Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia talk:APARKS)
Jump to: navigation, search
Super Star, Freak Out and KMG Booster, night.jpg WikiProject Amusement Parks
Main Talk Standards Assessment Featured Content Templates Task Forces Collaboration Participants Newsletters Category Portal Popular Pages
WikiProject Amusement Parks (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Theme park attractions use of Italics[edit]

Hey, I was trying to find what the MoS was about whether theme park attractions should use Italics or not, but couldn't find it on this project or MOS:ITALICTITLE. Is there a consensus on how this should be? To me it seems like it falls under the Major work category and is very similar to the Named exhibitions criteria. --Gonnym (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I share the same confusion with Gonnym as some articles in our project, such as Sheikra or Falcon's Fury are not italicized, but others such as Manta and Kraken are. I think they shouldn't be italicized based off what MOS:italictitle has to say but I think there should be consensus and more comments on this. Adog104 Talk to me 19:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
The most recent discussion is here, but there have been others as well. The overall consensus within the WikiProject has generally been to avoid italics for roller coasters. Besides the manual of style guides mentioned in past discussions, most reliable sources do not italicize them either. --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Funny enough that the example in that conversation is currently in italics. Back to the issue though, there are three points in the MoS that make me believe that theme park attractions should be in italics:
  • "Named exhibitions (artistic, historical, scientific, educational, cultural, literary, etc. – generally hosted by, or part of, an existing institution such as a museum or gallery), but not large-scale exhibition events or individual exhibits" - so exhibitions in a park should be, for example: Marvel Cinematic Universe#Live attractions: Avengers S.T.A.T.I.O.N
  • "Paintings, sculptures and other works of visual art with a title rather than a name" - would seem that a ride is more a work of visual art than it is a building.
  • "Named oratorios, cantatas, motets, orchestral works, and other compositions beyond the scope of a single song or dance" - Star Wars: A Galactic Spectacular would fall under something like this --Gonnym (talk) 22:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Certain types of attractions may very well fall into what some Manual of Style guides deem italics as necessary, however, I do not believe this applies to roller coasters and amusement rides. Also, we should keep in mind that exhibitions referenced above typically refers to when items (usually artistic in nature) are on display in a gallery-type venue. As long as that's the case, I would support italics. The examples you gave represent exceptions that warrant italics. --GoneIn60 (talk) 01:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

About references and sources[edit]

I've been trying to create articles relating to roller coasters more recently and trying to improve Mako among others amusement ride articles. More recently, I've been coming to small conclusions that some information found in detail among Good Articles and Featured Articles are found on websites that are less publicly known and reported (for instance, on SheiKra it sources "BGT Guide" and "Thrill Network" among those of other major outlets). To the point, my question is: what kind of websites are applicable to be used in roller coaster articles? Do they have to be well-known and referenced websites from mainstream media such as RCDB or Screamscape? Or can they be from lesser-known media in the industry, such as those who give a review about a roller coaster or may provide details as to the construction/making of it? (I've read WP:V about blogs and such but I feel like I need more verification about what I should and shouldn't use among what sources are okay or not) Adog104 Talk to me 23:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Typically, a source is deemed reliable if the author is a recognized expert within the industry (i.e. recognized by a mainstream publication), or if the publisher of the author's work is accepted as reliable. Many blogs and fan websites do not qualify per WP:USERGENERATED and WP:SPS. There was a recent RSN discussion you can read through in which the consensus agreed that greatadventurehistory.com, for example, was not reliable for similar reasons. Generally, RCDB.com is considered a reliable source, but I would strongly hesitate citing Screamscape. Information there is quickly removed over time, and often, they report on unconfirmed rumors. The only time I generally accept that source is if it's complemented by a reputable publication, such as a newspaper or magazine. If you're not sure, you can always start a discussion at WP:RSN and post a link on this page informing the project to weigh in. Hope that helps! --GoneIn60 (talk) 01:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
GoneIn60; It most certainly does, thank you! :D Adog104 Talk to me 02:48, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Requested Move for The Racer (Kings Island)[edit]

Please weigh in at Talk:The Racer (Kings Island)#Requested move 3 August 2017. Thank you. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

