Talk:Six Flags Great America

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Batmobile replica.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Split proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to not split the section. Harobouri ^{T • C (he/him)} 12:38, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

---

I am proposing the splitting of the History section into History of Six Flags Great America. According to the section size template seen above, the kB for the whole History section is around 74kB, and I'm estimating over 60kB if excluding linking, images etc. The section is very large and has multiple sources so I believe that it should get its own page. -- Harobouri ^{T • C (he/him)} 12:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

• Leaning Oppose – According to WP:LENGTH, an article with around 10,000 words could consider a split for readability purposes. The whole article is about 9,400 words, but does cross the threshold of around 50kB readable prose. The size rule suggests that over 50kB of readable prose may be split off into its page, increasing with size. I do not think a split is necessary now, but as the history section expands, it will probably need to in the future. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

The risk with splitting off a history section is people will forget about the split off page and keep adding to the history on the main page. Reminds me of High Speed 2 and History of High Speed 2. Garuda3 (talk) 20:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@Garuda3:, @Adog:, I totally understand the problems of splitting off the History section into another article and it would be totally redundant just to create a history article just for it not to be expanded on there. I see that the History section should be expanded more if it were to be split off. -- Harobouri ^{T • C (he/him)} 02:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Neutral about this. On one hand, the history section is pretty long. However, @Harobouri, what the section size template actually calculates is the full wikitext size, not the prose size (which is the length of the article that is visible to the reader). Using a byte counter, I calculated that the actual prose size is probably only about 32 kB. Garuda3 also has a good point that people can forget that there's a history subpage.

Nonetheless, the article itself is pretty long, with 56,548 bytes of prose, and the history section makes up an outright majority of this article's prose size. Sooner or later, the history section is going to be expanded further, and the question of splitting the article will come up once again, likely with a consensus to split. In my opinion, it's a matter of when to split, not whether the article should be split. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article length concern

Harobouri, I noticed the "split proposal" discussion and thought of a suggestion. A good portion of this article is being consumed by the various ride charts. Kings Island and a lot of other park articles tend to struggle with that issue. What I suggest is creating a dedicated list article where those charts can be moved to, similar to the early efforts at List of Kings Island attractions. The list article would be meant to cover every attraction, while the main park article instead focuses on summarizing the different themed areas and only mentioning the most notable attractions, such as roller coasters and award-winning rides.

Take a look at Cedar Point#Roller coasters. This type of chart would be good to compile and maintain at the main park article, while every other chart gets booted over to the list article, cutting down on clutter and overall length. Just a thought! --GoneIn60 (talk) 08:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey @GoneIn60, thanks for the idea! I'll start the move of the tables to the list article page, and then summarize the rides in this article. --Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him) 13:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Name origin

Mention Six_Flags#Name. Jidanni (talk) 17:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Why? Six Flags (the company) purchased Great America (the park). The name is only relevant as far as current ownership. Lost on  Belmont  ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 21:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)