Talk:Jungfrau Park
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello
[edit]Hello RickK !
Regarding the edits about "He went as far as grossly forge "proofs" (see Von Däniken" and " The overal impression is quite cheap [1]", I understand that the formulation is not appropriate... Do you think that there coud be alternative formulations which could save these ?
The part about Von Däniken might sound a little bit tendencious, but his claim to "educate" the population would probably be better presented with at least a lmited background on the fellow.
For the "cheap" part... I think you'd have to be there to judge -- it's hardly believable. I remember the badly adjusted projectors, the ridiculous flying saucer coming down from the ceiling "Ed Wood"-like, the lack of animations, ... I'm not even talking about the content of the message, but the mere means of commnication were really sub-standard compared to things like "Futuroscope" in Poitier. You se that there is even a press report which addresses this... (even in the context of "is expected to provide a boost for the stagnant local economy. The park has created 120 new jobs and the company expects to attract half a million people a year." -- now that say somehting). So again, do you think that a better formulation is possible ?
Thanks and cheers ! Rama 07:44, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Is it open now?
[edit]The official page link doesn't work for me, and I cannot find out. Does anyone know for sure? Kelisi 21:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
To Alli_jayne321
[edit]The entry has some serious style problems that could be resolved with better copyediting.Hoopes (talk) 18:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Start a discussion about improving the Jungfrau Park page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Jungfrau Park" page.