List of amusement rides[edit]

Would anyone care to weigh in here? Please see also the two preceeding edits. Thanks. 82.132.224.129 (talk) 09:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Weighed in, and ruled in. Adog104 Talk to me 10:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
"Weighed in, and rule in."? It seems like that's a signal of ownership qualities. From that phrase alone, it seems like you want the final edit. I didn't see any effort to explain your decision and you could of at least tagged me, so we could have a discussion instead of making your own changes. Hawkeye75 (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Hawkeye75; Didn't I just respond on my talk page a few hours ago exactly explaining on what you had said about the revert where I even pinged you? Also that's quite the accusation considering I had only edited that page twice recently, one edit being a revert per a remark you had made explained on my talk page and one per a mistake I made that I mentioned on my talk page. I'm going to say again this wasn't in my intentions to be rude, and to please be calm. Adog104 Talk to me 01:48, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Consensus[edit]

To be clear, and also because of this now, I would like to invite other editors in this project and outside to speak on the subject of amusement rides and what constitutes one and what doesn't. Since now looking between Hawkeye75 and I, there clearly will not be a consensus if slight comments are going to be [made] between us. Adog104 Talk to me 02:22, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

See below. Adog104 Talk to me 01:16, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Water parks and water rides[edit]

Four water parks have been removed from List of amusement parks in Greater Orlando with the edit summaries "Volcano Bay isnt an amusement park lol" and "more water parks removed". Should this be reverted? (If so, please go ahead - thanks.) 82.132.218.85 (talk) 07:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Water rides are now being removed from List of amusement rides. Should Category:Water rides be excluded from Category:Amusement rides? 82.132.242.204 (talk) 12:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I would say that they should be removed. They are kind of a sub-category of amusement rides, but at the same time, something pretty different. --Elisfkc (talk) 16:39, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
In term, I would agree for what I remarked about the water park slides, since they're technically not amusement park attractions rather mainly water rides (like Elisfkc said a sub-category). Technically water parks are generally a sub-category or equal to an amusement park status depending on their marketing or ownership (from my opinion, not from any direct source material). Although Volcano Bay seems to be a separate entity from its sister amusements parks, and therefore I would say it is as such. Adog104 Talk to me 18:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Removal of certain "amusement rides"[edit]

Hello, I have removed some articles that I fimly believe do not belong in List of amusement rides. If you want to review the current list and spot any other articles that don't belong there, please go ahead. I have removed: AquaLoop (water slide), Backyard railroad (not even rideable), Chairlift (form of transportation), Fishpipe (water activity), FlowRider (sport/water sport), Lazy river (usually found at water parks and not amusement parks lol), Russian Mountains (not sure what this is), Water slide (speaks for itself) and Wind Seeker (article is about Cedar Fair WindSeekers). @Adog104:, you had a few problems with some of these, so if you want to share your opinion, I'm tagging you in this conversation. Hawkeye75 (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Hawkeye75; Let's go through the list I guess since there wasn't much conversation from a third opinion, so Yes, No (Backyard railroad's are ride-able, and are a form of amusement attraction: Example), Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes (although water parks can be classified as standalone amusement parks), No (since Russian Mountains are a form of amusement attractions that preceded the actual roller coaster), Yes, Maybe (since its an amusement attraction, but debatable I guess due to its specific locations). Sorry about earlier also, I thought with us both being heated I thought I should have taken a break which ended in my computer breaking anyways and now I have to focus on other things off-wiki which you can find out in my talk page. Adog104 Talk to me 00:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Changing the 'Hypercoaster' wiki drastically[edit]

Hi everyone,
I started this Wikipedia account a few days ago with the intentions changing and correcting Wikipedia pages about the amusement branche. I was looking at the Dutch 'Mega Coaster' Wikipage and saw that a lot of things were very, very wrong. I was looking at the English Wikipage about Mega Coasters and this one was contradictory too. Me and a other Dutch speaking Wikipedia author are on a mission correcting these pages drastically and right. I will explain the following in paragraphs numbered 1 till 4:

