Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disney

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can I join? I love watching Disney Channel.--Peace, Cute 1 4 u 18:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes sure, because Disney is so big, I can't really handle the whole thing. That's why I'm planning to make branch out projects like Wikiproject Disney Channel. Anyway, if you've added your name to the proposed wikiprojects list, then your in! Julz

Contents 1 Launching of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney 2 Attractions template 3 Make a Portal? 4 Donald 5 Wikipedia Day Awards 6 Disney poster fair use 7 catégories 8 Disney TV Help? 9 Park listings 10 New Ride Quiz 11 TfD nomination of Template:Wikiproject Little Einsteins 12 Split Port Orleans Resort pages? 13 Main Page 14 Template for Disney World Resort

[edit] Launching of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney

I think you can start the project already since more than ten people signed on the proposal you made. -- ユージェイ 03:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

There is a mistake on the page, Walt didn't attend the Chicago Art Institute, instead he attended the Chicago Accademy of Fine Arts under Ruth VanSickle Ford, that by the way was the oldes cartoon school in the US until the 1970's when it closed its doors. -- Hope you change it as is a becoming a fact due to so many publications making the mistake.

[edit] Attractions template

Here is the final version of the template: Template:Infobox Disney attraction. Please discuss on the talk page. --blm07 21:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

It has been suggested that this be merged with other Disney attraction templates, specifically {{Disney_World_ride}}. Bytebear 00:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

After a looking around at various things, it appears people are supposed to have their template approved before being used. We have to come up with a template that everyone agrees on and submit it to Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed. That way, it will become the official infobox for this project, and if someone wanted to change it they have to discuss it here. --blm07 01:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think thats a great idea. I linked to the yet to be created template {{Infobox_Disney_ride}} as a way to create a template that will not stomp on the already used templates, but if you think we should set up a sandbox first, that's alright with me. Bytebear 01:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you think it should be called Disney ride? This template is going to be used on more than rides (3D films, films, live shows) right? The name is probably a minor thing, but that is why I ended up using Disney attraction. --blm07 01:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

No I think it should be called "Infobox Disney attraction" but since that is in use, we can call it "Infobox Disney ride" until we have all the pages using the "attraction" box removed (er.. replaced with the new infobox), and then rename it. I also looked at the List of Templates page and it's pretty out of date. I say we just get started. Bytebear 01:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have created a new template for Disney attractions at {{Infobox_Disney_ride}}. Please review and tell me where it can be improved. Here are some issues:

• acres should also have formula to do square meters.
• columns of data is not lined up between boxes (minor issue)
• instructions and standards for the values need to be defined
• spacing when no icons are visible needs to be fixed
• Additional values may be needed

Wow, I was skeptical at first, but I have to admit it is impressive. The ONLY thing I am worried about right now is how much room it takes up, it might not be possible to make it shorter. I really hate when templates take up most of the right side of the article, forcing pictures to the left and making the article annoying to read. For "Ride duration" you might want to change to "Ride duration (approx)" since they never have the same exact time twice. Also, you don't need underlines anywhere. --blm07 09:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment. I am less concerned about the length of the box for the attraction details, as I chose Big Thunder because it will likely be our worst case. Most attractions should be much shorter. I do worry about the Disneyland infobox (or other park) that lists every attraction in the park taking up the whole article. That infobox could be better served as a full width box similar to the categories box. I am also thinking of changing the style a bit. We may want to split up the template into two parts (attraction main details, and park specific details) with the latter template inside the former. Bytebear 17:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I've mentioned the length of that Disneyland template at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disneyland#Disneyland attractions template. --blm07 18:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, just saw the one you added to Spaceship Earth, and it looks real nice. It looks like you cleaned it up and gave a background color to the left column text, it looks much better than it did yesterday. The sponsors work out great as well, having the years next to each is something I was wondering about. There are some odd facts in Spaceship Earth's attraction facts section such as Diameter, Circumference, Volume, Weight etc, how do you think those figures should be handled? --blm07 21:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

There are many unusual facts about it, on the History Channel program about Disney World construction they mention that it had to be tested by engineers from one of the universities in California to avoid creating a wind tunnel effect under it. Also the drainage gutter system contained inside that drains rainwater into the lagoon, so people below will not get wet. One thing I wonder, but have not been there it the height of the wand that Mickey has with the added EPCOT sign. Spaceship Earth is 180ft. tall, under height requiring red light or strobe light as is the castle in the Magic Kingdom. But, the wand looks like it may be taller and have a stobe light at it's top, which would fit in EPCOT. Anyone know if there is? kidsheaven 23:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The height of the sphere and the height of the wand are both listed in the infobox. There are 8 generic labels that can be used for special information, like diameter, etc. I have replaced about 20 pages with the new infobox. Check them out. The list of pages is at Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Infobox_Disney_ride. Bytebear 00:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Make a Portal?

