Talk:Amusement park

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Amusement Parks (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Amusement parks 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


Most of this article is written badly. That is to say, it makes too many assumptions without references and generally is not written in the style of an encyclopedia as wikipedia entries strive to do. It reads too much like an essay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Stuff like this is weird, "The temporary nature of these fairs helps to convey the feeling that people are in a different place or time."

Huh? How so, and says who? When I go to fairs, the only impression about time and place and is that I'm in the place where the temporary park is erected from time to time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:42, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


Since the funfair came to town this morning (Cambridge UK), I'm looking at improving some of the related articles.

First off I am proposing to move the section on Fairgrounds here to become an article of its own, either at funfair or fairground (the dictionary definition of fairground is as the place were fairs take place, but fairground gets more google hits and the University of Sheffield apparently has a National Fairground Archive). Amusement parks certainly grew out of travelling fairs and share some of the same rides. But in the UK, a travelling fair is significantly different from an amusement park.

There also appears to be some confusion over the use of the word 'carnival'. I suspect in the United States the word 'carnival' is used to describe a smaller travelling fun fair. However the article on carnival is exclusively about its Catholic Europe/South American use as public revelry most particularly associated with Shrove Tuesday but potentially covering the months from mid-winter to Easter. Funfairs are often to be found alongside these festivals but they are not the same thing.

There must also be connections with the tradition of medieval fairs and markets (partially covered at fair) and modern county fairs, state fairs and similar agricultural shows, most of which appear to be covered in a disjointed fashion. I would also expect to find some similar traditions in mainland Europe - as I child I saw a German travelling fair/funfair which had very lavishly decorated traditional rides.

This morning I also discovered there is a small British subculture of 'fairground enthusiasts' who are rather similar to train spotters, following travelling fairs around the country and photographing their lorries. -- Solipsist 13:18, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  1. There seems to be a lot of regional bias towards the Americans and British. Other locations seem to be neglected.
  2. Solipist, I agree with you, the funfair article needs to be split.

Andrew pmk 02:20, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK I've now moved the section to funfair and started to grow it. It would benefit from some input on the European perspective and other international differences on funfairs.
I was tempted to move the section on Australian shows which now looks significantly out of place. However, it looks more appropriate to merged it with agricultural show. -- Solipsist 29 June 2005 18:03 (UTC)

May I suggest that the concept of a 'theme park' (from which this article is a redirect) is rather different from an amusement park or funfair? I think there is quite a lot to be said about the development of this concept in recent decades and the spread of this aspect of American culture throughout the world. Fluoronaut 12 December 2005 22:03 (UTC)

2 things. "Funfair" or "carnival" make me think "circus", which is a local (only?)/Canadian (only?) term for what both those terms imply, including a transportable fairground, complete with rides. Also, I've heard the oldest amusement park is in Denmark, N Swe. Anybody able to ID & locate it? Trekphiler 07:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


I'm sort of new to this, but I was confused when I posted a link to a site and then someone removed it removed because he/she considered it to be "spam". The site is not my own, and neither myself nor the site owner make money from the link. I only posted it because the content in the galleries would benefit the Wikipedia community. Can I get some explanation for this?

Edit in question:

WillMcC 23:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The linked site sells DVDs and T-shirts. You've even got a 'store' link in the main menu - that's spam. If the site offered seminal information on the subject it might be OK, but in practice it appears to have little to offer. See Wikipedia:spam and Wikipedia:External links for more on guidelines. -- Solipsist 00:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

As I said, spam was not the intention (if I wanted to spam, I would write a bot and do exactly that) Calling it "spam" is a bit extreme. Your link defines spam as "advertisements masquerading as articles, and wide-scale external link spamming", which the link is neither. The only purpose of posting was to benefit the Wikipedia community, as the site owners have some pictures of rarely seen attractions ( in the gallery.

According to the "External Link" page, one can add "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as textbooks or reviews." If it's the "store" section that's a problem, I understand, but to call it spam is rediculous. If this is the case however, you might want to remove the other links with stores too.

Alternatively, here are some sites that could be useful - An amusement park news and rumors site - A decent photo gallery of theme parks and rides, though no longer updated

WillMcC 01:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


Would someone create an infobox for amusement parks? It seems that parks would be ideal for an infobox where info like location, establishment date, owner, related themes, number of rides, number of rollercoasters, acreage (sq km), website, associated hotels/resort could be consolidated into a easy to read format? This could be easily be built from/consolidate the Disney park infobox Template:Disneyparkinfo. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 23:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Spammer on the loose[edit]

User has been inserting a large number of external links on many coaster/amusement park related sites. All these links point to I have removed most of them, but everyone should be on the lookout for when this user strikes again. WillMcC 03:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Some potentially useful info for inclusion in the article --Jason Ling 14:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC):


Legends for Chart:
B-Park & Location

  A B                                                    C
     Vista, Fla.                                      15,170,000
  2 DISNEYLAND Anaheim                                13,360,000
  3 TOKYO DISNEYLAND Tokyo                            13,200,000
  4 TOKYO DISNEY SEA Tokyo                            12,200,000
  5 DISNEYLAND PARIS Marne-La-Vallee, France          10,200,000
  6 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS JAPAN Osaka, Japan                9900,000
  7 EPCOT at WALT DISNEY WORLD take Buena Vista, Fla   9,4000,000
     WORLD Lake Buena Vista, Fla                       8,260,000
  9 LOTTE WORLD Seoul, South Korea                     8,000,000
     Lake Buena Vista, Fla                             7,820,000
 11 EVERLAND Kyonggi-Do, South Korea                   7,500,000
     ORLANDO Orlando                                   6,700,000
     ORLANDO Orlando                                   6,300,000
 14 BLACKPOOL PLEASURE BEACH Blackpool, England        6,200,000
 15 DISNEY'S CALIFORNIA ADVENTURE Anaheim              5,630,000
 16 SEAWORLD FLORIDA Orlando                           5,600,000
 17 YOKOHAMA HAKKEIJIMA SEA PARADISE Yokohama, Japan   5,100,000
 18 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS HOLLYWOOD Universal City, Calif  5,000,000
 19 ADVENTUREDOME at CIRCUS CIRCUS Las Vegas           4,400,000
 20 TIVOLI GARDENS Copenhagen Denmark                  4,240,000
 21 BUSCH GARDENS TAMPA BAY Tampa Bay, Fla             4,100,000
 22 SEAWORLD CALIFORNIA San Diego                      4,000,000
+23 OCEAN PARK, Hong Kong                              3,800,000
+23 NAGASHIMA SPA LAND Kuwana, Japan                   3,800,000
 25 KNOTT'S BERRY FARM Buena Park, Calif               3,580,000
 26 PARAMOUNT'S KINGS ISLAND Kings Island, Ohio        3,510,000
 27 PARAMOUNT CANADA'S WONDERLAND Maple, Ontario       3,420,000
 28 EUROPA-PARK Rust Germany                           3,300,000
 29 DE EFTEUNG Kaatsheuvel, Netherlands                3,200,000
 30 CEDAR POINT Sandusky, Ohio                         3,170,000
+31 MOREY'S PIERS Wildwood, NJ                         3,100,000
+31 PORT AVENTURA Salou, Spain                         3,100,000
+31 GARDALAND Castelnuovo del Garda, Italy             3,100,000
+31 LISEBERG Gothenburg, Sweden                        3,000,000
+34 SANTA CRUZ BEACH BOARDWALK Santa Cruz, Calif       3,000,000
 36 SIX FLAGS GREAT ADVENTURE Jackson, N.J.            2,800,000
 37 HUIS TEM BOSCH Sasebo City, Japan                  2,750,000
+38 SIX FLAGS MAGIC MOUNTAIN Valencia, Calif           2,700,000
+38 LA FERIA DE CHAPULTAPEC Mexico City                2,700,000
 40 SUZUKA CIRCUIT Suzuka, Japan                         200,000
 41 CAMP SNOOPY at MALI OF AMERICA Bloomington, Minn   2,590,000
+42 BAKKEN Klampenborg, Denmark                        2,500,000
+42 HERSHEYPARK Hershey, Pa                            2,500,000
+44 ALTON TOWERS Staffordshire, England                2,400,000
+44 BUSCH GARDENS (THE OLD COUNTRY) Williamsburg, Va   2,400,000
 46 SIX FLAGS GREAT AMERICA Gurnee, III                2,300,000
 47 SEOUL LAND Seoul, South Korea                       2250,000
+48 WALT DISNEY STUDIOS PARK Marne-La-Vallee, France   2,200,000
+48 SIX FLAGS OVER TEXAS Arlington Texas               2,200,000
 50 SIX FLAGS MEXICO Mexico City                       2,150,000
Note: + indicates a tie. Attendance estimated for calendar
year 2004.
Source: Amusement Business and Economics Research Associates

Lead tweak[edit]

An anon removed the following from the lead:

Disneyland in California (USA) was the first theme park.

Should it be restored? - RoyBoy 800 23:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Cite it, then we can put it back. Timetrial3141592 00:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Noteworthy amusement, theme and water parks[edit]

I removed this list from the article -- making a selection is clearly POV. We already have a comprehensive list at List of amusement parks. bogdan 19:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

External links section[edit]

The External Links section was a bit of a mess, so I trimmed down the listing of links and changed the tag. Of the sites that remain, I believe that there are better sources than some, but I deleted anything that did not offer a directly valuable resource beyond this page. If anyone wants to add a link, please check Wikipedia:External_links and propose it first on this page --WillMcC 20:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


SUGGESTED LINK - Contains maps with links and locations for what seems to be every amusement park in north america. Also state specific maps as well. Very useful information.

