Template talk:Infobox amusement park/Archive 1

Archive 1

Template broken

The template is broken when you specify location2, see Alton Towers for an example. I'll note that Categorization using templates recommends against categorizing from templates. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

The location2 parameter should not be prewikilinked. The template does the wikilinking. The documenation already says this. The wikilinked text in the infobox was wrong too. I have smartened the template for non existent categories. Peet Ern (talk) 09:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Address

Shouldn't the address be above the location? It looks silly to say Jackson, New Jersey, United States, 1 Six Flags Boulevard. 117Avenue (talk) 04:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Really address shouldn't be included in the template (WP:NOTDIRECTORY). It's not listed in the documentation and I didn't even know it existed until you pointed it out. Do you think it should be removed completely or just relocated to above or within location? Themeparkgc  Talk  05:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I guess amusement parks are fairly big, and the address is somewhat irrelevant. 117Avenue (talk) 06:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Amusement parks in United States

Resolved

 – updated template —EncMstr (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Just before protection, this template was edited to force everything that uses it into using "Category:Amusement parks in {{location2}}". This causes grammar errors like "Category:Amusement parks in United States" that cannot be removed. And what happens with things like "Georgia (U.S. state)" vs. the country of Georgia? Surely we don't need another infobox that will require obscure override parameters to fix categories, instead of editors just adding the right category to the article in the first place, right? I propose removing the involuntary categories that were just added instead. I have not added {{edit protected}} yet because that page requests consensus first. --Closeapple (talk) 03:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Would undoing my edit from June 2010 solve your concern? Don't ask me why I did that in the first place, I was only really starting out then. If not, and the categorisation was removed, a whole heap of categories would come up as empty and then be flagged for speedy. To prevent this, one would have to explicitly add the valid categories to articles through the use of AWB or something similar. Themeparkgc  Talk  07:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah! Yes, that is it. For some reason my sleep-deprived mind read the date as a recent edit. Perhaps we could have someone at Wikipedia:Bot requests do the deed? Someone might already have a bot that is designed to deal with state names like Category:Amusement parks in Georgia (U.S. state). --Closeapple (talk) 12:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

So, if someone was to revert the edit I referred to that would prevent any amusement parks from being listed in Category:Amusement parks in Georgia and Category:Amusement parks in United States because neither of those categories exist. If you agree put an {{edit requested}} tag on this page. Themeparkgc  Talk  23:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

This template is currently in use by 358 articles. That seems to me a reasonable number for manual conversion of the categories. I'll undertake it, and make the template edit when complete. No need for an edit request. —EncMstr (talk) 23:50, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I have completed the first 50 (or is it 100?). Most need no change—for location2 purposes—since either they already have an explicit category, or they don't use location2. —EncMstr (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I was just wondering how you went with this and if you are still planning editing the template to re-add the code to check whether a category exists or not? Themeparkgc  Talk  09:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I got through most of the direct uses. Turns out there are quite a few more than appears in the usage count due to indirect usage through redirect Template:Infobox Amusement park. I ran out of time at first, but I'll be able to dedicate some time today to the cause. —EncMstr (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Parameter changes

 Done template updated —EncMstr (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I was just wondering what everyone else thinks in regards with the following proposed changes:

• Remove address parameter as it is fairly irrelevant. It is no longer listed in documentation and is hardly ever used. Also Wikipedia is not a directory. See discussion above for more.
• Add resort parameter before location which would cater linking to resort articles e.g. Universal Orlando Resort, Walt Disney World Resort etc.
• Add theme parameter for all those true theme parks. Possible uses could include Movie studio for Warner Bros. Movie World, Australiana for Aussie World etc.

The latter two are also to be added to enable the merging of {{Infobox Disney theme park}} into this template. Any thoughts on my proposed changes before I request an admin to edit the template? Themeparkgc  Talk  08:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Have all the articles using location2 been placed into the appropriate category, as discussed above? If so that can be fixed as well. 117Avenue (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Not yet. Delayed by IRL pressing matters. I expect to wrap those up by Wednesday though. I got as far as Adventureland (Illinois), as shown in what appears to be random order (probably order of article usage) in the template's usage. —EncMstr (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I believe that it is in the order of creation, though this has never been confirmed. 117Avenue (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

EncMstr is an administrator so when those category fixes have been completed he can make that change himself (as mentioned in that section). These changes could be implemented separately. Themeparkgc  Talk  08:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I've reviewed and fixed all the location2= usage and am ready to implement the pending suggestions. However, I do not understand what the resort= and theme= parameters should do. —EncMstr (talk) 07:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Good work with all those changes. I see there was quite a lot in the end. Now the new parameters. In a lot of cases amusement parks are part of resorts. The resort= parameter would allow these to be linked within the infobox. The theme= parameter could be used for those true theme parks which have a theme. Both parameters could be implemented in the form:

{{#if:{{{theme<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
! Theme
{{!}} {{{theme}}}
{{!}}-
}}

Alternately resort= could be implemented as:

{{#if:{{{location<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
! Location
{{!}} {{comma separated entries|{{{resort|}}}|{{{location}}}|{{{location2|}}}|{{{location3|}}}}}
{{!}}-
}}

Hopefully this is the information that you wanted. These two parameters are the only thing that is different between this template and {{Infobox Disney theme park}} so implementing them here would not only have the benefit of providing additional information in the infobox for all amusement park articles, but we would be able to merge the Disney template into this one and standardise all the articles. Themeparkgc  Talk  08:28, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Would someone mind finishing the documentation? I added the entries, but don't know how to explain or provide an instructive example. —EncMstr (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Dom497, 14 August 2011

{{edit protected}} Hello, I am requesting that two new parameters be added to the template. The first parameter I am requesting is 'number of season's operated". This would tell readers how many season's the park has operated. The second is the status of the park. This will say "open", "closed" etc...

Please respond back with your decision. Thanks!!!

Dom497 (talk) 22:03, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't the status be obvious from the closed date? Status is a difficult thing to define, it was just removed from Template:Infobox television. 117Avenue (talk) 22:06, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

A status would not always be obvious from the closed date. For example, Six Flags New Orleans closed as Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, yet it remains standing but not operating (SBNO) to this day. As with all SBNO things there is a slim chance that they will operate again in the future. As for the other parameter, not all amusement parks have a "season" - several operate year-round so there is no definitive season. In summary, I don't believe either parameter would/could be wildly used in amusement park articles. Themeparkgc  Talk  22:31, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

There needs to be strict guidelines if the status parameter is added, not just "open, closed, etc." Opening it to interpretation can lead to many entries, which will then lose the standardization of the infobox. 117Avenue (talk) 00:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

So is it a yes or no?--Dom497 (talk) 20:41, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to see a list of possible inputs. 117Avenue (talk) 04:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

@Dom497: It's a definite maybe. Provide guidance on the new parameters' values in the proposed fields: if agreeable, it will be added to the documentation and the new parameters added to the template. —EncMstr (talk) 06:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Owner and operated by

I am requesting that the parameter, operated by be moved to under owner. I just feel it should be that way since they go together and general manager shouldn't be in between.--Astros4477 (talk) 00:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd support this:

{{#if:{{{owner<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
! Owner
{{!}} {{{owner}}}
{{!}}-
}}
{{#if:{{{operator<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
! Operated By
{{!}} {{{operator}}}
{{!}}-
}}
{{#if:{{{general_manager<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|
! General Manager
{{!}} {{{general_manager}}}
{{!}}-
}}

Since I'd consider it uncontroversial, I've added the edit protected tag. Themeparkgc  Talk  23:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I ended up giving the template a complete overhaul to base it on {{infobox}}, which should make updates easier in future. In the process I moved the general manager field down as requested. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 June 2012

The Infobox should include two parameters, where the logo and an image of the amusement park can be separately fitted into. Shawn 06:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

There is already an image parameter. You are proposing to add a parameter to display the logo of the park? Usually such changes require discussion and consensus, before they can be made. Please give time for other editors to comment on this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Well most amusement park articles use the image parameter for the logo. I don't like the idea of having an image and a logo parameter though, the infobox would become too big. I like it with just the logo.--Astros4477 (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, pictures can go elsewhere in the article. 117Avenue (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with those above. A logo and an image may become too cluttered. Themeparkgc  Talk  07:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Shall the documentation be updated? 117Avenue (talk) 02:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think the parameter should be changed from image to logo.--Astros4477 (talk) 14:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we need to go that far. If a logo isn't available, an appropriate image can still be used. 117Avenue (talk) 03:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 October 2012 – addition of maintenance category

I was hoping someone could please add the following code to the bottom of the infobox template. The code categorises articles which do not have coordinate data in Category:Wikipedia infobox amusement park articles without coordinates and allows users to easily run through and update the missing data.

<includeonly>{{ns0|{{#if:{{{coordinates|}}}||[[Category:Wikipedia infobox amusement park articles without coordinates]]}}}}</includeonly>

Similar code is already in use in Template:Infobox roller coaster as well as a couple of other templates listed here. Thanks in advance to any administrator who can put through this change. Themeparkgc  Talk  07:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Done. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Themeparkgc  Talk  02:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 November 2012

There is an error in the template's syntax brought up here. Could someone please change the following:

| data13     = {{#if:{{{area|}}}{{{area_ha|}}}{{{area_acre|}}}||{{convinfobox|{{{area_ha|}}}|ha|{{{area_acre|}}}|acre}}{{{area|}}}}}

...to...

| data13     = {{#if:{{{area|}}}{{{area_ha|}}}{{{area_acre|}}}|{{convinfobox|{{{area_ha|}}}|ha|{{{area_acre|}}}|acre}}{{{area|}}}}}

The extra pipe character ("|") was preventing this field from displaying. Themeparkgc  Talk  23:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 23:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 September 2013