Of all the subjects on Wikipedia, I'm surprised that Disney hasn't gotten its own portal, considering how many individual franchises have gained them. I assume that this will be a later project within the WikiProject, right? FigmentJedi 04:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It could, but it requires extreme dedication to keep it live and current. bibliomaniac15 05:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Donald

The people over at Donald Duck's page and I have been have a little bit of banter over a Kingdom Hearts Section. I approve of it. They Don't. I point to the other major characters having KH sections while minor Characters get a sentence or two explaining what they did. Donald, under the way the have it, is getting the treatment of a minor character. They claim it is not relevant and should stay within the KH area. I respond that we have no place for it their. Please help us reach an agreement we will all be happy with. Lego3400: The Sage of Time 03:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, there is way too much KH information in nearly every Disney article. A brief mention at best is appropriate. Donald, however, is one of the main characters in the series; if any Disney topic deserves a large Kingdom Hearts section, it's him (plus Mickey Mouse, Goofy, and Maleficent). Powers ^T 03:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney poster fair use

Someone tagged one of the poster images that I upload with the no fair use rationale template. He told me that all the posters in Category:Disney Theme Park posters should have a rationale. The link he gave did not help me, and I don't know what would be the best for this situation. This may become a problem in the future. --blm07 00:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline should explain what is needed. Assuming each poster appears in (and, generally, only in) the article for the poster's featured attraction (for example, Image:Adventure Thru Inner Space Poster.png on the article Adventure Through Inner Space), the fair use rationale should look something like this:

Disney theme park poster for _____

Fair use rationale: This image is of the official theme park attraction poster for the Disney attraction ____. It is used to identify and illustrate the attraction in the article _____. It is low resolution, and no free equivalent can be created, as it is an official poster.

Something like that. Powers ^T 02:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added the fair use statement to many of the posters. It seems the very template the guy is using to tag these posters with the no fair use rationale is supposed to notify users of each infraction, and I haven't seen a single warning on user talk pages. --blm07 03:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Meanwhile, the poster for Carousel of Progress has been deleted by OrphanBot. It seems that the task has some added urgency at this point. I will probably upload a different photo as a stopgap, but it won't be as appropriate. Karen | Talk | contribs 13:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, now that I look I see that none of my images will serve even as a temporary measure. Sorry. Karen | Talk | contribs 13:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, curiouser and curiouser. Image:Carousel of Progress Poster.jpg has not been deleted, except frm the article. The claim is that it has no source information, but the image page has the right source listed and a detailed fair use rationale. I don't see how it can possibly be made any plainer. Karen | Talk | contribs 13:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't actually see any source information. Where did you get the image? Did you scan it in from a paper copy? Powers ^T 02:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it fair to say that the source is the attraction poster? I didn't upload this (or any of these), but surely that's strongly implied in the verbiage. It seems to me that these small, low-res versions of the posters either are or are not legitimate fair use across the board for this one specific purpose (illustrating the relevant attraction), regardless of whether they were scanned from a physical poster or found on the Disney site or wherever. They are copyrighted Disney images, regardless. Karen | Talk | contribs 09:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but that's not the point. Our image use guidelines still require a source to be recorded. This is for credit purposes; it may not matter for fair use purposes who scanned in the images, but as a free encyclopedia, we try to give credit where credit is due. "The Attraction Poster" is not a specific-enough source; since these are electronic images, someone had to do something to capture the image electronically, probably via scanner. Powers ^T 16:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

In this case, the uploader was notified, I'm guessing they found it on a website and uploaded it here. I agree, in this case it probably doesn't matter where it came from since it was probably copied a million times and originally from an official Disney source. --blm07 10:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] catégories

I have done a extensive reorganisation of the wide "generic" Category:Disney parks and attractions. --Gdgourou 10:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I would like to see additional categories for attraction types. Specifically Omnimover attractions, Interactive Theater, etc. Bytebear 20:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes it's a good idea, perhaps it could be done with the use of the info ride box ?--Gdgourou 07:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disney TV Help?

I'm slowly meandering through a lot of Disney Channel shows and trying to remove trivia etc. Is there a child project that works for that, or can issues be addressed here? I'm looking for a little help on the Tanya Baxter article. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 21:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Park listings

So it seems the many pages (such as List of current Magic Kingdom attractions, List of past Magic Kingdom attractions, List of current Epcot attractions) are somewhat of a mess. Let's agree on putting all current attractions, previous attractions and entertainment on either one page or the land's page (such as Fantasyland or Future World). I've created a prototype of the one page idea here: User:Blm07/Epcot example --blm07 18:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

As mentioned on the main project page, this would include the slightly newer page List of Disney attractions, and perhaps encompass Closed rides and attractions as well.SpikeJones 18:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that the List of Disney attractions can be a comprehensive list. It is color coded to define current, past and future attractions, as well as gives a nice chart format for each park. It does need clean up and is incomplete, but with a few hands, adding to it, we can make it a stellar article. We can discuss the details of layout and information on its talk page. Bytebear 00:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I like the idea of a huge list, but I think past attractions / entertainment should be included on the land's page as well. Then again, Disneyland's list is huge, so a page for each park should be fine as well. --blm07 00:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I hold no opposition to having separate pages for each park. The main list serves the purpose of getting an overview of everything Disney has done. Others can focus on each park as needed. It just depends on the purpose for the list(s). Ideally you can use the attraction page itself as a template to generate the list from. A good example of such a concept can be found at List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The format is basically this: {{ Talk:attraction_page/data | format=template_style }} Using this format, you can reuse the data from each attraction in many lists, and even the infobox on the attraction page, and when data changes or is added, the lists get updated as well. It's a fairly slick solution. Bytebear 01:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Using more templates could be a good idea, do you think you can come up with a small example of how it would work and look? Also, what should the page be called? I was thinking "(Park) attractions and entertainment history" --blm07 01:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Ride Quiz

Everybody, I've just created a Disney Ride Quiz, which is located here. Hope you like it! 01kkk 01:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

While I'm sure you put some work into your quiz, please remember that WP is not to be used as your personal web host. Please see WP:NOT for details. SpikeJones 04:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Wikiproject Little Einsteins

Template:Wikiproject Little Einsteins has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 00:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Split Port Orleans Resort pages?

(myunknownside000) I think that the Port Orleans Page should be split into 2 pages for the simple reason that they are 2 different resorts. Myunknownside000 17:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

No. They were two different pages/resorts, but when the resorts merged into one Port Orleans entity, the associated pages were merged as well. For an example that should probably be merged into the main article anyway, see Disney's Dixie Landings Resort SpikeJones 19:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Main Page

The Walt Disney Company page is really a very dissapointing article at the moment, considering its importance. There are too many lists and the informations seems in parts sporadic and incomprehensive. It will need a lot of work, and really must be the top priority of this WikiProject at the moment S Newton 15:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template for Disney World Resort

Hi all, I created a template for the Disney World Resort based on Template:DLR. I have it on a temporary page here and would like to get some feedback before I move it to its own page and use it as a template. I left this message at Wikiproject Disney World, but it seems that project hasn't seen much activity lately so I just wanted to try here. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks. Phydend 01:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

DWR: I think it would be fine on each park's page, but I'm opposed to having it in each attraction's article. The new infobox design already takes up much of the right side, see Jim Henson's Muppet*Vision 3D, the infoboxes already take up nearly the entire right side. BTW it's Walt Disney World Resort, your template goes through a redirect when you click the top link. MGM: The template would probably be fine at the bottom of the page, if you look on the MuppetVision article, it would probably look fine in between the Muppet and DCA templates. --blm07 19:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I definitely don't want the DWR template on all attraction articles. Only on the Walt Disney World Resort page and others like it, kinda like the pages that the Disneyland Resort Template are on (here). I'm going to work on the MGM template some more before adding it to the list of templates to use. Thanks for the feedback (I fixed the link so it doesn't redirect anymore also). Phydend 00:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)