely solve the issue! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source spotcheck—10 citations will be randomly assessed
2a: can you provide the relevant sentences from McMorrow-Hernandez 2017 p. 77 Adog? 2b) no relevance to text, so should be removed.
11 good
13 neither this or 14 verify the phrase "each track titled "Lion" and "Tiger" to correspond with the respective dueling theme".
17 good
27 good, in combination with other citations
38 good
57 no verification of "testing halted after a week" statement
81 verification failed
98 good, in combination
111 good
7/10—not fantastic, we'll have to do another round of spotchecks. Ping me when you're ready for that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course and I provided some explanation and/or fixes for the sources that are questionable for clarity. Let me know if these suffice or should be changed! :)
From McMorrow-Hernandez (2017). page 77: "On October 25, 1995, it was announced the park's Anheuser-Busch brewery, which originally served as the anchoring feature of Busch Gardens Tampa Bay, would close. The demolition of the sprawling facility took more than one year." Deleted the second cite. I can send you a screenshot of the e-text if needed (on Amazon kindle).
The screenshot is not necessary, methinks. That should be fine.
For 13 and 14, 13 states: "One of Busch's Gwazi coasters will be decked out like a lion, the other like a tiger". corresponding to earlier statement "The bookend coasters will be named after an African legend of a half-lion, half-tiger called Gwazi that is forever struggling with itself." Removed 14 and subbed 12 for better clarity: "Taking the shape of twin dueling wooden coasters, the beast with both a lion's head and a tigers head will 'attack itself'..." and "One side will belong to the tiger with the trains being painted in blues and mauve colors to connote speed. The lion's trains will be in orange and reds to connote strength..." if that can suffice.
I still don't think its enough to support 'with each track titled "Lion" and "Tiger"'; the sources explicitly say the ride would be themed half-lion/tiger, but not titled as such (could be "Mufasa" and "Shere Khan" for all the sources say). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For 57, source: "Then the coronavirus pandemic happened, and it all came to a halt on March 16." and later "...a coaster that was completed to the point of doing test runs just before the coronavirus closure ... But the park closed just before testing was complete." That does rely on the previous statement in the Wikipedia article "RMC completed track work on March 8, 2020, and testing began the next day." March 8 to March 16 for the testing window. Should the previous reference of the testing start be linked with the sentence about testing halted after a week?
I think that would be best.
For 81, the ref. defines the element that the main article lists. I have linked the main article next to the definition. Apologies for that confusion.
Forgot to mention, thank you for doing the source check! Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AirshipJungleman29, thanks for picking this up, it is appreciated. Just checking that you are aware that it is ready for your next round of comments. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That was not a microsecond, my apologies (I did a spotcheck, was more than halfway through, my computer crashed and I rage-quit). Here I am again—if you're reading this, everything went well (crash-wise, not source-wise, although maybe that too—see below). Citation numbers from this revision
17 AGF, can you provide the quote?
27 good, but archived version is from 2009 and greatly out of date.
35 good
51 good
67 good
72 good
89 inaccessible, both on active and archive urls.
107 good
109 good
115 good
A much better result. None of the issues above are that concerning, so ping me when they're fixed Adog. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Phew. I can understand a rage quit and picking it up another day. I have done that a many of times. Good thing your system still works! I picked up a few books from my local library to hold me over and got a free Slurpee (or two) from 7-11 on July 11, so its been a pretty cool layover. Will provide the quotations above for inaccessible and AGF.
17: Relevant quote from the Tampa Tribune: "To boost the hype, the Tampa theme park has come up with a unique gimmick."
"Busch Gardens will let a limited number of annual passholders ride Gwazi a day before the official opening, for $8.95 a person. Only 5,700 people can buy the special First Ride tickets, which are numbered and personalized with each passholder's name".
"Busch is selling the tickets as "collectors' items ... to show we appreciate them," promotions director Jerry Johnson said", and "Busch won't say how many First Ride tickets have been sold or how many of its 4 million guests last year were season passholders".
27: Thank you for pointing that out. The archived reference was probably a holdover from the previous Gwazi article that I started to include information way back when, and I misjudged the bot would update previous archived links.
89: As of now, I can access the live article from St. Petersburg, Florida. Maybe a region-locked thing? I do see the problem on the archived end. Wayback Machine is telling me I cannot save the URL because it "has been excluded from the Wayback Machine" ... for whatever that means. That usually appears when I try to skirt around paywalls. Sometimes it works. Sometimes, it does not. This has now led me to archive it using archive.today, something I have never used but now learned! Relevant quotes from WTSP: "The coaster is built where the original Gwazi used to be and uses some of the iconic coaster's wood foundation for the new ride."
"While most of the station and ride foundation is from the original coaster, Schaffer said Iron Gwazi won't shake riders around like the first all-wooden Gwazi".
@AirshipJungleman29: At that, thank you again for your patience with me and your system. The article is looking better than ever! Let me know how it looks and if anything else should be addressed. :D Adog (Talk・Cont) 13:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough. I pass both the source spot-check and the the source review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:58, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WP:FAC coordinators: I want to inquire if there is anything more I should do in terms of review, since this is a first time nomination for me. This article review received three supports for prose, a pass on image review, and a pass on source review and integrity spot checks. I want to again thank everyone so far for taking their time to review this article, and for their patience in responses to my questions, comments, and concerns. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems to be ticking along nicely. It now has the minimum amount of support to be considered for promotion. However, the coordinators would ideally like more eyes on it for any nomination, and that applies especially for a first-time nomination. I shall list it at Urgents and see if we can attract another reviewer or two. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Placeholder for now, will review over next day or so, hopefully. JennyOz (talk) 08:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Adog, thank you for such a comprehensive article. I see it has had very comprehensive GA, Peer and FAC reviews including from editors who are familiar with roller coasters and members of APARKS.
Sorry my review took a little longer than I expected, but I needed to leave it for a couple of days after my first read through to clear my head to read it afresh. I found this hard going, not because it is not well written which it certainly is, but because I know very little about the subject matter. (And I'm not about to tell you how long ago I last rode on one:) though after reading this I feel like I just did!) The good use of wikilinks was very helpful. I have suggested a few more.
Please forgive me if any of my suggestions contradict what has already been discussed or are contrary to the APARKS project guidelines.
Here goes...
lede
Iron Gwazi (formerly Gwazi) is a steel-track hybrid roller coaster at - confusing? That sounds like it was the same thing just formerly named Gwazi. And Gwazi was not steel track. Maybe replace formerly with "(replacement of Gwazi)" or similar
To replace the former site of the Anheuser-Busch brewery, Busch Gardens announced - but they didn't "replace" the actual site, they replaced the brewery on the same site? Can I suggest something like 'To repurpose the site of the former Anheuser-Busch brewery, ...'?
Did you mean to miss moving "former"? It's the same site and the brewery that is former? JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great Coasters International (GCI) built Gwazi, a wooden dueling roller coaster - I'd insert 'the original' between "built" and "Gwazi" just to further ensure readers are clear from the beginning that there are two different versions
sold "first ride" tickets for a preview event in June 1999 - did they sell them in June or was the event scheduled for June? If the event was in June change "for a preview" to 'for the preview event' or 'preview event scheduled in June 1999'
of the 5,700 tickets sold, 3,500 tickets went to - second "tickets" not needed?
tickets went to Busch Gardens Tampa passholders - add Bay ie Tampa Bay?
the park built a bridge across its loading platform - is a "bridge" roller coaster jargon for something or was it just to block off access to the loading platform or something else? Where did it lead to and from?
I had a smile at this. It was basically a fixed pedestrian pathway to cross over the track. What was its purpose? RCDB states is was presumably for accessibility or fast pass holders. However, there is already an exit ramp that this bridge leads to that I believe the park used for those other two purposes (and they currently use for ADA accessibility). There is no clear definition of its purpose, but it nonetheless confirmed that the Tiger track was closed permanently. You can see it at this video, starting around 2:05 (we do not condone trespassing for evidence (sigh), but this is the only frame of reference I found). Changed to "the park built a pedestrian bridge across its loading platform". Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed and see above! Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Refurbishment and relaunch
Rose, then vice president of park services, stated - then not needed?
An internal SeaWorld Entertainment presentation leaked online to the public in October 2018 showcasing several projects under development across its parks, including a replacement ride for Gwazi as a "high-thrill hybrid roller coaster" - I think it would read more smoothly if 'was' is inserted before "leaked" or "showcasing" is changed to 'showcased'?
filed demolition permits with the city of Tampa - permit applications?
For this, the Tampa Bay Business Journal is quoted: "A demolition permit was filed for the 'Demolition of selected portions of an existing site structure, selected buildings, and portions of buildings' at Busch Gardens, according to city records". Not sure if you would still want this changed let me know. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RMC filed a lien against SeaWorld in May 2020 for $3.5 million out of $9 million - $3.5 million of the $9 million
the company says it was owed for work construction - tweak tense to 'said'
released a point-of-view video of the roller coaster - include video in the link ie point-of-view video (otherwise it reads like an opinion rather than a visual perspective)
postponed Iron Gwazi's launch date a second time to 2022 - comma after time (ie they didn't postpone it twice to 2022)
Iron Gwazi and Zadra at Energylandia, another RMC-built roller coaster located in Poland, - "another RMC-built roller coaster located in Poland" is ambiguous. Would be better if tweaked as 'Iron Gwazi and Zadra at Energylandia in Poland, another RMC-built roller coaster'
remove the left over "located in Poland" JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Poland - shouldn't really link countries but you are linking to ensure readers don't confuse the location to one of the Polands in the U.S.?
Fixed and see above! Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ride experience
This header might be better in plural ie 'experiences'?
roller coaster with 1.25 million board feet - board foot/feet not commonly known outside U.S. and Canada. You could consider linking it within the first convert ie ((convert|1.25|e6board feet|m3|abbr=out|lk=in)) which produces 1.25 million board feet (2,900 m3)
By adding lk=on parameter, it also links m3. Using lk=in would just link the uncommon board feet. Not a problem, just noting in case it wasn't intentional. JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gwazi was given a sealant coat instead of being traditionally painted to blend in with the park's African theme - commas after "coat" and "painted"
instead of being traditionally painted - instead of traditionally being painted
GCI offered new Millennium Flyer trains - maybe insert 'their' ie 'offered their new'
used the steel I-Box track created - wlink I-Box track (there's a helpful illustration there). Ditto link in infobox?
Regarding how much of the original wooden structure was reused, director of design and engineering Andrew Schaffer stated - I think you could remove "Regarding how much of the original wooden structure was reused" without losing anything
The roller coaster's theme is the crocodile, similar to other attractions at the park that carry an animal theme. - To avoid 2x "theme", you could swap one to 'motif'
remove left over "an" JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The queue area has educational elements about the species and their conservation, with reptile-themed graphics painted throughout. - "the species" is a problem here as there are many species of crocodiles. You could swap "the species" to "the reptile" and then change "reptile-themed graphics" to 'crocodile-themed'
Comparison table - has Iron Gwazi duration 1:50 (as does infobox) but prose says "One cycle of the roller coaster takes about two minutes to complete" (I imagine 10 seconds is quite a long time difference in context?)
Yes, and good eye. It was suggested, I think, during this review since the duration of so-and-so is a pretty exact number I started to put "the roller coaster takes about...to complete" at the end of a ride experience section. A roller coaster does not complete its course in the same amount of time throughout a day or even between spans of years since weather, climate, and structural integrity can work to slow or speed up a roller coaster's trains. The stated 1:50 is the time the roller coaster takes to complete its course, generally or variably. Let me know how you feel about this. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reception and legacy
Gwazi received generally positive reviews upon its debut - add in 1999 (and remove "1999" from "The opening of Gwazi in 1999 coincided")
some riders commented on the partial rattle typical of wooden roller coasters - were they complaining, nostalgic, enjoying the rattle?
