Template talk:Infobox Disney attraction\Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Disney on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

"it's a small world"

Locations, openings and status

1964 New York World's Fair April 22, 1964

Pepsi / UNICEF Closed October 17, 1965

Disneyland May 28, 1966

Open

Magic Kingdom October 1, 1971

Open

Tokyo Disneyland April 15, 1983

Open

Disneyland Park (Paris) April 12, 1992

France Télécom Open

Hong Kong Disneyland Early 2008

Planning phase

Magic Journeys

Locations, openings and status

EPCOT Center October 1, 1982

Closed February 9, 1986

Disneyland June 16, 1984

Closed January 1986

Tokyo Disneyland January 17, 1985

Closed 1987

Magic Kingdom December 15, 1987

Closed December 1, 1993

Contents 1 Usage 1.1 Definitions 1.2 Attraction Image example 1.3 Options example 1.4 Future changes 1.5 Credits 2 Discussion 3 Duration

[edit] Usage

• Copy the template text from the template page.
• Enter the parks in order of the attraction's opening date.
• Click here to see more examples.

[edit] Definitions

• Attraction: the name of the attraction.
• Attraction Image: the logo or an image that represents the attraction.
• Park: The park(s) which the attraction is in.
• Opening: The date the attraction opened.
• Options: Images for Fastpass, single rider & handicapped access.
• Sponsor: The current sponsor or sponsor when attraction was closed only.
• Status:
  • Planning phase
  • Under construction
  • Open
  • Open - "Current name"
  • Closed - Date
  • Under rehab
  • Seasonal operation

[edit] Attraction Image example

[[Image:Spacemountainoriginal1977poster.jpg|100px]]

Output:

[edit] Options example

[[Image:FASTPASSAvailability.png|20px]] [[Image:SingleRiderAvailability.png|20px]] [[Image:Handicapped.svg|20px]]

Output:

[edit] Future changes

• Colors for each entry.
• Customizable colors for the main text background.
• Dynamic park numbers.

[edit] Credits

The Splash Mountain infobox and the infobox that Wikipedia:WikiProject Disneyland uses was expanded and modified to create this one. The "programming" was put together thanks to various infoboxes on Wikipedia by blm07 03:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The alternate image and image caption was modified from Template:Infobox Album.

Big thanks to A.J. for the independent row code!

[edit] Discussion

Archives Old infobox talk

I know I've gone through many, many changes and designs, but this should be the most flexible and complete template that could be used for attractions. It has a few hidden options to make it work better under just about any circumstance. If this becomes the standard, I'll change all of the current infobox (at least the ones that use my old infobox) information to this new one. --blm07 20:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• 1. Should this be used as the standard template on all Disney rides and shows?
• 2. Does any other information need to be included?
• 3. If you can add any more information to the infobox without bloating it, then discuss.
• 4. Should the "attraction facts" section of the article be removed, everything be incorporated into the infobox and have separate infoboxes for each version of the ride? (Humongous task)

---

I like this new infobox... very clean and easy to understand. I could see most everything else going in a facts area not cluttering up an info box. --Napnet 14:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This info box should be used on all disney attractions. It should be flexible enough to handle information about every attraction. It may get large, but I doubt it will be so complicated that it becomes unusable. It should also include optional info like the "land" the attracion is in.

There are also some case where the ride has a slightly differnent name in a different park, like "Soarin'" vs. "Soarin' Over California" or "Indiana Jones Adventure: Temple of the Forbidden Eye" and "Indiana Jones Adventure: Temple of the Crystal Skull" both of which are essentially the same ride. Other instances the rides are completely different from park to park (see Space Mountain).

Other templates should be replaced with this, and explicitely indicated that they should not be used. Examples: Template:Disney ride, Template:Infobox roller coaster. . Some ideas from the roller coaster template should be incorporated.

There are bugs in the template already. If you define options and a sponsor, the template does not work (see Soarin' Over California).

The infobox should replace the "Attraction Facts" section, as it is just a list of statistics anyway.

