Talk:Medieval Times

message: The description of the show here is wrong, at least to the one I'm familiar with. It's possible there are either multiple shows or that the show is updated from time to time. I'm taking it out for now (since it's wrong) but if someone can find out about the show (which should have a spoiler warning, hint, hint) they should put the factual information in. User:AsukaSeagull 12 April 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.244.58.56 (talk) 00:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, cast is similarly not correct, at least per experience.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.244.58.56 (talk) 00:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I heard there is a new one in duluth GA? (Yes I live right next to the constructuion site of the new Medieval times...) The Samphexer 17:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Show Description

message: The map needs to be changed to reflect the new one in Duluth, Georgia and I have absolutely no idea how to do that.  Cynrin 20:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No doubt. Personally I think the map is not appropriate and we should consider removing it. For one, locations change regularly (it's already out of date) - also, what purpose does it serve in an encyclopedia article - it seems to just help people find the nearest location ie. marketing purposes. It seems more trouble than it is worth. -- Stbalbach 02:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that the map should be removed.  I think the map is useful and interesting even though I will never attend.  I just want it to be up to date.  Cynrin 02:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should not be updated nor removed. The map is to reflect what the ancient times were like, not what the place looks like now. Elks405 06:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What the?  It reflected the locations of the venue, before it was removed.  It had nothing to do with ancient times.--Vercalos 00:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need new map

message: You know the knights' description section? I think it was from some booklet because of the point of view, so somebody should fix it without damaging the information. contribsSTYROFOAM☭1994TALK 01:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited it to provide a basic description of each knight's character. Having recently gone there I can say for sure that the previous description was taken directly from the show or a pamphlet. Thee darcy (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree, the map we use is terrible!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.164.93 (talk) 19:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Restaurants or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. You can find the related request for tagging here  -- TinucherianBot (talk) 10:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD]] Tagging

message: Ignoring, for the moment, the vegetarian menu and the drinks, it might be noted that despite Medieval Times lack of cutlery and claims of authentic-ness, it isn't. They serve potatoes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.131.62.113 (talk) 21:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unauthentic fare 

message: It seems a little farfetched that the company requires over 1,000 employees per location to operate.  Does anyone know if this is or is not actually the case (as the infobox states)? 2001:569:BCD5:8600:7044:D47:92D8:811C (talk) 05:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That was part of an unsourced change over a year and a half ago. The 10,000+ figure, in addition to being unsourced doesn't seem realistic. The prior figure, 1,000+, was also unsourced. I've removed it. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Employee number realistic? 

message: made several edits, removing sections of the article with the intent of spinning them off as daughter articles. I have reverted those edits due to several problems.
First, we cannot have links in this, a live article, to anything in Drafts. Draft articles are not regularly reviewed and edited and, most importantly, are not held to the same standards as live articles.
Next is moving text between articles. While this is not my area by any means, I know that steps must be taken to ensure the chain of attributions is preserved. By pasting material from one article into another without attribution, you are (in effect) claiming to have written the material. I believe you are well-intentioned here, but please either seek some assistance with this before proceeding. It's far easier to fix any problems early on rather than hundreds of edits later.
I'd like to suggest an alternative to your plan. Rather than removing the material from the live article and secreting it away in a draft, why not work on the section in place? If the information is worth having, I can't really see a reason to have it out of circulation while it is under construction.
Along the same lines here would be the question of whether or not the proposed daughters are appropriate. Two issues come head to head here. If material is notable now, it is always notable: Ten years from now would the now current show be notable and the prior show not? Why?
Additionally, Wikipedia is not a program guide. While this typically means we don't, for example, discuss the current line-up and schedule of TV shows, concerts and such, it applies here. Combining those two issues means it is unlikely that we would have much detailed information on the various incarnations of the show; likely a brief summary of the original show and some broad discussion of how the shows change/have changed. A decent guideline here is looking at what independent reliable sources have to say about the subject. If you are writing much of anything that sources don't discuss, you've likely gone too far. - SummerPhDv2.0 04:44, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daughter page spin-offs 

message: Why the fuck is there a bunch of prattling on about the history of jousting, ti makes no sense 50.101.227.200 (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This is an article about a specific company. This article is ridiculous. oknazevad (talk) 23:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Jousting?