[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Zip line

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal

[edit]

These two articles are about the same thing I think they should be merged. The Flying fox (cablecar) article seems to (mistakenly) be more focused on childrens playgrounds, but Australians use the term "Flying fox" for everything covered in the Zip-line article. --Ozhiker 12:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - they look the same. No one in the UK will know what a flying fox is though. Sophia 15:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In North America the term "flying fox" is generally used, if at all, as a children's toy operated at low heights and speeds with little or no safety equipment required. The term "zip-line" however is viewed more as an outdoor adventure activity operated at high speeds and sometimes at considerable hights and covering much longer distances. "Zip-lines" require safety gear such as harnesses, helmets and, depending on design, thick leather gloves for braking. These pages could be combined but distinctions between the "toy" and "serious equipment" should be made in the newly combined article. Khaufle 03:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've just had a conversation with my sister in Scotland (UK) on this topic and apparently all the children there refer to these slides as Flying Foxes, which appears to contradict Sophia's point. On balance I think they should be merged, given that the zip-line article now makes bold mention of the Flying Fox term. Rhanbury 29 April 2007
This link is Scottish and calls it a zip-line [1] - do you sister's kids mean the high professionally run type of wire or the back garden type? Sophia 18:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I object. The proposal was put up and decision made in a period of five days. Much longer time should be provided for such a change. I object on the basis that Zip line is US Centric (as is much of WP) and shifting this article reinforces this. I request that the merge discussion be had before it is merged without agreement. Maustrauser 01:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it was a month and five days --Ozhiker 09:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merged doesn't mean it will be changed to Flying fox. Zip-line is the term used for a wire that is high enough to require safety equipment in the UK too so it would seem that this should be the parent article and Flying Fox as a "toy" version should redirect here. Sophia 09:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The merged article made specific note that in Austraila & New Zealand "Flying Fox" can also refer to the professional grade equipment. Also, the original article "Flying fox (cable car)" redirects to this page so that someone searching for that term will find it. According to Wikipedia stadards a waiting period over a month in duration and without any objections (or almost no feedback whatsoever) is sufficient before merging articles. The article was merged in such a way as to not distort the facts in either article.Khaufle 00:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I apologise on the time frame front, I can't count. I still point out that WP is becoming so US Centric that anything that has it's own name or cultural identity is subsumed under an American title. The argument could be made that zip-line should be redirected to Flying Fox, but I stand a snow ball's chance in hell of winning that argument. There are 300 million US residents and 25 million Australians and New Zealanders and so it is clear which cultural demand will win out. Why merge them at all? Why not have the Australian & NZ Flying Fox and the US and British Zip-line and each article could refer to each other article? Maustrauser 10:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an Australian, and I agree that the name zip-lne is US centric, but when I arrived at the zip-line article from another page (Cable car), my first thought was "thats a flying fox, how come the article doesn't say that it is a flying fox?". After skimming the article, I noticed that there was a separate article for a flying fox, which only partly covered what I would call a flying fox (it only considered toy/playground applcations). Thats why I suggested the merge. Although it is US-centric, I'd prefer to have one page that covers everything as long as it is clear that "Zip line" is not the only name used. --Ozhiker 19:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So shall we merge zip-line with flying fox? Maustrauser 00:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I had merged the article previously I carefully (I thought) wrote it so that the term "Flying Fox" was prominantly noted. I've found the term "zip-line" used in a lot more geographical areas than just the U.S. such as England, Central America, South Africa (actually uses both terms), and Canada. You're welcome to edit the Zip-Line page to better represent flying fox but to merge zip-line INTO flying fox seems to me to do both topics an injustice. Khaufle 03:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't heard of zip-line until it came up in a news article today, which led me to this page and then the Flying fox. There's discussion there about a merger too, which ends in deciding against it, but I think that the main case for a merger is that they are so similar and there is already a section in this one flying fox, which will inevitably lead to duplication and/or diverging information about the same thing. Incidentally I also noticed that there don't seem to be redirects for most of the synonyms given in the first line, apart from a variant spelling of "foefie slide", being Foofy slide, leading to Flying fox. This needs to be cleaned up at the very least. I will see if I can add a few redirects shortly. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notable zip-lines around the world?

[edit]

I'd love it if someone with knowledge of major ziplines in the world could add information about them. There are videos on myspace and YouTube of a few claiming to be the "world's biggest", "world's longest", etc. but information on that is spotty. I'd love a list of major ones-- please remember to add sources for verifiability. Migp 18:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A decent (tho not 100% up to date and probably not complete) collection at http://www.ziplinerider.com/Longest_Ziplines.html (first hit on google) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.7.237.245 (talk) 07:24, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Longest in the world?

