Talk:Walt Disney World Monorail System/Archive 2

message: Your edits make no sense. information is lost in translation, and hard to follow. your images don't match up with topics, and you add pointless information, and remove useful information. HeadMouse 03:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just wanted to make sure you seen that template up top that reads "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains," That has been there a while. Back when this article was cleaned up. SO you see, there is no need for you to come in an "clean up" HeadMouse 03:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TREYWiki 

message: I want to set this straight. I DO NOT CLAIM TO OWN THIS ARTICLE I DO however come in and make sure it remains clean up and within Wikipedia guidelines. This article has already been approved by wikipedia and Trains Wiki Project.
This article has been written and flows easily for readers to understand and gather information. When new information is added. it is placed in the correct part of the article. If incorrect information is added, it is removed. I have no problem with people adding information, moving things around and what not. but to totally mess things up so they make no sense at all, and to add pointless information and remove useful information. that's not needed.  All the information in this article is up to date. This article is written in accordance with WP guidelines and editing tools.
There is no need for a "clean up". this article received a B-class because it still lacks certain information. NOT because of the style it was written. HeadMouse 03:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because an article has been graded by a Wikiproject doesn't mean there isn't always room for improvement. Wikipedia is not a static project, and none of the pages within it should be static items. Every day there'll be new users coming along with new things to add, or better ideas how to format something. So we shouldn't be reverting those changes simply on the basis that "a wikiproject graded this version". The article will continue to change and improve, and eventually the WP might re-grade it, but really what the WP grades it is irrelevent to the overall idea that we're here to make wikipedia better, not just to maintain wikipedia's status quo. --Maelwys 17:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now re read what I wrote. I have no problem with adding new information to bring the grade up (which is why this article got a B). But as I said, Trey is totally changing the article, making it harder for members to follow along and adding irrelevant information and removing useful information. Read the responses in my talk page. I am not the only member that thinks Trey is doing wrong. Read the history of the article you will see. HeadMouse 17:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Regardless of an article's status with one or more WikiProjects, all articles must conform to Wikipedia's guidelines and official policies.  Judging by his edit summaries, TREYWiki feels the article does not meet either WP:MOS or WP:NOT.  Your insistence on reverting all edits made to the article back to your preferred version appears to be a clear violation of WP:OWN.  --Kralizec! (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lets get this straight 

message: Okay, lets start with the item by item, if we really must. Version 1 vs Version 2
Infobox changes:
*Version 1 shows image at 300px, Version 2 shows it at 150px
*Version 2 adds the System Length value
*Version 2 defines the operator and locale to be WDW, instead of WDW Resort or WDW Parks and Resorts
*Version 2 adds adds the Max Speed value
*Version 2 adds the Operation value
So which version of the infobox is better, Version 1 or Version 2? What changes should we make to one of them to make it better encapsulate both, so we have a single version of the infobox that everybody can agree on?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Maelwys (talk • contribs) 17:39, 14 June 2007
: Wikipedia is not a democracy. This is up to an admin, also, protection is not needed, it is one user causing all the trouble.--trey 17:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, it's not. But when some of the issue is a question of "what looks better?" or "what reads easier?" (which seem to be HeadMouse's points) then there's not always definitive guidelines to follow and it doesn't hurt to hold a Straw-poll. And in general I prefer to actually build consensus and resolve disputes through talking, rather than just outright blocking people. Although if he's not careful, he is about to be blocked for [3RR]. --Maelwys 17:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  He's reverted 8 times in 24 hours. He's already been blocked. WP:NOT is a "definite guideline" saying what should be in wikipedia. Emergency evacuations is not something that should be in this encyclopedia. WP:MoS is the "what looks better" policy. Please read that before you make  your points.--trey 17:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don't worry, I'm familiar with those guidelines. I'd already reverted the page to your version once before realizing that HM wasn't going to just give up on this. So I decided to try logic with him, and I was just trying to present things from a neutral point of view so that he could see exactly what the changes were and realize that they're not as bad as he seems to believe they are. --Maelwys 18:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I think it would definitely take some clean up, but most of that section might become salvagable. My main concern is the notability of the evacuation section, and how applicable it is to this article. Two problems I see: 1/This seems more like information that somebody about to get on the train wants to know, not what somebody looking up the train in an encyclopedia wants to know. 2/ Are the evacuation procedures that unique to WDW? I would've assumed that all monorail trains of this type would have the same procedures in place, and this would fit a lot better in the article for Mark VI monorail, instead of in the article that's specific to the WDW Monorail. What makes this information notable specifically to Disney? --Maelwys 17:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes they are unique to WDW, MOST monorails now have a saftey platform that runs along side the beam for evac. HeadMouse 04:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think at least part of the evacuation (roof evac) should be kept as I think this is unique to this style of monorail.  But the mention that the roof evacuation plans were used in 1985 are false... it was in the station. .  As for the rest of the article, I think the version currently in use is the better choice.--Napnet 16:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, your incorrect. I have the news paper articles that shows the monorail (gold) on the beam. it even mentions  the fire occured on the beam between EPCOT and TTC. The roof evac DID take place. the news paper article mentions that too. I will be glad to scann and post this article if need be. BUt you can go to Mark IV monorail and read about it and see refrence to The Orlando Sentinel News Paper. HeadMouse 15:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Napnet, as HeadMouse said the evac to the roof did take place , it seems the link you gave was relating to a different fire 10 years later. --15:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, we appear to be confusing the 1985 and 1996 fires.  --Kralizec! (talk) 15:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, my bad, I totally overlooked the dates.  --Napnet 17:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Item by item 

message: ::::The version HeadMouse put up right now is very bad.--trey 01:35, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Funny. ITS YOUR ARTICLE trey NOTHING changed, just added information. HeadMouse 01:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of trivial information (toys, riding tips, evac.)--trey 01:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is EVAC trivial????  Wouldn't you want to know how to evac one if you were stuck??? HeadMouse 01:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: no piggybacking create your own topic

message: I have removed the "riding tips" section from the article.  This clearly violates WP:NOT as it is basically function as a how-to guide and a travel agent all rolled into one.  Metros 02:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you know?  I was just reverted.  Metros 02:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Riding tips 

message: Why do you feel the need to be punks and constantly mess with my edits? You don't give time for me to add references, you claim it has unreliable information, yet when trey posted the EXACT SAME information, it was ok. whatever it is you have against me, you need to get over it. I WILL continue to edit this article and keep it clean, I WILL continue to keep the useful information in this article despite if you think it's "trivial" or not. it IS information that is about the WDW monorail and it DOES belong in this article. HeadMouse 02:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please remember to follow Wikipedia's official policy on civility and refrain from making personal attacks.  --Kralizec! (talk) 03:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why? 

message: You 2 have me so damn busy trying to revert to stupid crap your doing to the article, I have no time to FIX the things needing fixed. Why don't you give a person 24 hrs before you get all power happy. HeadMouse 02:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not just arbitrarily delete all of the maintenance tags in this article.  They are there to show you the sections that do not meet Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines.  Instead you should replace them individually as you add the required references to each section.  --Kralizec! (talk) 02:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's that broken record again. HeadMouse 02:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He removed all the references I added (5 or 6). --trey 02:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There would be no need for me or anyone else to be a broken record were you to read and follow Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines.  --Kralizec! (talk) 03:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and restored the citations that HeadMouse had bizarrely removed.  There were nine of them total.  Why someone would remove in-line citations is beyond me (well, other than the obvious WP:OWN issue).  The article is now up to thirteen citations; nice work, Trey!  --Kralizec! (talk) 01:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEE 

message: The sole source given  by  for the Other Safety Equipment section is the monorail-man1979.tripod.com web page.  As HeadMouse has previously stated  that this is his own personal web site, I have removed this reference from the article as per Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources (online and paper).  --Kralizec! (talk) 01:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well since there are only 2 sites that give this information, and the other site has been deemed un reliable, then I was left with my site. HeadMouse 15:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the Other Safety Equipment section cannot be substantiated in any way other than via a self-published source, then it does not belong in Wikipedia.  As per WP:VER ("the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth."), I have removed this section.  --Kralizec! (talk) 01:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-published source removed 

message: I am tired of the crap from all of you. I am done trying to keep this article readable and clean. You all can screw this article up all you want. I am tired of (personal attack removed) not waiting till someoen is finished, just assuming that I have converted the entire article back to the original. they didn't bother to look and see that it's the same article, just cleaned up some with new information added. It's also bull shit that rider tips, a major part of the WDW monorail system, is removed, but the toy remained, BOTH are part of the WDW monorail experiance. But who cares about the content of the articles, as long as it looks good and meets some retarted code of style. Who cares that refrences that went no where were removed. lets block the guy for trying to give good refs to non borken links. Also odd that thre is a ref to a site that refs back to this article. Now we can't have a ref to a legit site with legit information just because it's a site by the editor, but we CAN have a ref to a site that send you in circles back to this article.  But as I said, this article has gone to hell. It is no longer a good resorce for information. I will wait and maybe in enough time trey, Kralizec!, Maelwys , and the rest will stop trying to own this article and will let other editors fix it up. Untill then this article will remain crap. Again I say, I feel sorry for anyone doing research trying to find info on the WDW monorail system and finding this article. So go have fun trashing this article. I'll kep an eye on it and maybe come back later. HeadMouse 15:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh... funny, here I thought you'd come back and be pleasently surprised at how much of your information we've managed to keep in the article. All we've done is add some references to it, and some extra sections of information (like the train specs) and rename a couple areas to make them more encyclopedic and thus more keepable. Yes, even your "Rider Tips" section is still there, and almost completely intact. It was just renamed "Customer Service" so that it's more inline with giving information about the train (the subject of the article) instead of information to train riders (not the subject of the article). As far as I can tell, very little of your info has even been removed at this point, we're just trying to make it all follow Wiki guidelines, that's all. And if you'd get off your high-horse and stop assuming that we were all out to get you, you might even realize that. --Maelwys 15:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah becasue the topic title makes alot of sense being called customer service. since first of all there are not "customers" at WDW they are guest, so if anything it should be called Guest Relations, but then you would be interfering witht he "guest relations" int he Walt Disney World article. and since it is infact a rider tip then that title makes the most sense. If you all would get off your high horse you woudl realise that. HeadMouse 15:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article has gone to hell 

message: The greek leter DELTA has nothing to do with this use of the word. HeadMouse 16:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DELTA 

message: Hi everyone, just a reminder to remain civil in your posts to talk pages and in your edit summaries.  Personal attacks and other inappropriate content may be removed.  Thanks.  Exploding Boy 17:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk page rules

message: # people that are color blind have special equipment to help them see colors on computers.
# the small amount of color used in the article would not hurt anything.
But none of that matters, Any and all edits made by me have to be undone to make a few people feel bigger and better. HeadMouse 04:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: — wikipedia has polices, like WP:MOSCOLOR. You are not helping the encyclopedia, so you cant ignore them. --trey 05:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Funny how when you first posed that link, it didn't exist.  HeadMouse 05:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All TREYWiki did was create a shortcut to a specific section in Wikipedia:Manual of Style that has existed for years.  --Kralizec! (talk) 12:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  COLOR 

message: If you go to your beloved www.monorailyellow.com click on "monorails" you will see pics of monorail SILVEr and the page talks about it being parked NEXT TO the new Mark VI trains, this was AFTER the fire. You will also notice that there is no Mark IV monorail GOLD around. It does however mis read saying that monorail silver caught fire, this (along with other faulse information liek this) is why this site was removed as a source from this article long ago. HeadMouse 05:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please calm down and remain civil. I know deep down inside you want to help. Check out the welcome page.--trey 05:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am calm and civil. your the one being a PITAHeadMouse 05:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Personal Attacks are serious crimes.--trey 05:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have made no personal attacks. HeadMouse 06:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Does this really have to be such a big argument? If we don't have a Reliable Source on either gold or silver, let's just change it to say "An example of this was seen in 1985 when one of the trains caught fire..." --Maelwys 12:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please allow me to reiterate what Maelwys said.  In the absence of a published, reliable source on which train caught fire, we should follow WP:VER and just remove the disputed fact.  While I have no doubt that you guys only want to create the best possible article, your continual mass revert of each other's edits is only serving to disrupt the project.  --Kralizec! (talk) 12:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, please note that calling someone a pain in the ass (PITA) is indeed a personal attack.  --Yamla 14:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kralizec!, after telling headmouse to calm down and be civil, I was called a pain in the ass. Also, please stop with your pre-RfA garbage.--trey 16:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's twice I've seen you attack Kralizec's arguments to follow the rules on personal grounds. You might want to stop burning your bridges here by assuming bad faith on behalf of people who are basically on your side. Chris Cunningham 16:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOLD not SILVER 

message: Some of us HAVE the articles. And some of us was actually there when the fire happened. It was Monorail GOLD, not SILVER. HeadMouse 16:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there's so much contention over this particular fact, maybe we should just leave it out together?  After all, it's interesting that a monorail train caught fire, but it's not particularly relevant which one.  We can talk about the fire, without mentioning whcih particular train was involved.  What do you all think? ➪HiDrNick! 20:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Already did that earlier this afternoon. ;-) --Maelwys 21:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  24.98.83.176 

message: The prose and graphic representation of the color for Monorail Lime is incorrect. The train's stripe is slightly-green yellow with a blue delta. It does not have a white delta (only Monorail Coral has a white delta). See here: . I'd fix it myself, but I haven't figured out how to edit images on Wikipedia yet. Roothog 01:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The image is only to show what a "delta" is. The image you linked to is a VERY old image. The blue delta on monorail lime was removed along time ago when the train was re-pained. it is now white as you can see here in this video.  HeadMouse 23:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't know it had been repainted since I saw it last. Thanks for the link to the video. Roothog 01:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No prob. I think the white looks better on it IMO. That blue just made it look weird. HeadMouse 02:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monorail Lime 

message: At the risk of inciting another battle on this page, I added an incidents section to the article. I meant for this to be similar to incident sections on other transit pages, particularly those for airlines or airports. I'm not someone who minds if you edit or delete my text, but I would be particularly happy if Wikipedia would reimburse the $20 I spent getting access to the full articles on the Orlando Sentinel website. :)  
This also got the fire sentence out of a paragraph that I found problematic. The sentence's previous location implied that guests were walking the beam during the train fire. Whether or not that actually happened, it was not mentioned in any of the Orlando Sentinel articles. The Sentinel articles only indicated that guests had climbed onto the roof of the train. Roothog 03:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good luck. see I have the newspaper articles. I scanned them and posted them. and they were removed because WP did not like the rational given. I even used WP's template for rational and they still did not like it so I gave up. BTW during THAT incident, the guest did NOT walk the beam, they moved to the next car and were rescued from there. HeadMouse 23:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incidents Section 

message: When I am wrong I admit it. and here I stand corrected. I just got off the phone with WDW monorail shop with a Cast Member named Danny. He has been working there for 25 years. I asked him if he remembered the fire and he said yes. I asked him what color monorail it was he said Silver. So I apologize to those that I argued with. HeadMouse 17:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monorail Fire