This template needs fixing. The header for Total Rides is backwards, with Rides on one line jutting out into the middle of the box, and Total on the line below. Take a look at the entry for Europa-Park

Me thinks something in the 2 lines of code (header14 and label15) is causing the problem. Ebonyskye (talk) 09:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Ebonyskye (talk) 09:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Not done: It looks fine to me. "Rides" is a heading for the items which follow; "Total" shows that there are 54 rides altogether, of which 11 are roller coasters and 9 are water rides. Presumably there are 34 which are neither roller coasters nor water rides. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Redrose64 is correct, that's the way it's supposed to be.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 18:45, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Add status and projected opening date to infobox

Currently, this infobox doesn't work well for parks that have not yet opened. There needs to be a "planned_opening_date" field that would display "Opens:" instead of "Opened:", as it's awkward to see "Opened: 2015" when it's still 2014. I also propose adding some fields that are in Infobox roller coaster such as: a "Status:" field that could contain data such as "Planned", "Under Construction", "Operating", "Closed", etc; a "previouspark" field for a park that replaced an earlier one; and a "replacement" field for the park that replaced the park that the article is about. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 12:52, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Suggested code is below for handling future parks without having to add a new "planned_opening_date" field. If the new "status" field is "Planned" or "Under Construction" the "Opened" field will display "Opens" instead and the date will be followed by "(planned)". Replace label8 and data8 with the following:

| label8     = {{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{status|}}}}}|planned|Opens|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{status|}}}}}|under construction|Opens|Opened}}}}
| data8      = {{{opening_date|}}} {{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{status|}}}}}|planned|(planned)|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{status|}}}}}|under construction|(planned)|}}}}

Add label19 and data19:

| label19     = Status
| data19      = {{{status|}}}

--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:31, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done using the somewhat simpler {{#switch}}. SiBr₄ (talk) 21:35, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Logo and image

Hi, does anyone know if it is possible to add an image and a logo to the info box ***Adam*** (?) 01:31, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The above request is now more than 2 years old. In other word could some one add the parameter "| logo =" so that one can have both a logo and an image in all the infoboxes. Peter Horn User talk 14:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Now, THAT request is itself three years old, and so far this has not been done (though it seems to me like a good idea). I will see if I can implement this change myself. KDS4444^Talk 13:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, it seems the consensus has been to use the Image parameter to add the logo, with the images then moved down into the actual article, see discussion below. KDS4444^Talk 13:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Logo and image parameters

I disagree with this. Most other infoboxes have both a logo and a photo (eg. {{Infobox venue}}, {{Infobox company}}). If there's no space for a photo in the infobox then the best place is to put that photo in the lead... at which point you've effectively got an infobox where the photo is below all the other (less useful) information, and bolted on in an awkward outside-the-infobox way. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I moved your comment above to its own section, as I plan to archive the old, inactive discussions above. Once archived, I'll link "this" in your comments to the appropriate discussion. As for your comments, I agree that logo and image can co-exist, but not necessarily for the reasons you stated. There is a {{Stack}} template that can be invoked to place images alongside the infobox, which negates the concern you brought up. You can see an example of what the stack template does at Son of Beast. However, since other infoboxes such as {{Infobox attraction}} have it, I don't see any reason why the amusement park template can't either. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:40, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, the old discussion was here. Using a stack template to have a photo stuck onto the left-hand side of the infobox still seems like a "bolted on". I've added a "photo" field to the infobox to allow a photograph in addition to the logo. --Lord Belbury (talk) 11:28, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Request for status

Can we add "canceled" as a status option? Right now the only options are planned, under construction, operating, and closed. Canceled would be useful for projects like Universal Studios Dubailand, which was under construction but never completed. Using "closed" would imply it was once open. Johndavies837 (talk) 15:30, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Area(s) name

Many pages use this template for themed areas of a park. If themed areas don't have their own infobox, an Area label should be an option for each park as well (sometimes park names vary for localized markets or other reasons, (Discoveryland vs. Tomorrowland, Toy Story Playland vs Toy Story Land, etc. This would make the appearance of pages like those and Avengers Campus appear more organized, and clear. GeekInParadise (talk) 08:16, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Push-pin map display

Jonesey95, I see an edit summary that says you added push-pin maps to this infobox about three months ago. I noticed The Children's Republic today and the map looks different than other infoboxes; it is not centered but indented like other data. I assume this wasn't intentional? MB 03:45, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Oof, that was horrible. Why did I do that? I have moved the map (and the slogan, which was in a goofy place). – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Colored links

Jonesey95, This template displays |status= in color. That was removed from {{infobox building}} in this edit years ago. That reasoning would apply here also. MB 16:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Excessive text decoration removed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Jonesey95, just noticed there is color in some of the sister templates like {{infobox roller coaster}}. I haven't checked the rest - there are six total listed. MB 20:07, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done. As far as I can tell, they were all using a single subtemplate (which is good design; thank you to whoever set these up). – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)