1. Mistakes Dutch Wikipage 2. Mistakes English Wikipage 3. The starting process 4. Exchanging information

Mistakes Dutch Wikipage
The mistakes made on the Dutch wikipage were too bad. Really. The page told us a Mega Coaster is counted in 3 groups: Mega, Hyper and Giga. What's wrong about these is that 1st Mega a model name is from Intamin AG[1] and Mack Rides[2], second Hyper[3] being the model of B&M, Arrow Dynamics[4] and Mack Rides[5] (larger than the Mack Megacoaster) and Giga[6] being a model from Intamin. All hypercoasters from B&M having the minimal height of a Giga aren't actually a Giga, but still a Hyper. Heights: Intamin Mega Coaster 45 meters (148ft) till 90 meters (295ft) Intamin Giga Coaster 90 meters (295ft) till 120 meters (394ft) B&M Hyper Coaster 50 meters (164ft) no max.

This are the 'approximate' heights of the models and the other companies are using these heights too. With some information from RCDB we will get to it.

Mistakes English Wikipage
The English Wikipage was to be honest a well advanced Wikipage with correct information, but with common mistakes like parting B&Ms and Arrows into Giga's while it's just a model name, where they don't belong to. Read previous paragraph for further information.

The starting process
The starting process is probably the most difficult time for a Wikipage. Common things like "Oh, I forgot about that" "I did not have enough time to involve in any of these Wikis..." etc. When we make a deal, we talk furthermore.

Exchanging information
Information can be found on RCDB, for European coasters we are available for questions, if we are able to ask about non-European coaster to you.

I hope to hear from you soon,

Kind Regards
--Rc030 (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC) (thanks Adog104 for linking this community)

Appreciate your thoughts on the matter, but I'm not quite sure what is being asked. Perhaps you should start by linking to the articles you have interest in, such as hypercoaster. Your comments above don't mention what articles are involved and aren't clear on what changes need to be made. One thing to keep in mind is that there is the model from Intamin, Giga Coaster, and the height classification known in the industry as giga coaster. So while the manufacturer may or may not recognize the term when naming their models, that doesn't change how the industry has defined them. Reliable sources other than RCDB, such as newspapers, magazines, books, etc., have published information that support the height classification and ignore the model names. So if your goal is to only go by the model name, then your efforts will likely meet some resistance.
But before we assume what those efforts are, please take some time to lay out specific examples of what you want to change. Thank you. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata and RCDB on multi-location coasters/Migrating RCDB numbers to Wikidata[edit]

I've been adding information to a lot of wikidata items recently. I am wondering what the best way to deal with multi-location coasters is (like Rock 'n' Roller Coaster Starring Aerosmith, where there is one in Florida and one in France). Specifically, I am trying to migrate RCDB numbers to Wikidata and then have the infobox template call that number from Wikidata. This would mean that we don't need to actually have the RCDB number on the article itself, but just on the Wikidata page, similar to coordinates and official websites (also, this makes it easier for other language projects to call the RCDB number). However, I noticed that even though {{Infobox roller coaster}} has an option for multi-location coasters, we don't seem to support the RCDB number for these extra locations. Can we figure out a solution to support these multi-location coasters? --Elisfkc (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying it would pull from Wikidata if the parameter in the article is empty? That would be the preferred scenario as opposed to removing the parameter from the article altogether. While Wikidata can be useful to fill in missing information, I don't believe it should be relied upon as a full-out replacement. That's just an additional location that would need to be maintained and wouldn't be clear to most Wikipedia editors, especially new ones. I prefer to set and update the RCDB number as needed directly in the article, but I can appreciate having Wikidata as a backup just in case the parameter isn't filled in. --GoneIn60 (talk) 10:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, still trying to figure it all out, bug wise. Right now, {{RCDB}} is pulling it on Expedition Everest but doesn't seem to pull it from Wikidata elsewhere. However, both templates are running if statements that sort articles into Category:Articles needing RCDB numbers and Category:Articles needing their RCDB number moved to Wikidata as needed. As for the multi-location {{Infobox roller coaster}}, I see now that there is already a solution (after looking at Seven Dwarfs Mine Train). --Elisfkc (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)