SUGGESTED LINK - * Negative-G - Photos and information about amusement parks and roller coasters.

SUGGESTED LINK - * EuroThemePark - An online MMORPG which is based on theme/amusement parks, you build your own.

SUGGESTED LINK - * The Coaster Forums - Discuss theme parks, roller coasters, flat rides, other rides, water slides, trip reports, upcoming trips, and more at these forums! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

SUGGESTED LINK - * Defunct Parks A catalog/encyclopedia of N. American amusement parks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

SUGGESTED LINK - * Watch Tower Amusement Park —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

SUGGESTED LINK It's a database of amusement park all over the world. It show them in a map. --Angelo Penone (talk) 11:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


I am going to tackle the task of inserting some references for the article. Any suggestions appreciated. --Tinned Elk 00:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Done for now. Still needs some added work. --Tinned Elk 01:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

New section on Alternative Energy Theme Parks[edit]

As a new wiki editor, I just added this section. OK? There is a lot of activity and discussion in the business world about alternative energy theme parks, but it is difficult to find wiki-quality references. If anyone has seen a propsal or plan that can be referenced, please enter some text in this section. I'll continue to look, myself, but this first entry was the only one that came up on Google. I have a quote about an Epcot contact in an email saying that such a new style park is a "no-brainer", but that can't be referenced until it is reported. I also have a quote in email concerning Disney and Las Vegas as a another place a park might be going - lots of sunlight there. This first Cape Cod entry obviously exploits their wind potential. Nukeh (talk) 15:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The Manapouri power plant "ride" is one of the scariest things I have ever done. If any wiki people have pictures of the bus going into or through the tunnel to the power cavern, it would be nice of you to link here through wiki media and edit the text accordingly.Nukeh (talk) 23:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

While I certainly believe you were editing in good faith, what you linked to described either (a) a tour of a hydroelectric plant or (b) a stab in the dark latching onto currently-hot buzzwords as a hope of jump-starting tourism (yes, I looked at both references). I toured Hoover Dam 4 years ago, and I would hardly call that a theme park, as there was no theme; it was a hydroelectric dam. For that matter, having medical restrictions is not one of the defining characteristics of a theme/amusement park. Convenience stores have warnings about the use of microwave ovens for people who use artificial pacemakers, and they certainly aren't amusement parks.
Let's assume for a moment that there actually is a desire to construct amusement parks whose theme is alternative energy. By extension, we would then need to craft separate subheads on all the different types of themes there are--movies (like Universal Studios Hollywood and Disney's Hollywood Studios), fantasy (like Disneyland) or even chocolate (like Hersheypark). The article should be generic, with the actual theme discussed in the article for the individual parks.
McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I should start a new page and think of a better title. Any suggestions? Perhaps a Hover Dam tour and other things educational could be included. Nukeh (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Description of notable tour elements could certainly be added to the various facility articles; I looked at Hoover Dam's page and it does mention the tour but it doesn't have too many details. Or, you could start an article on the power plant in New Zealand you visited. However, don't approach it as a theme park, since that's not what it is. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 02:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Ontario Place[edit]

Ontario Place is many things. Inside a mall is not one of them. Heads up, I'm going to edit that notation. DJSparky (talk) 03:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Pay one price vs. pay as you go[edit]

This section appeared to have too many citation tags. I do agree that some citations were needed, and I did add a few. However, some fact tags were added to what would be simple, logical arguments. For example, under a pay-as-you-go scheme, guests do only spend money on what they wish to experience. Further, prices can be adjusted if only to satisfy the laws of supply and demand. We can certainly discuss this here, and I would suggest adding a section banner instead of filling the thing with fact tags. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 17:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Unable to Add Reference[edit]

