Talk:IllumiNations: Reflections of Earth

message: I visit EPCOT several times a month and last night made a point to sit and listen to the entire pre-show. Since the guidelines discourage "Original Research" there is no real way to verify the exact play list unless I upload an entire video of the pre-show with audio and sitting right next to a speaker. If this is requested of me I will do it as I will be there again in a few days but here is what the pre-show music was as of last night from sitting in the Canadian Paviliion:
1 - Jalan Kopo
2 - East Wind
3 - Busindre Reel
4 - Gaviotes
5 - Tula
6 - Our Life
The last group that plays in the Word Showcase is done (with the exception of Mo'roccan) by 8:25 for the pre-show music which lasts about 30min. These lists of 8 or 9 songs is totally false as that would add up to nearly an hour of pre-show music. I am going to visit a few more paviliions and record the audio and post it online for people to debate and discuss. The Claw (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-Show Music Update 

message: I don't know what exactly they are doing with this new sound system, but it's a mess. The preshow music was the newer loop. I could hear the echo from another speaker from the other side of the lagoon during the show. Afterwards, I couldn't hear the post show music through most of World Showcase. The post show music just cut off randomly and then "Celebrate You" played. The intro narrator is not the same as the ending narrator. I just wanna throw in that I'm not a fan of Bose, it's over priced and over simplified setups if you ask me. Where is all of this new info coming from anyway? They should have just left it alone, before, Jim Cummings narrated the intro and ending, the preshow music didn't mix and sound like crap with the country's music, the post show music was nice and loud and could be heard from everywhere, and no Celebrate You. --blm07 07:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New speakers 

message: Pyro pieces per show updated to current level.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyroteq (talk • contribs) 20:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pyro count update 

message: I have renamed the acts to reflect what the Show Manager called them in the video I referenced.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elisfkc (talk • contribs) Elisfkc (talk) 06:13, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Act Names 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:1 epcot illuminations 2010.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 31, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-12-31. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:1 epcot illuminations 2010.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Disney has indeed announced that Reflections of Earth will give its final performance sometime in the 2nd half of 2019. The article prose should certainly have that, but the infobox does not yet need it. Why? Because we don't have an exact date. Also, plans do change; something may come up that may cause Disney to extend the show's run later ... or force it to close earlier. Let's keep the infobox clear until we actually have a final performance. Opinions?  --McDoobAU93 12:14, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: My thought is to keep it blank until an exact date is reached. Infoboxes should not have relative dates such as second half. --Elisfkc (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

text: *Strongly disagree. Infoboxes, by design, are meant to summarize the key points of the prose. In this case, the "Second half of 2019" date range for closure is a key point. And while, yes, it could change. So could the status of Pluto as a dwarf planet. And if it does, you know what happens? WP:SPACE will update it. Or if you want to talk planned dates, WP:NFL will change the date of Super Bowl XLIII if need be. The point I'm trying to make is that we are a encyclopedia in a unique position where we can update instantly if information changes. As a result, it does not hurt the Wiki to list this date in the infobox as the key point that it is. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 02:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But it hasn't closed. So why have a closing date, or even a closing window, if the event that is intended by that field hasn't occurred? There is no rush.  --McDoobAU93 12:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This is starting to sound an awful lot like a "I don't like it" argument. No there is no deadline, but that irrelevant here. No one is arguing or acting like there is. I'm simply stating the opinion that it's in improper use of the infobox not to list it. Because, as started, an infobox's purpose is to summarize the key points of the article. No, the show has not ceased operations yet. But it is currently scheduled to within the time window that is sourced in the prose, and thus is our duty to list it as such. It's why the window had the phrase "scheduled" in parenthesis. It indicates to the reader that's reading the infobox that the attraction is set to close but is not closed yet. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 00:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But that infobox isn't looking for "scheduled" or "planned" ... it's looking for when it actually happened. As Elisfkc pointed out, MOS:RELTIME states "it is better to use explicit dates supported by sources". The planned closure belongs in the lede and in the text, where RELTIME would be satisfied, but not in the infobox, where it would not be. You can "strongly disagree", but as of this time, there is no clear consensus to include a planned date in the infobox. It can wait.  --McDoobAU93 12:20, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Show closing