[edit]

Happy Valley Adventures in Nelson, New Zealand has a ride that is half cable car and half flying fox. It's 1.6km long and I am trying to verify if this would make it the longest in the world. This article claims the longest in the world is in NZ - does anyone know which that is referring to?

There's one in SA thats 2000m long, 280m high, and claims to be the fastest; up to 140km/h. http://thelongestlistofthelongeststuffatthelongestdomainnameatlonglast.com/long366.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.222.6.200 (talk) 23:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, 'SA' (in the line above) is South Africa.--Potion (talk) 17:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

origin of term "zip line"

[edit]

Twomothy 23:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Does anybody know when the term zip line came into use. Our summer camp has had what we call a 'sky ride' since the 1940's or 1950's. It consists of a thick (1") hemp rope tied between two trees, and the rider holds onto another rope attached to a pulley. Now all the kids are calling it a zip line. Which term came first?[reply]

Short Documentary on using a zip line

[edit]

I have added a link to a short documentary on zip lines in the External Links section. This video delves deeper into the experience, revealing more facts and details than the YouTube videos of a person with a camera going down the zip line. -- 69.253.80.30 (talk) 07:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Names for zip-line

[edit]

A South African colloquialism for this is foefie-slide or foofie-slide. I am unsure of the origin of the term, but it sounds onomatopoeic.Potion (talk) 17:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

[edit]

I've cleaned it up a lot since its first iteration, but still think Canopy tour ought to be merged here, since at its heart it's a type of ziplining. — e. ripley\talk 13:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Canopy tours and zip-lines are often used synonymously .However Canopy tours are less adrenaline oriented and often include rope bridges or skybridges connecting some platforms as well rappelling down to platforms below. An example of a canopy tour with the above can be seen here http://www.ziplinenirvana.com/details/hocking-hills-canopy-tours.html and further evidence highlighting the differences is presented here http://www.adventurelogue.com/get-out-there/zip-lines-and-canopy-tours.html I can add content to both pages (Canopy tour and zipline) in order to disambiguate them. (Johncline (talk) 09:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks for your perspective John. I still hold my original opinion, so I suppose until someone else weighs in we'll remain at an impasse. If we don't get some other attention to the question soon, I'll open up a request for a third opinion to expose the question to some more eyes. Thanks again. — e. ripley\talk 21:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a bit of time without any additional input, so I'm going to go ahead and list this on WP:3O. I'll post a link when it's done. — e. ripley\talk 18:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here it is: Wikipedia:Third opinion#Active_disagreements. — e. ripley\talk 19:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion on merge proposal

[edit]

I am responding to a request for a third opinion.

Having read both articles, I think it's appropriate that they remain separate. The {{merge}} template on the canopy tour article may generate further discussion. – Athaenara ✉ 00:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion in merge proposal

[edit]

As a professional in the industry it has been found a necessity that these designations remain separate. The primary overseeing body (Association of Challenge Course Technology) provides separate definitions in the written standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brupski (talk • contribs) 00:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flagrant advertising

[edit]

Many advertisements were contained in the 'professional zipline courses' section, which I removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.2.21 (talk) 20:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge "Tyrolean_traverse" Into Zip-Line

[edit]

The former is either a synonym for the latter (as the Zip-Line page essentially says) or a subtype of the latter with few distinctive features (as the Tyrolean traverse page would have it); either way, the Tyrolean_traverse page seems redundant and should be merged in and edited down for redundant content. Mikalra (talk) 12:18, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NASA

[edit]

Hasn't NASA used zip lines as a means for emergency evacuation from the top of launch pads? Seems like I read somewhere it was implemented after the Apollo 1 disaster so that in case of emergency astronauts could be evacuated to a safe distance away from the launch pad/spacecraft as quickly as possible. Eric Cable  |  Talk  20:19, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is NOT a ‘zip wire’, it’s ‘zip line’.

[edit]

And if it is, then a disambiguation page need be added as there is something legitimate and widespread referred by design as ‘zip wire’, namely a two or more conductor cable in which the two conductors are separated from one another by a very thin section of the insulation material. They are made so that you may cut into the thin section at one end and then pull the two ends apart like a zipper. Most inexpensive headphones use this type of wire and have a piece keeping the wire from unzipping past were the wires separate to go to each speaker.

Thistledowne (talk) 10:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC) Thistledowne (talk) 10:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip-cord Thistledowne (talk) 10:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement and merge under way (finished Jan 2019)

[edit]

I am in the process of trying to improve this article and will be merging and deleting Flying fox (cablecar) into it afterwards, as previously discussed on that talk page. I will also consider some of the issues raised on this talk page and try to incorporate suggested improvements, and also improve citations. However I have found so far that there's very little on the history and non-adventure type of uses in reliable English language sources, so some sections may remain more extensive than others. Still a work-in progress!
Attribution: I have, in my first draft re-write, included John Hill's photo of the zip-line/flying fox in Ladakh. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:51, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PrimeHunter Sorry to undo your brief edit but I had just got to the end of reshaping a whole section and was about to save when it said there was an edit conflict. I'll be returning to this tomorrow and will review all of the <br>s, which I have only used as an attempt to counteract an erratic bug I keep encountering when I try to preview my changes (varying results between paragraphs) - which I also posted on the Help page discussion. I have to stop now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies Sorry, unintentionally reverted your revert, but I'm doing a lot of work on this page atm and will come back to this. Can you please hold off until I've finished? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have finished my changes for now. I've tried to improve the flow, layout and citations and merged info from Canopy Tours and Flying Fox (cablecar) before turning those into Redirects. I found it difficult to find sources of a very high standard for the topic, with most hits landing on commercial or travel-guide types of website, and some remain which may not be quite WP:RS, but I tried to provide extra citations where possible. I will leave further improvements to others. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 27 January 2019

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to alt, I've left the disambiguation page where it is for now as all of the entries have no space but no prejudice against that being nominated upon this closure. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Zip-line → Zipline – This name is most commonly used on tourist sites. See here, and here. Mstrojny (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 00:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I pondered this issue as I was working on this recently, and in the end decided to stick with the status quo and bring all spelling in this article in line with the article name so at least there is internal consistency. There's a huge variation out there amongst both spelling and terminology, which varies from country to country too. I see that the Google Ngram thing won't show anything beyond 2008, and as the industry seems to have grown enormously in the past 10 years, I'm not sure if that can be the ultimate guide; also, it seems to relate only to books, not online mentions? Unfortunately using quotes to attempt to gauge numbers on each in Google search is not satisfactory because most sites add the alternative spellings for search purposes, but FWIW, "zipline" got 10.4m hits and zip-line and zip line 9.9m and 9.7m respectively...
I don't feel strongly either way, so long as the article retains internal consistency. I suspect that a non-hyphenated form will take precedence at some point though. As mentioned above, there are few authoritative articles on the topic. I have just looked more closely at Zipline (disambiguation) page, which shows 3 articles relating to specific uses of that term (all commercial but only one relating to an actual zip-line), and wondered if this needs anything more? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
One thing that's for sure is that "zip-line" is distant 3rd behind "zip line" and "zipline", which are a very close 1st and 2nd. "Zip line" pulls just barely ahead on several measures, like the Ngrams above. I also just checked Google Scholar, which would have fewer false-positives, and "zip line" gives 2740 results vs "zipline" with 2190. Another, more narrow measure using patent searches shows "zip line" at 504 results vs "zipline" at 131. The article definitely should change from being the 3rd-place spelling, and so far any objective, impartial evidence seems to point to "zip line" being slightly more common. -- Netoholic @ 06:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@StraussInTheHouse: I'm fine with whatever the consensus is here. Maybe the disambiguation page can be moved to Zip line (disambiguation) to be consistent with whatever consensus is here. Mstrojny (talk) 00:53, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. —  AjaxSmack  04:33, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Edit to Zip-line#Safety 31 January 2019

[edit]

I was going to revert all of your recent edits, @Eblebl1:, but as you appear to be a novice editor and there is some information of possible value in your recent large addition to this section, I have added a "too detailed" template instead. If you can compress and summarise what you have written, with citations, to a couple of sentences outline the development of the safety code (with a blue link to ANSI and anything else on Wikipedia), we may be able to salvage some of it. Personal experience and first-hand knowledge cannot be a source for what you write in Wikipedia; sources must be cited as per WP:RS. The paragraph beginning "Zip lines have been growing in popularity since 2002..." will have to go, for several reasons: no RS, the implication that EBL single-handedly fuelled the increase in popularity of zip-lining, too much detail, reads like an ad, etc. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following your lack of response to my message, @Eblebl1:, I have no alternative but to revert your edit, say within 24 hours. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Laterthanyouthink, I did make edits and changes per your suggestions. For some reason they didn't take. They are now posted and much more condensed per your feedback. Thank You!Eblebl1

Retrieving the zipwire seat from the other side of the valley

[edit]

When a zipwire crosses a deep and/ or Lon valley, retrieving the seat is a non trivial task. The operation of zipwires in this context must have addressed some awkward issues to ensure any additional rope or similar used to retrieve the seat or other cargo device does not get caught up in other things or otherwise cause complications. This is not needed on an application like a children’s playground. CuriousMarkE (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[[Special:Contributions/2400:1A00:B080:6

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zip_line&oldid=1218476474"