Template talk:Infobox Disney attraction

message: NOTE: This section is an archive.  Please do not add or modify it
How is the Intercot link in here not a self serving link?  I personally dont think something like that needs to be in a template but should be in the references. --Napnet 22:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess if no one complains, I'll remove it since in theory we should also add links to sites like WDWMagic, WDWHistory, All Ears, Jim Hill, Laughingplace.com and others that have information about Disney rides in the template.  I'll wait till August 12, 2006.  --Napnet 17:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought it was odd being there as well, not saying Intercot is bad, but if anything is there it should be a link to the official page. --blm07 06:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok I removed it and checked to make sure it didn't break anything.  No one seemed to mind.  --Napnet 23:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The Template:Infobox Disney attraction is much more inclusive, and this template should be deprecated in favor of the infobox.  There are still some problems with it, but I will address them on that talk page. Bytebear 00:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk Archive from [[Template talk:Disney World ride]] 

message: Since I was never happy with the super duper simple templates (Template:Disney show & Template:Disney ride) I've been tinkering with a brand spanking new infobox template for the past couple of hours.
Check out Template:Infobox Disney attraction, it can be used for Disney shows and rides and it looks as nice as the infobox on some articles. To see it in action check out this example. It even includes a place for the four New York World's Fair attractions and sponsors for each resort used. --blm07 02:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Template:Infobox Disney attraction is much more inclusive, and this template should be deprecated in favor of the infobox.  There are still some problems with it, but I will address them on that talk page. Bytebear 00:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New template 

message: I saw you added entries for these two icons, so I uploaded two icons from park maps that you can add to the template:
:Image:Disney - Transfer from wheelchair icon.png :Image:Disney - Assistive listening icon.png --blm07 02:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I was going to request it.  we also need closed captioning. Bytebear 02:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Take a look at some of the pages using the new template.  I think it makes it much easier to read.  I don't think we need the Roller Coaster template, as the new template covers most of the settings, and has 8 general values for additional info.  I agree we need more feedback.  maybe we can request a formal review.  or we can look at the talk pages of other infoboxes for clarity. Bytebear 22:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Hey, thanks.  That's great. I made a slight attempt to clean up the images, but I am just not an artist.  I will leave that to the more talented. Bytebear 20:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New discussion

message: Do we want to add E-Ticket and other ticket information?  I suppose we can use the custom fields, but it might be nice to use a graphic for the ticket.  Thoughts? Bytebear 00:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you go for a graphical look, you might want to use the Waltograph font. There is enough room on the other side of the extra options to put something like "Ticket: E" there (with the ticket letter being the image. The only thing is, how to tell the viewer that this ticket method isn't used anymore. --blm07 01:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could have it like this maybe: "Ticket: E" --blm07 01:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  E-Ticket  

message: So apparently it "can't" be used, so what about this? Maybe I'll try to make something. --blm07 03:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here it is: :Image:Assistive listening icon.png. Crummy? Good? Don't know, but that's why its free.  --blm07 03:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deaf symbol

message: Since it has been quiet here for a while, I might as well bring this up. Do long lists really need to be in infoboxes? I think there should be a section just for scenes and / or previous attractions. It isn't necessary to shove all of that info into the box. --blm07 23:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. This is like a bit of a pet peeve of mine on TV infoboxes that re-list the list of episodes in the infobox.. -- Ned Scott 05:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I will disagree.  There is a lot of choices on this infobox, but only about 5 or 6 of them are actually used for a single attraction.  If you look at how it is used, this box is not long. Bytebear 22:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at Test Track, it's pointless to have all those scenes in there, and what about the MSEP article? The infoboxes would be utterly huge if the floats were put into the boxes. We really need more input on this template from the rest of the community. --blm07 01:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  Test Track is an example of abusing the "custom" field, and adding every scene.  It is not a standard field, and should be removed.  Otherwise it looks fine.  Bytebear 22:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Long lists

message: How does one add |track_gauge= ((3ft)) ?? Peter Horn 02:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there is currently a track_gauge parameter. You might be able to use one of the custom fields instead. —Remember the dot (talk) 02:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please add the parameter track gauge for Disneyland Railroad (Paris), pleast see Talk:Disneyland Railroad (Paris)#Track gauge. Peter Horn User talk 23:35, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So how does one parse the custom fields parameter? There is also the Wildlife Express Train. Peter Horn User talk 13:57, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I managed to insert "|track_gauge=", but now "" appears in every infobox where ever it is used. How does one fix that? Peter Horn User talk 15:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

text: I finally figured it all out. Peter Horn User talk 16:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Track gauge

message: I'd like to propose that we add a coordinates field to this template, as I've noticed coordinates sprinkled around many different Disney attraction articles, but with no consistent home.  It would be a natural fit for the infobox.  See WP:COORDS for more info.-- φ OnePt618Talk φ   07:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This is necessary for articles that cover the same attraction at multiple parks around the world like Soarin' Over California and Captain EO. I'm not too conversant with template syntax so it might be better for someone else to handle it. In the meantime, I'll use the custom value field to add it to existing articles. Uncle Dick (talk) 23:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I second the need for it. However, Google will only parse only set of coordinates per page and it must be set to "display=title". This is preventing many locations in Google Maps and Google Earth from linking directly to Wikipedia articles that cover an a ride with more than one location, such as Big Thunder Mountain Railroad. I wonder if it would work to create redirects for each location of the ride with the proper coordinates in addition to adding the information to the infoboxes in the main article? Does Google parse redirects with coordinates? Perhaps I'll go create one as a test. —UncleDouggie (talk) 11:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have added a "coord" parameter to the template and updated Big Thunder Mountain Railroad to show the proper usage. —UncleDouggie (talk) 18:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: Not all of the pages this infobox are about rides.  There are other attractions including "lands".  The name of the infobox & some of it's underlying assumptions (e.g. site area will be in square feet) don't fit.  An array of specific infoboxes seems a bit of an overkill, better to fix this one up.  Here's what I say.
*Let the template be renamed from  to .
*Make it more flexible.
I realise that renaming  is a step backwards (it was moved from this title five years ago) but backwards is not always the wrong direction. I've given my argument for moving it back I see nothing in the archives justifying moving it here in the first place. JIMp talk·cont 15:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in non-rides 

message: Shouldn't there be a "status" parameter within the template like most other attraction infobox's have?--Dom497 (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Status" Parameter? 

message: What is the consensus for themed areas with more than one location? Currently they have an infobox for each park section. Since the themed area infobox template only takes one park should it just replace the current usage of the Disney template and have multiple versions of it throughout the article? The other alternatives are having a combined infobox with limited information (such as the one on the top of Adventureland) or extending the themed area infobox to cater for multiple parks. Themeparkgc  Talk  04:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think extending it to include more than one location is the best. That way there's not multiple infoboxes on a page.--Astros4477 (talk) 05:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, extending it would be best.  ~ Jedi94 (talk) 16:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I extended the template to cater for up to 6 locations and applied it on all the major themed area articles (Fantasyland, Tomorrowland etc). Themeparkgc  Talk  00:21, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Themed areas

message: Almost there! There are only 3 more articles that have the infobox. All of them are related to Epcot and feature multiple infoboxes for the attractions' various themes and names. Any suggestions on how to handle these?
* ImageWorks: The What-If Labs
* Journey into Imagination with Figment
* The Seas with Nemo & Friends
Themeparkgc  Talk  01:06, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ya I noticed that when I was doing Epcot. I hate having more than one infobox on a page but I don't see another way to do it.--Astros4477 (talk) 04:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Themeparkgc  Talk  04:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple themes

message: I have created a listing of all the categories that need to be changed below. Add the done icon and sign it when you've completed it. This is a easy way to list all the categories that have been done.--Astros4477 (talk) 02:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Replacing Disney attraction templates

message: Why is there Undue color in these boxes? Green for opened lands and red for closed ones? What is the potential need for this color? Doesn't saying "open" and "closed" accomplish the same effect without the color?JOJ Hutton 23:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The colour has been in the other infoboxes for at least a year now. It was first suggested here and then implemented by me on all the infoboxes. Themeparkgc  Talk  00:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the colors, there's also yellow for testing and purple for under construction and under refurbishment.--Astros4477 (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Liking the color is one thing, but is it needed? Didn't see the any color in the previous infobox. I don't see any need for it at all. JOJ Hutton 01:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there anything wrong with there being color in the new infoboxes? —Jclavet (Talk • Contributions) 01:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. It gives undue weight to one particular part of the infobox over the others. You can't help it. Your eye gets directed straight toward that particular part/parts of the infobox.--JOJ Hutton 02:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything wrong with it. It's used in other templates too.--Astros4477 (talk) 02:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

text: Yes, blue links can be just as distracting. I think that they need to stand out just a bit however, so that can be easily identified. But blue is not nearly as distracting as red or green text. Per MOS:INFOBOX, infoboxes should be as simple as possible and shouldn't be overly decorative. Is there a really good reason why they must be colored? Simply wanting it that way isn't enough. Does the color serve a purpose at all? Does it portray any additional information than is read with simple text?JOJ Hutton 03:51, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe those colors lend themselves to this purpose; they are universally associated with something that is on or off, functioning or not functioning, acceptable or unacceptable, good or bad, and so on. I think they are good visual cues in this situation. I did notice, though, that your signature makes use of those very "distracting" colors. —Jclavet (Talk • Contributions) 04:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My Signature isn't main space and is not part of the encyclopedia, so lets not attempt to redirect the focus of the problem by using fallacy arguments. We're getting enough of that already in the United States; being an election year and all. Secondly, would the same information not encyclopedically represented to the reader if the words were in normal black instead of color?--JOJ Hutton 13:26, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying that the colors are needed to convey the information; I believe that they help to convey the information. But, I'm curious as to why you think the colored text is harmful. —Jclavet (Talk • Contributions) 14:11, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Colored text is ultimately distracting to many readers. The color gives the impression that that single part of the infobox has more importance than any other part.  Since the same information is Given without the color, it's better to remove the distracting color since its not needed anyway. JOJ Hutton 14:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with new info boxes