Talk:Log flume

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Forestry Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry 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.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This appears that it might have been plagiarized from this website: https://www.mendorailhistory.org/1_logging/flumes.htm but it is also possible that this website plagiarized Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reasonable Doubt24 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page of this article has been redirected to Talk:Log flume (attraction) as the original article was divided up into these two articles and the talk page only concerned the amusement park attraction. -Yupik 08:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Log flume (ride) - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 16:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Timber slide and log flume is the same: merge! Creuzbourg (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting; two articles that have stood since 2003! They are certainly very similar, with Timber slide describing their use to bipass waterfalls, and Log flume describing the use in other contexts. Given that both articles are well-developed, and the scope is identifiably different, it might be best to leave them as this are but to link them with a hatnote. Klbrain (talk) 08:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This: seems quite different from this: . The intro/definitions at the articles describe the difference. But there appears to be inconsistency or overlap in the use of the terms. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:46, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]