# Talk:Banshee (roller coaster)

Some thoughts for possible did you know hooks:

... that Banshee at the Kings Island amusement park will become world's longest inverted roller coaster when it opens in 2014?
... that, with a length of over 4,000 feet (1,200 m), Banshee at the Kings Island amusement park will become world's longest inverted roller coaster when it opens in 2014?
... that Banshee at the Kings Island amusement park is named after the Irish mythological spirit and will become world's longest inverted roller coaster when it opens in 2014?
Any other ideas, comments or opinions? Themeparkgc  Talk  08:42, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh...Uumm......Sorry, I jumped the gun (mine was similar to the first suggestion by you). We can still change it. Anyway, my vote to for number 1 which is already similar to the one in the nomination. Number two can be alternate.--Dom497 (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
My top vote would be for # 1 followed by # 3.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 13:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
My vote is for # 3. Seems like it brings more to the table in one line. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I didn't realise you had already done that Dom. I personally prefer #3, followed by #1. Themeparkgc  Talk  05:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

We should probably do away with the hatnote, since it's not likely many readers will find it useful. Very few if any will be looking for Mantis when they search for "Banshee" or "Banshee (roller coaster)". Better to mention it in prose within the article instead. Doing this would also give us a reason to remove the "See also" section. Any objections? --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

No objections from me. Maybe a sentence or two could be included directly after the one about the trademark application. Themeparkgc  Talk  07:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone object to me saying that this is a terrain roller coaster?Wackyike (talk) 21:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Nope.--Dom497 (talk) 22:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Usually a terrain roller coaster refers to significant use of terrain in its layout (e.g., forests, cliffs, etc). Banshee doesn't strike me as one that fits the bill. There are only a few trees around part of the track and no significant changes in elevation due to the terrain. --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:33, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I can understand what you are saying GoneIn60, but I think the following extract of the article sums up why I think it could be considered a terrain roller coaster:

I'm not definite either way, just slightly leaning towards terrain at this stage. Themeparkgc  Talk  23:55, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I suppose it's subjective as to whether or not that's considered "significant" use of terrain. We're talking about a 41-foot difference and some unmeasurable increase in speed (since we don't know what the speed would have been like without it). When I think of a terrain roller coaster, I usually think of coasters like The Beast or Phantom's Revenge, that really make use of the terrain throughout the entire ride, not just on one or two elements. Doesn't matter much to me though. Just making an observation. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

From browsing RCDB, it does appear to be the fastest. However, there are several inverted coasters in the database that do not have their speed listed. Also, unless there is a source that actually states it is the "fastest", then I'm not sure we should rely on RCDB alone. Doing so would appear to be crossing the line with original research. Also, doesn't it seem strange that Kings Island wouldn't have used the opportunity to bill it as the fastest in addition to the longest? --GoneIn60 (talk) 20:48, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't Wicked Twister faster?Wackyike (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
WT isn't a complete circuit invert.--Dom497 (talk) 21:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
You're right. I didn't realize that you guys meant complete circuit above and on the article page.Wackyike (talk) 22:34, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey guys, Volcano is actually faster than Banshee and it's complete circuit.Wackyike (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Wow, totally forgot about this. Glad you removed it. Even if we couldn't find an example like Volcano, a source should have been cited for that claim. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Banshee (roller coaster). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.visitkingsisland.com/events/things-to-do/special-events/KI-for-the-Cure
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130811033336/http://www.wdtn.com:80/dpp/news/ohio/kings-island-unveils-the-banshee to http://www.wdtn.com/dpp/news/ohio/kings-island-unveils-the-banshee#.UgSV8azLKSo
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140101055422/http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20130808/NEWS01/308090004/Kings-Island-unveils-Banshee-roller-coaster?nclick_check=1 to http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20130808/NEWS01/308090004/Kings-Island-unveils-Banshee-roller-coaster?nclick_check=1
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/features/2014/03/17/kings-island-begins-testing-banshee/6514397/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/entertainment/Banshee-Kings-Island-Amusement-Park-announces-plans-for-15th-coaster
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.screamscape.com/html/kings_island.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.themeparktourist.com/features/20130808/13794/preview-banshee-kings-island
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: 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) 10:32, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Banshee (roller coaster)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Newtothisedit (talk · contribs) 02:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I'll pick this up for review. I will start leaving comments next week.--Newtothisedit (talk) 02:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it 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. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 


### Comments
"Banshee cost $24 million to build, the largest project in Kings Island's history at the time" to "Banshee cost $24 million to build, making it the most expensive project in Kings Island's history at the time"
Thats all I have, good job on the article. --Newtothisedit (talk) 15:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the review @Newtothisedit. I apologize that I didn't see this before - I have fixed that issue now. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:41, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Looks good. I'll pass it. Newtothisedit (talk) 15:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)