Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks: Difference between revisions

Line 66: Line 66:

==Article being considered for GAR==

[[File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg|25px|link=|alt=]] You are invited to join the discussion at [[:Talk:Oblivion (roller coaster)#Article review|Talk:Oblivion (roller coaster) § Article review]] regarding multiple concerns over the article’s current state. Any editors able to dedicate some time to tidy up the article are encouraged to participate, thanks! –[[User:GoneIn60|GoneIn60]] ([[User talk:GoneIn60|talk]]) 01:08, 16 September 2025 (UTC)<!– [[Template:Please see]] –>

== Good article reassessment for [[Nemesis Reborn]] ==

[[Nemesis Reborn]] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Nemesis Reborn/1|reassessment page]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 13:48, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

== Good article reassessment for [[Oblivion (roller coaster)]] ==

WikiProject Amusement Parks

Hey everyone! Who ever is here or around. In my sandbox, User:Adog/sandbox2, I have finally finished a general type-out of some of the rough-rough ideas from here, and here. It took six months right? I did not put in the new UI GoneIn60 created into the sandbox yet, however, you can view that right here. In the sandbox, you can find two new banners, a research guide, a perennial sources list, a start to some new changes to the collaboration tab (maybe the barnstars can be merged or a two-level system), and finally the thing that needs to most scrutinization: a non-official APARKS notability guide. I took most of the ideas from previous discussions, and from my readings on guide after guide. It is mostly aimed at new users, and attempts to solve some problems regarding the limbo system of information inclusion. If anything is wrong, feel free to edit it for anything: grammar, functional idea changes, an idea you wanna throw in there, delete whatever does not feel right. Hopefully these can be rolled out by the end of the year, and what else we have not thought of yet.

Forewarn, it is a lot of information. If you are not into that stuff skip this post, but, I would appreciate your help with our project’s future. Adog (Talk・Cont) 11:26, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Adog: Hi there! I know this is a relatively old topic, but I think this is worth bringing up again. I’ve skimmed the linked talk pages and almost all the ideas seem really solid. Since this project seemingly has had a bit more life breathed into it recently with the upcoming revival of Project B&M, I was thinking maybe the changes discussed in late 2022 could see some implementation. I think a visual makeover to this project would be really nice, and I’ve been mocking up a possible re-design of the main WikiProject page at User:Plighting Engineerd/WikiProject Amusement Parks (permalink). Note: PC standard width on light mode doesn’t look great, but all other combinations of device, color, and width should work. A logo and theme color would be a good way to tie everything together as well.

Regarding the talks to close project B&M, as of right now, it seems it’s certainly best to keep it open. Work has started back up again, including 1 new GA promotion and 1 new GA nomination. Ping @Therguy10: on this one. I think giving it a specific time window (maybe a year) could be good, however.

I think the pages drafted at User:Adog/sandbox2 seem very good, and would be useful to have available here. Perhaps a consolidated “resources” page would be helpful, containing links to other guidance pages, such as the existing templates page, and the proposed pages on guiding research and evaluating sources. This would also help cut down the number of tabs, as at standard width, it looks quite cramped, both on the current layout and the one drafted in my sandbox (which was adapted from User:GoneIn60‘s sandbox, by the way).

As for the ‘exposure’ sections mentioned in the 2022 discussions, a refreshed talk page welcome + Wikipedia ad that could be more in line with the project’s proposed visual overhaul would be great. Overall, increased use of such templates could help as well.

Additionally, I think starting back up the newsletter would be good too. I’d be more than happy to write it if no one else wants to. Quarterly seems about right for the schedule in my opinion.

Overall, I think the discussions from 2022 brought up a lot of good points that could help refresh the project, and implementing some of the proposals would be great. If anyone else has any input on any of these points, either the ones I listed above or the ones from those two talk pages, that would be great! Plighting Engineerd (talk) 02:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Plighting Engineerd Replying to my ping here, I agree that a timetable for OPB&M could be just fine. I’d suggest a year and then a revisit; it could be continued if it was successful, or moved on from if not as successful!

Therguy10 (talk) 02:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that! OPB&M is where the motivation is at the moment, so I don’t think there’s any sense in closing it anytime super soon, but I think a project rotation could be a good idea to keep things fresh. I don’t think OPB&M would have to be shelved after a year either – possibly just moved down, or off of the main ‘collaboration’ page to spotlight a different project. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 02:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have created a preliminary draft/mockup of what a logo for the project could possibly look like, and I’ve added it to my sandbox page as well. I think something along the lines of this could be good to tie together the project’s visual refresh. I’ve used a theme color of blue here, but that, along with literally everything else I’ve made here, is very open to change (or open to not being used in the slightest). If anyone has any feedback on any of this, it would be appreciated 😀 Plighting Engineerd (talk) 02:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally i love this, looks much better than whats currently on the page CosmicVortecs (talk) 07:49, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Plighting Engineerd that looks really nice. Would this replace the image that currently is there Because I feel like that should definitely be updated as well.

(And maybe I’m bias here, but why make the blue a “Millennium Force” blue? Might be a neat little easter egg. ~~[You could also add a hint of silver too but that’s definitely just my bias opinion]~~)

Therguy10 (talk) 14:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Plighting Engineerd did we ever get a chance to implement this logo? And which sandbox might the preview be in? Thanks. Therguy10 (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think implementing this along with the redesign of the project would be good. The sandbox is User:Plighting Engineerd/WikiProject Amusement Parks. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 16:03, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, this looks fantastic! I definitely am in full support of the redesign. I’m not sure what jurisdiction we’d (I use the term “we” lightly here; I did nothing to help with this lol) need to go through to implement all of this.

I’m assuming you’d like to follow through with this is one motion, rather than gradually. Correct me if I’m wrong. Therguy10 (talk) 16:11, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a community WikiProject, so I don’t think there’s any approval process or anything – we can just change it – but we should get a general consensus from members of the project first.

And yes, I think it would make the most sense to do the visual overhaul as one personally, but other changes could be made after. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like jurisdiction wasn’t the right term for me to use, but yes I agree.

And the overhaul sounds good. I’m not sure if you saw the second topic I discussed on your talk page, but it regards the members’ census. I believe we should run the members’ consensus before this one. That way we send the redesign notice to active members.

Of course, we could merge them together into one. We could also send the redesign first, as awaiting a members’ consensus could take some time. Therguy10 (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The words census and consensus being so similar is getting confusing to me haha. I don’t know that we would need to send out a message to members about the redesign, but we could make a new topic on this talk page to get feedback and possibly link to it with a notice at the top of the WikiProject’s main page. Mainly I want to get the opinion of someone who has more experience with the project (such as GoneIn60). Plighting Engineerd (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Plighting Engineerd lol my mistake! Let me make sure I’m on the same page.

The “census” I’m talking about is listed here as tentatively scheduled. This never seemed to happen. I wanted to check if this is something we wanted to follow through on before any refreshes.

The “consensus” I think we’re referring too is opinions on the refresh. (Aka, thoughts from Gonein60 and updating changes on the message board or something, rather than just messaging every member) I also think a notice is a good idea.

Apologies for the confusion! Therguy10 (talk) 19:10, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the census was scheduled to happen, might as well send messages out to all the members on that list. The census message could also mention the overhaul, and ask for any input on it. I’ve been lurking for a while on this topic, the overhaul looks really good and I expect most people would be in support, but no harm in checking with the census. CosmicVortecs (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Plighting Engineerd If you don’t have any objections, I may be able to work on that members’ census this weekend. I may ask for some assistance drafting a message.

And is the redesign ready for immediate deployment? I still believe we should at least make Gone aware of everything. Therguy10 (talk) 04:39, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the template. You can now add 2025 placings for parks and roller coasters to their respective articles.

https://goldenticketawards.com/2025-gta-winners/ Somarain (talk) 20:27, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is appreciated, thanks! — GoneIn60 (talk) 11:50, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Oblivion (roller coaster) § Article review regarding multiple concerns over the article’s current state. Any editors able to dedicate some time to tidy up the article are encouraged to participate, thanks! —GoneIn60 (talk) 01:08, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oblivion (roller coaster) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:50, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any opinions on this site? Seems fairly legit, although I would lean on anyone from the UK and their expertise with sourcing in their region to weigh in. Thanks. —GoneIn60 (talk) 14:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsu has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say “priority” instead of “importance”. This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:37, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)[reply]

I noticed that there wasn’t a top icon for user pages for this WikiProject, so I made one. If you want, you can edit the icon for it. You can use it by adding {{User:BlueStaticHorse/Topicons/Wikiproject-AmusementParks/}} to your userpage. BlueStaticHorse (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, this is very cool! Plighting Engineerd (talk) 01:11, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also I believe there needs to be a slash at the end for it to work: {{User:BlueStaticHorse/Topicons/Wikiproject-AmusementParks/}} Plighting Engineerd (talk) 01:12, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment