Talk:Mirabilandia

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Amusement Parks

This disambiguation page 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.Amusement ParksWikipedia:WikiProject Amusement ParksTemplate:WikiProject Amusement Parksamusement park articles

Untitled

Someone REWROTE this article from the italian park to cover the brasilian... --89.0.10.69 (talk) 19:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Split

Would it be possible to split the subject into two articles, like it is done on the French wiki ? See : fr:Mirabilandia (Brésil), fr:Mirabilandia.--Jik jik (talk) 15:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since there is no mention of the Italian park on this article it's not really a split, but I see what you mean. If you want to start writing an article about the Italian park I'd suggest doing so in a sandbox in your userspace (like User:Jik jik/Sandbox). Once you're done, I'll move this article to Mirabilandia (Brasil) and move your article to Mirabilandia (Italy). This page (Mirabilandia) could then serve as a disambiguation page. How does that sound? Themeparkgc Talk 22:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry. I have no ambiton to write articles on the English wiki. My English is not good enough. I just found out and resolved the confusion across the various Interwikis and found out that the French wiki is the only one, which handels both subjects (Italian and Brasilian park) in parallel. As the first complain in discussion appeared, that the article was originally describing the Italian park and was overwriten by the Brasilian one, I just wanted to give the proposal to "exhume" the original version (Italian park) from the article history and let both articles live in parallel. But I am for sure not going to do it by myself.--Jik jik (talk) 04:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article version [1] shall be probably the best starting point for the article about the Italian park.--Jik jik (talk) 05:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So far no other one did, I tried to preform the page split according to my proposal.--Jik jik (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

On the page Talk:Mirabilandia I described the reasons why I think that it is resonable to handle the topics Mirabilandia (Brasil) and Mirabilandia (Italy) separately. If I did something wrong in sense of the standard processes (copying instead of redirect), I am sorry, and I would appreciate and help and correction. The final state accroding to my opinion shall be :

Mirabilandia (Brasil) : separate page based on the version of Mirabilandia page dated 19:14, 28 April 2011
Mirabilandia (Italy) : separate page based on the version of Mirabilandia page dated 18:25, 20 May 2010
Mirabilandia : shall serve as disambiguation page

--Jik jik (talk) 17:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the a10 speedy request with a history merge request to repair the cur&paste move. noq (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]