Talk:List of Disney theme park attractions

message: Keep an eye on the Toy Story Mania page, as it may end up moving to Toy Story Mania!. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SpikeJones (talk • contribs) 19:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toy Story Mania ?!!? 

message: Given that numerous attractions are 'planned' and rumored, are we only going to commit to those attractions formally announced by the company? Case in point 'Western Expedition' was planned for WDW but never technically buildt. There have also been a plethora of attractions that got killed sometime before being green-lit.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.101.129.91 (talk) 07:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Planned' Attractions

message: Are we supposed to be adding years to this? I don't like the idea but I'm wondering what others are thinking. Also, can anyone make the Epcot column wider? --blm07 18:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IF we add years, I would add them to the column itself, not to the attraction name.  Ideally, the year info should be on the linked attraction page.  Putting the years on this page may make it too cluttered.  Perhaps a "for years of operation, please view each attractions page" notice would suffice.SpikeJones 18:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought years would be nice, especially for closed attractions.  It should be in the "park" cell, because different parks will have different dates.  Clearly this list will need clean up, but I think we should first focus on getting the list complete. Bytebear 01:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Years 

message: This will come up eventually, might as well start the discussion now. Should we have each name change under a new entry or put it all under one. Things like Buzz Lightyear will have four entries instead of a crammed one, but that is the only attraction with so many name changes. Currently some things like "Countdown to Extinction" and "Dinosaur" have two entries, with the old name marked as closed. --blm07 19:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is a separate page for the attraction, then it should have a separate entry in the list, IMHO.  Some articles combine past and present attractions, others separate them. Bytebear 01:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names 

message: It would make the list easier to use and clearer if it was seperated into at least Current Attractions and Former Attractions. It may be worth discussing how we could format or arrange this to be more useful/useable.
Tiggerjay 20:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former Attractions 

message: There are quite a few spelling errors, and there are restaurants, fireworks shows and parades in this list.  This is only supposed to list attractions.  Also, we should find a way to do edits in mid-list more easily. 70.181.109.146 07:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Restaurants, fireworks shows and parades are attractions too. They attract people to come. Valerius Myotis 01:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: This article covers attractions from all Disney theme parks, not just Disney World. Bytebear (talk) 04:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major cleanup needed 

message: So this is something that I've been thinking about. Why should "pavilion" be capitalized after attraction names? "Pavilion" isn't part of the official name, so why should it be capitalized? --blm07 02:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Becaue it's capitalized in all of their articles. Valerius Myotis 02:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: hmm, I just noticed - in most of their articles... Valerius Myotis 02:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm talking about overall in Wikipedia. I don't see a reason that it should be capitalized at all, maybe someone can tell me what the reason is. --blm07 02:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On their homepage] they capitalize pavilions too, as part of the names I guess, but in some descriptions they write pavilions in lower case. Valerius Myotis 03:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When it is part of the name of the pavilion it should be capitalized as it is part of a proper name (ie Canada Pavilion)Arrjay74 (talk) 16:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Guidemaps from the park only show the country name, but on the website "Pavilion" is added. Both are official sources. My opinion is that the country itself is the official name. --blm07 17:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  On Disney.com they use the Pavilion naming both in text and on the map available.  Since Disney calls it the Mexico Pavilion instead of just Mexico, I feel the former is a more "official" name. Arrjay74 (talk) 14:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the years of guidebooks that I have that only show the country names? Disney should make up their mind. --blm07 19:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've noticed the inconsistency as well.  I'm in favor of keeping Pavilion in the name simply because it seems this is the naming that Disney currently favors, or at least it is what they present on their website about the parks. Arrjay74 (talk) 20:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pavilion vs pavilion 

message: Someone suggested that the various park attractions lists should be merged into this list. That is ridiculous. How can you fit all of the information from those lists into this list? --blm07 であります！ 16:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge