Jump to content

Talk:SeaWorld San Diego

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on SeaWorld San Diego. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:13, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional and poorly sourced from top to bottom

[edit]

Re: the template you removed, Viewmont Viking, this goes far beyond two or three specifics. Much of the article is both unsourced and promotional in tone. I'm going to take the first section I came across at random:

Shows

[edit]
  • Orca Encounter (Orca Encounter): A live documentary about killer whales, educating guests about various aspects of their lives.
  • Dolphin Days (Dolphin Amphitheater): A show where guests can be amazed by the athleticism of the Whale and Dolphin family and find out what inspires their trainers.
  • Sea Lions Live (Sea Lion & Otter Amphitheater): Clyde, Seamore, and OP Otter spoof their favorite TV shows and music.
  • Pets Rule (Nautilus Amphitheater): A show that features a variety of animals, including dogs, cats, birds, kangaroos, emus, and a porcupine (Currently not in production; Returning January 20, 2018).

SeaWorld's Christmas Celebration

[edit]

SeaWorld's Christmas Celebration features seasonal shopping, festive food and drinks, and stunning live shows. Guests can see Christmas themed shows, including O Wondrous Night, Dolphin Island Christmas, and Clyde and Seamore's Christmas Special. Guests can walk around Santa's Christmas Village and take pictures with Santa at Santa's Cottage. Guests can also meet Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer and friends in Rudolph's Christmastown. Rudolph's Christmastown also features The Happiest Christmas Tree, which dances along with Christmas music. Guests also have the opportunity to have breakfast with Orcas and Santa for an additional cost. SeaWorld's Christmas Celebration runs November 18-January 6.

Seasonal Shows

[edit]
  • Cirque Electrique (Bayside Amphitheater): This summer nighttime takes guests on a journey to the island of Amphibia, where brightly colored amphibians combine characteristics of humans and sea creatures. These whimsical creatures captivate the audience as they demonstrate their super-human abilities through exhilarating acrobatic feats of strength and discipline. This show features sea sprites (physical comedians), acrobats on Chinese poles and a tramp barge, duo trapeze, silk aerialists, and a jet blade performer.
  • IllumiNight (Nautilus Amphitheater) : This summer nighttime experience will submerge guests below the waves and electrify the ocean floor with a radiant exhibition of sight and sound, featuring overhead laser lights and an interactive RFID experience, dancers, high-flying acrobats, a live singer, an electric violinist and guitarist, and larger-than-life animals that soar over guests.
  • Sea Lions TONITE (Sea Lion & Otter Amphitheater): A summer night comedy show that spoofs SeaWorld's day shows featuring California sea lions and Asian small-clawed otters.
  • Clyde & Seamore's Big Halloween Bash (Sea Lion & Otter Amphitheater): Clyde and Seamore spoof their favorite Halloween classics, with a little help from OP otter of course!
  • Who Said Boo?! (Mission Bay Theater): See The Count, Elmo, Abby, and more of your favorite Sesame Street characters as they work together through fun games, music, and dance to figure out "Who Said Boo?!"
  • Clyde & Seamore's Christmas Special (Sea Lion & Otter Amphitheater): Join Clyde, Seamore, and OP otter as they host their own nighttime Christmas special, which is sure to create an unforgettable show full of holiday cheer.
  • Dolphin Island Christmas (Dolphin Amphitheater): A Polynesian themed show where guests can meet the residents of Dolphin Island.
  • O Wondrous Night (Nautilus Amphitheater): The greatest story never told, O Wondrous Night is a live nativity, featuring carolers, live animals, and story-telling puppets.