Rattle is subjective. A little rattle can be positively or negatively viewed depending on the person. The reviewer shows it in a promising, positive light, so I inserted that adjective for clarity. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
including Dueling Dragons and The Incredible Hulk Coaster at Universal Islands of Adventure and - insert 'both' before "at"
The rebuilt Iron Gwazi garnered positive reviews by critics on its debut. - add in 2022
and re-ridden ability - what's that, re-rideability?
Worded awkwardly, replaced with "ability to be re-rideable". Essentially how many times can I ride this thing before I get sick (of it). Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed and see above! Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Awards
In its debut year, Iron Gwazi received the Golden Ticket Award for Best New Roller Coaster.[105] - maybe move that to above the second table and add 'and its first ranking?
but refused medical treatment after the ride -"refused" sounds very strong. Did they just decline because they weren't badly injured?
Fixed to they declined. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
References
Ref 44 quote=A crane can was [sic] spotted this month - I'd just "silently" fix that to "A crane was spotted this month" ie per MOS:TYPOFIX "However, insignificant spelling and typographic errors should simply be silently corrected (for example, correct basicly to basically)"
Ref 46 Wynee, Sharon Kennedy - typo Wynne, but... in other refs (56, 64, 66, 93) this author's surname is given as Kennedy Wynne, and...
Fixed and wow, a little embarrassing for me haha. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Misc
template Roller coasters at Busch Gardens Tampa Bay - includes a link to Gwazi which is a redirect to this page, prob not allowed, should be piped so that it doesn't appear as a different page (and also appears as a black not blue link on this article)
infobox section Morocco - not mentioned in prose?
Gwazi existed in the Morocco section of the park previously, so Iron Gwazi is, presumably, in the same section. No reliable sources clearly state this, and in recent times, the park sections are unclear where they stop and start on a map. I removed this. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Image Iron Gwazi - Busch Gardens Tampa.jpg|...|alt=Iron Gwazi as pitured in July 2020 ... - typo pictured
Image caption "A view of the original Gwazi's entrance and Lion's lift hill in 2006" - remove "A view of"
I see you caught another of these (Skyride) but this one can also go JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed and see above! Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's all from me for now. Let me know if you need any clarification to any of my comments.
I have learnt a lot, including that: 1 lion + 1 tiger = 1 crocodile. Crikey! Thank you again for your mammoth work on this. JennyOz (talk) 13:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JennyOz: Wow, I still am amazed at the little things that were still there. The name is very much unimaginative, and I wonder why the park did not go with its other trademarks it had filed for "Twisted Tiger" or "Uproar" (my favorite). Added notes to parts that need clarity or provide an explanation. We do not have many standards that limit our style guide (however, we are actively working on some). Thank you for taking your time to review this article. I greatly appreciate it! Let me know if there is anything else that should be changed or needs attention! :D Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all of those tweaks and explanations Adog. I've added 7 minor comments above for your consideration. Feel free to adjust my bulleting! JennyOz (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JennyOz: Alright, those things are now corrected. Let me know if there is anything else that needs to be changed or that I missed. Thank you for these tweaks! Adog (Talk・Cont) 11:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All on track! Thanks Adog, I am very happy to add my s'port. JennyOz (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per the FAC instructions, as the (first-time) nominator, I support the current article based on the comprehensive, thoughtful, and detailed feedback from the reviewers above. Unless otherwise stated, I believe this FAC is ready for determination on consensus. Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, we assume a nominator would support their nomination's elevation to FA status, but it's always nice to hear appreciation for the reviewers' efforts...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the ((featured article candidates)) template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 21:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_01.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