I attempted to add a reference to a work which, in full disclosure, I am the author. This is an academic, peer-reviewed text that considers the history and development of the theme park. It's also the first to focus rather exclusively on the theme park as a social phenomenon--including how the theme park has been used as a 'text' by people on virtual spaces, in feature films, and in novels and video games. Alas, I cannot include such discussion or reference in this page due to the administrator's decisions. This is unfortunate as I am interested in theme parks as a social form and I feel that this research would benefit the entry. I should note that I have made no profits from this text. It is an academic text intended to extend the public's understanding of the theme park as a social form. In any case, I am hopeful that others might develop this line of reasoning in the entry since my edits are not allowed by this particular editor. Xrhetor (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Xrhetor, this is not about "censorship", "tolerance", "politics" or any of the other false claims you're making about my actions. Simply put, a substantial percentage of your edits have involved anonymously posting links, text and other references to your own published work. You may well disagree with the decision to remove your self-references per the conflict of interest and other guidelines, as is your right. You're also certainly entitled to seek other opinions. However, I must object to your chosen methodology, which to date has involved the misrepresentation of both my actions and your own edits. If you want to have a fair, balanced discussion about this, by all means do so in a centralized location rather than on a series of unconnected talk pages, and be clear about what has really occurred. Making false claims, and spreading those claims to multiple pages, does not strike me as "fair" under any definition of the term. --Ckatzchatspy 23:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Ckatz, you have helped prove a point here. You are the arbiter and you are the one who gets to decide the nature of the content. This has been taken to a new level. I am not permitted to cite my own work, even though, to again quote Wikipedia's policy ("This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia, but it does prohibit them from drawing on their personal knowledge without citing reliable sources. If an editor has published the results of his or her research in a reliable publication, the editor may cite that source while writing in the third person and complying with our neutrality policy. See also Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest.") this can be allowed. Here is one example of how this ultimately impacts the quality of Wikipedia entries. If I wanted to discuss an ethnographic study of the theme park AstroWorld, which some might consider significant, I could not do this per your watchdogging. To do so would be to cite the only work published in this regard, which I have written. So, here you (Ckatz ) fail Wikipedia in two respects: (1) you have limited the encyclopedic content of an entry, (2) you have decided that expert knowledge on a subject is irrelevant. The new level, as you now have raised it, involves your rebuking of my contributions to a number of 'talk' pages. Talk pages are not part of the entry (directly) and now you are deeming those contributions to be illicit. But, certainly, this is not about the power of language, representation or politics...because, so it seems, you have said so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xrhetor (talkcontribs) 23:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I think you may be over-interpreting Ckatz's actions. While we appreciate your attempts to add your work as references in Wikipedia, if that's all you're doing, it does begin to look less like helpfulness and more like self-promotion. We have to guard very carefully against the latter, for what should be obvious reasons. You have several options ahead of you, here. One, you could present your work on the talk page of relevant articles for consideration by other authors; that's the modest route, in which you trust the judgment of your fellow editors to recognize the relevancy of your work and add appropriate information from it to the articles. Two, you could seek a broader, single forum, rather than several individual article pages; Wikipedia:Editor assistance may attract the attention of those more skilled than I at offering suggestions. Three, you could begin editing other areas of interest that have nothing to do with your own published work, and establish a reputation for fairness, skill at evaluating sources, and collaboration, and only then begin using your own work as a source on a limited scale; this will greatly reduce, if not eliminate, any suspicion of self-promotion from your actions. Powers T 14:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Urban Legend[edit]

The article still contains urban legends regarding history. I want to recall this one: Walt Disney never visited the Efteling park in The Netherlands, prior to opening Disneyland. He did visit Madurodam (also in The Netherlands) however, a place that possibly inspired him to the concept of the "Storybook Land" attraction. More, the totally walled concept of Madurodam: a dyke going around it preventing views in and preventing the visitors to see the world outside of Madurodam (= one specific point Walt Disney always repeated to be a design guideline for Disneyland as a whole, and of Storybook Land as an attraction !). Miniature railways were circling the Madurodam park, hence a double relationship again with Disneyland & Storybook Land, both having the trains encircling it completely, and in those cases: on the dyke. But, no design or concept relation whatsoever between the Efteling park, and Disneyland can be proven. Concept & design differ totally and Walt's visit, as mentioned, is an urban legend. Reference :

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC) 

File:4a25634r.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:4a25634r.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Family-owned theme parks--Keith McKray?[edit]

"The park is still owned and operated by the Keith McKray family has several other parks including Moonlight Luna Park, Fish Story, Pirates of the Caribbean, Carosel, Royal Carnival, Pay and Ride, Garanimals, and Tom Sawyer Adventures."

What does this even mean? This sentence appears right after the article talks about Silver Dollar City and the Herschend family, and I don't know who Keith McKray is but he certainly doesn't own or operate SDC. After googleing "Keith McKray" the only info I can find about him is the same exact grammatically incorrect sentence on other websites. If nobody clears this up I'll probably delete this sentence. Nonoah59 (talk) 16:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems it was vandalism by (talk · contribs · WHOIS) on 26 December 2011. I have now reverted their edits. Themeparkgc  Talk  22:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

First Amusement Park in the Country Debate[edit]

Eldorado Amusement Park of 25 acres was opened in 1981 overlooking New York City. It is mentioned as the first of it's kind in several references. I added this Eldorado Amusement Park to the article but it has been removed; Why?--Wikipietime (talk) 21:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)