An alternative to having Park 1=, Park 2=, etc, is to have multiple infoboxes per article, one for each park. Make the title and image optional so the infoboxes flow well. This seems reasonable to me. - Bytebear 00:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Another advantage to mutliple infoboxes is that you can combine the Roller Coaster box with the Disney attraction box in cases like Rock 'n' Roller Coaster which fits into both catagories. Bytebear 00:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll think about some of those changes, but I'm not so sure about removing attraction facts and putting everything into the infobox. Separate infoboxes for each version of the ride... maybe, but that is still a big change. The only reason the template not working right in Soarin is because "park 2 Options" was not capitalized, it is working as it should. --blm07 00:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad on the template typo. Bytebear 01:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I like the info box as it is kind of based on a infobox that I added for Space Mountain in July - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Space_Mountain&oldid=65626659 - but I have some issues with it. First, the inclusion of sponsor is the most confusing. Sponsors of attractions come and go and some attractions do not have sponsors and also closing several attraction haven't closed or are not in line to do so. Maybe it's just that the few times I've used it comes out funny when I added information, so it could be a technicality on my part, but I like the info box features dates and logos/posters. It's just whenever I write Disney attraction articles I usually mention the sponsor in the article or in full attraction information featured below the article. I can revert my infobox for Astro Orbitor if you would like back to your model..--Randomgbear 21:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I based this template originally from the one in the Splash Mountain article, I thought it looked great and used it. About the Sponsor field - in this template, only one should be used: the current or sponsor when the attraction closed, and it is not a required field. I think previous sponsors should be kept in the attraction facts section as you said. The Status field isn't just for if the attraction is closed, it can be used when the attraction is open. --blm07 22:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

you can put conditionals on the template so if you leave sponsor blank, for example, the temple knows to render correctly without that info. I still think you should look at the roller coaster template and have a separate template entry for each park, and stack them on top of each other. This will save you from designing a template that has to handle cross-park information. Bytebear 19:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It does render correctly if sponsor isn't used, in fact I think it renders correctly when any of the fields are missing. I'll have to wait for more votes to add all of the information like in the roller coaster template, that is a beyond huge task that I do not want to do by myself. --blm07 19:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I will help. I have made some fairly complex templates before, and they are tricky. I am more concerned with the Park1, Park2, etc. That is just too hard to maintain. Bytebear 19:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duration

Where's the ride duration? I'm going to keep using Template:Disney_ride until a ride duration field is added. 1ne 17:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I never thought about adding ride duration, mostly because for rides it will always vary. A 3D film that lasts a certain amount of time, sure. But a ride length is always different due to breakdowns, current ride speed, and vehicles being backed up which are all common occurrences. Not to mention the length are almost always dramatically different in each park. --blm07 19:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ride duration was already in Template:Disney_ride, which you got rid of in the first place. 1ne 22:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

And why aren't we using Disney_ride for Disney World-exclusive rides? It's a better template for Disney World-exclusive rides...in fact, I'm going to change it from Disney_ride to Disney World ride. 1ne 23:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I think we should use mine for singular park-exclusive rides, since there's separate space for sponsors and such. I'm going to use Disney World ride (which I'll probably move back) for Disney World-only, Disneyland-only, (or Tokyo-only...you get the rest) rides, and we can use yours for multiple park rides. 1ne 23:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Obviously we disagree about things. I don't think it is so important to have every sponsor that the attraction has had in the infobox and I don't think there needs to be templates for each resort. Maybe you should start a discussion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disney about your template since Disney attraction articles are part of a official Wikiproject. Didn't you see anything about my template when it was being modified for a month, why didn't you say your rejections then? I really think some kind of agreement should be made in Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney soon. --blm07 00:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't get this arguement. Have one Template. Have an entry for PARK= another for LAND= another for SPONSOR=, etc. and just stack the templates on top of each other on the page. Bytebear 00:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

That's how it works, people argue about things until they come up with a solution. Maybe I made my template and started using it too early, but it was months ago, back then nobody had anything but good things to say about it. I didn't want to wait an unknown amount of time to see if everyone was going to agree, I did take a month (or longer) to modify the current one so people had a chance to say something. Thats why I said since this is the sorta thing Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney should handle, I think it should be discussed there, if you have a concept template to show, then by all means show it. --blm07 00:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I am moving my discussion to that page.Bytebear 00:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer 1ne's version. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 01:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)