There's virtually nothing here that comes within driving distance of 'enecyclopedic.' It's an advertisement, and it's probably indicative of the entire article. Since the spring several accounts have dumped a lot more of this sort of dreck, without sources, I'm guessing. Among other things, it's not Wikipedia's function to publish directories of events or promotional calendars. This article is a brochure--are other SeaWorld articles this problematic? 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • The issues of unsourced promotional content are now so woven into the article's fabric, the question is what do we keep? Even if sourced (and then one expects the references to be mostly primary), I'm skeptical about the need to retain descriptions of various programs and attractions. But even many of these aren't cited. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it is poorly sourced and promotional. I do believe that the regular shows do warrant inclusion especially the Orca Encounters as that was a big change from the Believe show and is a result of fairly recent events and possible legislation. My one concern is there are so many people that are currently against Seaworld that I don't want to see this go from a promotional article to an POV article the other way. After viewing your talk page and your edits I trust you understand Wikipedia. When I asked you to come to the talk page. It is always a good idea, but I also thought it was a drive by tag from an IP that is trying to hide their identity. VVikingTalkEdits 14:32, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Viewmont Viking—this is 2601, editing from a hotel room in NYC tonight. I understand your misgivings, and welcome a discussion before eviscerating the article. The template wasn’t meant to be a drive-by, but was conceived as a warning shot. I came upon the article by following the breadcrumbs left by an unreliable account. No ulterior motive regarding this subject. Yeah, the blatantly promotional content can go first. After that, I’m dubious about inclusion of exhibitions and performances unless they’re well-sourced, apart from Sea World’s publications. Otherwise it’s so easy for the whole thing to tilt toward promotional bias, like listing exhibitions in a museum article. That may require a more nuanced discussion, but for the moment we can start paring prose like the examples I’ve noted above. There’s no hurry from here—I’m away from home another day or two, then we’re having a winter storm, which means we’ll likely lose power. Just getting the ball rolling. Thanks, 206.252.208.214 (talk) 01:29, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(I wanted to respond, even if it meant doing so from a new and temporary IP, rather than letting the talk go quiet. If I'm right about losing power tomorrow, I'll return as a different 2601 once the juice is restored.) 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 05:41, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problems, Because of my schedule I really only have a few minutes a day to edit. I will see if I can find some good sources to add to the article though. --VVikingTalkEdits 14:11, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Updating and adding citations etc. per above section

[edit]

I have just added one citation to the Killer Whale section and added a bit about the Orca Encounters show.

Additional Items that should be added to the article include Kandu incident, J.J. The Grey Whale, major expansions i.e 1995 Orca habitat expansion, Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute, the Kasatka incident got a lot of press coverage in 2006, and I also remember something about one Killer Whale leaping and landing on a trainer. That may be included too if we have sources. Number of shows performed may also be a nice contrast and help with the POV issues since incidences gain more publicity than thousands of shows going on without any issues. --VVikingTalkEdits 18:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course incidents and accidents receive coverage--we have stand-alone articles about airplane disasters, but not about the multitude of uneventful flights. That said, I'm not keen on including incidents that don't have lasting import, per WP:NOTNEWS. The real problem here is the abundance of hitherto unchallenged, unsourced cruft about attractions and numbers and names of fish and mammals. This needs to be sourced and pared. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2020 and 9 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): James Latimer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why not include orca deaths

[edit]

I recently added the deaths of two orcas, using legitimate sources, but it was reverted without reason. Wondering why this information should not be included, but the whales who are alive are? Thanks for your consideration. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 12:40, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a whole page on Killer Whales in Captivity. In zoos as in the wild and everywhere else animals, people, plants, etc. die. We don't include each of the deaths in every article. Besides adding it here can create a fork. --VVikingTalkEdits 13:18, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But when those animals, people and plants are a significant draw and/or provide significant profit for an organization, their death is news. That is certainly the case with these orcas. I did a cursory review of other zoo wiki pages and the deaths of animals who were beloved or big draws are noted. I would respectfully suggest that the same be allowed here. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 13:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree. SeaWorld built its entire empire around performing Orcas, I think their deaths should be noted, particularly if there is a section on those alive.—JlACEer (talk) 15:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I am not too inclined to note every animal death as these events do not have lasting notability to the overall history of SeaWorld San Diego, or for that matter if any animal died at an animal theme park. I've been working on Busch Gardens Tampa Bay via Newspapers.com. I have seen some coverage of animals dying (for instance, a koala who died 11 months young because of a blood disorder), but that does not mean we should include such information because they do not contribute lasting significance to the article's overall history or sections. The exception I'd propose would be for notable animals such as Tilikum (for obvious reasons) or Winter. Adog (Talk・Cont) 15:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and I understand what you're saying about not noting every animal who dies. But to your other point about "notable" animals, I would again argue that Sea World's orcas are part of their brand and a lot of their bread & butter. Otherwise, why list the ones who are alive?
Secondly, it is also newsworthy because of their significance to Sea World and because two whales died within a year, and under circumstances that may not be "natural," in that they clearly did not die of old age. And to your point about the koala, while his or her death may not warrant a mention on the wiki page, if the death was part of a trend, I would argue that it does rise to significance. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At least in my opinion, I would not be comfortable with this inclusion. I would not even list the names of animals alive as they are not notable. The two sources cited (CNN) & (Los Angeles Times), do not associate these deaths with the larger circumstance of captivity. Rather, they simply state an unfortunate cause. Animals sometimes die young, and we cannot speculate at large whether captivity led to their early death when the reliable sources used do not attribute to that conclusion. I am sure that captivity could have contributed to an early death, but I cannot outright state such since reliable sources did not state it for these instances. Additional arguments I would point out: these deaths also do not have lasting effects for the company or its image like Blackfish did, nor have in depth coverage. It stinks and sucks, like when 11 antelopes died at Busch Gardens because of Johne's disease, but it is not notable for me in the grander picture. Adog (Talk・Cont) 23:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I think we have some common ground in this proposal: If the animals who are alive are going to be listed, then when those animals die, that should be noted as well (with sources), not just removed from the list. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 19:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suppose animals are to be listed; what would stop someone from adding every named animal at a said theme park to a Wikipedia article? If they are listed, they should be notable. Individually, these animals are not noteworthy to mention. Soon, it would become a WP:MEMORIAL. The last orca to die or be removed may warrant inclusion (such as this one (The Guardian)), but these deaths do not surmount to mention. Pinging editors to discuss further @Viewmont Viking:, @JlACEer:. Will post to Wikiproject Zoo and Amusement Parks for additional voices. Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Here are my thoughts. Orcas in captivity receive a lot of coverage, and negative publicity surrounding the subject has even forced SeaWorld to change course and end their Orca breeding programs. But is that pertinent to this article? No, not really. They are a main attraction that deserves coverage at each park article, but SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment is where I'd cover this aspect in more depth. Each park article can then use "See also" section hatnotes that link to the company article.
    Orca deaths, on the other hand, are probably less significant. I would say exceptions to that include deaths that lead to well-covered controversies or changes within SeaWorld's Orca program. Both would have lasting significance.
    And no, we shouldn't be naming the individual orcas unless we're talking about a milestone (Shamu), controversy, or human injuries/fatalities. --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AdogThank you for enlisting other voices. My point is that the live orcas are listed on this page, which, to me, suggests significance. When one died, his name was simply removed, even though I would argue his death (and the one before his last year) are significant events. In fact, all the animals with names are listed on this page. If they're not notable, not important to the park, why are they listed? If we can't agree that the ones who die should be listed, then I say the lists of those alive should also be removed. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 22:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I had the same thoughts about this page. The live animals are listed and then when two died, they simply disappeared from the list. If a coaster or even a flat ride were removed, it would have been noted. These whales are probably as significant to the park as a ride or other attraction. So it does beg the question — should they also be noted? On the flip side, I did a little research and discovered that 44 orcas under SeaWorld's care have died over the years. I'm not sure how many were at the San Diego park but do we really want to list all of those deaths? I'm starting to think the list of live animals needs to be removed. There is already a page dedicated to captive orcas with a link to List of captive orcas including those that have died. Perhaps it would be better to just link to those pages.—JlACEer (talk) 23:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the sheer number of orcas in captivity both past and present, each individual orca is not inherently significant, and attempting to list them all would violate WP:UNDUE. There are exceptions, as I listed above, but we need to keep in mind that the orcas are just one aspect of the subject, SeaWorld San Diego. Coverage of the orcas should be limited, and I agree all names that don't qualify as an exception need to go. We can always link to other articles dedicated to orcas as JlACEer suggests. --GoneIn60 (talk) 00:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree with this line of questioning. I am not sure why these animals are listed. It seems a niche has grown to add animals to certain Wikipedia pages. Deaths of SeaWorld orcas overall (as noted by JIACEer) may be important to note on the captive orcas page with some WP:DUE care. Adog (Talk・Cont) 13:45, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, folks, I am going to remove all the named animals from this page, per this discussion. If we're not going to note their deaths, then we don't need to be listing them when they're alive. SpeakingUpForNonHumanAnimals (talk) 13:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rescue Jr. addition

[edit]

SeaWorld recently announced their new "Rescue Jr." re-theme of the original Sesame Street's Bay of Play area, so I decided to update the information about the area, but somebody reverted it. Why? Leocoastrrz (talk) 23:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leocoastrrz: It looks like they were initially reverted, but then that was undone, putting your changes back. Having reviewed your changes, I noticed a couple issues, however. In your Rescue Jr. change, you removed the existing sources covering the Sesame Street play area and replaced them with this source, but that source doesn't even mention Sesame Street. So that caused previously-sourced information to become unsourced. I went ahead and corrected that. Eventually, retired rides and attractions should be tracked in their own section, and once that gets long in the tooth, be moved to their own article.
The other issue was italics and quotes. Ride and attraction names shouldn't be formatted with either. Hope that helps. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

chuck's feed and seed

[edit]

Did someone straight up insert an old Simpson's gag into this article? Image description says the Wayfarer restaurant at Hemsworth water park but description says "Chuck's feed and seed". Given that the contributor who added this is "FormerlyChucks" I'm going to guess they do this in articles and see how long it takes for someone to notice? 2001:1458:204:1:0:0:101:802F (talk) 21:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SeaWorld_San_Diego&oldid=1251184565"